FW187 as a fighter-bomber/ground attack aircraft?

I confess I don't know where the intercooler intakes are ... but I can ask in the next few days. The exhausts are very well routed ... 4 on top, 4 on each side, and 6 at the bottom of the cowling.

After thinking about this I was tempted to fire off a reply that it was 2-stage mechanically supercharged and didn't HAVE an intercooler, but I am not sure. Some R-2800's had an intercooler between the auxiliary supercharger and the main stage ... but I don't KNOW off the top of my head if the -22W and -34W were in that group.

So ... I'll ask as stated above.

The Tigercat and Bearcat were using single stage R-2800 engines. No intercoolers there: the ADI (water-alcohol injection) system was installed.
Every 2 stage R-2800 that saw service used intercoolers. From early 1944 on, they also used ADI in service.

I see two supercharger drive ratios for the -22W and -34W, but am not immediately aware just now if those are 2-stage or 2-speed. I very rarely memorize engine variants. Too easy to get it wrong in your mind.

I can certainly look it up, but wasn't in the mood to dig this evening.

Being a Navy plane, it makes sense to have a single-stage, 2-speed engine, but things don't always follow the sensible route ...

If I get a chance to work on a Bearcat or Tigercat, it would most likely not be an engine anyway. It would be sheet metal, systems or landing gear. I could do more, but Tigercats are privately owned these days and the owners are picky about who does what.

If I had one, I would be, too!

GregP said:

I see that in my reference above, it is said to have been completed with the DB601s but there are no performance numbers. According to another source, it achieved some 391 mph but, in service, the use of conventional radiators would have slowed it to 348 mph, so it was discarded. Another reference, German Aircraft of the Second World War by Kay Smith says it had DB 600 engines, not DB 601s, and that it was deemed "unsuitable."

So ... I overlooked the V5 in my first post and cannot find any two references that agree on either performance or engines installed ... other than the dates when it was accepted, Aug 1940, and the when taken out of service, July 1941, and parked.

I have no record of flights completed in any of the references.

It certainly LOOKS like a potential winner, but so did a lot of other potential service aircraft that were not eventually accepted into service ... on both sides. Maybe the radical cooling system was its downfall because it showed very promising performance until conventional radiators were needed. Then it's predicted performance became rather ordinary, speed-wise.

Maybe they didn't look much at handling when the projected top speed didn't represent a jump in performance in that category.

Click to expand...

Your post and citation is incorrect!

At paige 78 it is clearly stated that the FW 187 V5 with DB 601 V40 + 42 (1100PS each) clocked 635 km/h / 394,5 mph at sea level after measure flights from FW documents.

Reference on paige 158/159

Focke-Wulf Fw 187, An Illustrated History" by Dietmar Hermann and Peter Petrick

The reason Kurt Tank wanted to use DB600/601 was that they had pressurized cooling circuits which made them suitable for evaporative skin cooling which was all the rage for a while, Mitchell even tried it on the progenitor for the Spitfire. Neither the Jumo 210 or early Jumo 211 had a pressurized cooling circuit. Nevertheless the small Jumo 210 (21 Litres) using only radiators was still 100kmh faster than the Bf 109D which used the same engine.

Click to expand...

This information is incorrect!
The DB 600/601 had NOT pressurized cooling circuits till the DB 601 E

The idea with a evaporative skin cooling is to take the pressurized hot water from the engine, allow it to flash into steam, then use a centrifuge to separate out any water, then to condense the steam to a liquid in the skin of the aircraft eg the leading edges. Scavenge pumps than collect the water.

Click to expand...

The cooling system of the FW 187 was called Dampfheißkühlung and not Oberflächenverdampfungskühlung/ evaporative cooling and is described at the book, Focke-Wulf Fw 187, An Illustrated History" by Dietmar Hermann and Peter Petrick to detail at paige 73-78.
The system of the Fw 187 used not any "SKIN" of the aircraft, compare to the He 100, to condense the steam to a liquid in the skin of the aircraft.
It used radiators under the engine block to do this, which is described to detail and you can see at original pictures also at the book.

Fw187 CI+NY (WkNmr 1976) was fitted with DB engines and flown late 1939 onward. While it proved to be fast, it was prone to skin buckling and cooling problems. Last mention of it was 1942.

Click to expand...

What is the reference from Griehl?

Also at the book Focke-Wulf Fw 187, An Illustrated History" by Dietmar Hermann and Peter Petrick, is a detailed official specification of the FW 187 C as destroyer, which was send to the RLM.
At this specification are clear performance numbers/estimations of the FW 187 "destroyer" with DB 605 and conventional cooling.
The speed estimation was 682 km/h at 7,1 km full throttle high and 6620kg weight.

aboard the 1st

GregP said:

I see two supercharger drive ratios for the -22W and -34W, but am not immediately aware just now if those are 2-stage or 2-speed. I very rarely memorize engine variants. Too easy to get it wrong in your mind.

I can certainly look it up, but wasn't in the mood to dig this evening.

Being a Navy plane, it makes sense to have a single-stage, 2-speed engine, but things don't always follow the sensible route ...

If I get a chance to work on a Bearcat or Tigercat, it would most likely not be an engine anyway. It would be sheet metal, systems or landing gear. I could do more, but Tigercats are privately owned these days and the owners are picky about who does what.

If I had one, I would be, too!

Click to expand...

Number of supercharger speeds is directly related to the number of supercharger drive ratios. Hence - 2 speed S/C for the Tigercat's and Bearcat's R-2800s. Number of supercharger stages has no relation to the number of S/C speeds, it simply says that, for example in 2-stage system, one impeller, or one supercharger stage is fed by another S/C stage.
The USN was on forefront of 2-stage engines' development, two P&W engines were used on a wide sclale through ww2, while one Wright R-2600 with 2-stage S/C powered the 1st Hellcat's prototype. USN was never in the turbo business, they believed more in the engine-driven 2-stage systems.

tomo pauk said:

The USN was on forefront of 2-stage engines' development, two P&W engines were used on a wide sclale through ww2, while one Wright R-2600 with 2-stage S/C powered the 1st Hellcat's prototype. USN was never in the turbo business, they believed more in the engine-driven 2-stage systems.

Click to expand...

Oh, if only they had such interest with the V-1710

Hi DonL,

In my post I did not recall exactly the number so I said it achieved "some 391 mph," which is very close to being correct. That's why I added the "some" in front of the figure.

You say the author states that speed was at sea level; that is incorrect. He states it was achieved "at low level" on page 78. He makes no mention of the flight being at sea level at all. He DOES say the DB 601s could produce 1,350 HP for one minute at ground level, but that in no way implies the flight was made at sea level, it only tells us the power that the engine could produce at "ground level" which, in Bremen, is quite low but is not at mean sea level.

I must thank you for your post calling my attention to this topic again since, also, on page 77, the author states that "Until now the Fw 187 V-5, CI + NY, has usually been identified as a Fw 187 A-0 pre-production aircraft powered by Jumo 210 engines. As may be seen, this was not the case, for the Fw 187 V-5 was designed from the beginning for DB 601 engines and evaporation cooling."

Note the author offers no evidence of having DB 601 engines actually installed, he just asserts that it was designed for them. There are numerous instances of aircraft being designed for an engine only to be fitted with something else. The Bf 109 prototype was fitted with a Rolls-Royce engine when the intended engine was not available. After reading this carefully, I now discount his assertion that the V-5 was equipped with DB 601 engines because not one shred of evidence is provided except his assertion that it was designed for DB 601s. That isn't evidence that it ever happened.

So I now stick with my earlier assertion that no DB powered Fw 187 was ever flown until such time as some evidence that it actually had the DB 601s installed surfaces. It doesn't surface in this book by Hermann and Petrick. It is an unsubstantiated claim.

In the chapter on the FDw 187 V-4, no picture of the V-4 is shown. The pic on page 81 of the DB 601 in the V-7 airframe is very misleading since the V-7 was never flown with the DB engines. It was converted to Jumos when 80% completed. But the picture is not so captioned, even though that is the truth.

The only pic of the Fw 187 V-5 shown is on page 82 and I cannot tell what engines are installed. The cowlings are on and I can't see any actual exhaust stubs in the side view, though the cowlings look like DB cowlings (we have several display aircraft at the Planes of Fame with no engines ... but we have props installed for appearance ... it's easy to do). Look at the picture of the Bf 110 in page 101 ... the exhaust stubs are very clear. In the views on page 82 of the Fw 187 V-5, I can't see a single stub. In the front view I see the sheet metal bulges where they would come out, but no stubs. In every other real DB 601 installation, the stubs or manifolds are quite evident.

So the Fw 187 V-5 DID fly, but I see no evidence that the engines were DB 601s other than conjecture.

This post is not intended to start a fight, but because something was designed for a particular engine does NOT mean it ever had the engine installed. So, please don't go off wailing about my beliefs. You are free to believe whatever you want and I won't try to convince you otherwise.

I'll wait for some proof of DB 601s actually being installed and actually flown before I jump on the bandwagon and that proof in not in this book as far as I can tell so far. I'm still digging into it hoping to find some evidence somewhere along the way in the book.

Any thoughts about the FW187s potential with the BMW as a fighter-bomber or as a DB605 equipped interceptor, replacing the BF110/Me410 as a bomber destroyer and not requiring a Me109/FW190 escort?

Perhaps you should learn to read!
Sorry for my rudeness, but what you here post is a complete ly and isn't written in this book!
Also you can see at paige 158 and 159 very clearly the references from Daimler Benz about the FW 187 V5.

You are clearly lying to this forum about the statements in this book!

On page 77 and 78 in following sentences (in one block) is written:
Bislang ist die Fw 187 V5, SKZ CI+NY immer wieder in die mit Jumo 210 angetriebene Fw 187 A0 Vorserie eingereiht worden, Dies ist wie hier ausführlich dargelegt wurde nicht richtig, denn die Fw 187 V-5 war von Anfang an mit DB 601 Motorosierung und Dampfheisskühlung vorgesehen gewesen. Die V-5 erhielt für die Erprobung mit der Dampfheisskühlung erstmalig versuchsweise zwei der noch seltenen DB 601 V Motoren, nämlich den DB 601 V 40 + V 42. Diese zwi Motoren basieren auf den 1100 PS starken DB 601 A.

"Until now the Fw 187 V-5, CI + NY, has usually been identified as a Fw 187 A-0 pre-production aircraft powered by Jumo 210 engines. As may be seen, this was not the case, for the Fw 187 V-5 was designed from the beginning for DB 601 engines and evaporation cooling." NEXT SENTENCE
The V-5 was given for testing the steam Heisskühlung first tentative two of the more rare DB 601 V engines, namely the DB 601 V 40 + V 42. These engines are based on the 1100 PS DB 601 A.

Note the author offers no evidence of having DB 601 engines actually installed, he just asserts that it was designed for them. There are numerous instances of aircraft being designed for an engine only to be fitted with something else. The Bf 109 prototype was fitted with a Rolls-Royce engine when the intended engine was not available. After reading this carefully, I now discount his assertion that the V-5 was equipped with DB 601 engines because not one shred of evidence is provided except his assertion that it was designed for DB 601s. That isn't evidence that it ever happened.

Click to expand...

This is a complete ly, because the Author stated exactly which engines the V-5 has flown in the next sentence of your cited sentence.

There are four pictures of the Fw 187 V5 paige 81 and 82!

You say the author states that speed was at sea level; that is incorrect. He states it was achieved "at low level" on page 78. He makes no mention of the flight being at sea level at all. He DOES say the DB 601s could produce 1,350 HP for one minute at ground level, but that in no way implies the flight was made at sea level, it only tells us the power that the engine could produce at "ground level" which, in Bremen, is quite low but is not at mean sea level.

Click to expand...

Die FW 187 V5 erzielte 635 km/h in Bodennähe. Bodennähe is SEA LEVEL

The Fw 187 appears on the surface to be an excellent candidate as an effective aircraft, even with the original Jumo engines. It was much more maneuverable than any of it's competitors and, if equipped with either the DB or the BMW engines, should have been a winner relative to the actual "Destroyers" used in combat.

However, things are not always as they seem.

If the Fw 187 was killed by politics alone, it was a shame. But if the Fw 187 was fairly evaluated and found wanting by the Luftwaffe or the RLM for some reason lost to history, then it falls into a different category. The Arado AR 240 comes to mind. The performance was great but the handling was bad and was never cured, so it was a waste of time because the faults were never corrected. They built a total of 15 AR 240's compared with 9 Fw 187's ... why?

I have to think SOMETHING was wrong with the Fw 187 or else politics in the Third Reich cost them a great plane. I'm inclined to believe the Fw 187 could have been a very good one if given the chance ... but it never GOT that chance. I could easily be wrong in the belief and the Fw 187 could have had some fatal flaw that was never corrected.

If so, it has also never been documented for us to see.

Greg, I get your point, but using the same logic, given the absence of documentation of something wrong with the FW187 other than in 1937 not meeting the Zerstörer spec (i.e. lack if a rear firing MG) and then in 1942 the FW187 requiring retooling at a time when there was a machine tool production capacity crunch while also not being a decent night fighter, I don't think that we can say there was a problem with the design, it just didn't meet the role envisioned by the LW at the time (of course neither did the ME210/410, but that's a different story).

Hi DonL,

My copy of the book on pages 158 - 159 says nothing whatsoever about a flight test report for the V5. In the "Minutes" portion these is a memorandum about the discussion of the V4 and V5 powerplants and another one about the evaporative cooling of the V5. Both are dated 1938 and are rather obviously design memos from the dates alone.

There is a cost summary of the contact for the V5 dated 1940. Cost summaries usually have no technical data in them ... they are summaries of the costs only.

There is a reference to some document about conversion of werknummer 1976 (the V5) with four dates in 1942, and all but one of the dates are well after the aircraft was parked after termination of testing. Since they are dated following termination of testing, they have to be talking about the proposed conversion to DB 605 engines which never happened.

All of the above are on page 150. None of them are flight test reports and all but one are early in the program.

On page 151 there is mention of a contract for conversion of werknummer 1976 to DB 605 engines dated april 1942, but we all know that never happened, and the authors never even claim it happened, and that is the very subject of three of the documents above ... conversion to DB 605 that never happened.

There is mention of a report on evaporator development in 1938 but, again, that is clearly early in the program.

None of the above are flight test reports on werknummer 1976, which is Fw 187 V5.

Perhaps it is YOU who needs to learn to read?

Don't you ever type in here that I am clearly lying again unless you have some actual evidence of same, understand? Or excuses for being rude aside, this will elevate to moderators immediately. Please be civil. In no post above did I insult you directly or call you a liar. You can't say the same.

Your "SENTENCE" above does not appear in my English language book. Yes, he states what engines he believes were installed, but there is not one shred of evidence it was ever done or ever flew. They actually installed the DBs in the V6 and there is a pic of it, but they were removed later, when 80% complete, and when it flew, it flew on Jumos.

A city can be very near sea level, but that does NOT mean the plane was flown at sea level. It only means the city offers this option if they decide to take it. The text says "low level" and that is not the same as "sea level." To a plane with a ceiling of 30,000+ feet, 10,000 feet is "low level." That's why flight test reports are so handy, they have the numbers. Since we have no flight test report, neither you nor I know what "low level" means here.

If you think anything in this book offers any evidence that the DB-powered V5 ever flew with DB engines actually installed in it, maybe you could offer some proof? The references in this book include no flight test reports for the V5 and from the pictures you can't even say there are engines installed in it at all. It surely has props, but mockups have props without engines.

There is a lot of conjecture in the book, but not one shred of evidence the Fw 187 V5 ever flew with DB engines installed. An airborne picture would be good ... IF we could be sure it was the V5. They have a lot of other pics of airborne Fw 187s, why not the one that was supposed to be the best?

If you're going to make claims of flight with the DB engines, a flight test report would be a fantastic place to start, particularly if the configuration is included, as it is on most flight test reports. Unfortunately, it doesn't show up in this book or the references for this book on any page I have seen so far. Yes, I'm still looking through it hoping to find evidence, but it doesn't look good so far.

Please keep discussion civil.
Please keep in mind that some detail information may be lost in translation if it wasn't done 100% correct.

Paige 159

Daimler Benz documentations

1. Versuchsbericht 1018101425 Focke Wulf Dampfheißkühlung 19.05.1939
2. Versuchsbericht 1018101425 Focke Wulf Dampfheißkühlung 25.05.1939
Versuchsbericht 1018101544 Ansaugschacht Fw 187 V5 01.08.1939

On paige 77:

Der Erstflug der Fw 187 V5 fand dann noch im Oktober 1939 statt.
The first flight of the Fw 187 V5 happened at the end of October 1939.

Your "SENTENCE" above does not appear in my English language book. Yes, he states what engines he believes were installed, but there is not one shred of evidence it was ever done or ever flew. They actually installed the DBs in the V6 and there is a pic of it, but they were removed later, when 80% complete, and when it flew, it flew on Jumos.

Click to expand...

This is a clear ly

http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/av...e-been-german-p-51-a-38757-6.html#post1067337
http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/av...e-been-german-p-51-a-38757-6.html#post1067346

Original wrote from SR6 who has also the book:

In the English edition the passage " The V5 was equipped with the DB 601 V40 and V42, which were basing on the DB 601A with 1100 PS." appears on page 77 and says HP instead of PS. I fear this may be a common problem in the English edition.

You are clearly lying about the book and what is written also about the sources!

Where in this book is written in a single word or sentence, that the V6 had ever received DB engines?

Please keep discussion civil.
Please keep in mind that some detail information may be lost in translation if it wasn't done 100% correct.

Click to expand...

I don't stay civil if someone is clearly lying about an respectable author and clearly lies and misinterpret his book!

Good post Denniss.

I just saw Joe's post above, so my response is not needed to further this discussion.

If anyone has other references for the Fw 187, maybe share them? This is a fascinating plane that probably should have been acquired by the Luftwaffe early in the war but, for some reason or another, wasn't. It might well have been the "Destroyer" they were searching for all along, had it been placed into service.


Sorry DonL,

The "V6" above is a typo and should have been "V7" on page 81. My fault there. I DO make the occasional, or not so occasional, typo. Generally, great pics in this book. I particularly like the one on page 45 showing the Fw 187 in the inverted position. I'd like to find that one in high-resolution format, but it is unlikely.

Actually, only one typo for me is pretty good!

The Author provided 6-7 sources about the Fw 187 V5 and the Dampfheisskühlung also a visit from DB people at the references 13.09.1939 till 23.09.1939.

He described the system of the Dampfheißkühlung with original sources dated from late 1938 till october 1939, which were the problems and steps to solve this problems with FW documents and DB documents. The Fw 187 V5 has from the beginning DB engines and was equipped with the Dampfheisskühlung, this is proved from his sources at the references! Also the timeline from late 1938 till october 1939 and the first flight.
Also there are pictures of the Fw 187 V5 and it's DB engines.

How can someone write the complete opposite what is stated in this book?
He claimed it is only an author opinion, but there are clear references which are proves. To me GregP has a clear agenda and implies that Mr. Herrmann provides opinions and lies instead of proves.

DonL said:

Th To me GregP has a clear agenda and implies that Mr. Herrmann provides opinions and lies instead of proves.

Click to expand...

OK Don, go away for a while, come back when you pull your head out of your @ss

GregP said:

Good post Denniss.

I just saw Joe's post above, so my response is not needed to further this discussion.

If anyone has other references for the Fw 187, maybe share them? This is a fascinating plane that probably should have been acquired by the Luftwaffe early in the war but, for some reason or another, wasn't. It might well have been the "Destroyer" they were searching for all along, had it been placed into service.


Sorry DonL,

The "V6" above is a typo and should have been "V7" on page 81. My fault there. I DO make the occasional, or not so occasional, typo. Generally, great pics in this book. I particularly like the one on page 45 showing the Fw 187 in the inverted position. I'd like to find that one in high-resolution format, but it is unlikely.

Actually, only one typo for me is pretty good!

Click to expand...

Any chance we could get you to post some scans of some choice pictures and diagrams that you think are not what one would usually find online?

I would, if allowed, but my scanner broke some time back. I'll se what I can do going forward. The book has some very nice pics of the Fw 187, especially considering only 9 were built. That definitely qualifies it as "rare."

I'd recommend the book (not too expensive) if you are interested in the type. I was interested enough to buy it myself and am not sorry. I think I made my case earlier about the V5 and don't want to repeat it here.

In the end, DonL's opinion might turn out to be correct and the authors may simply have inadvertently left out the V5 flight test data while including a lot of other V5 information that is NOT flight data. Could be. That seems strange for a text touting the DB 601 version as the ultimate Destroyer, though ... doesn't it? Especially since the V5 was supposed to be the only DB-powered unit that flew.

I would really like to know for sure. Maybe the missing flight test data for the V5 will surface sometime. If they DID, in fact, fly a DB 601-powered Fw 187 with a real cooling system that worked and was suitable for service deployment, I'd like to see the real performance achieved by an armed, deployable variant. If it existed and performed, it seems almost criminally negligent not to have acquired it in lieu of the Bf 110 / 210 / 410 series, given the differences in potential combat performance. Perhaps it might have made a big difference in the BOB had it been there in numbers, or maybe even later down the pike in the war.

The Mosquito proved a real asset to the British. The P-38 proved an asset to the USA once the faults were fixed. Perhaps the Fw 187 could have been a German equivalent. I doubt it would have changed the war. The Allies would have won in the end without the Mosquito or the P-38 or even without both. But the Fw 187 might have given the Germans a better aircraft than the Bf 110 for the Destroyer mission. Maybe even one that didn't itself need a fighter escort. Likely as not it would have been a minor change in real life events and we might be having this discussion about the projected merits of the Bf 110 instead.