One of the main engines used in German airframes was the BMW-801. It was powering one of the best fighters to see widespread service in the ww2, the Fw-190. How would a fighter looked like if you were to propose it? The engine power remains the same as it was historically, so does the fan cooled feature, along with the armored oil cooler. Feel free to 'design' a fine fighter around it, in service from second half of 1941.
BMW-801: build your fighter
- Thread starter tomo pauk
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
wuzak
Captain
Um, Fw 190?
johnbr
2nd Lieutenant
How about the Ju-88 with the bmw 801.
- Thread starter
- #6
davebender
1st Lieutenant
I agree. Furthermore the Fw-190A wasn't all that good during the fall of 1941. Nothing wrong with the airframe but the BMW801 engine left much to be desired when it first entered service.
During the fall of 1941 the Fw-187 should have been powered by a pair of 1,350 hp DB601E engines. With 2,700 total hp I suspect it would out perform a 1941 Fw-190A in every way except roll, have greater endurance and be far more reliable. Why screw the Falke up by installing BMW801 engines?
During the fall of 1941 the Fw-187 should have been powered by a pair of 1,350 hp DB601E engines. With 2,700 total hp I suspect it would out perform a 1941 Fw-190A in every way except roll, have greater endurance and be far more reliable. Why screw the Falke up by installing BMW801 engines?
When Focke-Wulf made the proposal the choice was between the DB 605 and the BMW 801. Despite the extra weight and change in profile Focke-Wulf thought that the performance of the two would be very similar,the extra weight and drag of the radial engines being "offset by their greater horsepower".
That doesn't sound like "screwing up the Falke." Of course this is all theoreitcal as,as I've pointed out elsewhere,neither version was built. Most seem keen to accept Focke-Wulf's word for the Fw 187's theoretical performance in other instances so I suppose we should here too.
I'm not sure it would have done much for the looks of the thing.
Steve
Shortround6
Major General
C'mon, people, be creative
Any increase in armament (not really needed?) or range ( needed more?) comes at the expense of performance. Any increase in performance comes at the the expense of firepower or range.
What is the mission?
as the Mission will drive the armament and range requirements.
davebender
1st Lieutenant
When Focke Wulf made the proposal RLM had already rejected a DB601/DB605 powered Fw-187.
The BMW801 engine was a favorite of RLM. Offering to power the Fw-187 with that engine smacks of desperation to obtain a Fw-187 production contract.
The BMW801 engine was a favorite of RLM. Offering to power the Fw-187 with that engine smacks of desperation to obtain a Fw-187 production contract.
I agree,everything Focke-Wulf did from the moment they added another seat and tried to make a nightfighter smacks of that same desperation.
In the context of the original question it may well have made a decent fighter. I'd go back to a single seater.
Steve
davebender
1st Lieutenant
I agree.
RLM rejection was the kiss of death for many promising German airframe and engine programs. Me-210/Me-410 was saved only because it was supported by Goering and even then the program was watered down. Fw-187 needs a similiar Goering or Hitler endorsement to enter mass production.
- Thread starter
- #13
Okay, for the starters I'd like to see some thinner wing, but with greater wing area. Keeping the drag low as possible, while making the resulting fighter as good performer as possible at higher altitudes. The fuselage MGs are so demode; I'd like to see a fighter with one fuselage MG-151, along with 2 wing root ones. Maybe 4 in the wing roots? So far (1941-42), the outboard part of the wing will not contain any guns.
davebender
1st Lieutenant
Did the BMW801 engine have a hollow prop shaft for use with a hub cannon? Otherwise you can forget the centerline mounted cannon on a single engine fighter aircraft.
- Thread starter
- #15
MikeGazdik
Senior Airman
Put the BMW engine into a ME109 fuselage, with new wings that have inward retracting gear, and a wing design (doesn't have to be laminar flow) structure that can carry fuel. I would suppose the tail would have to be larger to absorb the torque.
PWR4360-59B
Senior Airman
- 379
- May 27, 2008
The fan would have to go, as that is instant HP loss. And why need it on such a low powered engine?
You mean the cooling fan?
On the Fw 190 it goes back to original cooling problems with the BMW 139 engine and the ducted spinner (doppelhaube). Focke-Wulf thought they would lose 40kph by sacrificing the spinner. They were wrong,the aircraft fitted with the BMW designed cowling (einheitstriebwerk) that would become familiar on production versions was actually 20 kph faster.
Focke-Wulf had got their sums badly wrong,by 60kph! Theoretical and actual performance are not the same thing. Focke-Wulf had not allowed for the drag created by air ducted through the spinner by the gap between spinner and engine cowling.
The fan was retained on the BMW 801 which initially also experienced cooling problems.
You could design an installation for the BMW 801 which did not require the fan but you would need to be sure that the drag created by ducting air around the engine to cool it did not reduce performance more than the minor loss of power to the cooling fan.
For the Fw 190 at least the addition of the fan was the most advantageous solution.
Steve
davebender
1st Lieutenant
One proposed version of the Do-335 had a pair of cowl mounted MG151/20 cannon.
If the aircraft nose is large enough you may as well put two MG151/20 cannon on top of the cowl and another pair underneath. That way all four weapons are on the centerline. Synchronization with the prop will lower rate of fire a bit but it's still plenty.
If the aircraft nose is large enough you may as well put two MG151/20 cannon on top of the cowl and another pair underneath. That way all four weapons are on the centerline. Synchronization with the prop will lower rate of fire a bit but it's still plenty.
