Fw190D/Ta 152C vs. Latest Generation Allied Fighters

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

GregP, yes I'd like to compare the latest Focke Wulf fighters and their development potential to the latest generation of allied fighters, be it postwar of not.
What would it take to stay competitive in the various tasks that a fighter should fulfill: pure dogfighter, interceptor, low med high alt fighter, long range, jack of all trades etc..
 
Last edited:
I think it would take further development on the part of the German aircraft industry, and that stopped with the war's end. German equipment was very good and I have no doubt that with continued development, the Germans would hve been good at the game. But by early 1945, it just wasn't going to be.

In my mind, the best pistons were the last of the breed, the Bearcat, the Sea Fury, the La-9 / -11, the P-51H, the F4U-5 and possibly a few others. Their potential superiority was short-lived as planes like the F-86 were coming out at the same time and the P-80 was out before the end of the war. While the Sabre could not dogfight with a Bearcat or a Sea Fury, the Sabre COULD dictate the terms of engagement, so the handwriting was on the wall.

The last piston's short-lived glory days were enjoyed by the pilots, but the war was over and they faded away.
 
Tomo, going back to the Sea Fury Tempest V top speed figures. (Post 11)
Wiki has ;
Tempest V Maximum speed: 432 mph (695 km/h) Sabre IIA at 18,400 ft (5,608 m), Sabre IIB 435 mph at 19,000 ft (700 km/h at 5,791 m) and,
Sea Fury ; Maximum speed: 460 mph (740 km/h) at 18,000 ft (5,500 m)
These figures may not be accurate, but they were what I found?
 
Indeed, you're right.
The maximum power, in high gear, for Tempest V with Sabre IIA, was 1830 HP at 11500 ft, no ram. For Sabre IIB, it was 2050 HP at 13750 ft, no ram.
The Centaurus in Tempest II was rated 1950 HP at 16500 ft, high gear. Since the maximum speed was usually (always?) achieved with engine running in second gear (for planes with 2 supercharger gears), my take is that better altitude capacity of Centaurus was providing better speed, than the high power of Sabre, that was achieved at lower altitude. Hence the difference of 15-20 mph.
The Centaurus in the Sea Fury was (should be) an up-rated version, the speed gain was some 10+ mph vs. Tempest II, 25-30 vs. Tempest V.

engine speed data from wwiiaircraftperformance.com

added: the Sea Fury have had the wing area of 280 sq ft, the Tempests of 302 sq ft - the smaller wing area can add some speed. Wing span was also smaller, by some 2.5 ft.
 
Last edited:
My thoughts exactly. By 1946 I assume the majority of whatever is left of the Luftwaffe fighter squadrons (depending of course on when your 'what-if' starts), will be equpped with Me 262s and He 162s. I guess the Ta 152 C will be the 'all-weather' fighter-bomber it was designed to be and the Ta 152 H the high altitude fighter / interceptor. They will be numerically significant but still kind of a niche in the whole picture.
 
I believe they got about 300 Me 262's into comabt and about 100 of them were shot down. I'd stick with the pistons with a record like that or close to that and continue jet development.
 
Last edited:
That's your opinion but not theirs. Bf 109 production was to end with the K and the Ta 152s aside from the H (which filled a felt need that the jets couldn't fill) were essentially already fighter-bombers in the sense that air-superiority and interception was to be done by different aircraft.
 
I have brought it up before but post war development was longer than war time. Hours put in the R&D people dropped from 12-14 hours per day to 8-10 hours. Sundays were taken of (for the most part) instead of being work days (or part work days). Saturdays were half days or reduced hour days, not full days like war time. People took vacations for the first time in years.

How this affects a time scale of months/year I don't know but it did exist. There is also the condition that with the war over, putting planes/engines into service that were not quite right but were accepted due to the war time conditions was less likely to happen. This also lead to longer development times.
 
For a light fighter (<7000lb empty), the Germans would need a 2200-2400 hp engine (DB 603LA?), for a heavy fighter, 2800-3500 hp. The Ta 152C could do it for a light fighter but it needed to lose weight.

In reality, without gas turbine engines and supersonic propellers, propeller planes had pretty well reached their peak and additional performance would be difficult to obtain.
 
Yep, it's my opinion and 109 production would have ended anyway since the factoies were in rubble. Had they the chance, Germany would have flown any warplnes they could get their hands on, but most ended the war without any fuel and many without any propellers. The end of the war brought about peace through inability to continue development or prosecution of the conflict. So jet development, too, came to a halt due to cessation of hostilities and reduction in development hours for the Allies ... as it should have.

No sense in continuing wartime expenditures when the war is over.

Good post, davparlr ... they HAD reached their zenith and were into the limits of propeller-driven aircraft when they died out.
 
Thanks for the excellent explanation Tommo.
I see where your interpretation of figures makes more practical sense than just plain top speed figures alone. An aircrafts useable power spread is very important and the altitudes at which it performs best, including its climb, turn and dive rates are what get people out of trouble or into good firing positions.
I had not taken note of the differing wingspan and wing area - they could easily account for speed differentials. Thanks again for the input.
 
Shortround, you are correct about the rates of development being slower in peace time than when countries are on a war footing and give good examples of why that happens. Another factor is the urgent that everyone feels when at war. In peace time far less people feel "driven", unless they feel that war is imminent - like RJ Mitchell designing the Spitfire pre-war.
Frank Whittle and his team made slow progress before the war, and during the early stages as the powers that be did not understand his work or realise how important it would be. Greater progress was made when support was given to him and his team, especially when news of German developments in this technology circulated.
 
One thing you cannot do in the Centaurus is increase the rpm. In you run the Centaurus more than about 150 rpm faster than rated rpm, it will grenade in a short time right at the sleeve valve mechanism. It was basically a 2,700 rpm engine MAX. At 2,900 rpm it was pretty sure to be scrap metal soon if not already. Later models were 2,500 - 2,650 HP MAX. So any additional power will have to come from more boost, displacement increase, efficiency increase, or perhaps power recovery turbine(s).

The real Centaurus is pretty much maxed out for available power and, if operated within recommended settings, is also pretty reliable.

So far, the real Achilles heel seems to be getting cylinders done once they wear. Joe Yancey has that figured out and can hone them round while almost everyone else seemingly cannot get it right (that is what is reported to us by 5+ users). We just finished doing 25 cylinders for one owner and he is now reassembling his Centaurus and hopes to have his Sea Fury flying again within the year. I like seeing one with the original powerplant and seeing it do big powerful aerobatics.
 

Way OT: according to White Pratt Whitney seriously investigated using sleeve valves for the R-2800, but, instead of using Roy Feddon's design of five triangular ports -three inlet, two exhaust - P W looked at six rectangular ports, four inlet, two exhaust. (R-2800 pages 219-220). Roy Feddon on sleeve valves: Flight Archive 1939
 
My info is from 5+ owners and people who race at Reno (nobody races a Centaurus). I have nothing against the sleeve valve, but the implementation in the Centaurus is rpm-limited (that is from the users, not from me). Papers notwithstanding, we know of 3 users who have destroyed one at 2,800 rpm or so. The users who stay within recommended speeds seem to have pretty good luck with their operation until they need overhaul and the cylinders need to be made round again.

Nobody who owns or flies one today will run it at elevated rpm, so we pretty much believe that is the limit and the weak link.

I am a big Sea Fury fan myself and one of the Sanders Sea Furies puts on a great demo at our airshow almost every year in Chino. Argonaut used to have an R-3350 in it but now sports an R-2800. Almost can't tell the difference in the big, liong-vertical climbs, but I notice it isn't exactly burning up the course at Reno, either. Like it used to do with the R-3350.

Too bad we are out of R-3350 main bearings! If there were some more around, they'd fly longer ... but they are on borrowed time right now. When the mains go, the engine is pretty much a museum piece unless you can find one in a crate in Vietnam, that is. I cannot see it being econimically possible to make mew mains since the hydraulic press would never get paid for, much less any additional equiipment and time! There just aren't enough R-3350's around to justify specialty part development and FAA acceptance.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

FW190D-9 vs Allied fighters
2 3 4
Replies
65
Views
10K
Demopan78
S
Day fighter Ta 154
Replies
0
Views
630
spicmart
S
S
Spitfire vs. Dora mass battle
2
Replies
33
Views
3K
Snautzer01
S
State-of-the-art Japanese fighters with western engines
Replies
10
Views
532
GregP
Vickers Wellington vs. Warwick
Replies
6
Views
605
SaparotRob
Menu
Log in
Register