Fw-190 A Series - Hypothetical Senario Question

Discussion in 'Aviation' started by Broncazonk, Aug 11, 2008.

  1. Broncazonk

    Broncazonk Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2008
    Messages:
    31
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    It's July 1943, and you have just replaced Adolf Galland as General der Jagdflieger.

    Realizing:

    The Me-262 is a long way off -
    The Daimler 603 Fw-190 is a long way off -
    The Jumo 213 Fw-190 is a long way off -

    What can YOU do to make the Fw-190 (specifically) more competitive in the East and West?


    Bronc
     
  2. KrazyKraut

    KrazyKraut Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2008
    Messages:
    339
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    1. It's still very competitive in the east. No change required so far (1943).

    2. Build turbocharged BMW 801Js to increase competitiveness in the west.
     
  3. Broncazonk

    Broncazonk Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2008
    Messages:
    31
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Did the General der Jagdflieger have the authority to order the BMW 801J into production?

    I would have done five things immediately:

    1) Remove ALL outboard MG-151/20's to improve speed, climb and turn. (Sacrifice firepower for increased survivability.)

    2) Installed rubber engine cover seals and gaskets to streamline the cowling.
    (Amazingly, when they did this with the D-9, it improved the speed considerably.)

    3) Retrieved all of the 'black-men' that were sent to the Luftwaffe infantry divisions. At any one time, something like 40% - 50% of all the Fw-190's ever built were sitting around somewhere in an unserviceable condition. If you can build only so many, it makes sense to keep all of what you do have flying.

    4) Strip out the MG-151's and Mg-151/20's on Fw-190's flying bomber interception missions and replace them with one (1) Mk-103 30mm in a central pod with lots of ammunition. (You don't hunt elephants with a .22 cal machine gun. "Use enough gun," means two or three 30mm hits on a heavy and it goes down.)

    5) Find a way to replace the supercharger gear ratio and cut-in altitude so it would cut in earlier.

    Bronc
     
  4. delcyros

    delcyros Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2005
    Messages:
    2,037
    Likes Received:
    27
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Berlin (Kreuzberg)
    1.) remove all outboard guns. This can be done on the lower service unit level

    2.) Install a paddle prop (improving climb rate).

    3.) serially install computing gunsights for improving long range hitting rates

    4.) replace the MG 151/20 and the MG 131 with four MG 151/15 (less weight, same volume of fire but massively better ballistics).
    5.) rework the engine controll unit so that it doesn´t suffer the division by zero error. (improves altitude power output)
     
  5. Broncazonk

    Broncazonk Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2008
    Messages:
    31
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I'm sorry, "the division by zero error" term goes right over my head.

    Would you please have mercy and explain?

    Bronc
     
  6. drgondog

    drgondog Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2006
    Messages:
    7,359
    Likes Received:
    561
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Executive, Consulting
    Location:
    Scurry, Texas
    The Fw 190A6 and A7 were excellent a/c. The problems they encountered as interceptors at 24,000-30,000 feet is that altitude zone was the best performance altitude for it's opponents in the P-47 and later the Mustang and later the P-38J/L.
     
  7. kool kitty89

    kool kitty89 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2007
    Messages:
    3,069
    Likes Received:
    36
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    San Jose, CA
    The problem with using turbochargers is that they usually required the same scarse materials for the turbines that were being diverted for the jet engines. (though thy could probably have developed some alternative versions using substitute materials, but I don't know if this was done)
     
  8. delcyros

    delcyros Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2005
    Messages:
    2,037
    Likes Received:
    27
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Berlin (Kreuzberg)
    I am afraid that I don´t understand much of the technical issue behind. IIRC, RG_Lunatic deserves the credit for mentioning it the first time on this board (it is actually buried here on another Fw-190 discussion).

    Best regards,
     
  9. Soren

    Soren Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2005
    Messages:
    6,624
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Delcyros, the division by zero error os non-existant. The higher alt performance issue suffered by the Anton series had to do with the engine supercharger, it nothing to do with the kommandogerät.
     
  10. Soren

    Soren Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2005
    Messages:
    6,624
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Well said.
     
  11. KrazyKraut

    KrazyKraut Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2008
    Messages:
    339
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I disagree with lots of ammunition. The best approach was the "Kompaniefront" - gathering all fighters ahead of the bombers and make a single frontal pass and then use the speed advantage to escape. You don't need extra ammo for that. I also think the MK-103 is rather worthless: Too heavy, too large and I don't think "sniping" the bombers would've worked anyway.
     
  12. HoHun

    HoHun Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2006
    Messages:
    1,766
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Hi Broncazonk,

    >It's July 1943, and you have just replaced Adolf Galland as General der Jagdflieger.

    Maybe of interesting in this context: In August 1942, the first prototype of the Fw 190A-3/U7 made its first flight. In the current issue of Flugzeug Classic, there is an article by Dietmar Hermann on this type.

    The gist of it: The Fw 190A-3/U7 was down in weight to 3660 kg from the 3850 kg from a standard A-3. This was achieved by eliminating pilot back and head armour, the cowl guns and by using non-sealing fuel tanks. Additionally, forward-facing "cheek" intakes were used to exploit ram effect.

    This resulted in a decrease in turn radius from 1450 m at 10 km altitude for the A-3 to 1250 m for the A-3/U7. The Höhenjagdflugzeug, which would have a slightly enlarged wingspan (12.3 m) and wing area (20.3 m^2) - adding another 40 kg to the weight of the A-3/U7 - would have decreased turn radius to 950 m.

    For the longer wings, the safe pull-out load multiple decreased from 6.93 for the A-3 to 6.0 for the (lighter) Höhenjagdflugzeug.

    The Fw 190A-3/U7 with enlarged wing achieved an initial climb rate of 18 m/s, a ceiling of 11.9 km and a top speed of 694 km/h @ 7.4 km at "take-off power". Sea level speed was 534 km/h at take-off power.

    The article is a bit contradictory with regard to the A-3/U7 - it seems it had the enlarged wing, but the above comparison suggests otherwise. Three prototypes were built.

    Hermann reports that the full throttle height increased from 6400 m for the A-3 to 7400 m for the A-3/U7 thanks to the external intakes. Reportedly, this means 60% ram efficiency compared to 22% ram efficiency for the standard variant. Unfortunately, he omitted the full throttle heights for climb, or there'd be a good way to cross-check it.

    Anyway, someone once posted a later chart on the Fw 190A-6, showing 652 km/h @ 6300 m for internal intakes versus 655 km/h @ 6850 m for external intakes. The gain above full throttle height appears to be around 10 to 15 km/h top speed, quite a bit less than the figures mentioned in Hermann's article.

    Regards,

    Henning (HoHun)
     
  13. tango35

    tango35 Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2005
    Messages:
    208
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Occupation:
    Marketing
    Location:
    Hannover Region
    Maybe a bit off topic, but i would force the development of the He 280 at Wien Schwechat - this was a twin jet before the Me 262 came; but Messerschmitt ws a Nazi and so he got the privilege to produce the jet fighter first. Anfd for the Fw 190 no changes at that time

    Thomas
     
  14. tango35

    tango35 Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2005
    Messages:
    208
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Occupation:
    Marketing
    Location:
    Hannover Region
    From Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaJump to: navigation, search
    He 280

    Heinkel He-280 V2.
    Note missing engine cowlings. Early flights were carried out with cowlings removed in order to minimize the risk of fire as a result of dripping fuel.[1]
    Role Fighter
    Manufacturer Heinkel
    Designed by Robert Lusser
    First flight September 22, 1940
    Status Cancelled
    Produced 1940–1943
    Number built 9

    The Heinkel He 280 was the first turbojet-powered fighter aircraft in the world. It was inspired by Ernst Heinkel's emphasis on research into high-speed flight and built on the company's experience with the He 178 jet prototype. A combination of technical and political factors led to it being passed over in favor of the Messerschmitt Me 262.[citation needed] Only nine were built and none reached operational status.[citation needed]

    Contents [hide]
    1 Development
    2 Specifications (He 280 V3)
    3 See also
    4 References

    [edit] Development
    The Heinkel company began the He 280 project on its own initiative after the He 178 had been met with indifference from the Reichsluftfahrtministerium ("RLM") (Ger. "Reich Aviation Ministry"). The head designer was Robert Lusser, who began the project under the designation He 180 in late 1939. It had a typical Heinkel fighter fuselage, elliptically-shaped wings and a dihedralled tailplane with twin fins and rudders. The landing gear was of the retractable tricycle type with very little ground clearance.[2] Internally, the He 280 was equipped with a compressed-air powered ejection seat, the first aircraft to carry one. It was also planned to pressurize the cockpit.[citation needed]

    The first prototype was completed in the summer of 1940, but the HeS 8 intended to power it was running into difficulties. On 22 September 1940, while work on the engine continued, the first prototype started glide tests with ballast hung in place of its engines.[2] It would be another six months before Fritz Schäfer would take the second prototype into the air under its own power, on 30 March 1941. The type was then demonstrated to Ernst Udet, head of RLM's development wing, on 5 April, but like its predecessor, it apparently failed to make an impression.[citation needed]

    Had Udet approved development, Heinkel would have received the extra funding which they needed. This might have led to a rectification of the problems they were having with the jet engines. This was the case across all jet engine development in Germany; government funding was lacking at the critical stage that of initial development.

    A contest flight in 1941 comparing an He 280 with a Focke-Wulf Fw 190 had the He 280 completing four laps of an oval course before the Fw 190 could complete three. Ernst Heinkel designed a smaller jet fighter airframe for the He 280 that was well matched to the lower-thrust jet engines available in 1941. The maximum weight of the He 280 was 4,296 kg (9,470 lb), compared to 7,130 kg (15,720 lb) for the Me 262 (which did not get an adequate thrust engine until late 1944). The He 280 could have gone into production by late 1941 and maintained the air superiority which the Fw 190 had established, and filled the gap between the Fw 190 and Me 262. Initial problems with the HeS 8 engine would have likely been ironed out as production of the fighter began.

    Some of the resistance to the He 280 would make little sense today. The tricycle landing gear was considered too frail for grass or dirt airfields which were common at the time especially in Russia and North Africa. The Me 262 was originally designed as a tail-dragger, but this configuration makes it difficult for a jet to become airborne. Test pilots had to tap on the brakes to get the Me 262 tail off the ground while trying to take off. Pioneered on its fifth prototype with fixed gear, and made retractable on the sixth prototype and afterwards, the Me 262 emerged with its redesigned tricycle landing gear.

    One benefit of the He 280 which impressed the political leadership was the fact that the jet engines could burn kerosene, which requires much less expense and refining than the high-octane fuel used by piston-engine aircraft. The He 280 might have been more easily "sold" if Heinkel stressed the possibility of using it as an attack aircraft for anti-shipping. While the R4M rockets were not available until 1944, the Germans did develop the Nebelwerfer in 1941, which was a 150 mm (5.9 in) artillery rocket launcher. These tubes could have been mounted underneath the wings of a jet. German pilots complained that bombs dropped by the Me 262 had little chance of hitting their targets. A forward-firing recoilless weapon would have been much more effective.

    Had the German government given support to production, the He 280s could conceivably have gone into production earlier in the war and reached the Luftwaffe earlier than was ultimately the case with the Me 262. But it was not to be, as Udet, on that April day in 1941, could not see a need for a plane without propellers, no matter what its future might be.[citation needed]

    Over the next year, progress was slow due to the ongoing engine problems. A second engine design, the HeS 30 was also undergoing development, both as an interesting engine in its own right, as well as a potential replacement for the HeS 8. In the meantime, alternative powerplants were considered, including the Argus As 014 pulsejet that famously powered the V-1 flying bomb.[3] (Using as many as eight was proposed.)[4]

    By the end of 1943, however, the third prototype was fitted with refined versions of the HeS 8 engine and was ready for its next demonstration. On 22 December, a mock dogfight was staged for RLM officials in which the He 280 was matched against an Fw 190. Here, the jet demonstrated its vastly superior speed.[citation needed] Finally, at this point the RLM became interested and placed an order for 20 pre-production test aircraft, to be followed by 300 production machines.

    Engine problems continued to plague the project. In 1942, the RLM had ordered Heinkel to abandon the HeS 8 and HeS 30 to focus all development on a follow-on engine, the HeS 011, a much more advanced (and therefore problematic) design.[citation needed] Meanwhile, the first He 280 prototype had been re-equipped with pulsejets[5] and was towed aloft to test them. Bad weather caused the aircraft to ice up, however, and before the jets could be tested, pilot Helmut Schenk became the first person to put an ejection seat to use. The seat worked perfectly, but the aircraft was lost, and never found.

    With the HeS 011 not expected for some time, Heinkel was forced to accept that it would have to use a competitor's engines, and selected the BMW 003. Unfortunately, this engine was also experiencing problems and delays, and in the meantime, the second He 280 prototype was re-engined with Junkers Jumo 004s while the next three airframes were earmarked for the BMW motor (which, in the end, would never be ready before the end of the He 280 project). The Jumo engines were much larger and heavier than the HeS 8 that the plane had been designed for, and while it flew well enough (for the first time on 16 March 1943), it was immediately obvious that this engine would be unsuitable in the long term.[citation needed] The aircraft was slower and generally less efficient than the Me 262.[2]

    Less than two weeks later, on 27 March, Erhard Milch cancelled the project. The Jumo 004-powered Me 262 appeared to have most of the qualities of the He 280, but was better matched to its engine. Heinkel was ordered to abandon the He 280 and focus attention on bomber development and construction, something he remained bitter about until his death.[citation needed]

    [edit] Specifications (He 280 V3)
    General characteristics

    Crew: 1, pilot
    Length: 10.40 m (34 ft 1 in)
    Wingspan: 12.20 m (40 ft)
    Height: 3.06 m (10 ft)
    Wing area: 21.5 m² (233 ft²)
    Empty weight: 3,215 kg (7,073 lb)
    Loaded weight: 4,280 kg (9,416 lb)
    Max takeoff weight: 4,300 kg (9,470 lb)
    Powerplant: 2× Heinkel HeS.8 turbojet, 5.9 kN (1,320 lbf) each
    Performance

    Maximum speed: 820 km/h (512 mph)
    Range: 370 km (230 mi)
    Service ceiling: 10,000 m (32,000 ft)
    Rate of climb: 1,145 m/min (3,756 ft/min)
    Armament


    3 × 20 mm MG 151/20 cannons


    So, ignorance and political memberships cancelled an early air superior fighter


    Thomas

    and now back to the topic
     
  15. riacrato

    riacrato Member

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2009
    Messages:
    669
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Occupation:
    Project Manager in FADEC industrialization
    If you read up on the subject besides wikipedia you will find out it is much more complex than that and that basically technical aspects and the choice of engines "killed" the He 280.
     
  16. davebender

    davebender Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2009
    Messages:
    6,418
    Likes Received:
    64
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Michigan, USA
    Too late to matter. Mass production requires at least a year of lead time. It will be mid 1944 before any of your proposed changes place equipment into operational service.

    Since we are talking about the Fw-190 you really need to make different decisions starting in 1937. I think it's possible to have the Fw-190C (DB603 engine) in mass production by 1941. The General der Jagdflieger must present a pursuasive case for continued development of the DB603 V12 engine ILO the historical decision to develop a large twin radial engine. Dr. Tank preferred the DB603 engine so you won't get any argument from him.
     
  17. Mosshorn

    Mosshorn Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2009
    Messages:
    44
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    These are field modifications, not production items.

    1) Remove the outboard wing MG-151/20's to improve speed, climb and turn.

    2) Installed engine panel seals and gaskets to seal and streamline the cowling.

    3) Strip out both cowl machine guns and replace them with one (1) Mk-103 30mm in a belly pod.

    4) Replace the supercharger gear ratio (and cut-in altitude) so it would cut in earlier and work higher.

    5) Add drop-tank mounts and the plumbing to both wings.

    In 1943, you would had an A - 4/5 armed with (2) 20mm's plus an incredibly powerful 30mm that was a tank AND a bomber killer with a much longer range. (The Mk-103 fired a HUGE round at about 3000 fps--a lot like the A-10 30mm round. The armor-piercing round was a T-34 killer and the HE round was a bomber killer.)

    Moss
     
  18. Mosshorn

    Mosshorn Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2009
    Messages:
    44
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
  19. Shortround6

    Shortround6 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2009
    Messages:
    9,761
    Likes Received:
    793
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    retired Firefighter
    Location:
    Central Florida Highlands
    Will only change the speed by a small amount \, climb a turn by a bit more while cutting fire power by a significant amount.

    It was done in some cases though.


    There is some question as to wither the MK 103 could be synchronized to fire through a propeller.
    While there is a picture of a plane with MK 103s in the wing roots it may be a test rig and no other type of German plane ever carried such an installation.

    Replacing a pair MG 17 pea shooters with an external 30mm cannon is not even close to a fair swap in either weight or drag.
    Not sure what you are trying to do here. to work higher you need a higher gear ratio. A higher gear ratio needs more power to turn the supercharger at all altitudes so while it will move the full throttle height higher it does mean that the engine will have less power to the propeller at all heights below the old FTH and and only provide more power at a hight above were the old gear ratio was falling off. Single stage superchargers had height restrictions no matter what gear ratio was used to drive them. Cutting in the high ratio sooner just means less power at the altitudes in question because A. the higher ratio needs more power from the engine and B. At the change over point the engine has to be throttled back to keep the boost from wrecking the engine, this also introduces pumping losses and also higher charge heating which lowers the charge density and power.

    Already done on some fighter bomber versions.
     
  20. davebender

    davebender Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2009
    Messages:
    6,418
    Likes Received:
    64
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Michigan, USA
    That's a rather large and heavy weapon. The Fw-190 would need to be designed for it from the beginning. However Fw-190s powered by V12 engines (DB603 and/or Jumo213) could probably fire the lighter Mk108 3cm cannon through the propellor shaft.
     
Loading...

Share This Page