Luftwaffe A10-style aircraft in 1944-45?

Discussion in 'Aviation' started by wiking85, May 28, 2013.

  1. wiking85

    wiking85 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2012
    Messages:
    1,321
    Likes Received:
    32
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Chicagoland Area
    Could the Luftwaffe have had a jet powered CAS/Ground Attack aircraft in 1944-45 similar to the A10? Of couse I don't think the Germans would have had a chain gun with AP rounds nor would the aircraft have the same capabilities, but it could have had rockets (Panzerblitz), autocannons, etc. I suppose it would be a jet powered Hs129. Would it have been possible and would it have made a difference for German forces in the East?
     
  2. altsym

    altsym Member

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2012
    Messages:
    228
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    18
    I believe the Me 262 A-3a fits that bill nicely.
     
  3. wiking85

    wiking85 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2012
    Messages:
    1,321
    Likes Received:
    32
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Chicagoland Area
    I don't. It wasn't designed as a CAS/Ground Attack aircraft, but rather as a fighter. I'm talking about a purpose build aircraft like the Hs129 or A10, rather than a fighter shoe horned in to the role. Also the 'Sturmvogel' was a failure in that role AFAIK.
     
  4. davebender

    davebender Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2009
    Messages:
    6,411
    Likes Received:
    59
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Michigan, USA
    Possible but why? Even today with mature jet engine technology many think prop aircraft work better for CAS. If anything 1945 Germany would field a Junkers turboprop for this mission.
     
  5. Shortround6

    Shortround6 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2009
    Messages:
    9,082
    Likes Received:
    547
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    retired Firefighter
    Location:
    Connecticut
    Not with the exiting engines.

    Pure jets do not work well at low speeds. The A-10 uses turbo-fans. In fact it uses hi-bypass ratio turbo fans (6.2-6.3 to one by pass ratio) which give a very good low speed thrust. They tend to loose thrust as aircraft speed goes up. (low exhaust speed)

    Pure jets move much less air air at a higher speed exhaust and and are more efficient at higher air speeds.

    High speed passes aren't very effective for CAS/Ground Attack aircraft.
     
  6. Shortround6

    Shortround6 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2009
    Messages:
    9,082
    Likes Received:
    547
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    retired Firefighter
    Location:
    Connecticut
    They would be better off using Junkers jet engines in air superiority aircraft and piston engines in the CAS aircraft.

    A turbo prop won't give enough performance to allow the CAS aircraft to survive against piston engine fighters. And the turbo prop is harder to build and needs more resources than the jet equivalent/cousin.
     
  7. GrauGeist

    GrauGeist Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2008
    Messages:
    13,989
    Likes Received:
    1,641
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Public Safety Automotive Technician
    Location:
    Redding, California
    Home Page:
    #7 GrauGeist, May 28, 2013
    Last edited: May 28, 2013
    Why, when they had the Fw190 (radial engined and armored to survive ground fire) or the Ju87G-1 for anti-armor (and other targets of opportunity) and of course, the Hs129 "flying infantryman" that could do the job and were already proven performers.

    To try and create a new ground attack aircraft, let alone a jet version, would consume time and materials they were desperately in need of at that point in the war.

    Also keep in mind that the Jumo or BMW jet engines were not as reliable as the engines in the afore-mention aircraft and they were not well suited to being struck by small arms fire, schrapnell or anything else that would be encountered by an aircraft in a GA role...
     
  8. altsym

    altsym Member

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2012
    Messages:
    228
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Well then, you got yourself a dilemma. I can't think of any other A/C to fit the roll. But I would equate the A-10 to the Ju 87 G-1 "Kanonenvogel".
     
  9. A4K

    A4K Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2007
    Messages:
    12,124
    Likes Received:
    120
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    The back of beyond
    Luftwaffe A10-style aircraft in 1944-45?

    Heinkel He 162. High mounted engine, protected against ground fire, and bent wing tips for tighter manoeverability... just like the later A-10...
     
  10. parsifal

    parsifal Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2008
    Messages:
    10,129
    Likes Received:
    611
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Urban Design/Strategic Studies Tutor
    Location:
    Orange NSW
    whats wrong with the AR234. not exactly CAS, admittedly, but a pretty good tactical bomber and a very good recon aircraft. what the LW really needed at the very end was the ability to see what was coming, and where, the AR234 could fulfil that mission perfectly
     
  11. tyrodtom

    tyrodtom Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2010
    Messages:
    2,345
    Likes Received:
    76
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Occupation:
    auto body repair
    Location:
    pound va
    Every countries first jet engines were extremely delicate when it come to sudden throttle changes, they'd flame out very easy.
    And very inefficient at low altitude.
    Not the best combination for a aircraft flying low level in a high threat enviroment.
     
  12. N4521U

    N4521U Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2009
    Messages:
    8,629
    Likes Received:
    227
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Occupation:
    reduced to all around slobbing
    Location:
    Heathcote, NSW
    There was a segment on TV a few days ago, said the Germans were working on Everything that has ever been developed for jet aircraft!
     
  13. A4K

    A4K Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2007
    Messages:
    12,124
    Likes Received:
    120
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    The back of beyond
    Clever buggers, no doubt about it. Look at many of the early postwar US and Russian jets, and you'll find their origins in a captured German design.
     
  14. drgondog

    drgondog Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2006
    Messages:
    7,149
    Likes Received:
    351
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Occupation:
    Executive, Consulting
    Location:
    Scurry, Texas
    You need substantial air superiority for slow CAS. Even the A-10 took lumps in Gulf War to ZU-23s with Complete air dominance over Iraq.

    Short answer - no it wouldn't help or significantly augment over Fw 190F or G. Hs 129 and Ju 87 couldn't survive in late 1944/1945. 262 more survivable at high speed but less likely effective CEP for bombs although four Mk 108s would be awesome against light T-34 engine covers.
     
  15. bobbysocks

    bobbysocks Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2010
    Messages:
    3,555
    Likes Received:
    144
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    why would you waste something new like a jet engine in this kind of role? the inception of the JE was able to give your planes an airspeed superiority by a vast amount. of all the 262s shot down the vast majority were taken when they were vulnerable during landing and take off ( when at low speeds ) not at high altitudes. its been argued that hitler wasted the 262 by making it a bomber instead of a fighter/interceptor....now you want to make it a ground attack ac??? that is just as bad or worse. the lw had many more prop planes better suited for gs....or ones that could have been improved to make them better.
     
  16. davebender

    davebender Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2009
    Messages:
    6,411
    Likes Received:
    59
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Michigan, USA
    CAS aircraft fly low and slow. They are loaded down with weapons. Air superiority (at least locally) is mandatory if you want any CAS aircraft to survive. Works the same for modern day A-10 as for WWII era Hs.129 or Ju-87.
     
  17. Shortround6

    Shortround6 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2009
    Messages:
    9,082
    Likes Received:
    547
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    retired Firefighter
    Location:
    Connecticut
    True but why put jet engines on the slow aircraft?

    A-10 engines are almost ducted fans. Over 6 times as much air goes through the fan as goes through the combustion chambers (core) of the engine. A much better mach to the performance needed for a CAS aircraft.
     
  18. davebender

    davebender Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2009
    Messages:
    6,411
    Likes Received:
    59
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Michigan, USA
    I wouldn't.

    During WWII a pair of inexpensive 1,200hp radial engines will work just fine for this type aircraft.
     
  19. drgondog

    drgondog Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2006
    Messages:
    7,149
    Likes Received:
    351
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Occupation:
    Executive, Consulting
    Location:
    Scurry, Texas
    Unless it has to pull a Yak9 or Mustang away from a kill shot
     
  20. parsifal

    parsifal Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2008
    Messages:
    10,129
    Likes Received:
    611
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Urban Design/Strategic Studies Tutor
    Location:
    Orange NSW
    The war was not a level playing field. If you have air superiority, a bomb truck like the Ju87 was fine. But if you are operating in a hostile air environment, a Ju87 is inneffective. It will suffer too many casualties in trying to complete its mission. For the Germans, they needed CAS that was much more suvivable, to cope with the operation in hostile air environment. Something like the FW190-F8
     
Loading...

Share This Page