Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
So, prior to that, a DB-605 (or possibly 601) powered 190 variants would have mostly been good for specialized tasks where long endurance/range is required, possibly with reduced armament to save further weight. That and high altitude performance with the 605-AS. (even with the DB-605A, the reduced weight and drag might make it better at high altitude work, including escorting heavier interceptors -possibly better at that job than similarly engined 109s, and 2x wing root synched MG-151/20s is better than 1x 151/20 and 2x 131s)Not that a good fit before late 1943, until the DB 605A was allowed for 2800 rpm and 1.42 ata. The 605AM is also not available before 1944. I'd still prefer the DB 603 and Jumo 213 for West-bound Fw-190s, indeed the BMW 801 seem like the best bet for fighter-bomber versions of the Fw-190. Also for fighters for Eastern front, with it's good/excellent power under 5-6 km alt.
Methinks it is a question of timing. The BMW 801D is IMO the best engine for the Fw-190 until the DB 603A is available reliable (late 1943?). The Jumo 213A is there also by late 1943/early 1944 - that means the Jumo 211 is slowly phased out from production/use, and the promising 'fighter version', the 211R will not be produced. The 211J/N/P in the Bf 109 will cut it's performance. I'd push 213s in the Fw-190 (along with DB 603s), so the Bf-109 can keep the Db 605s.
The question was more whether they could have ramped up production even further with the Fw 190 variants becoming the primary/solitary single engine fighter in production.The Fw 190 was already produced in several factories. Indeed it is flexible, has other strong points, just need a good piece of engine from late 1943 on to remain competitive against Western opposition.
So ... the He-162 but earlier? The Jumo 004B might not have been reliable enough for that. Inability to limp home on one engine means almost certain loss of the aircraft in the case of engine failure, especially at low speed/altitude.I'd displace the Bf 109 with a jet. Simple 1-engined job, with 2 cannons.
So, prior to that, a DB-605 (or possibly 601) powered 190 variants would have mostly been good for specialized tasks where long endurance/range is required, possibly with reduced armament to save further weight. That and high altitude performance with the 605-AS. (even with the DB-605A, the reduced weight and drag might make it better at high altitude work, including escorting heavier interceptors -possibly better at that job than similarly engined 109s, and 2x wing root synched MG-151/20s is better than 1x 151/20 and 2x 131s)
It'd be somewhat like a hypothetical R-2600 or perhaps single-stage R-2800 (or maybe Hercules) powered Mustang vs Merlin Mustang or hypothetical Merlin XX Mustang. (Allison Mustang might be more akin to Jumo-211 powered 190? -if performance was anything close to the Allison mustang, that might actually be useful too -if there's surplus airframes to 'waste' on a lesser engine)
The question was more whether they could have ramped up production even further with the Fw 190 variants becoming the primary/solitary single engine fighter in production.
...
Or go back and forth like the Goblin and Whittle designs did. (Halford's work started later but progressed much faster than Whittle's at powerjets -or Rover- but Rolls Royce's involvement accelerated things considerably; I've wondered how things might have progressed if the Vampire+Goblin had been giving priority by the air ministry over the Meteor+W.2 ... or the goblin in general since the Meteor itself adapted well enough to mounting goblins) The Whittel based Rolls Royce designs ended up developing out much better post-war (Derwent V/8 better than Goblin and Nene/Tay better than Ghost at least performance to size/weight wise -maybe not manufacturing cost and maintenance)The early jets simply were not powerful enough on their own as singles. Which is why just about everybody initially designed twins. You can cut the armament in half but you can't cut the pilot, armor, radio and cockpit in half so the single engine plane winds up with a lower power to weight ratio. That leaves cutting fuel below 1/2 and the resulting very short endurance.
When jet designs started power was around 12-1600lbs thrust. Even one year could bring big changes and with start of design to flight taking around 3 years many programs over lapped a quicker later program could over take an earlier program. With 25-3000lb thrust engines a single engine plane.looked a lot.better.
Perhaps shifting manufacturing emphais from 605 to 603 earlier on (with the Fw-190 in mind) would have made more sense then?The Fw 190 with DB 605A would be similar to the Re.2005? Good for Eastern Front, not that good for MTO/ETO? The variant with 605AS/ASM does ring a bell, but again the DB 603A is significantly earlier.
Yes, I meant more in terms of re-allocating manufacturing resources earlier on to allow the 109 to be phased out while minimizing loss in capacity while transitioning to newer types. (if it was between re-tooling for the He-100 or pumping out more Fw-190 airframes across the board, the latter seems a more conservative bet ... He-100 would be a better direct replacement for the small fighter/interceptor role, though, and the wing root gun placement apparently would have allowed MG-151s to be fitted in place of the MG-17s, similar to the Fw-190 A1 vs A2 plus the engine cannon, and no cowl guns hindering aerodynamics) The Fw-187 and He-100 were both in development early enough to be seriously considered for war-time use ... at least for a more heavily strategically minded standpoint. (the tunnel vision surrounding a short, tactical power emphasized war obviously limited a lot of things in the longer term, yet that didn't stop them from still investing in numerous other follow-on developments)Fighter production was probably as ramped up as possible by 1944, what was needed was quality (ie. performance advantage vs. Allies), night fighters, better bombers. With such a flow of fighters, the trained pilots and fuel are bottlenecks; that was felt before, but in 1944 became acute.
...
Perhaps shifting manufacturing emphais from 605 to 603 earlier on (with the Fw-190 in mind) would have made more sense then?
The BMW 802 seems like a more practical and straightforward design than the Jumo 222 as well, but focusing on improving the 801 (particularly the intake manifold and supercharger ducting) would have likely been more worthwhile.Forgetting the Jumo 222 in a timely manner would've helped both with DB 603 (so it can be produced in the Ostmark factory earlier) and Jumo 213 (more people resources for it in development stage). A simple re-shuffle of produced engines from second half of 1943 on - DB 603 for Fw-190, BMW 801 for Me-410 the like - would not harm the twins, but it would bring necessary boost in hi-alt performance for the Fw-190 for the ETO. The over-boosted BMW 801 in the 190 would be still plenty enough for the Eastern Front.
Didn't some of the Japanese radials manage similar/better with single stage superchargers?It's power at altitude was decent, only comparable radial that was better used a 2-stage supercharger.
Weren't some of the major changes to the 802's induction system designed to resolve those problems? (and potentially more worthwhile applied directly to 801 development)What hampered the real life performance in a Fw-190 was the layout of air intake: the internal type was too restricted/squished (messes with ram effect; not sure how much the turbulent air due to the fan prop interfered), the external type was an after-thought - good for hi-alt, too draggy otherwise.
The single stage Allisons were also breaking 61 hp/L when overboosted to 66" ... albeit near sea level.I would note that on a per liter basis a Merlin could beat this using 100/130 fuel, 18lbs of boost, NO water injection. In fact some Merlins could come very close (60 hp per liter) using a single stage supercharger, no inter-cooler, 18lbs boost (about 66in), no water injection and 100/130 fuel. The Merlin 32 might even beat it.
Probably better to forgo the coupled V-12s entirely ... don't waste 601/605 production/development resources on those.Keep the Fw 190 as-is but as soon as DB 603 and Jumo 213 become available in a reliable from switch Fw 190 fighters to use these two engines. Keep the 801-engined version as ground attack F/G.
Bombers historically powered by DB 603/Jumo 213 may switch to BMW 801 (or even DB 606/610) or keep last generation Jumo 211.
The BMW 802 seems like a more practical and straightforward design than the Jumo 222 as well, but focusing on improving the 801 (particularly the intake manifold and supercharger ducting) would have likely been more worthwhile.
Didn't some of the Japanese radials manage similar/better with single stage superchargers?
Weren't some of the major changes to the 802's induction system designed to resolve those problems? (and potentially more worthwhile applied directly to 801 development)
.
In 1945, the working Homare was better, looks like it was even better than the contemporary 801S. US report on the Homare: link.
.The working Homare, was not just better,it was much better than the BMW 801. It produced 2000hp on low grade fuel,was smaller in frontal surface and was much lighter than the 801.
No surprise that the ki 84 was probably among the Top dogfighters of the war
Perhaps,better technology Exchange would have helped the 190 alot
I was also thinking the Ha109 and some models of Kasei were on a similar (or slightly better) level of altitude performance than the 801. (or at least relative to size, weight, and/or displacement)In 1945, the working Homare was better, looks like it was even better than the contemporary 801S. US report on the Homare: link.
Or a larger (or faster) single stage unit with aftercooler, or single speed integral stage + 2 speed+neutral aux stage like American engines adopted. (and in any case, better ducting arrangement, minimizing intake losses and allowing ram)The 802 was to feature either 1-stage 3-speed S/C or a 2-stage S/C (each stage with independent 2 speed gearing). The after-cooler was also to be installed (for 2-stage version only?), not inter-cooler like at 2-stage R-2800. Oil coolers were to be installed behind cylinders.
The 2-stage S/C would come in handy for the 801D, but, please, with simple 2-speed gearing
Not to mention the communication and translation issues (aside from political ones) complicating exchange. It was bad enough trying to get domestic German firms to collaborate or share information (and ministry attempts at such cooperation were also harmed by other ministry meddling and political posturing ... ) You still had independent firms competing with each other for projects and retaining considerable trade secrets without much consideration for cross-licensing. (that goes for piston and jet engines alike)Problem with a working Homare is that is way too late for LW needs - the Japanese were still having reliability issues in 1945 with it.
What Germany could use is the Farman-style 2-stage supercharger that was featured in Flight magazine in 1938 (or 1939?), or maybe RR Merlin 61 type 2-stage supercharger that was published in Flight magazine in December 1942. The Germans were probably aware of P&W developments of 2-stage superchargers for radial engines before Pearl Harbour, as well about advantages of Bristol-engined aircraft with 2-stage engines that claimed several world records in altitude in late 1930s.
...
They then added multi point fuel injection. This meant the last component of end gas during the exhaust stroke could be scavenged by using either blower pressure and inlet/outlet tunning (known as extractors by hot roders) perhaps 10% more fresh air inducted without fear of loosing air/fuel out of the exhaust.
This perhaps also allowed a higher compression ratio (more like 7:1 versus the Merlin 6:1) which allowed more power and efficiency since residual end gases can cause preignition.
Even with this effort a 87 octane Merlin could produce 1030hp wheras the DB601A little more and the more advanced DB601AA maybe, just maybe 100hp more (1175 ps say 1150hp) The reality is that the Merlin was on 100 octane by the time war broke out and producing 1310hp, then soon enough by 1942 1500 and then 1620. The DB605 never reached these power levels till 1944 and the DB601E never did.
A crical year was 1942. The Merlin added power mainly by improved fuels getting to 1620hp on the Merlin 25 single stage. However the Merlin 61 added an two stage supercharger to increase critical altitude and an intercooler to allow slightly higher supercharger compression ratios at high altitude (but also slightly a low altitudes).
The DB601 increased piston swept volume while retaining DB601 key dimensions but increasing weight from 580kg to 720kg (about same as Merlin 61 two stage) but the result is that in 1942 Me 109G1 with 1300 hp DB605A are facing 1560hp Spitfire IX with Merlin 61 (and likely a lot more jet thrust).
The single stage DB engines did quite well on a single stage because by their design they did not use the supercharger to 'overboost' the engine to gain power but mainly to altitude compensate. Hence the DB605AS which increased the volume of air that could be compressed by being bigger rather than focusing on pressure ratios.