Fw187 could have been German P-38?
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
The Luftwaffe could have caused far more damage to Fighter Command with the aircraft it had given better intelligence, tactics, communications etc. It didn't need a Fw 187 to do this.
I don't agree that any THEORETICAL service version of the Fw 187 in 1940 would have had an edge on the RAF's Spitfire I. Nobody knows because a fully equipped service version of the Fw 187 never existed. Quoting figures for the DB 601 powered prototype, which was little more than an experimental flying test bed, just doesn't work for me.
The single seat version was ditched by the RLM on 20th January 1937, long before the war and shouldn't enter into consideration. The only possible version after that would have been a two seat 'destroyer'.
We'll just agree to differ
.
Cheers
Steve
I don't agree that any THEORETICAL service version of the Fw 187 in 1940 would have had an edge on the RAF's Spitfire I. Nobody knows because a fully equipped service version of the Fw 187 never existed. Quoting figures for the DB 601 powered prototype, which was little more than an experimental flying test bed, just doesn't work for me.
The single seat version was ditched by the RLM on 20th January 1937, long before the war and shouldn't enter into consideration. The only possible version after that would have been a two seat 'destroyer'.
We'll just agree to differ
.Cheers
Steve
GregP
Major
Hey Viking85,
Looks like everyone more or less agrees that the Fw 187 could probably have been a German P-38, but we're not all that much in agreement as to whether it would make any difference to the outcome of the war.
I think EVERYBODY recognizes that a DB-powered Fw 187 was a better heavy fighter than the Bf 110. It's the details of the Fw 187's potential versatility and what would have been missing had it been produced that seem to be the sticky points.
Looks like everyone more or less agrees that the Fw 187 could probably have been a German P-38, but we're not all that much in agreement as to whether it would make any difference to the outcome of the war.
I think EVERYBODY recognizes that a DB-powered Fw 187 was a better heavy fighter than the Bf 110. It's the details of the Fw 187's potential versatility and what would have been missing had it been produced that seem to be the sticky points.
Last edited:
- Thread starter
- #104
wiking85
Staff Sergeant
Fair enough. I didn't think it would change the outcome, one piece of equipment rarely will (unless its the A-bomb). Still it would be an improvement over what was there.
I think the DH 103 Hornet is what the Fw 187 would have evolved into if had been given the time to be developed further. It compares better to the 187 than the P-38 does as it is not a twin boom configuration. The fuselages virtually have the same dimensions being just as sleek.
At the time the Hornet appeared it could be transformed into a night fighter. The equipment has been fitted in it. Maybe the 187 could be, too.
At the time the Hornet appeared it could be transformed into a night fighter. The equipment has been fitted in it. Maybe the 187 could be, too.
GregP
Major
LOVE the Hornet! It is one seriously good-looking plane with a wonderful excess of power. Wish we had some around the warbird circuit today!
wuzak
Captain
In the Luftwaffe's dreams.
I thought the dimensions would be the more important part, not the configuration.
Remember that the NF.21 was a post war aircraft, meaning that its radar equipment was, most probably, smaller and lighter than war time radar.
The cockpit of the Fw 187 was a seriously tight space.
http://1000aircraftphotos.com/Contributions/PippinBill/5614.jpg
So I doubt that any useful radar could be fitted. They could change the fuselage to fit radar, but then it would be a virtually new aircraft.
Shortround6
Major General
A problem with the 187 as built is that the main fuel tank was right behind the cockpit. 620 liters on the V4 and around 880 liters for some of the later proposed versions, two more tanks were in the wing roots. 245 liters each on the V4 and 210 liters each for the proposed versions. This helps roll performance compared to a plane with most of it's fuel in the wings but limits how much stuff you can stick in the fuselage for other roles. The Hornet did have a fuel tank in the fuselage behind the pilot but it wasn't the main tank, most of the fuel in the Hornet was in a series of wing tanks.
Hornet nightfighter had the radar operator quite a ways back in the fuselage
Counter balance for the weight of radar equipment in the new nose or????
Radar operator was about where the normal radio gear was or camera location for recon versions. Early war German cameras were much larger than British cameras. I am not getting into an argument on which was better but an early war German recon plane needed a certain amount of volume (space) to hold the standard camera/s. The standard large German camera also went about 160lbs (73KG ?) so was a little harder to place in an aircraft due to CG problems.
Luftwaffe Cameras
Perhaps a Fw 187 recon plane could have used a smaller fuselage tank and more internal wing tanks but the more changes you make between different versions they more expensive they get.
The Hornet was designed for and had six times the power of the Jumo powered Fw 187. There would certainly have been serious problems involved in adapting the Fw 187 airframe to that. I doubt that would be a feasible 'evolution'. Better to start again with a better airframe.
Cheers
Steve
Cheers
Steve
The Bf 109 airframe started with 600 ps and ended with 2000 ps with minor airframe modifications. Why Fw 187 would not be able tofollow the same path?
Besides , Fw did produce design of the 187 with db605 and judged the airframe capable of speeds of 700 ++ km/h
The Hornet's Cockpit looks just as tight. Concerning the smaller radar equipment that's what I meant that it could have been build into the 187.
The late war Doras and Ta 152 did or at least were planned to have wing tanks. Why this shouldn't be possible with their stablemate 187?
See dedalos' post.
Hornet's engines were 3 times as powerful as Jumo 210s, not 6 times
It's wing was some 20% greater than the Fw-187, the fuel volume/weight 50-100% greater than the Fw-187. The later, with DB 605ASM or 605D should be a contender.
The Hornet had a wing area of 33,5 m^2, the 187 30,6 m^2
Last edited:
By incorporating wing tanks the fuselage tank could be reduced or omitted thus making space for other stuff e.g. sufficient weaponry etc..
And the night fighter versions of the Hornet needed a lenghtened nose for the radar. So that should be possible for the Fw 187, too.
And the night fighter versions of the Hornet needed a lenghtened nose for the radar. So that should be possible for the Fw 187, too.
Last edited:
Shortround6
Major General
Adding fuel tanks to existing wings was certainly possible. It just wasn't as easy as some people believe. P-38 was kind of a special case as the leading edge from the engine nacelle to the wing tip had been used for the inter cooler and Lockheed did change the form of construction of the leading edge.
http://legendsintheirowntime.com/Content/1944/P38_Av_4408_DA_leading-edge_p131_W.png
Other planes may have needed one or more ribs taken out and suitable reinforcements (including heavier wing skin) used around the tank area.
While the Spitfire added leading edge tanks it was only done to Spitfires done in certain factories, Other factories (or one?) stayed with the original wing until end of production.
http://legendsintheirowntime.com/Content/1944/P38_Av_4408_DA_leading-edge_p131_W.png
Other planes may have needed one or more ribs taken out and suitable reinforcements (including heavier wing skin) used around the tank area.
While the Spitfire added leading edge tanks it was only done to Spitfires done in certain factories, Other factories (or one?) stayed with the original wing until end of production.
I just assume that the radar equipment of the Fw 187 is just
as small as the Hornet's. The Hornet's nose had to be lenghtened
for the radar. Why shouldn't that be possible for the 187?
The Ta 152 c and H had a shortened wing spar in order to make space for the
Wing tanks. The rest of the wings were reinforced by more ribs and had more rugged skin.
as small as the Hornet's. The Hornet's nose had to be lenghtened
for the radar. Why shouldn't that be possible for the 187?
The Ta 152 c and H had a shortened wing spar in order to make space for the
Wing tanks. The rest of the wings were reinforced by more ribs and had more rugged skin.
wuzak
Captain
The Germans were behind on centimetric AI radar.
The Sea Hornet's radar was a late war development, and it was a smaller radar of lesser capability than the ones used in the Mosquito and Black Widow.
The Germans won't have an equivalent before the end of the war.
The Sea Hornet's radar was a late war development, and it was a smaller radar of lesser capability than the ones used in the Mosquito and Black Widow.
The Germans won't have an equivalent before the end of the war.
wuzak
Captain
At least all the engine instruments for the Hornet are in the cockpit.
German ww2 radar will have to have the 'antlers' antennae, bar a token number of 'Berlin' radars that appeared as ww2 drew to the end. For the second crew member (I'm not the greatest fan of a 2-seater Fw-187, but it sure beats the Fw 190 as a night fighter), maybe devise an 'elevated' cockpit, not unlike what the Do-335 had? Granted, it will cost performance-wise, but should leave a bit more room for the 'black boxes'? Also gives more room for the radar operator?
Relocating more fuel in the wings should free more space in the fuselage.
Relocating more fuel in the wings should free more space in the fuselage.
I am just assuming that they hypothetically have similar radar equipment to make them equal in this point.
Maybe some modification of spacial nature to the nose could have helped the Fw 187 to have in-cockpit-instruments. Some little but sufficient change to not affect the aerodynamics adversely of course. It perhaps would have resulted in blunder or longer nose but with the same frontal cross section.
Last edited:
