Fw-191C

Discussion in 'Aviation' started by davebender, Nov 8, 2010.

  1. davebender

    davebender Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2009
    Messages:
    6,418
    Likes Received:
    64
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Michigan, USA
    #1 davebender, Nov 8, 2010
    Last edited: Nov 8, 2010
    Focke-Wulf Fw 191 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    Just what the German Navy needed for a maritime patrol bomber. Why didn't they fund the Fw-191C or something similiar rather then piddling around with aircraft like the Ju-290 and Do-217?
    [​IMG]
     
  2. johnbr

    johnbr Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2006
    Messages:
    2,534
    Likes Received:
    399
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Retired
    Location:
    London Ontario Canada
    Because it made to much sense.
     
  3. vikingBerserker

    vikingBerserker Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2009
    Messages:
    24,093
    Likes Received:
    656
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Korporate Kontrolleur
    Location:
    South Carolina
    Interesting, would it have been better to just improve upon the Fw 200? It seems the only thing the 191 had over it was thebomb load it could carry - with more powerful engines the 200 probably could have matched it.
     
  4. davebender

    davebender Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2009
    Messages:
    6,418
    Likes Received:
    64
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Michigan, USA
    If I'm carrying passengers then I want an aircraft like the Fw-200 which was designed for that purpose. If I'm carrying bombs then I want an aircraft like the Fw-191C which was designed as a bomber.

    In the case of the Fw-191C I like the idea of 4 reliable Jumo 211F engines for 10+ hour flights over water. I also like having a bomb bay large enough for two aerial torpedos or two BT700 torpedo-bombs (for skip bombing).
     
  5. Jabberwocky

    Jabberwocky Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2005
    Messages:
    1,090
    Likes Received:
    16
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Occupation:
    Teacher
    Location:
    Japan
    #5 Jabberwocky, Nov 8, 2010
    Last edited: Nov 8, 2010
    Because there was so little payoff for the effort.

    Germany already had two patrol bombers already in production, the Jumo 222 and DB-604 were chronically unreliable and in 1942 the design was several years away from being ready unless it was re-plumbed for different engines, like Jumo 211s, DB601/DB605s or 801Ds.

    It took Focke-Wulf three years to produce just three complete Fw-191 prototypes. There were problems with the electrical systems, flaps, remote gun stations and, most importantly, lateral stability.

    Even if the aircraft had worked out its little bugs in service, producing a four engine variant and getting it into production/initial service before early 1944 would be no little feat.
     
  6. Milosh

    Milosh Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2009
    Messages:
    1,919
    Likes Received:
    96
    Trophy Points:
    48
    davebender, what do you do for a living?
     
  7. davebender

    davebender Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2009
    Messages:
    6,418
    Likes Received:
    64
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Michigan, USA
    Which German naval aircraft are your referring to? Let's use 1940 for the purposes of this discussion.

    German aircraft production during World War II - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    104 x AR-196. A short range ship based seaplane.
    82 x BV-138. A long range seaplane.
    49 x Do-18. A medium range seaplane used for air-sea rescue.
    76 x He-115. A long range seaplane torpedo bomber.
    1 x Do-24. A long range seaplane.
    36 x Fw200. Converted airliners. However they are Germany's only land based naval attack aircraft.

    IMO this does not constitute a serious naval air arm. The German Navy should have funded something as good or better then the Japanese G4M (Betty) bomber. It doesn't need to be the Fw-191C. However I think that particular design has the right characteristics to make it effective in the long range naval attack role.
     
  8. riacrato

    riacrato Member

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2009
    Messages:
    669
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Occupation:
    Project Manager in FADEC industrialization
    All German bombers I can think of were used for anti-shipping duties as well.
     
  9. DerAdlerIstGelandet

    DerAdlerIstGelandet Der Crew Chief
    Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2004
    Messages:
    41,771
    Likes Received:
    687
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    A&P - Aircraft Technician
    Location:
    USA/Germany
    There were more pressing and urgent things to spending resources on than the Fw 191. The Fw 200 was able to do the job fine enough. Why waste resources that should be used for more urgent things like fighters?
     
  10. CharlesBronson

    CharlesBronson Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2005
    Messages:
    3,822
    Likes Received:
    66
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Metalurgic Technician
    Location:
    Cordoba - Argentina
    They simply prefer to have 4 fighters or 2 medium bombers instead a single recce/bomber aircraft, the engine production numbers are key to undestand some plans of the german air force.
     
  11. davebender

    davebender Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2009
    Messages:
    6,418
    Likes Received:
    64
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Michigan, USA
    This debate isn't about building Luftwaffe bombers ILO Luftwaffe fighters.

    I am talking about the German Navy building a naval air arm ILO ordering so many battleships and heavy cruisers. For instance 6 H class dreadnoughts were approved during January 1939 and two were laid down before WWII began. Each H class battleship cost about as much as the Ostmark aircraft engine plant (originally intended to produce Jumo222A V24 engines). Each H class battleship cost more then the Gelsenberg hydrogenation plant which produced 400,000 tons of aviation fuel and 460,000 tons of motor fuel per year.
     
  12. DerAdlerIstGelandet

    DerAdlerIstGelandet Der Crew Chief
    Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2004
    Messages:
    41,771
    Likes Received:
    687
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    A&P - Aircraft Technician
    Location:
    USA/Germany
    #12 DerAdlerIstGelandet, Nov 9, 2010
    Last edited: Nov 9, 2010
    Then what is the point of this discussion? You wondered why they did not put an emphasis on developing this aircraft. I gave you a valid reason. Resources for engines and aircraft could very well have been a major reason why. If they felt they had what they needed, then why allocate more aero resources that could be used for other things such as fighters?

    Excuse me, I wasn't aware that I was not allowed to do this :rolleyes:
     
  13. Shortround6

    Shortround6 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2009
    Messages:
    9,779
    Likes Received:
    802
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    retired Firefighter
    Location:
    Central Florida Highlands
    they may have been "approved" but they were not built, as you note, 4 were never even laid down, only small amounts of material was assembled for them. much of the "ordered" material was not delivered or ever left the steel mills. The total "approved" money was never spent on them. It was spent on something else, just as all those ship yard workers didn't sit on the hands for years, they did other work.
    there is no vast sum of money that could be redirected to long range maritime bombers which ,without fighter escort, are just going to get shot down anyway if they meet fighter opposition.
     
  14. Gixxerman

    Gixxerman Member

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2009
    Messages:
    517
    Likes Received:
    15
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Occupation:
    retired
    Location:
    Northern Ireland
    I would largely agree with that but from my reading the issue and problem here isn't one of aircraft as such but politics.

    Goering is widely reported as doing everything in his power to avoid a 'proper' Kriegsmarine air arm - and by doing so obstructed a truly naval air-arm dedicated to operating like one......and selecting machines fit for the purposes that they, not the LW, identify.

    Surely the truth is demonstrated by the reality of what happened (relatively small handful of seaplanes aside) no matter which aircraft was ever available it would undoubtedly have been a LW operated plane and as such always liable to LW priorities, operational use and being side-tracked onto other needy missions?
    The huge losses of the training aircraft and so much of the LW's bomber force pressed into transport duties at Stalingrad being a case in point?

    I'm sure the Fw 191 could have been an interesting naval aircraft if it's bugs could have been worked out but this is IMHO a separate issue and one which comes long after the debate over whether the KM is actually allowed to get have their own naval air-arm is settled.
     
  15. davebender

    davebender Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2009
    Messages:
    6,418
    Likes Received:
    64
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Michigan, USA
    Everything I have read suggests Admiral Raeder did everything in his power to channel most of the naval construction budget into battleships and heavy cruisers. Even submarines received a low construction priority prior to about 1940. I think that's the crux of the issue. Goering wasn't going to provide naval aircraft for free during the mid to late 1930s while the German Navy spent most of their huge budget on battleships.
     
  16. Milosh

    Milosh Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2009
    Messages:
    1,919
    Likes Received:
    96
    Trophy Points:
    48
    The first flight of the twin engined Fw191 did not happen til early 1942.

    The four engined Fw191C came about because of the failure of the B-Bomber program.

    So what is all this nonsense about the 1930s since the Fw191C was a late war airplane.
     
  17. davebender

    davebender Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2009
    Messages:
    6,418
    Likes Received:
    64
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Michigan, USA
    That's when the German Navy was spending money like water for capital ship construction. If the KM are to fund a serious aviation program it will need to start about 1935.
     
  18. Shortround6

    Shortround6 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2009
    Messages:
    9,779
    Likes Received:
    802
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    retired Firefighter
    Location:
    Central Florida Highlands

    Since Goring claimed anything remotely connected with aircraft belong to him (parachute troops and ground based AA guns) it may not have been a question of Goring providing planes for free but rather NOT building battleships (using the Navy budget for the Navy) and building aircraft for Goring to use/allocate (Using the Navy budget to build the Luftwaffe?).
    While it seems obvious NOW what should have been done in the late 30s it was nowhere near as obvious at the time. There is also the question of the naval treaties of the time and in particular the Anglo-German naval treaty

    Anglo-German Naval Agreement - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Now we know that most of these treaties were broken in one way or another but a massive submarine building program could not be hidden and would have prompted some sort of response from the British even if it was just the building of more escorts earlier.
    While 6 "H" class battle ships was certainly breaking the treaty the laying down of two more Bismark or "H" class ships was not. How much of the program could the Germans have kept hidden and for how long?
     
  19. Shortround6

    Shortround6 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2009
    Messages:
    9,779
    Likes Received:
    802
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    retired Firefighter
    Location:
    Central Florida Highlands

    Again, the idea of the KM funding a serious program of aircraft construction that they would not control or use as they wished was a non-starter. If the Heer could not control the parachute troops, even to the point of what arms they would use or that each Heer division had attached Luftwaffe flak units what makes you think that Goring was going to let the KM have it's own private air force?
     
  20. davebender

    davebender Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2009
    Messages:
    6,418
    Likes Received:
    64
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Michigan, USA
    What makes you think Goering had absolute control over all aspects of the German military budget during 1935?

    Admiral Raeder appealed directly to Hitler for funding of German capital ship construction. If he desires a naval air service ILO battleships Admiral Raeder would appeal directly to Hitler for funding of that also.
     
Loading...
Similar Threads
  1. blobs
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    937
  2. Bucksnort101
    Replies:
    33
    Views:
    6,814
  3. Adaing1976
    Replies:
    10
    Views:
    3,452
  4. danielp
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    1,468
  5. zeppelinman
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    2,180

Share This Page