Biggest speed increase within type?

[tail end charlie]

It must be the wright flyers, although I think each one was a prototype

 

[zoomar]

I can't imagine anything beating the Bf-109. It's a conceptual stretch, but if one considered the P-40 basically a re-engined P-36, there's a good difference between early P-36s and the final P-40Q. Similarly, one could consider the Ta-152 simply a redesignated Fw-190D. Even with cheats like this the Bf-109 still takes the cake.

 

[Colin1]

I can't imagine anything beating the Bf-109.

It's a conceptual stretch, but if one considered the P-40 basically a re-engined P-36, there's a good difference between early P-36s and the final P-40Q. Similarly, one could consider the Ta-152 simply a redesignated Fw-190D. Even with cheats like this the Bf-109 still takes the cake.

You'd be right

It IS a conceptual sketch, if only because the P-40Q never became anything more than the XP-40Q

 

[Shortround6]

Who said anything about a bad rap?

Colin 1: "I think it is worth noting that the Spitfire, though it kept its name throughout its development life, wasn't anything like the same aircraft under the skin at the end of its run that it started out as, though the subsequent marks were clearly descended from the previous model."

While you did not give it a bad rap other people have but as I noted it is only from the MK 21 on that it really changed and even then not that much different than some other planes that kept their names.

I don't really see the Typhoon and Tempest as developments of the Hurricane airframe. Different methods of construction, a bit different plane-form to the wing, slightly gulled on the Typhoon, radically different on the Tempest.

Feel free to discuss the P-47, I'm listening

Maybe the P-47 can be seen as a "development" of the P-35 and so be in this contest

from the 310mph P-35 to the 500mph (prototype P-47J) comes close to the 109s record but I am not serious about it.

No other piston fighter almost tripled it's power. From the under 700hp Kestrel and Jumo 210s used on the first prototypes to the over 1800hp engine used on the final versions, I think the 109 keeps the crown

 

[NZTyphoon]

First, a look at the original question:

The Messerschmitt Bf-109H-1 high altitude fighter had a speed of 466 m.p.h., or 1.664 times the speed of the prototype Bf-109, which had an estimated speed of 280 m.p.h. Are there any other WW2 aircraft with comparable or bigger speed increases?

That top speed of 466 mph is dubious, for a start: according to (admittedly an old source) Augsburg Eagle the Bf 109 H-1 was a variant of the Bf 109G-5 with GM 1 with a 43' 6" wingspan. When several of these were flown by "an experimental service evaluation unit" they experienced wing flutter at anything over 455 mph in a dive.
Q: How is it possible for an aircraft with a bigger wing, weighing some 750 kg more, with wider, strut braced tailplanes, manage to fly about 60mph faster than the aircraft on which it was based, using the same engine?

Q: If the H-1s experienced wing flutter in a dive at 455 mph, how could they reach 466 mph in level flight?

The only version of the H which approached 466 mph was the experimental V-55 with a DB605 AS which reached 427 mph. Production versions were intended to use the Jumo 213E.

The fastest production Bf 109 was the K-4 (452 mph) - this was 1.615 times faster than the Bf 109B-1; according to Augsburg Eagle the V-1 reached 290 mph - the R-R Kestrel was rated at 695 hp v the Jumo 210D of the B-1 at 680 hp.

Still means the Bf 109 series had the biggest speed spread of WW 2 piston engine aircraft.

 

[tail end charlie]

No other piston fighter almost tripled it's power. From the under 700hp Kestrel and Jumo 210s used on the first prototypes to the over 1800hp engine used on the final versions, I think the 109 keeps the crown

The kestrel was put in a 109 airframe for the same reason as a 262 had a propellor to test the airframe (in the 262 case it also added insurance), the 109 was quite clearly not designed to use a British engine.

 

[Colin1]

...the R-R Kestrel was rated at 295 hp v the Jumo 210D of the B-1 at 280 hp.

eh? what?
am I misunderstanding something here?

 

[NZTyphoon]

The kestrel was put in a 109 airframe for the same reason as a 262 had a propellor to test the airframe (in the 262 case it also added insurance), the 109 was quite clearly not designed to use a British engine.

Irrelevant because the first production 109s, the B-series had Jumo 210Da engines with a similar power rating to the Kestrel, albeit with improved rated altitudes - the next major improvement in 109 performance came with the experimental DB 600 powered Vs and the DB 601 powered Es.

 

[NZTyphoon]

eh? what?
am I misunderstanding something here?

Sorry, finger trouble, since edited.

 

[Colin1]

Sorry, finger trouble, since edited.

We've all been there..

 

[tail end charlie]

Irrelevant because the first production 109s, the B-series had Jumo 210Da engines with a similar power rating to the Kestrel, albeit with improved rated altitudes - the next major improvement in 109 performance came with the experimental DB 600 powered Vs and the DB 601 powered Es.

The experimental DB 600 was what the 109 was designed to take, this was the mid 30s not the second world war. The spitfire changed engines from merlin to griffon. The question about aircraft types in the second world war must surely be confined to the second worl war. If not the hawker series must have a shout from the hart to hurricane typhoon tempest fury draw the line where you will its still impressive

 

[davebender]

280 mph. Ju88A1. First production version.
402 mph. Ju-88G7. Late war night fighter.

The Ju-88 probably won't beat the Me-109 but it might win the bomber prize for greatest speed increase.

 

[Milosh]

280 mph. Ju88A1. First production version.
402 mph. Ju-88G7. Late war night fighter.

The Ju-88 probably won't beat the Me-109 but it might win the bomber prize for greatest speed increase.

Nice of you to mention an a/c that never saw service.

"History of the German Night Fighter Force 1917-1945", page 186. Summarizing:

"…fitted with more powerful Jumo 213 engine, it also had the pointed wingtips of the Ju 188/388 series, as specifically stated in an RLM aircraft type manual. Only about 10-12 Ju 88G-7s were completed in November 1944 and none were ever delivered to an operational unit…Plans for large scale series production were shelved because the performance of this version did not show any notable improvement over that of the current Ju 88G-6 series"

In an appendix, Aders gives performance as:
Max Speed: 584 km/h @ 9,000 m
Range: 2,220 km
Ceiling: 9,800 m.

 

[fastmongrel]

The 1st production version of the Fiat G50 with an 875 hp radial had a top speed around the 290 to 300 mph range. The Fiat G56 prototype which apart from the obviously different engine (it was fitted with the DB 603) looked identical and was reckoned to be good for 440 mph. Obviously the G56 was a prototype but it nearly got into production before events overtook it.

Someone else who isnt a mathematical idiot will have to do the sums for me its too cold to take my socks off.

 

[Colin1]

I don't really see the Typhoon and Tempest as developments of the Hurricane airframe. Different methods of construction, a bit different plane-form to the wing, slightly gulled on the Typhoon, radically different on the Tempest

Camm got cracking
on the Tornado/Typhoon around 4 months prior to the maiden flight of the Hurricane, I would imagine he revisited his Hurricane drawings to see what he could carry over. He probably reasoned he wasn't going to get away with canvas again. I think there's more of a lineage to the wing than you're prepared to concede.
Early Typhoons did bear a superficial resemblance to the Hurricane.

Conjecture on my part, admittedly

 

[NZTyphoon]

The experimental DB 600 was what the 109 was designed to take, this was the mid 30s not the second world war. The spitfire changed engines from merlin to griffon. The question about aircraft types in the second world war must surely be confined to the second worl war. If not the hawker series must have a shout from the hart to hurricane typhoon tempest fury draw the line where you will its still impressive

Read the first post which started this discussion..."The Messerschmitt Bf-109H-1 high altitude fighter had a speed of 466 m.p.h., or 1.664 times the speed of the prototype Bf-109 which had an estimated speed of 280 m.p.h..Are there any other WW2 aircraft with comparable or bigger speed increases?"

As far as I can tell the Bf 109 V-1 first flew in 1935, sure with an interim engine, but one with slightly more hp than the engine which was fitted to the first production series.

"The spitfire changed engines from merlin to griffon". And the point is? You're forgetting the change from the single-stage to the two-stage Merlin series, which was a substantial one. The Bf 109 changed engines from the Jumo 210 to the DB 601 to the DB 605, so what's the difference between its development and that of the Spitfire?

 

[koivis]

I'm surprised no one has mentioned the Dornier Do 17 family.

Some variants:

Do 17E-1 (first production variant, two 750 PS BMW VI 7.3): 379 km/h at sea level, probably not much more at altitude
Do 215B-1 (still the same basic airframe, two 1175 PS DB 601 Ba): 506 km/h at 4500 m
Do 217M-1 (evolved version, two 1750 PS DB 603A): 557 km/h at 5700 m

While the M-1 figure might be on the high side, Eric Brown flew the aircraft at 523 km/h at 5500 m.

Last but not least, to be taken with a grain of salt, I present this:

Do 217P (HZ-Anlage, two 1750 PS DB 603Bs plus one 1475 PS DB 605T supercharging them): 785 km/h at altitude, service ceiling over 16000 meters!

If that data is true (which I doubt), the Do-17 has a ratio of 2.07.

Now, what do I win? 8)

 

[Shortround6]

Camm got cracking
on the Tornado/Typhoon around 4 months prior to the maiden flight of the Hurricane, I would imagine he revisited his Hurricane drawings to see what he could carry over. He probably reasoned he wasn't going to get away with canvas again. I think there's more of a lineage to the wing than you're prepared to concede.
Early Typhoons did bear a superficial resemblance to the Hurricane.

Conjecture on my part, admittedly

If the Typhoon had used a tube fuselage covered in metal instead of "canvas" you might have a point. Since the Typhoon used a semi-monocoque construction (like the Spitfire) from in back of the cockpit that is one change. Hurricane used a three part wing. A center section and two outer sections. Typhoon used a two part wing, left and right that meet under the fuselage.

See:

http://www.aviastar.org/pictures/england/hawker_hurricane.gif

and:

http://www.aviastar.org/pictures/england/hawker_typhoon.gif

Both wings are thick and both wings have the same general shape but is that enough to say that one is the direct development of the other?

At least with the Spitfire you might be able to bolt a MK XII or MK XVI wing onto a MK II or MK V fuselage.

many design teams are influenced by what they have done before and tend to carry over certain features rather than TRY to make everything completely different. I don't think that makes a later design by the same team the same as a design that has gone through several modifications or upgrades.

 

[Colin1]

SR
all good points

I think at least some of my conjecture was on the mark:

Armed thus with information about the Air Ministry's new fighter, Camm's small team of project designers set about scheming up rough designs for aircraft with the Napier and Rolls-Royce engines in May 1937. Not unnaturally, the 'starting point' was an airframe envelope approximating to that of the Hurricane and in overall configuration the main structural features were retained, including an inward retracting, wide-track undercarriage, ventral radiator and gun arrangement in the outer wings. However, owing to the increased consumptions of the bigger engines (although specific fuel consumption remained little changed), larger fuel and oil tanks had to be accommodated, while the much greater weight of the engines resulted in shorter nose and with larger propellers anticipated the landing gear would be longer.

To limit the increase in landing gear oleos a very slightly 'cranked' wing form was adopted, the centre section possessing slight (effective) anhedral. By increasing the width of this centre section over that of the Hurricane it proved possible to further increase the undercarriage track and at the same time move the wheel bays apart, thereby permitting the large ventral radiator fairing to be mounted directly below the centre of gravity. Indeed, compared with the Hurricane, the main longitudinal moments about the CoG were somewhat shorter.

Generous flap and aileron areas were provided and these were to have been accommodated in a wing of the same span and area as those of the Hurricane had there been any firm indication of what armament would finally be demanded by the Air Ministry; as it was, Hawkers opted to design for the worst eventuality, that of a cannon armament. It was the bulky Oerlikons, then being studied by the Armaments Branch, that largely retained the thick wing which was to compromise the Typhoon's high altitude performance. Mason

 

[Colin1]

I've only just learned that Frank passed away on 31st August this year after a long illness.
God rest your soul Frank