Fw 187 for 1939-45

[JuniorJarhead09]

How much there is left of the Bf 109B when we are at Bf 109F1, or when we are at 109K-4? Ho much there is left of the DB-7 when we're at A-20G?

We All know 109 E 109 F are 2 completely different airframes.
109F really is the ME-209 if you think about it.
G and K are also redesigns you can say

 

[GrauGeist]

We All know 109 E 109 F are 2 completely different airframes.
109F really is the ME-209 if you think about it.
G and K are also redesigns you can say

The Bf109E and F are not completely different airframes.
The F was developed from the E airframe (V21, V22, V23 and V24).

The Me209-II was developed from the Bf109G.

 

[tomo pauk]

<snip>

Thanks for the feedback.
It is beyond the scope of this thread, though.

 

[Shortround6]

Sidenote: A-4 frame is smaller than the A-5 frame.

Not sure what we are getting at here.
The A-4 and A-5 used pretty much the same airframe. The A-5 was intended to cover over problems with Jumo 211J engine deliveries. So they took the A-1 airframes (fuselage?), stuck the bigger A-4 wing on them, fitted the beefed up landing gear of the A-4 and used the Jumo 211B-1, G-1, H-1 engines of 1200hp instead of the 1340hp Jumo J-1 engines.

I'd rather have 6 FW190 chasing 2 B17/B24 stragglers than 2 ju-88's.

Well, so would most people, But that depends of how long the chase is.

FW-190F series comes out years earlier. Really no reason to NOT have an F line as soon as the 190 comes out real world either. F series climbed quicker to 3k meters.

Well, they were fooling around with the Fw 190F-1 (converted A-4 airframes) the fall of 1942. The F-2 showed up in the spring of 1943.
Maybe you can speed things up by ONE year. More than one year is really pushing things. It took until the end of Oct 1941 for the 100 Fw-190A-1s to show up. The A-2 overlapped but they only built 124 A-2s by the end of 1941.
Please note that the BMW 801D-1 engine was not available until the Spring of 1942. Any ground attack Fw 190s built in 1941 or early 1942 would have had to use the C-1/2 versions of the engine. Down about 100hp for take-off. For ground attack the lower performance at 15,000-20,000ft would be less important. Please note that historically the 190A-1s used the four Mg 17 armament ( some had 20mm FFMs added out board).
Germans were working on the ground attack version within 6 months of getting the A-3 into large scale production.
Sometimes development can be speeded up by using more manpower, sometimes it cannot.
British/American bombing was having very little impact on German production in 1942. It may have been affecting production planning/programs in anticipation of increased Allied raids for 1943.

 

[tomo pauk]

Not sure what we are getting at here.
The A-4 and A-5 used pretty much the same airframe. The A-5 was intended to cover over problems with Jumo 211J engine deliveries. So they took the A-1 airframes (fuselage?), stuck the bigger A-4 wing on them, fitted the beefed up landing gear of the A-4 and used the Jumo 211B-1, G-1, H-1 engines of 1200hp instead of the 1340hp Jumo J-1 engines

It is about the Fw 190.

Please note that historically the 190A-1s used the four Mg 17 armament ( some had 20mm FFMs added out board).

A-1s were the ones with the outboard MG FFMs. The A-0 were 4 LMGs only.

 

[Shortround6]

A-1s were the ones with the outboard MG FFMs. The A-0 were 4 LMGs only.

Old book (William Green) says many of the A-1s were built with 4 LMGS and had the MG FFMs added in service. Could be well be wrong.
But if we are discussing possible development, it has bearing as what would a ground attack 190 A-1 had been armed with?
Germans had not sorted out the synchronizer method (electric priming?) on the MG 151s in the summer/fall of 1941?
Adding extra armor to the early 190A's was certainly possible even with the lower powered engines. But trying to use more/heavier guns at the same time?
And in the summer/fall of 1941 would the Germans even be looking at heavier guns for ground attack than double the number of guns on Ju 87?

Now in the fall of 1942 it may have been a different story but this is part of the problem of trying to back date things.
Soviet equipment and resistance in the summer/fall of 1941 did not call for the same equipment was was desired in late 1942/early 1943.

 

[tomo pauk]

Old book (William Green) says many of the A-1s were built with 4 LMGS and had the MG FFMs added in service. Could be well be wrong.

It probably is

But if we are discussing possible development, it has bearing as what would a ground attack 190 A-1 had been armed with?
Germans had not sorted out the synchronizer method (electric priming?) on the MG 151s in the summer/fall of 1941?
Adding extra armor to the early 190A's was certainly possible even with the lower powered engines. But trying to use more/heavier guns at the same time?
And in the summer/fall of 1941 would the Germans even be looking at heavier guns for ground attack than double the number of guns on Ju 87?

It is about the Fw 187, but I guess any fruitful discussion is okay
Stick the MG FFM in the outer wing panels, that together with the four MG 17s will do for the ground attack. Main weapon should've been the bombs, IMO.

 

[MikeMeech]

Old book (William Green) says many of the A-1s were built with 4 LMGS and had the MG FFMs added in service. Could be well be wrong.
But if we are discussing possible development, it has bearing as what would a ground attack 190 A-1 had been armed with?
Germans had not sorted out the synchronizer method (electric priming?) on the MG 151s in the summer/fall of 1941?
Adding extra armor to the early 190A's was certainly possible even with the lower powered engines. But trying to use more/heavier guns at the same time?
And in the summer/fall of 1941 would the Germans even be looking at heavier guns for ground attack than double the number of guns on Ju 87?

Now in the fall of 1942 it may have been a different story but this is part of the problem of trying to back date things.
Soviet equipment and resistance in the summer/fall of 1941 did not call for the same equipment was was desired in late 1942/early 1943.

Hi
It is not just William Green books that mention that the A-1 (100 produced?) had 4 LMGs, that is why there was the A-2 (2 x 20mm + 2 LMGs) and A-3 (4 x 20mm + 2 LMGs) to replace them in production. So maybe all the other sources were incorrect as well (always possible if the same original source was used by different authors). What do your sources say the A-1 was armed with, and if it was well armed why was it replaced on the production line?

Mike

 

[tomo pauk]

It goes like this:
A0 - 4 LMGs as produced
A1 - 4 LMGs + 2 MG FFMs
A2 - 2 LMGs + 2MG FFMs + 2 MG 151/20s
A3 - more or less A2 with the new engine version

The German language Wikipedia has a very good article about the 190, that is easy to translate.
A0s were pretty much the test examples, later some of them saw the MG 131s installed (Wr. 008 and 014), MG 151s (instead of a pair wing root MG 17s?; Wr. 018), or the extra pair of MG FFMs (Wr. 021) - source is the table from May 1941, on page 27 in the Rodeike's book about 190s. Same source notes the above listed weapon set-up for the A1 etc.

Manuals about the Fw 190s can be gotten here, in the 1st post there are two about the 190A1.