FW190 a year earlier

[B29WereWolf]

I read that the FW190 entered service in Spring 1941, if it had been a year earlier and been in the Battle Of Britain, would it have made any sort of a significant difference for the Luftwaffe? Something that was running through my head.

 

[GTX]

If it were possible, I suspect the greater range (if I am correct) of the Fw190 vs the 109 might have made a difference.

 

[Denniss]

+ the better maneuverability of the fw 190.
But impossible without a working engine as there were lots of problems to iron out

 

[Howard Gibson]

I read that the FW190 entered service in Spring 1941, if it had been a year earlier and been in the Battle Of Britain, would it have made any sort of a significant difference for the Luftwaffe? Something that was running through my head.

How do we get the Fw190 into service a year earlier? If they use an earlier, already reliable radial engine, they get nowhere near the power the Fw190 had.

 

[Snautzer01]

How do we get the Fw190 into service a year earlier? If they use an earlier, already reliable radial engine, they get nowhere near the power the Fw190 had.

Yes i agree but lets say they used that engine. Seems fair. Would undependable weigh up to the advantage? And would could the uk do? And more more important can they in that period?

 

[Thumpalumpacus]

Fighter Command would be in a world of hurt.

 

[Howard Gibson]

Yes i agree but lets say they used that engine. Seems fair. Would undependable weigh up to the advantage? And would could the uk do? And more more important can they in that period?

Subtract hundreds of horsepower from the Fw190, it does not have grossly superior performance against the Spitfires. The RAF continues to inflect unacceptable casualties on Luftwaffe bombers.

 

[Snautzer01]

Subtract hundreds of horsepower from the Fw190, it does not have grossly superior performance against the Spitfires. The RAF continues to inflect unacceptable casualties on Luftwaffe bombers.

Hundreds you say? Well dont know about that. Lets invite Snowygrouch

 

[tomo pauk]

Yes i agree but lets say they used that engine. Seems fair. Would undependable weigh up to the advantage? And would could the uk do? And more more important can they in that period?

The best and reliable German radial engine of 1940 was the Bramo 323P. It was somewhat lower powered than R-1820s what powered some of the French Hawk 75s, and more powerful than R-1820s that powered the CW-21. So we'd have - best case - a 315-320 mph not-Fw-190? Rate of climb would also be very sedate.

Best bet for an alternative Fw 190 powerplant early in the war is probably a V12, like DB 601. Even the Jumo 211 makes much more sense than the 9 cyl radials. But then again, a DB 601-powered Fw 190 is probably not what people will think when Fw 190 is mentioned.

 

[Denniss]

Bramo 323 might have a larger frontal area. Dont know how much difference there was in weight.

 

[tomo pauk]

Bramo 323 might have a larger frontal area. Dont know how much difference there was in weight.

801 was about twice as heavy.

 

[Denniss]

So the 323 installed would occur a massive CoG shift in the aircraft

 

[tomo pauk]

So the 323 installed would occur a massive CoG shift in the aircraft

The 323 is a pretty bad fit for the Fw 190 anyway we look at it

 

[Shortround6]

As a very, very rough guide, a 14 cylinder radial will have the same frontal area (or within a few percent) as a 9 cylinder radial but have 55% more power. Obviously it is much heavier.
18 cylinder radials can be a bit smaller if you give up on a little power or you can keep the full diameter and wind up with a fighter with an R-3350 engine

This assumes everything was equal. French and Italians tried to make light 18 cylinder engines in the 1930s early 40s but since they left the center bearing out running at 70-80% of the rpm and using lower boost pressure tended to make the whole thing pointless.

 

[z42]

As others have mentioned, the critical issue is the availability of a suitable power plant. The 801 was late, and after arriving it was unreliable and had to be derated. Though eventually it turned out to be excellent.

Tooting my own horn here, one solution would be for the RLM to not force BMW to pivot to radials, and instead BMW could have continued developing their 117, a 35L liquid cooled V-12. Resulting in a mature engine sooner. And obviously in that scenario Kurt Tank would have designed the 190 for an inline from the start. Thread: In retrospect, were the BMW radial engine developments a mistake?

 

[Howard Gibson]

... instead BMW could have continued developing their 117, a 35L liquid cooled V-12. Resulting in a mature engine sooner. And obviously in that scenario Kurt Tank would have designed the 190 for an inline from the start. Thread: In retrospect, were the BMW radial engine developments a mistake?

Is there any reason why the BMW 117 would be developed into a reliable engine before the BMW 801?

Why would the RLM develop three approximately 35litre engines in parallel?

 

[PAT303]

I read that the FW190 entered service in Spring 1941, if it had been a year earlier and been in the Battle Of Britain, would it have made any sort of a significant difference for the Luftwaffe? Something that was running through my head.

If the Luftwaffe can have the FW190 in the BoB the RAF can have the Spitfire MkIII, balance restored. Unfortunately the Hurricane is knocked out of the fight.

 

[z42]

Is there any reason why the BMW 117 would be developed into a reliable engine before the BMW 801?

Why would the RLM develop three approximately 35litre engines in parallel?

These questions are discussed in the linked thread, lets not derail this thread by reiterating that discussion.