German WW2 engine production numbers can be found here, http://www.enginehistory.org/Piston/WW2GermanProduction/WW2GermanProduction.shtml
Other a/c used the BMW801 besides the Fw190.
Other a/c used the BMW801 besides the Fw190.
Most overrated german plane? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter aurelien wolff
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
My friend BMW 801 had terribly bad power to weight ratio. It weighted 1012 kgr and needed c3 fuel tp produced 1700 ps. 70 of those ps were absorbed by it s cooling fan. Even when was cleared for 2000ps after the summer 1944, it still was inferior. For comparisin the Homare 21 produced 2000hp from 810kgr, using inerior 92 octane fuel, and with smaller diameter. The BMW 801 on b4 fuel when used in bombers was just capable for 1560 ps.Above the 6000m the 801 was even worse.
The wing was terrible because although it was small, which means high wing loading, had very high drag. The Fw190A9 on 2400ps would barely touch 590km/h at sea level. The sea fury on the same power was over 60 km/h faster , despite the fact that it was a larger aircraft with more wetted area. The Fw 190D9 on 2100ps, and assuming that it was properly built, could just exceed 600kmh/h at sea level. The P51H on the same power was 60-70 km/h faster. The la7 on 250 ps less hp, claimed 620km/h( to be honest i have my doubts about the soviet claiming)
Yes, it had decent rate of roll, but thats a property that requires a well trained pilot, to convert it to desicive advantage in combat.
Finally after , the A5 version, the 190 was simply far too heavy for its size, resuting in bad power and wing loadings
Clayton Magnet
Staff Sergeant
- 902
- Feb 16, 2013
The Homare also never worked correctly. An impressive engine on paper, but a nightmare in operation
michael rauls
Tech Sergeant
- 1,679
- Jul 15, 2016
Hmmmm... I've never heard the Fw 190 discribed in any other than superlative terms by pilots on both sides. Not nescesarily saying you are wrong. Just never heard that perspective before.
And I don't think a high wing loading is nescesarily a bad thing in and of itself.
There are certainly those around here with much more aerodynamic knowledge than myself but as I understand it it's like most things in aircraft design a trade off. That is you gane in some areas but loose in others. I believe all other things being equal a higher wing loading would give you a quicker roll rate for example. One of the things the Fw190 was known for.
Not 100% sure about this but I am sure several people will be along shortly to correct me if im wrong
.
GrauGeist
Generalfeldmarschall zur Luftschiff Abteilung
What's all this about?
The Fw190 was not a large aircraft. All but the "D" had a 29 foot length and a 34 foot wingspan, two feet wider rhan the Bf109, and it's wing area was proportionate to it's airframe. The Fw190A was still a deadly adversary right to war's end, particularly at lower altitudes and it's heavy armament would tear up anything unfortunate enough to get in it's sights.
Also using a P-51H in comparison to types that saw combat is reaching a little, because we could start citing a whole list of late-war types that had good performance, but never saw action.
As for the Ju52/3m, that's a type that entered service in 1931, so what can you expect? Their up-side is they used non-essential engines, were dependable and easy to manufacture...
As a very experience jet pilot, my shot as an over rated aircraft, the ME 262. Fine airframe and weapon package but the Jumo 004 just wasn't ready for prime time. Besides lacking proper materials for an axial flow engine, the main drawback was lack of a real fuel control unit. In effect the throttle was just a valve letting fuel into the engine. The lean/rich range in acceleration/deceleration is very easy to exceed with rather unfortunate operational results. That and the atrocious low speed acceleration aspect which made them incredibly vulnerable on takeoff and landing. Definitely depended on maintaining high speed energy tactics. The speed advantage against bomber formations was a two edge sword, one could slice in and probably avoid the escorts but the firing time in a pass was very short. I knew a FAA inspector who flew B-50's in Korea, their defense against Migs? Toss out the flaps and slow way down! The speed however did give better possibility of several passes.
Thorlifter
Captain
I don't consider the Stuka overrated at all. It suffered the same fate as all early participants in the war, it was simply outdated once superior aircraft and tactics were developed. It did it's job well....early on.
I'd lean towards the Me-163.
I'd lean towards the Me-163.
CatTheCool
Airman
- 32
- Aug 28, 2018
The 262 did shoot down over 300 allied aircraft.....
And I don't think it was overrated...
parsifal
Colonel
Its actually a hard question.
Overrated to me is an aircraft that has massive resources poured into it for little or no return. to me that rules out both the 109 and the 190 as both gave excellent returns of service
Aircraft that I consider suspect include Me 210/410, He 219, He 177, Me 262 and Me 163. There are plenty of others to choose from.
Truth is, every nation fielded dud aircraft. Germany did have a lot though, which I think can be traced back to their faulty procurement machinery.
Overrated to me is an aircraft that has massive resources poured into it for little or no return. to me that rules out both the 109 and the 190 as both gave excellent returns of service
Aircraft that I consider suspect include Me 210/410, He 219, He 177, Me 262 and Me 163. There are plenty of others to choose from.
Truth is, every nation fielded dud aircraft. Germany did have a lot though, which I think can be traced back to their faulty procurement machinery.
Parsifal,
I agree very much so with your conclusion, particularly the bang for the buck methodology. I had refrained from posting in this thread due to being unable to pick just one. However I had been favoring the He177; 163 and 262 in no particular order.
Of the aircraft you mentioned do you have any monetary numbers to go along with airframes?
Cheers,
Biff
parsifal
Colonel
I don't, but somewhere at home I have the amounts being spent by the air ministry on R&D, and it was staggering. approximately 2.5 times that being spent by Britain in the later years of the war. they didn't get 2.5 times the numbers of new aircraft, or other aircraft technologies. Result/conclusion....an awful lot of the LW budget got p*ssed up the wall for no benefit to the nation.
GrauGeist
Generalfeldmarschall zur Luftschiff Abteilung
I agree with the He177 and Me163, but the Me262 was perhaps the most effective of all nation's jet fighter programs, even if it was muddied up by politics, delays and last minute priorities.
I know it's been said before, but the He280 was a HUGE missed opportunity by the RLM and it was that same cool approach to the jet program that made the Me262 late to the game.
It didn't help any, when the Me262 was finally being demonstrated and Hitler asked Messerschmitt if it could be a bomber and Willy without hesitation said "yes!".
The Ar234, a dedicated bomber, was about to enter production and the Me262 had no business in that role.
*IF* the RLM had played their cards right, they would have got behind the jet program in the early days, when Germany still had the upper hand. This would have seen the He280 enter service as a true fighter, the Me262 as a Heavy Fighter/Interceptor and the Ar234 as the dedicated bomber with the Hs132 as the precision bomber/dive bomber - all well before 1944.
There were other missed opportunities, like the Ar240, Fw187, Ta154 and so on...I don't think that the He219 was a waste but rather the RLM's doctrine that created waste. Mandating that virtually everything had to be capable of dive-bombing, to the point where I'm surprised that the Tiger Tank wasn't able to dive-bomb, created serious delays in development and production and was absolutely unnecessary.
I know it's been said before, but the He280 was a HUGE missed opportunity by the RLM and it was that same cool approach to the jet program that made the Me262 late to the game.
It didn't help any, when the Me262 was finally being demonstrated and Hitler asked Messerschmitt if it could be a bomber and Willy without hesitation said "yes!".
The Ar234, a dedicated bomber, was about to enter production and the Me262 had no business in that role.
*IF* the RLM had played their cards right, they would have got behind the jet program in the early days, when Germany still had the upper hand. This would have seen the He280 enter service as a true fighter, the Me262 as a Heavy Fighter/Interceptor and the Ar234 as the dedicated bomber with the Hs132 as the precision bomber/dive bomber - all well before 1944.
There were other missed opportunities, like the Ar240, Fw187, Ta154 and so on...I don't think that the He219 was a waste but rather the RLM's doctrine that created waste. Mandating that virtually everything had to be capable of dive-bombing, to the point where I'm surprised that the Tiger Tank wasn't able to dive-bomb, created serious delays in development and production and was absolutely unnecessary.
parsifal
Colonel
The Me 262 was easily the biggest R&D program of all the jet fighter programs of any nation, but it was far from the most efficient. In fact I am of the opinion that it was probably the least efficient program
The attached article provides a reasonable overview of the vastly different approaches to resource allocation for the development of jet engines, and demonstrates the massively greater resources the germans were prepared to expend
https://trace.tennessee.edu/cgi/vie...redir=1&article=2648&context=utk_chanhonoproj
The attached article provides a reasonable overview of the vastly different approaches to resource allocation for the development of jet engines, and demonstrates the massively greater resources the germans were prepared to expend
https://trace.tennessee.edu/cgi/vie...redir=1&article=2648&context=utk_chanhonoproj
Fliger,
I very much agree with your facts surrounding the 262 and it's limitations engine wise. However, do you think there might be a little retrospectroscoptive in your analysis? Of course the engines fuel control was bad but it was the best they could do at the time. Imagine from a 1930s perspective looking at WW1 fighters with metal plates on the props for "protection " vice a synchronizer. Or wooden fixed pitch props versus metal constant speed versions. My point is only that progress is incremental in aviation especially during wartime circa 1940-1945.
The Germans were trying, however the tsunami that was the Allies was growing massively and directly opposite of the Axis powers circa 42-43 and beyond.
I seem to remember the later Jumos had a much improved FC. I flew the mighty T37 in pilot training, and the throttle response in it was atrocious, with surges along the way if you cobbed in the power. However it could ingest a lot of bird and not get damaged. And it was a decade newer. The T38 engines fan blades would flex if you touched them, however they were very reliable inside their envelope. Just don't get into iceing EVER. The throttle response in the Eagle, between the Electronic Engine Control (F100-100), and the FADEC version (F100-220) is night and day. Thrust went up, response way up, mileage up a hair, and reliability off the chart better. You have to start somewhere.
Even if the 262 had much better engines the spool up time would have been only marginally better, and acceleration would be along the same lines. The engines needed better metals for longevity. The Nazis needed many, many more to make even a small dent in the opposition. End result would not have changed tactics, vulnerabilities or outcome in my opine.
Cheers,
Biff
From the German perspective, having been told they are the superior people, do you think their attitude could have been we will get past these pesky Allies with superior knowledge, tactics, and products? Could that be the driving force behind the wonder weapons and the dumping of massive coin into the R&D programs?
Cheers,
Biff
parsifal
Colonel
I think it was a lack of discipline strangely enough. in Britain and America, at the beginning of the war (and even before) there was a ruthless weeding out of R&D projects unlikely to benefit the war effort. Tight controls on how much money and who did that development were imposed. The whole country was shifted over to a war footing in other words and every aspect of the national apparatus was geared towards the goal of winning the war. this was slightly less apparent in the US, but then they had the sinews to be able to afford that.
In germany, for a very long time, the nation was kept on more or less a peace footing. I know there have been many that have tried to quash that idea, but in certain areas it was very apparent. R&D was one of those. Though the national apparatus would not hesitate to crush or suppress thinking on ideological reasons without giving it a second thought, they also failed to regiment those R&D efforts from a centralised bureau. Nazi germany, contrary to the myth that hitler controlled everything, was really much more a series of semi autonomous fiefdoms, intensely corrupt with fiercely guarded turfs that more or less were run for the benefit of that fief leader, who in turn made sure that the efforts of his "kingdom" were primarily doing stuff that made Hitler happy. an unbelievably inefficient system. Japanese were similar but substituted this near feudal system of control with a duopoly.
Both systems were incredibly corrupt, which manifested itself in a number of ways. One of the ways was that whilst in the two democracies there was a genuine competitive tender system .....if you were the losing tender it was tough luck basically, in Germany, if you were the losing bidder you probably would get some consolation contract of some description....a tender process in which everyone except the country itself was a winner.....yippee!!!!!
In germany, for a very long time, the nation was kept on more or less a peace footing. I know there have been many that have tried to quash that idea, but in certain areas it was very apparent. R&D was one of those. Though the national apparatus would not hesitate to crush or suppress thinking on ideological reasons without giving it a second thought, they also failed to regiment those R&D efforts from a centralised bureau. Nazi germany, contrary to the myth that hitler controlled everything, was really much more a series of semi autonomous fiefdoms, intensely corrupt with fiercely guarded turfs that more or less were run for the benefit of that fief leader, who in turn made sure that the efforts of his "kingdom" were primarily doing stuff that made Hitler happy. an unbelievably inefficient system. Japanese were similar but substituted this near feudal system of control with a duopoly.
Both systems were incredibly corrupt, which manifested itself in a number of ways. One of the ways was that whilst in the two democracies there was a genuine competitive tender system .....if you were the losing tender it was tough luck basically, in Germany, if you were the losing bidder you probably would get some consolation contract of some description....a tender process in which everyone except the country itself was a winner.....yippee!!!!!
Clayton Magnet
Staff Sergeant
- 902
- Feb 16, 2013
A lot is made about the short engine life of the 004, but it wasn't outlandish. Consider that the first generations of GE J47's, which first flew long after the war, had a TBO of 15 hours.
The WW2 German (and Japanese) aircraft industries are so interesting to armchair experts like me as they failed to keep pace technically due to poor planning decisions more than inability. The Germans seemed to have chosen the wrong high tech projects (Komet, Mistel, Moskito) whether bad luck or bad concept?? The Allies sure had some dud planes like the early Typhoon, Stirling and Helldiver but they had other designs to fallback on.
I can add the pilot-less plane V1 as been overrated IMHO Its accuracy was very poor and was just a low yield nasty anti-civilian weapon. Now if they had made it as a fire-and-forget sea skimming anti-ship missile vs say anchored D-Day fleet etc it could have been useful!
I can add the pilot-less plane
V1 as been overrated IMHO Its accuracy was very poor and was just a low yield nasty anti-civilian weapon. Now if they had made it as a fire-and-forget sea skimming anti-ship missile vs say anchored D-Day fleet etc it could have been useful!
