G10N Fugaku vs German Amerika Bombers -- Why the Big Difference?

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

S

SpicyJuan11

Senior Airman
335
37
May 29, 2015
Luxemburg
Something that I'm having difficulty answering is the vast difference in performance between the G10N and the plethora of long-range German bomber designs. I'll post data and some pictures below, but it seems that despite the bomber having the same mission (to bomb America), the Japanese design completely outclassed the German's in almost every metric: top speed (430-480mph!), cruise speed, bomb load, range, service ceiling, etc. I don't understand how despite there being over a dozen designs, the Germans never seemed to match Japanese ambition. I understand that a lot of these metrics (bomb load and range) are due to the much bigger size of the Japanese design, but I don't understand how such a high speed was projected. Does anyone know more about the G10N? Were these "projected" data really what they believed, or was it all fantasy to sell to the higher ups (yes I understand that all of these designs only existed on paper and were to be powered by engines that also mostly existed on paper).

What accounts for the massive disparity between German and Japanese bomber designs when they had the same mission?

Here is some bomb load over range data based on some quick checks (uncertainties marked with a ?):
Bomb load over Range:
  • G10N - 20,000 kg over 16,000 km(?)
  • Me 264 - 8,400 kg over 11,300 km or 14,000 kg over 8,150 km
  • Ju 390 - 1,930 kg over 9,254 km (?)
  • He 277 - 5,600 kg over 4,300 km or 3,000 kg over 9,000 km(?)
  • Ta 400 - 10,000 kg over 4,800 km or 9,000 km(?)
  • Fw 238 - 10,000 kg over 8,500 km or 5,000 kg over 10,300 km
  • Scaled up Fw 238 (P. 03.10206-22) - 24,000 kg over 8,000 km or 4,000 kg over 13,000km
  • Ju EF 100 - 5,000 kg over 9,000 km
 
Last edited:


The problem with these aircraft is as follows.

  • G10N - 20,000 kg over 16,000 km(?) This never got past the design stage but it is a much larger 6 engine aircraft than the 4 engined Me 264.
  • Me 264 - 8,400 kg over 11,300 km or 14,000 kg over 8,150 km. This is not the data for the Me 264 H3 Langtrecken bomber which carried extra fuel for the Amerika mission.
  • The correct data is 2000kg bombs over 15000km, 3000kg bombs over 14400, 3600kg over 14000km all of which can reach New York from Berlin and back with reserves.
  • See B-29 vs Me 264 Dimensions
  • Ju 390 - 1,930 kg over 9,254 km (?) The Ju 390A was too short ranged. It could get to New York and half way back. Being a low wing tansport aircraft the aircraft lacked a bomb bay though I suppose you could extract a bomb MOAB style from the trappoklappe with a drogue. The Ju 390B versions would have had a ventral pannier to carry bombs and turbocharged engines. With in flight refueling the range was however more than enough. One of these supposedly flew of the South African Coast in Cape Town and another saw the Skyline of New York. I tend to believe these stories since two well respected test pilots made these claims and we've found out a little more of their in flight refuelling capabilities.. The flight within the view of NY Skyline has some challenges as without US IFF the aircraft would have been rapidly challenged. Its not impossible to imagine the Germans used a captured US IFF and had the crystals and codes required for the day. Not impossible on occaision given the radar and electronics and space on these martime patrol aircraft.
  • He 277 - 5,600 kg over 4,300 km or 3,000 kg over 9,000 km(?) The He 277 was a very radical modification of the He 177 with a completely new wing. It could do the Amerika mission only with at least one flight refuelling. In flight refuelling kits had been ordered as far back as the He 177A1 but nothing came of it. They used hose and drogue method but the tanker flew behind and below the bomber. The rear gunner was to be in charge of operating the procedure.
  • Ta 400 - 10,000 kg over 4,800 km or 9,000 km(?) Project only wind tunnel models made and models made. Not as good as the Me 264, way to heavy, would take longer.
  • Fw 238 - 10,000 kg over 8,500 km or 5,000 kg over 10,300 km Way off to the future. I would say this is not good data.
  • Scaled up Fw 238 (P. 03.10206-22) - 24,000 kg over 8,000 km or 4,000 kg over 13,000km. As above.
  • Ju EF 100 - 5,000 kg over 9,000 km. This was an airliner, a beautiful diesel airliner. without a war we would have seen these winging passengers between Berlin and New York.
The G10N was a truly massive aircraft at 268,963lbs it is nearly twice as big as the B29 at 141,000lbs. It is nearly 2.4 times heavier than the Me 264H3 at 110,000lbs. It needed to be because it needed much more range, over 12000 miles to fly across the pacific, drop bombs on targets in the mid west states and fly home. The Me 264 H3 would hit the east coast, maybe 300 miles inland unless inflight refuelling was used which would add about 5000km range and allow a 1400 mile penetration into the US inland. The G10N mountain range incorporated amazing technology, the Six Nakajima Ha-505 ( or Ha-54 ), 36-cylinder radials, developing 4,100hp powering it were to allow an operational ceiling of each at 49,212ft and a speed of 484mph at 32000ft. It really was more in the B36 class.
 
Last edited:
Why didn't the Germans come up with anything like this, or if they did, what was it? They had BMW 803 (4,500HP), but I never have seen a "German B-36". I cannot find anything that can match the G10N size or performance, I guess they didn't have to? Could you please shed some light on this? Why didn't we see any German projects with 6xBMW 803 with projected speed of 480+MPH, 49,000+ft ceiling, and carrying, say, 30,000kg (66,000lbs) at 12774 km (7937 mi) range? Were the Germans simply less ambitious?

EDIT: Fw 238 upscale (P. 03.10206-22) had similar engines (4 x BMW 803), dimensions, and weight (277,000 lbs), but nowhere near the performance. Dieter Herwig and Heinz Rode give speed at 342mph and a range of 8,100 miles with 8,800 lbs bomb load, or 5,000 miles with 53,000lbs. I still have no idea why there is a 140mph difference between this aircraft and the G10N Fugaku, or why the G10N could carry so much more at a longer range.

Koopernic said:
Not as good as the Me 264, way to heavy
Click to expand...
Could you please elaborate more? It supposedly would weigh less than a B-29.

Koopernic said:
I would say this is not good data
Click to expand...
Do you have good data? I'm finding lots of conflicting information. Dieter Herwig and Heinz Rode claim a top speed of 340mph, while Heinz J. Nowarra go with 417mph.

Koopernic said:
This was an airliner, a beautiful diesel airliner.
Click to expand...
Why could it not be redesigned for a military role, it was big enough, no?
 
Japanese 1930-40 aviation often made very demanding specifications for new planes, for example the A6M Zero carrier fighter and the C6N Saiun carrier reconnaisance plane specifications were only met by radical design choices.

About the G10N Fugaku, its specification was probably correct if it was to accomplish the mission of a "hemisphere" bomber, which I believe was far more ambitious than the German "Amerika" bomber project, which reads to be the minimum to do the task. Using the B-36 as baseline 435mph from 22,800hp, the G10N would have had some 36,000hp so some 480mph seems possibile
 
JUNKERS had been developing a 4,000++Hp aero steam turbine for this class of long-range bomber. Most interesting.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

Why did the U.S. navy reject the F6U Pirate?
Replies
10
Views
643
eagledad
E
German heavy bombers
2 3
Replies
50
Views
5K
Geoffrey Sinclair
G
M
Why Didn't The RAF use Beaufighters Instead of Typhoons In The ETO
2
Replies
29
Views
3K
MIflyer
M
S
Spitfire vs. Dora mass battle
2
Replies
31
Views
2K
spicmart
S
S
Why airplanes were designed the way they were.
3 4 5
Replies
90
Views
8K
EwenS
E
Menu
Log in
Register