Improved Henschel Hs 129

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

Yep. But which programs do you cut to get the raw materials, engines and factory space to make those aircraft? Because the reality is that the Germans were limited in quantities of all three. To get the BMW 801s should they cut production of the FW190 or the JU88? They are not going to be able to make more of them so something would have to give.
 
Stuff for the what-if sub-forum?

BMW 801 weighted more than 3 times than the initial Argus engine, and more than 2 times more than the G&R 14M. We're looking at a brand new aircraft here if the 801 is to power it.
 
Perhaps refitting the Hs129 with the GR14 series engines, but otherwise it was a purpose-built ground attack platform.
It needed a small airframe to present the smallest possible profile to defenders and the armored cockpit was expensive (and heavy). The larger the airframe, the more armor needed.
There are some who feel it should have been faster and able to dogfight, but like the A-10, it was designed purely as ground attack and relied on top cover.
 
more powerful radials were typically longer and several hundred kilos heavier. such an engine would move the CoG a lot forward. I don't know if that was possible to balance-out with a lengthened fuselage.
 
Certainly what the OP didn't asked, but just one BMW 801 in nose of Stuka will come a long way in making the 'German Warthog'.
 
BMW has a few things going for it, and a few shortcomings vs. the G&R 14M.
Advantages - it is already in the production in Germany proper, it is known quantity for mechanics and pilots alike, spare parts are available. Power is good - 900 PS give or take for 'hi-alt' versions, while the version for Fw 200C (132H) was good for 1000 PS for 1 minute for take off. 5 minute ratings were around 750 PS. Weight was modest, under 550 kg even for the latest versions.
Shortcomings might be diameter -55 in - and thus the frontal area and resulting drag. Hs 129 was slow anyway, so this drag increase might be a moot point. Mileage will suffer somewhat due to greater engine power and drag. The biggest shortcoming might be that pilot's visibility to the sides will be even worse than with the G&R radials.

On the other hand, once we start talking about installing two 900 HP engines, let alone more powerful ones on the Hs 129, installing just one on Ju 87 seems to be better idea than installing such two on the 129. And this is my main 'issue' with Hs 129 - it needed a big investment to became an over-achiever.
 
If the BMW 132 is considered, then perhaps the G-R 14N might be looked at, slightly less in diameter, more horsepower and a hundred or so pounds heavier than the 132.
As far as the Ju87 goes, I'm not sure how much faster you could make it go, there's drag galore all over it's airframe.
 
Ju 87 is slow and will remain slow even if we stick R-2800 in the nose.
One 14N in Stuka can carry two MK 101 or 103 cannons, plus a rear gunner.
 


The GR 14M engines on the Hs 129 were very small, one source says 964mm (37.9 in) and 419Kg. please compare to the ground crew.
Using any other radial engine is going to have a large increase in drag.
GR-14N was 1290mm (50.8in) 620Kg
Fiat A.74 1195mm ( 46.8in) 570Kg
BMW 132 1380mm (54.3in) 530Kg.
Bramo 323 1388mm ( 54.7in) 545Kg

The last two each have more frontal area than both GR 14Ms put together.


Tough trying to scale from human beings but in th Hs 129 photo the outside of the engine cowl seems to be about the size of the mens torso.
Bottom photo of a Bramo 323 undergoing restoration goes from below the knees to the top of head of taller of the two men on either side.

The HS 129 carried 610 liters of fuel, range at most economical speed was 560km with the 30mm gun fitted.
Fitting more powerful engines is going to give really short range. Yes with more power you can put in bigger fuel tanks but now we are into a real weight escalation spiral.
Do you need larger, heavier landing gear to handle the increased gross weight? DO you need to beef up the wing spars (or sing skin?)

Lets not forget that the GR 14M 419Kg engines were replacing 315Kg Argus engines to begin with and only a minimum of changes had been to accommodate the new engines.
 
Shortround6 said:
...
Lets not forget that the GR 14M 419Kg engines were replacing 315Kg Argus engines to begin with and only a minimum of changes had been to accommodate the new engines.
Click to expand...

There were changes. Wing lost the 'sweep' so the CoG can be restored. picture
(same change was done on Me 210 when it became Me 410, while on Il-2 series there was back-and-forth with wings gaining sweep and then loosing it)
That is already for bare weight increase of roughly 2 x 100 kg, despite the G&R 14M being shorter than Argus engines.
 
It is not a trivial increase in power, however the 215kg increase in weight per engine (dry weight) is also not trivial.
Dry weights of engines most of the time do not include starting system, exhaust system (aside from flanges) generators or hydraulic pumps, cowlings, engine mounts and so on. They certainly don't include propellers, larger engines generally use larger, heavier versions of all those items (except the hydraulic pump/s).

Lots of luck using those propellers on a BMW 132 engine.
frontal area of the Argus was 3.9 sq ft without the cowl. Frontal area of the BMW 132 was 16 sq ft, also without cowl.

Please note the weight of the GR 14M was just about 1/2 way between the Argus and the BMW 132 and that the frontal area of the 14M was 7.9 sq ft (W/O cowl)
 

Perhaps the G14M could be given MW50 injection. This was used on the BMW/Bramo 323R2 which then achieved an increase in power from about 940 (sea level) or 1000 at altitude to 1200hp. The 323 seems only 125 kg heavier than the 419 kg G14M which is 26% more.
it would seem manageable.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

Hs-129 use on the Western Front/MTO?
Replies
6
Views
1K
Andrew Arthy
A
W
Mass produced HS-123s
4 5 6
Replies
100
Views
7K
nuuumannn
S
Henschel Hs 126 production
Replies
3
Views
844
Spielmann
S
The Hs 129 idea done 'right', and for everyone
3 4 5
Replies
91
Views
8K
Shortround6
S
Can we make a slightly smaller Fulmar as an improved carrier fighter?
18 19 20
Replies
391
Views
19K
z42
Z
Menu
Log in
Register