p-80 V Me 262 (1 Viewer)

[Soren]

And in what way is Germany "well ahead" in metallurgy today? I don't see any breakthroughs in heat treating, processing, welding or any other processing associated with producing aircraft

FLYBOYJ, what fighter aircraft besides the Eurofighter does Germany build today ?

Anyway I wasn't talking appliance within aircraft production specifically FLYBOYJ, just metallurgical science in general. A good example today as-well as back in the day is the metals generally used in AFV's, guns and tools (of all kinds nearly) the methods in which they are machined refined.

As to production capabilities, sure the Germans can't mass-produce in the same scale as the US but they make up for that in the quality of their work, much like the Swiss - You don't have to look far to notice either.

Point is Germany specializes itself very much within steel-making having depending on huge exports in this area.

 

[Soren]

Koolkitty,

Just a quick response to your comments about turbochargers piston engined fighter top speeds. The Germans employed both turbo superchargers in their aircraft, and their quickest piston engined fighters (Ta-152 Dora-12/13) reached speeds ranging from 475 - 500 mph, thats faster than both the P-47M N

 

[FLYBOYJ]

FLYBOYJ, what fighter aircraft besides the Eurofighter does Germany build today ?

NONE - and they haven't built a whole airframe in mass since the war...

Anyway I wasn't talking appliance within aircraft production specifically FLYBOYJ, just metallurgical science in general. A good example today as-well as back in the day is the metals generally used in AFV's, guns and tools (of all kinds nearly) the methods in which they are machined refined.

Again, nothing that any other European country and these days Japan hasn't done or done similar.

As to production capabilities, sure the Germans can't mass-produce in the same scale as the US but they make up for that in the quality of their work, much like the Swiss - You don't have to look far to notice either.

Agreed to a point but in the case of metallurgical sciences there isn't much differance, in fact the US has been the leader in Titanium fabrication since the U-2 days.

Point is Germany specializes itself very much within steel-making having depending on huge exports in this area.

OK, but there's nothing world leading there. I don't see any plasma spray coating, titanium welding or laser cutting state of the art facilities that are world leading anywhere in Germany. Its not to say that the German metallurgical industry (consisting of heat treating and special processing companies) are no further state of the art than those found in the US or for that matter any where else in Europe. The leaders in this science are the ones who can produce and produce "state of the art" with that said, it's the UK, Japan and the US.

 

[AL Schlageter]

Koolkitty,

Just a quick response to your comments about turbochargers piston engined fighter top speeds. The Germans employed both turbo superchargers in their aircraft, and their quickest piston engined fighters (Ta-152 Dora-12/13) reached speeds ranging from 475 - 500 mph, thats faster than both the P-47M N

Your proof for this claim of top speed is ...... .

The Germans tried turbo charging in the Folke-Wulf 190 but couldn't get it to work.

The turbocharged Bv 155 only topped out at 429mph @ ~52,000ft.

 

[kool kitty89]

Soren that's what I thought you meant by metalurgy (as said in my previous post). As I also said the US also has much merit in the feild of metalugical engeneering. (see my previous example)

And on your comment on quality of work in steels, I heartily agree. Just look at the world famous knives and blades from Solingen.

on a different note here's another comparison between the 262 and the P-80
(picture below) from: The First American Jet (1942) - WW2inColor Talk I still think its amazing that Lockheed got such an amazing plane out of less than a year of development (~150 days to the XP-80A then later the full-blown XP-80A and YP-80A) Though obviously not flawless, it was amazing especially considdering it was comparable to the 262 (both having their own advantages) which had over 3 years of development work.

Below the comparison is an picture story from: The Aviation History Online Museum "Bolt from Above" - Robert Winks - P51D Mustang - Me262 Jet

 

[AL Schlageter]

Sheffield steel anyone.

 

[kool kitty89]

With the GM boost I think the Ta-152 had a top speed of 472mph, though it might have been faster with both MW 50 and GM engaged at the same time. But less than 200 of this aircraft were produced and few evermade it to service. (I think a few were used as interceptors and as cover for Me-262 airfeilds) You could also include the Bf-209 world-speed setter at 469 mph, but this was never a combat plane, despite the breif attenpt to convert it to one. The Do-335 was also faster at 474 mph, and as a fighter-bomber its use is comparable to the P-47, but it didn't enter service.

The XP-47J and XP-52 were faster though (at 506 mph and 490 mph tested and 550 mph theoretical for the P-72) though these didn't enter production.

What is the Dora-12/13?

 

[kool kitty89]

Sheffield steel? isn't that an album from the 1980s Sheffield Steel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia =)

But seriously, you're right many countries have regions famous for such things. My example for germany was Solingen.

 

[AL Schlageter]

MW50 was usable up to ~FTH.
GM1 was usually used above FTH.
False. Ta152H were not used as airfield cover.

 

[kool kitty89]

Oh, I found an article on the FH Phantom and itlists the size of arious Westinghouse engines proposed for it, the chosen J30 engines were 19 inches in diameter and produced 1600 lbs thrust. That is a more compact design then i thought, the powere of a welland or I-16 in an engine of less than half the diameter and thus less than 1/4 the frontal area and about half the frontal area of the 003! This engine possibly has the highest thrust to frontal area ratio of the war, even higher than the 24.4 inch HeS-30 tested at 2004 lbf (910 kp). It powered the US's first aircraft to take-off and land on a carrier the FH Phantom, which was also the first US jet to use axial engines. here are some line drawings: http://richard.ferriere.free.fr/3vues/fh1_1_3v.jpg http://richard.ferriere.free.fr/3vues/fh1_2_3v.jpg and its sucessor the F2H Banshee: http://richard.ferriere.free.fr/3vues/f2h_banshee_3v.jpg

Though, with both the engine and aircraft development going slowly the prototype wasn't ready untill 1945 (ordered in '43), and largely due to the war in the Pacific ending, didn't enter production untill '46, and service untill mid '47 by which time its replacement the larger, more powerefull, higher performing and better armed F2H Banshee was nearly ready to enter service along with the F9 Panther and the FJ Fury and would all would enter service in about a year. So the order was reduced from 100 to 30 andthen raised to 60 and the Phantom served as a conversion trainer and never saw combat, similar to the P-59, though it did see a short period of front-line use from 1947-1948. (though if the war had continued and Japan was invaded a planned, its likely the FH Phantom would have seen some service before Japan surrendered)

 

[kool kitty89]

Of the aifield cover with the 152, I thought that might be a mith, that's why I said I think...
But thanks for the correction. =)

 

[Ome_Joop]

False. Ta152H were not used as airfield cover.

Although some writers have stated that Ta 152s flew "top-cover" for bases from which Messerschmitt Me 262 jet fighters operated, this seems unlikely..... The Ta 152s of the Stabsschwarm did fly airfield protection duties for the Doras of II./JG 301 given that the various Gruppen of JG 301 were housed on different fields..

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Soren that's what I thought you meant by metalurgy (as said in my previous post). As I also said the US also has much merit in the feild of metalugical engeneering. (see my previous example)

And on your comment on quality of work in steels, I heartily agree. Just look at the world famous knives and blades from Solingen.

Knives don't fly unless you throw them!

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Sheffield steel anyone.

BINGO!

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Of the aifield cover with the 152, I thought that might be a mith, that's why I said I think...
But thanks for the correction. =)

Ask Erich about more info on this. He has family ties to this squadon and plenty of information.

 

[kool kitty89]

Knives don't fly unless you throw them!

I guess we have gotten a little off topic huh...

 

[FLYBOYJ]

I guess we have gotten a little off topic huh...

Yup -

 

[drgondog]

One more thing, I was wrong when I said the P-80's 169 gallon teardrop wingtip tanks increased drag. According to several sources I read the tanks reduced drag by improving airflow around the wingtips as well as improving roll (the same effect as the F9F's perminant wing tanks) and increased lift at the tips reducing in-flight wing loading. Though I doubt the T-33's tanks had the same effect due to change in aerodynamic shape and larger size resulting in high-speed interferance. (as FlyboyJ said they caused the wings to flap)

FlyboyJ, any idea of the volume of the T-33's wingtip tanks?

To be technical, the design theory with having tip tanks was to create a 'two dimensional' effect at the wing tip to reduce the tip vortex - which reduces induce drag - the more elegant approach is the modern 'winglet'.

 

[drgondog]

You've got to be kidding me Koolkitty!

In terms of metallurgy the Germans were well ahead throughout WW2, and they continue to be so till this day. The problem bugging the German Jet program was a lack of the necessary expensive metals needed to solve the reliability problems bugging their Jet engines. The Germans knew exactly what they needed to make their engines even more powerful reliable, problem was however that it wasn't in big enough a supply, as much had to be used for other projects.

What other projects took such a 'high priority' that turbine blade improvement retarded their best channce to attain parity in the air? As contrast with knowing what to do and having the technology to dit?

I also strongly disagree with your false theory that the US would've been ahead had they showed interest earlier on. Fact is Germany possessed better educated engineers aerodynamicists right from the start of the war, and they were well ahead in both fields from the beginning till the end (Hence the performance they managed to achieve with the Me-262 design) In fact the Germans have been ahead in aerodynamics all the way back since 1904 and up until the end of the 2nd world war. All of this mainly thanks to the fact that all of the ground breaking research before and during WW2 was carried out at the laboratory of Ludwig Prandtl at Göttingen, which was the main center of theoretical and mathematical aerodynamics and fluid dynamics research in the world from soon after 1904 to the end of WW2. This is where the term boundary layer was coined as-well as the place where modern mathematical aerodynamics was founded.

???? Facts Soren? The giants in theoretical Aero were primarily Theodorsen (Norwegian born, naturalized US), Whitcomb, Von Karman (Hungarian/US) and a couple of others - but all were making major contributions to shock wave theory, aeroelasticity, propeller aero, boundary layer theory and area rule shape theory - starting in the 1920s in the example of Theodorsen

Interesting, Theodorsen was a common base study for Fluid Mechanics and Intro Aero for me - and certainly provided the basis for transforming lift distribution and moment to an airfoil section from a revloving cylinder. It is the first example of a Complex Variable transformation that I am aware of and the only possible 'German theoretician (name) other than Von Karman that was even mentioned in literature or course work.

Most of the theoretical aero (including wake turbulence and boundary layer theory) for laminar flow were American and Brit - The Germans contributed exactly zero on modern aerodynamic finite element modelling through my own Masters and early (not completed) PhD studies on Aero in 1960's. We wer whores for best results in math, aero and physical modelling - Germans Russians and Brits were OK with us.

This is when computers were first introduced and ANY Theroetical basis from ANY source including German or Russian was important. E.g the Stealth technology from a signal attenuation contect was extracted from Russian theoretical paper in Signal Theory Math back in early 80's.

Who are you proposing as 'best German theoreticians and what breakthroughs are you suggesting here?

The laboratory first lost its dominance after the war when the researchers were dispersed.

Soren, I leave you alone for a couple of weeks and you slither back with some really bold claims - how do you define 'dominance'? and how do you base term 'best engineers' and how do you provide sources and facts to back these claims up?

I have enormous respect for the aero and metallurgy and pure engineering skills exhibited by Germans then and now - but for some reason you trivialize Brit and American engineering talent in comparison.

Why?

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Though I doubt the T-33's tanks had the same effect due to change in aerodynamic shape and larger size resulting in high-speed interferance. (as FlyboyJ said they caused the wings to flap)

FlyboyJ, any idea of the volume of the T-33's wingtip tanks?

Actually Bill got it right - they just flapped like hell in a dive or at higher mach numbers.

The Fletcher tip tanks (found on most T-33s) had a capacity of 233 gallons