Fw190D/Ta 152C vs. Latest Generation Allied Fighters

Discussion in 'Aviation' started by spicmart, Jan 21, 2013.

  1. spicmart

    spicmart Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2008
    Messages:
    274
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    18
    [What measures were needed to make the Focke Wulf fighters competitive in the various flight regimes (maneouverability, climb, acceleration etc.) against the arguably last generation of allied fighter aircraft?
    That is is the F8F / P-51H/ La-9 / Spitfire 21 / Spiteful / Sea Fury/ F4U, F2G.
    Those appear to have lost weight compared to their predecessors to increase performance wheras the 190 and 152 (short wing) just became heavier.
    Maybe build in the DB 603N and Jumo 213J/S or something?
     
  2. vinnye

    vinnye Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2009
    Messages:
    604
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Occupation:
    Maths teacher
    Location:
    Barnsley, UK
    #2 vinnye, Jan 21, 2013
    Last edited: Jan 21, 2013
    I believe some LW fighters got heavier because they were being fitted with heavier armament (bigger cannons), heavier armour protection and heavier more powerful engines. These changes were brought about in some cases to improve aircraft survivability in combat and effectiveness in shooting down Allied bombers.
    This would in some cases have detrimental affects on handling, which could have serious implications in a dogfight.
     
  3. tomo pauk

    tomo pauk Creator of Interesting Threads

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2008
    Messages:
    7,995
    Likes Received:
    438
    Trophy Points:
    83
    I don't think that Allied fighters lost any weight, compared to the predecessors, bar P-51H. They gained weight, but also the engine power, most of them able to top 2000 HP, some going to almost 2500. IMO, the F8F does not have a direct predecessor, despite the existence of the F6F. Maybe the F4F was the predecessor? The light weight of the F8F being achieved by using a single stage engine, with less fuel, ammo guns than F6F F4U, so it can be a fine airplane under 20000 ft, but not so much above that, along with La-9, a plane from 1946/47. The Yak-9U/P can be in the consideration here for the Soviets, but that one also falling short vs. top 1945 hardware.
    Another planes that need to be added here is the P-47M -N, those were real heavyweights.

    Any of the German planes needs as powerful engine as is gets, the 2-stage Db-603 or Jumo 213 get my vote.
     
  4. delcyros

    delcyros Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2005
    Messages:
    2,037
    Likes Received:
    27
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Berlin (Kreuzberg)
    Jumo-222E. Not possible on the -109 airframe but the Fw-190 could possibly take one.
     
  5. stona

    stona Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2009
    Messages:
    7,528
    Likes Received:
    947
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Aren't there some time line issues with the types you are comparing?
    Just saying :)
    Cheers
    Steve
     
  6. vinnye

    vinnye Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2009
    Messages:
    604
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Occupation:
    Maths teacher
    Location:
    Barnsley, UK
    #6 vinnye, Jan 21, 2013
    Last edited: Jan 21, 2013
    I believe the Sea Fury was a lightened version of the Tempest ?
    So this was one that got lighter?
     
  7. tomo pauk

    tomo pauk Creator of Interesting Threads

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2008
    Messages:
    7,995
    Likes Received:
    438
    Trophy Points:
    83
    It was being intended as the lightened Tempest, but that was not so, especially the carrier compatibility was being engineered in.
     
  8. vinnye

    vinnye Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2009
    Messages:
    604
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Occupation:
    Maths teacher
    Location:
    Barnsley, UK
    You are of course correct Tommo.
    I have just looked at the weights of the two and they are near identical.
    The Sea Fury was about 30 mph faster - was this just down to extra hp from the engine?
     
  9. spicmart

    spicmart Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2008
    Messages:
    274
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    18
    #9 spicmart, Jan 21, 2013
    Last edited: Jan 21, 2013
    Yes, some of the allied planes are post war, right?, such the La-9 that was a '46 plane.

    Tomo, I may be wrong about the weight assumption...

    I mean the F6F as the predessor as an air superiority fighter to the F8F. Well, about the armament, some compare with the late war germans (Spitfire, Sea Fury) and some don't (F8F-1, P-51H).
    As said the german fighters were also heavily armored as they carried the burden of being exposed to bombers's defensive fire and their escorts.
    In order to achieve a superior (or at least on par) dogfighter maybe a specialized low alt version could be made of the 190 by making them lighter and using the Jumo 213S.

    The La-9 featured impressive range while weighing not too much than a Me 109K.
    With all that fuel just weighing a few 100 Kg more.
    I wonder what drawbacks they were ready to accept to gain such a volume of fuel in such a small airframe.
    According to GregP (Ray Hanna?) it was able to outroll and out-accelerate the Bearcat, quite a feat..

    The La-7 was said to have matched 190 in rate of roll and control harmony so there should be not much to gain for a Dora-9 at low and med alt.
    What disadvantages would a lightened Fock Wulf expect to get?

    What power did the last Gen Spitfires' (21 and up) sport? About in the 2300PS range?





    .
     
  10. davebender

    davebender Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2009
    Messages:
    6,418
    Likes Received:
    64
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Michigan, USA
    That places time period in the fall of 1945. By then Fw-190 series would have numerous improvements.

    Jumo 213J engine.
    MG213 revolver cannon.
    R4M FF rockets.
    Gyro stabilized gun sight.
     
  11. tomo pauk

    tomo pauk Creator of Interesting Threads

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2008
    Messages:
    7,995
    Likes Received:
    438
    Trophy Points:
    83
    #11 tomo pauk, Jan 21, 2013
    Last edited: Jan 21, 2013
    I'm not sure the Sea Fury was faster than Tempest II (Centaurus engines), bot were capable to do 450 mph. Maybe you talking about Tempest V (Sabre engine)?
    added: no 30 mph difference, Tempest V vs. Sea Fury, maybe some 10-15 mph?

    Hi, spicmart,
    Yu can check out here, Griffon 69:
    http://www.spitfireperformance.com/griffon-69.pdf
    Basically, up to 2300 HP at 500 ft, 2060 HP at 15750 ft, 1800 HP at 21000 ft.
     
  12. spicmart

    spicmart Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2008
    Messages:
    274
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    18
    What about the DB 603N? Did the 603 series had more development potential than the 213?
     
  13. davebender

    davebender Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2009
    Messages:
    6,418
    Likes Received:
    64
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Michigan, USA
    That makes little difference. RLM wanted to mass produce the Jumo 213. They did not want to mass produce the DB603 engine so there won't be enough for all the Fw-190 airframes.
     
  14. Vincenzo

    Vincenzo Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2007
    Messages:
    2,281
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    none
    Location:
    Lazio
    if we want compare the late Tank fighters we need choice allied fighters as they were in april '45
     
  15. GregP

    GregP Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2003
    Messages:
    5,906
    Likes Received:
    853
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Electrical Engineer, Aircraft Restoration
    Location:
    Rancho Cucamonga, California, U.S.A.
    Hi Tomo Pauk,

    Not sure where you got the idea that the bearcat was a 20,000 foot and under aircraft, but that turns out not to be the case. The F8F-2 had a service ceiling of 40,800 feet and the supercharger was a variable speed hydraulic drive 2-stage centrifugal unit (-30W engine). Even the -10W was a 2-stage unit. If featured carburetor injection and a low-voltage distributor with remote coils near the spark plugs and was very much at home in the mid 30,000 feet arena. Performance was sparking and max speed was 455 mph ... about average for late war, but then again, nothing else wanted to catch it anyway since the 4 guns were 20 mm cannons in all but the very early F8F's and it was going to out turn them when they arrived.
     
  16. Shortround6

    Shortround6 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2009
    Messages:
    9,770
    Likes Received:
    801
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    retired Firefighter
    Location:
    Central Florida Highlands
    The US Navy was shifting to the F4U-4 for "air superiority", a fair number of the later ones had 4 20mm cannon. By 1946 they were ordering the F4U-5 which had a rather good performance at altitude.
     
  17. wuzak

    wuzak Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2011
    Messages:
    4,184
    Likes Received:
    167
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Hobart Tasmania
    The F8F-2 was decidedly post war. The F8F-1 only just made it into service before the end of WW2, but didn't see action.

    The F8F-1 had a single stage supercharger.
     
  18. GregP

    GregP Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2003
    Messages:
    5,906
    Likes Received:
    853
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Electrical Engineer, Aircraft Restoration
    Location:
    Rancho Cucamonga, California, U.S.A.
    #18 GregP, Jan 22, 2013
    Last edited: Jan 22, 2013
    Yeah, a hydraulically-copupled single stage, much like the DB 601/3/5 the Germans flew, and I never hear THEY dind't have altitude capability, do I?

    I'm talking late pistons, not specifically WWII, so the F8F-2 makes it in my book. If not in yours then show me an F8F-1 that can't make it to 38,000+ feet in stock trim, with ammunition. Can't, huh?

    Of course, today, none are running quite stock, are they? Rod Lewis' F8F-2 even has an air conditioner in the belly and still climbs over 6,000 feet per minute. Since he likes to fly it like a fighter, he never gets into IFR altitudes in it unless required by weather. If the weather is that bad, they don't usually fly the warbrds and use one of the bizjets instead.
     
  19. wuzak

    wuzak Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2011
    Messages:
    4,184
    Likes Received:
    167
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Hobart Tasmania
    No Greg, the F8F-1 had either the R-2800-22W or -34W, both 2 speed single stage supercharged engines.

    P&W only used the hydraulic coupling for 2 stage engines, as far as I am aware.


    F8F-1 first delivery December 1944.
    F8F-2 first delivery October 1947.

    So, doesn't really "make it".


    White's R-2800 P&W's Dependable Masterpiece has the service ceiling of the F8F-1 at 38,900ft. The F8F-2 at 40,700ft.

    But so what? Spitfire II had a ceiling of around 37,000ft in 1940.
    Spitfire Mk IIA Performance Testing

    The Spitfire XII (with single stage Griffon) had a ceiling of just over 38,000ft in 1943.
    Spitfire Mk XII DP.845 Report

    White has the F8F-1 at 421mph @ 19,700ft, the F8F-2 447mph @ 28,000ft.

    btw, F8F beats Spitfire 21 to 10,000ft - but not to 20,000ft.
     
  20. wuzak

    wuzak Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2011
    Messages:
    4,184
    Likes Received:
    167
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Hobart Tasmania
    For comparison between single stage and 2 stage engine aircraft:

    Spitfire XII: 392mph @ 24,000ft
    Spitfire XIV prototype (Mk VIIIG): 440mph @ 24,000ft, 421mph @ 39,000ft.
     
Loading...

Share This Page