Fw-187 could have been German P-51?

A good 1943-special, 2nd half 43, for heavy daylight bomber travail ('work') :
Get a pair of some well working Db-605s (at last!), just a fair amount of armour for the difficult mission, including thick side glasses too but not too much, ennemy escort fighters are to be expected. (Think South Italy, Mediterranea.) One Mk-103 under belly with good ammunition provision inside the fuselage, and two Mg-151s at wing roots à la Fw-190 !

A little incrase in wing span from the roots to allow this fine pair of 20mil (aimers), but else, nothing, not too much heavy gunning. Just the right amount of overall armour (far better than the historical Luftwaffe 1943 breed yet), a welcome help to assault those fearsome Fortresses' boxes...

You'd get a good agressor well fitted for survival and certainly ready for some scoring against the 8th AF 1944 plans, and still a fighter able to fight and defend itself against US escort jockeys, by design if not by tactics (which were to the advantage of the escort anyway.)

It could have been thought about during the 1st half of 1943, considering only the Mediterranean situation, a 9th AF '2nd ranking' response, where enemy escort fighters were indeed expected in the general theater. (We know that at that time, for central Germany the 'big brass' still thought a P-51D scenario as impossible. But in the MTO it was daily urgency already.) Perhaps a small batch, but an easy desision to get, adressing an increasing threat. (Rome etc.)

Bred as a 2nd ranker, the well armoured FW-187, with one 30mil mk-103 under belly + two 20mils 'aimers' at wing roots, slightly increased wing spans and fully capable Db-605s (at last) ; would not need any miraculous big change of mind from the RLM decisons makers... Just allow a '2nd ranker' industrial batch to adress a '2nd ranking' theater threat (MTO with its 9th AF biggies escorted all the way (Sicilly, South Italy..)) , then you'll get the Fw-187 version as described above.

Which, in turn, would find itself amazingly well fitted to react against the early 1944 'Katastrophe', of Big Week fame; that of central Germany being poundered by a renewed 8th AF avec son escorte of wide spraying P-51D vendettas..

An aircraft able to withold escort fighter presence on a fair foot, while carriyng some usefull armour and a well fitted armament. Very good high altitude behaviour. And already launched in industrial production, although '2nd ranking', for about 6 months...

How easy it is in 2013 lying on cushins..., striking keyboards.. and caring very little too (actual history being just as good), to spice in, at the very least, the distant drama.
One cannot expect a fighting camp to get things always right 8 months in advance, even Napoleon I've heard showed the occasional 'dumbheit' some times..

The later proposed FW 187 had various armaments with one practical (to my mind anyway) option of four 20mm MG 151s, Two replacing the original MG/FF cannon and two replacing the original four 7.9mm machine guns. With 250rpg. That is about 20+ seconds firing time which is enough for about 1/2 dozen firing passes in one flight.

MG 151/20s make lousy 'aimers' for the MK 103 as the trajectories and times of flight are too far off unless the distance is so close it doesn't really matter if you have 'aimers' or not. The Germans figured the "effective" range of the MK 103 was about double that of the MG 151/20.

Shortround6 said:

The later proposed FW 187 had various armaments with one practical (to my mind anyway) option of four 20mm MG 151s, Two replacing the original MG/FF cannon and two replacing the original four 7.9mm machine guns. With 250rpg. That is about 20+ seconds firing time which is enough for about 1/2 dozen firing passes in one flight.

MG 151/20s make lousy 'aimers' for the MK 103 as the trajectories and times of flight are too far off unless the distance is so close it doesn't really matter if you have 'aimers' or not. The Germans figured the "effective" range of the MK 103 was about double that of the MG 151/20.

Click to expand...

Could it have taken two Mk108s instead? Or a Mk 103?

Any aerial target including heavy bombers would be quickly ripped to pieces by four nose mounted 20mm cannon. Just get your Fw-187 pilots to an aerial gunnery range before posting to an operational unit.

Forget about Mk103 cannon. That's for aircraft like Me-109 which can carry only one centerline mounted cannon.

No service 109 ever carried a MK 103 cannon. It is rather doubtful one would fit without sever modification to both gun and aircraft despite the many claims in books and websites.

[to Davebendr.]
At the opposite I think the Fw-187 was the one day fighter able to make good use of the Mk103.

Save perhaps for a Ta-152 much later coming.
On the Fw-187 that 'big' gun was not too big, and overall it could make a slim aerodynamic package, with a lot of ammunition too.
Of course a well fed 4x20mil mount would be classic and efficient, but I maintain the Fw-187 brings a unique occasion to put the Mk-103 into play, at an interesting time and with little disturbance. It seems the fine combination to me.
Also, it migh follow an easy historical track.
Euh.., on a Me-109 ???!

There was an option for putting one or two MK 103s under the fuselage in place of a bomb load, It is doable but forget the "aimer" guns.

Shortround6 said:

There was an option for putting one or two MK 103s under the fuselage in place of a bomb load, It is doable but forget the "aimer" guns.

Click to expand...

How about two Mk 108s in the nose instead of the four MG 151/20s?

It is doable but forget the "aimer" guns.

Click to expand...

Hum. Medium range 'little helpers' then...

Besides, efficiency range is a full military criterium, meaning effective destruction potential I'd guess. For aiming purposes you can 'call' longer ranges, up to a point..

Effective range was considered 800meters for the MK 103, 400 meters for the MG 151/20. a 30 mm round for the MK 103 weighed about 4 times what a 20mm round did. The gun weighed about 3 1/2 times as much. The 30mm was much more destructive IF it hit.
Closest match for an "aimer" is the MG 151/15.

So with the Fw-187s might not the Luftwaffe have had its Mustang to attrit RAF Fighter Command?

Click to expand...

Not really, because one thing that you haven't mentioned with regards to the Mustang and its impact on the war, Viking, was its availability in numbers over the combat arena, as well as its performance. Whilst I believe the Fw 187 might have been an excellent fighter had it been put into production and service and it would have had a definite impact on precedings during the Battle of Britain, there would not have been enough of them to have made the same impact that the P-51 had over Germany in 1944-45.

What the Fw 187 might have done was prompt the British into developing a faster and better performing fighter sooner than what it did and not sticking with just fitting the Merlin 45 to the Spit Mk.I airframe to make the Spit V, which was intended as an interim only. Had the Germans had access to an aircraft with such superior performance that it would and could outclass anything else in the air at the time, you can guarantee the British would not have sat still. Perhaps instead of producing a two-speed, two-stage Merlin for bombers, as the Merlin 60 was originally intended, it could be argued that Rolls would have been asked to carry out research into this modification sooner to enable it to be fitted to the Spitfire sooner, so the Spit Mk.IX could have been available around mid to late 1941 at a guess.

This would have enabled the Griffon to have been fitted with the same supercharger technology sooner, which might have produed not only a Griffon engined Spitfire sooner, but a two-speed, two-stage Griffon engined Spitfire, the 'XIV sooner. What impact would these decisions have made on the Luftwaffe? Also bearing in mind that if Focke Wulf is putting resources into the Fw 187, what are they not putting resources into that had them in real life? The Fw 190? Surely that might not be the best path to have taken for the Luftwaffe considering how excellent that aircraft was.

Shortround6 said:

Effective range was considered 800meters for the MK 103, 400 meters for the MG 151/20. a 30 mm round for the MK 103 weighed about 4 times what a 20mm round did. The gun weighed about 3 1/2 times as much. The 30mm was much more destructive IF it hit.
Closest match for an "aimer" is the MG 151/15.

Click to expand...

The Zero/"Harmonization" charts I have seen all show 600M Effective range for the Various weapons fits in German fighters, not counting the Mk-103 which was "Over" 1,000M.
The only exception was the Mk-108 which was not effective at under 400M except possibly when shooting at bombers. My favorite bit of German GCF shows several Nazi Fighters trying to down P-47s. The huge curvature of trajectory of the Mk-108 tracers is clearly visible, even at very close range and the obvious lack of effect, as in no hits what so ever, is also clearly visible.

nuuumannn said:

Not really, because one thing that you haven't mentioned with regards to the Mustang and its impact on the war, Viking, was its availability in numbers over the combat arena, as well as its performance. Whilst I believe the Fw 187 might have been an excellent fighter had it been put into production and service and it would have had a definite impact on precedings during the Battle of Britain, there would not have been enough of them to have made the same impact that the P-51 had over Germany in 1944-45.

What the Fw 187 might have done was prompt the British into developing a faster and better performing fighter sooner than what it did and not sticking with just fitting the Merlin 45 to the Spit Mk.I airframe to make the Spit V, which was intended as an interim only. Had the Germans had access to an aircraft with such superior performance that it would and could outclass anything else in the air at the time, you can guarantee the British would not have sat still. Perhaps instead of producing a two-speed, two-stage Merlin for bombers, as the Merlin 60 was originally intended, it could be argued that Rolls would have been asked to carry out research into this modification sooner to enable it to be fitted to the Spitfire sooner, so the Spit Mk.IX could have been available around mid to late 1941 at a guess.

This would have enabled the Griffon to have been fitted with the same supercharger technology sooner, which might have produed not only a Griffon engined Spitfire sooner, but a two-speed, two-stage Griffon engined Spitfire, the 'XIV sooner. What impact would these decisions have made on the Luftwaffe? Also bearing in mind that if Focke Wulf is putting resources into the Fw 187, what are they not putting resources into that had them in real life? The Fw 190? Surely that might not be the best path to have taken for the Luftwaffe considering how excellent that aircraft was.

Click to expand...

You seem to miss the point that the Mk-IX and the even more extreme Mk-XIV both had very long gestation periods. The single largest problem with both of them was the lack of Directional Stability caused by fitment of the four and later five bladed props which added enough area forward, that the rudder and Horizontal Stab were no longer large enough to have the same sterling flight qualities as the earlier types.

SHOOTER said:

You seem to miss the point that the Mk-IX and the even more extreme Mk-XIV both had very long gestation periods...

Click to expand...

So you think some 4 months from idea to production is a very long gestation period? What is your definitation for a short gestation period? One can say that Mk VIII suffered from a long gestation period but not Mk IX.

Juha

SHOOTER said:

You seem to miss the point that the Mk-IX and the even more extreme Mk-XIV both had very long gestation periods. The single largest problem with both of them was the lack of Directional Stability caused by fitment of the four and later five bladed props which added enough area forward, that the rudder and Horizontal Stab were no longer large enough to have the same sterling flight qualities as the earlier types.

Click to expand...

Never heard that the IX had any major stability problems. The IX's gestation period was not all that long. The first Spitfire to get a 60-series Merlin was the Spitfire III prototype, in September 1941. The first IX, a converted V, was being trialed by April 1942.

The XIV had some, but they were solved.

And part of the time it took to develop and put these aircraft into production was waiting for production of the engines to get going. Merlin 61s only started coming off the line in 1942.

The XIV used the improved airframe of the VII/VIII. The devlopment of which was delayed by stop-gap measures such as putting the IX into production.

nuuumannn said:

What the Fw 187 might have done was prompt the British into developing a faster and better performing fighter sooner than what it did and not sticking with just fitting the Merlin 45 to the Spit Mk.I airframe to make the Spit V, which was intended as an interim only.

Click to expand...

That may have led to Spitfire IIIs instead of Vs and no Hurricane IIs.

Shortround6 said:

In looking through the book it helps some and is also confusing at certain points.

The DB engines used some sort of cooling that allowed the creation of steam, ( so did the Merlin and Allison but to a lesser extent?). Items called "condensers" were used but NO pictures or diagrams of ANY wing surfaces are in the book (unlike the HE 100)
There are pictures of ""condensers"/radiators underneath the engine that are almost as long as the cylinder blocks, pictures show engine uncowled. Test rigs were built that allowed the tilting of the engine and cooling system to different angles. Cooling system appears to be in unit with the engine.

Click to expand...

Thanks SR.

The "condesers" under the cylinder blocks may be heat exhchangers with liquid/vapour on one side and a cooling liquid on the other side. That is, maybe, 2 cooling circuits.

Hi DonL,

When you post something about an American plane, say, a P-51 or a P-40, do you use original primary source documents from North American or Curtiss? If so, where did you get them? You probably cannot get original primary source documents from Japan or the former Soviet Union, so you have to rely on secondary sources if you talk about a Lavochkin or MiG.

When we restored our A6M5 model 52 Zero, we had help from Mitsubishi and Nakajima, and they wouldn't give the information to anyone except to restore an original aircraft, which we did. So, if you write about the Zero, what primary source would you use?

I find it almost impossible to believe that only ONE author in the world knows the full story of the Fw 187. If he can find the information, so can other people. Actually it was made in such small numbers that very few people have written anything on it, and most of them agree with one another.

So ... I am interested enough to have ordered the book you described. I'll refrain until I get it (and READ it) and then decide whether the author is telling the truth or whether he is another of the same sort you feel all the other authors are.

A surface evaporative cooling system can use steam separators, otherwise known as condensers, and I am not convinced the Fw 187 with the DB engines did not use surface evaporation yet. The information I have says it had issues wuith skin buckling, but does not go into specifics about the locaion of same, so I don't know the location except that it was reported for the DB-powered aircraft. The skin bucking might be connected to the cooling and might not be, the cause of it was not stated where I read about it. When encountered, it can be easy to fix or quite problematic, depending on what the issue is.

While we may not think the same in the end, I'll wait until I read this new account and see how it compares with the data I already have. As far as your demads to tell the forum where I got data, I already did, in my posts, and that is as far as it will go at this time.

The information I have says the Fw 187 was supposed to be very maneuverable, which might change a bit as they added heavier engines, but it makes me wonder why the RLM didn't proceed with it. Perhaps that is covered in the book you suggested. At this time I am under the impression the Fw 187 was killed due internal Third Reich politics, and that smacks of truth though I don't know for sure. Politics is bad regardless of nationality.

Meanwhile, have a nice day.

wuzak said:

Never heard that the IX had any major stability problems. The IX's gestation period was not all that long. The first Spitfire to get a 60-series Merlin was the Spitfire III prototype, in September 1941. The first IX, a converted V, was being trialed by April 1942.

The XIV had some, but they were solved.

And part of the time it took to develop and put these aircraft into production was waiting for production of the engines to get going. Merlin 61s only started coming off the line in 1942.

The XIV used the improved airframe of the VII/VIII. The devlopment of which was delayed by stop-gap measures such as putting the IX into production.

Click to expand...

Wuzak, don't waste your time trying to correct him.

Shooter has confused the Mk XIVs minor lateral control instability with the Mk 21s more substantial problems. He's been corrected on this time and time again here and other forums (Warbirds Forum, Strategy PAge, Tony William's forums) both by me and other members.

He simply refuses to accept he is wrong about it.

This is a very depressing thread. Ive read the discussiuon, and come to the conclusion that it is not worth getting involved. Most of you guys will be relieved and happy to hear that Im sure.


Good luck trying to solve thye unsolvable