Performance of He177 with Jumo 222s?

Discussion in 'Aviation' started by wiking85, Jun 17, 2015.

  1. wiking85

    wiking85 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2012
    Messages:
    1,321
    Likes Received:
    32
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Chicagoland Area
    Does anyone have any idea what the spec of a He177B with four Jumo 222s was? It might have been tested with it:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heinkel_He_177#Further_development-the_Heinkel_He_177B
    If it were, what sort of range, speed, and altitude could it have had with the Jumo 222 E/F?
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Junkers_Jumo_222#Variants
     
  2. SpicyJuan11

    SpicyJuan11 Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2015
    Messages:
    235
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    Luxemburg
    Are you referring to the He 177B proposed in 1938 (which was built and flown in 1944) or the oft confused as He 177B, He 277?
     
  3. wiking85

    wiking85 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2012
    Messages:
    1,321
    Likes Received:
    32
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Chicagoland Area
    He277 really, as the tail assembly made a lot more sense, but it doesn't have to be Transatlantic.
     
  4. SpicyJuan11

    SpicyJuan11 Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2015
    Messages:
    235
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    Luxemburg
    Well I imagine that the greater efficiency of the 222 would allow for far greater ranges than the BMW 801 powered He 277, I'm unsure if it could carry a greater max bomb load the than the BMW powered one since I still have yet to see any figures of the BMW 801 powered at all.
     
  5. Koopernic

    Koopernic Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2013
    Messages:
    638
    Likes Received:
    74
    Trophy Points:
    28
    #5 Koopernic, Jun 18, 2015
    Last edited: Jun 18, 2015
    If the research on enginehistory.org is to believed only 6 Jumo 222E/F were made with a further 4 under construction, they were trying to raise the full pressure altitude of the engine from 9000m to 11000m by improving the supercharger.

    However the same engine, with the same bore and stroke, but with only a single stage supercharger (instead of 2) known as the Jumo 222A2/B2 was the model that would have entered production first.

    Power was the same, 2500hp on B4 fuel though the engine had run on 2800-2900 with B4+MW50 on a bench.

    This engine could in general be easily fitted where a Jumo 213 or DB603 was mounted as it was quite compact, it may even have had the same mounting points (usually a pair of magnesium beams) It weighed around 1080kg vs the 920kg of the V12's.

    So its certainly possible, if the engines had been made available, that they could be fitted. The nice thing about these engines was that they came in clockwise and counter clockwise rotating sets which greatly simplifies some of the handling issues as their power otherwise implies the need for greater fin area to handle the torque. Issues of strengthening the wings might come up.

    This engine certainly would have solved a lot of problems for German aircraft. The He 219 even with the Jumo 222A2/B2 for instance would be able to take on a Mosquito, the plain old Ju 388 becomes quite fast, the Do 335 can cruise at very high speed. With the Jumo 222C/D the Ju 290 or derivatives can reach US shores.

    The Me 264 can complete a round trip to bomb the east coast of the USA with a significant bomb load with the Jumo 222

    After the USA started supply lend lease to the UK and escorting UK vessels via 'neutrality partrols' the Me 264 was conceived of as a bomber able to do a return mission to the USA. The US had already started its
    B-36 program.

    The 4 engine aircraft was to use 4 x DB603H engines of 2400hp, these engines were to use C3 fuel. Arment was an electro hydraulic dorsal and ventral barbette firing due 20mm guns over the twin tails and guns in the inner engine nacelles eliminating any blind spot.

    When the Me 264V1 flew in December 1942 it only had 4 x 1350hp Jumo 211F engines taken out of the Ju 88A4.

    The problem with these sorts of weak engines is that the aircraft didn't have the power to accelerate up to Vr in a realistically short enough runway, carrying the required amount of fuel. These days 2000-2500m long sealed runways are normal but in WW2 Germany they were targets and rare. RATO was the only option and it caused concern.

    Only a few months latter the 1750HP DB603A engine was being used in Me 410 and Do 217 aircraft.

    Calculations from flight test data eventually showed that with the 2000hp BMW801's that were becoming available in late 1943 or early 1944 the Me 264 could just perform the mission with a few hundred miles reserve range.

    One would have though that the Me 264V1 would have been built with BMW801's straight away or perhaps the early versions of the DB603H, the DB603A.

    So one of the intended applications was the Me 264.

    The DB603E was in large scale production in the second half of 1944 and was offering 1800hp at higher altitude, with C3 fuel and MW50 over 2260hp was, its written, available as the DB603EM. The engine might have been the first to power the Fw 190D9 bar the fact that Focke Wulf had miscalculated the weight of the engine and thought it was 128kg heavier than the Jumo 213A, too heavy for the Fw 190. After some acrimony Daimer Benz actually dissembled both types of engine installation and proved that the DB603E was only 2.7kg heavier.

    The three 2000+ hp engines the Germans had and that actually flew combat were
    BMW801TS, 2050ps on C3
    Jumo 213A 2100ps on B4+MW50, seemingly doing 2250 on C3 fuel at 1.80ata
    Jumo 213E 2050 on B4+MW50, this had a intercooled two stage engine
    Jumo 213F, same engine as above without intercooler but using C3 fuel to compensate
    DB603LA 2260hp, two stage non intercooled engine used on the Ta 152C3 aircraft (4 on Luftwaffe charge at end of war)
    DB603E's use is controversial, possibly used on some He 219,

    Two engines expected to be in service around June 1945 were the
    DB603L of around 2400hp, appears to be an intercooled development of the DB603LA. Ive seen documents rating this at 2400hp, was supposed to drive a Do 335 to 490mph or so.
    Jumo213EB which had an enlarged head, valves, RPM and an intercooler suitable for both the Fw 190D12 and the Ta 152H. I've read on other blogs this was rated around 2500hp. Allowed the Ta 152H to operate at the same searing 478mph but at lower altitudes and without need for GM-1. The Fw 190D13/R25 with this engine was expected to reach 488mph.

    Beyond that there was the DB603N, of around 2800hp and the Jumo 213J, new 4 valve cylinder heads of around 2600hp (without MW50)

    Hence production of the Jumo 222 was questioned again in Feb 1945 and I read a claim somewhere that they decided to hold back from production unless it could do 3000hp (it did 2800hp on B4+MW50 on a Bench). I've also read that the Jumo 222C/D, the bored out 145mm version of higher capacity and capable of 3000hp on B4 fuel alone received development priority as it was seen as the only way of conducting the bombing missions to the USA, these junkers based designes were of interest since the aircraft could operate of very short rough runways. Given its 1945 when this is happening these decisions are taking place in a vacuum.

    As for the speed estimate I recall that the He 177B with 4 x BMW801E was expected to achieve 346mph, likely at its engines full throttle height of just over 20,000ft. The Jumo 222A2/B2 would have 25% more power so taking the cube root of 1.25 = 1.077 so 7.77% faster or 372mph. With the Jumo 222E/F able to produce the same power at much higher altitude, FTH of 11000m instead of 7000 where the air is about 0.3 atmospheres instead of 0.5 then the aircraft will have 30% to 40% less drag and so by again apply the cube root law it will be 10% faster ie about 407mph at 30,000ft or so.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Bacon Bacon x 1
  6. Milosh

    Milosh Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2009
    Messages:
    1,918
    Likes Received:
    96
    Trophy Points:
    48
    The difference between the DB603L and DB604LA, was the LA had MW50 injection.
     
  7. SpicyJuan11

    SpicyJuan11 Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2015
    Messages:
    235
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    Luxemburg
    Thanks for the calculations Koopernic, with Jumo 222's, would the 6 engines Me 264 (sometimes called Me 364) have been necessary to extend the range? Also, how much greater payload would it (222) have over the 801 powered 264? Are you also suggesting that the Ju 390 would have been unnecessary if the 290 was powered by 222's?
     
  8. dedalos

    dedalos Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2014
    Messages:
    123
    Likes Received:
    11
    Trophy Points:
    18

    Hi, nice post
    But you did forgot The DB610 as a german engine of over 2000ps. With it the ju288 was faster than with the Jumo222 but with shorter range.
    Since after late 1943 the Db605 problems were largely solved and ADI was made available in early 1944, i wonder if would be possible a DB610 based on the block of the 605D plus MW50. Propably more than 3500ps.

    A question for you. From your Research , did the muthical 2250 ps power setting (on C3 fuel)for the 213A existed? I have read that indivintual Doras had fantastic speed perfrormance, but my (relatively old) books on the 190D reject the use of 2250 ps on the Jumo213A
     
  9. Koopernic

    Koopernic Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2013
    Messages:
    638
    Likes Received:
    74
    Trophy Points:
    28
    #9 Koopernic, Jun 18, 2015
    Last edited: Jun 19, 2015

    No, they weren't necessary. The use of 6 engines was primarily a way of using the weaker 1450 hp Jumo 211J or P engines and still get a good take off run. Even with 4 Jumo 211P engines (1500hp ea) the Me 264 could do the mission, it just needed an unrealistically long runway: 2500m or so, hence it would need to use RATO which was unattractive. There wasn't enough hanger space for the Me 264, Milch wasn't disposed in a kindly manner to Messerschmitt, he felt it an extravagance, so its development wasn't supplied with enough engineers, hanger space, draughtsmen. A small token 'Doolittle' style on the US east coast seems possible in late 1944 had it of been pushed. The Me 364 (ie Me 264/6m) of course would have superior performance than the 4 engine versions given the same engines.

    AFAIKT engines in the 2500hp class solve the takeoff problem, the runways the Me 262 jet was using would seem enough. It had a high take-off speed even then, by the standards of yesterday.

    The electrohydraulic remote controlled guns existed, there are photographs of them being installed on the V2 on the Creek/Forsyth book on the Me 264.
     
  10. Koopernic

    Koopernic Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2013
    Messages:
    638
    Likes Received:
    74
    Trophy Points:
    28
    #10 Koopernic, Jun 18, 2015
    Last edited: Jun 18, 2015
    The power levels definitely existed on the bench and if you look at the speed curves on WW2 performance net where the runs with C3 are faster than those with B4+MW50 then the C3 runs must have been more than 2100hp. C3 must have been better than B4+MW50 on the Jumo 213A at charge cooling. Apparently there were two MW50 systems fitted, one used supercharger pressure to blow in the MW50 by pressurising the tank and another that had to be fitted by Junkers technicians which used a pump and had a higher flow rate. Clearly using supercharger pressure to blow into a manifold pressurised by that same supercharger was going to mean the flow would experience back pressure and the flow would dwindle as full throttle height was reached.

    Going from B4+MW50 2100hp at 1.8ata to 1.98ata suggests 2310hp, not 2250hp.
     
  11. kool kitty89

    kool kitty89 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2007
    Messages:
    3,069
    Likes Received:
    36
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    San Jose, CA
    I wonder if investing in a coupled Jumo 211 arrangement would have been more worthwhile in terms of getting a serviceable, reliable engine into production rather than investing so much into the Jumo 222 project (or possibly over investing in the coupled DB engines at all). I suppose crankcase coupled double-v arrangements like the V-3420 might be preferable in terms of weight and frontal area (an X-24 based on the Jumo 211 cylinder banks would be better), but the coupled arrangement sharing only a gearbox has less contention for development and manufacturing resources with the existing 211.

    With the 211 being a more conservative and generally less troublesome engine than the DB-601 or (especially) 605 in service (and in production), it seems likely that a coupled version of the 211 would at very least be more satisfactory and more readily available than the 606 and 610. (plus, if it coincided with the 211F and J developments, there could even have been a real power/performance advantage over the initial 606)
     
  12. wiking85

    wiking85 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2012
    Messages:
    1,321
    Likes Received:
    32
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Chicagoland Area
    Any idea why the He177B wasn't fitted with Jumo 213s? It was fitted with DB603s, but the 213 seemed like it would have been a better bomber engine.
     
  13. Koopernic

    Koopernic Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2013
    Messages:
    638
    Likes Received:
    74
    Trophy Points:
    28
    I believe DB603A entered service in early June 1943 on Me 410 while the Jumo 213A about 10 months latter in May 1944 on Ju 188A. Early Jumo 213A were down about 100hp due to supercharger issues. Jumo 213A seem to have been prioritised for the important FW 190D program. Dieter Hermann mentions in "long nose" that Focke-Wulf had made a mistake calculating the weight of the DB603E and thought it an impossible to use 128kg more than the 213. Had this mistake not been made the Fw 190D9 might have flown with the 2260 hp DB603EM engine.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  14. SpicyJuan11

    SpicyJuan11 Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2015
    Messages:
    235
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    Luxemburg
    Just an interesting tidbit I found in Griehl and Dressel's He,177,277 274 Pg 197:

    I guess nothing came of it as none were built? Also of note is the face that although the the He 277's bomb bay is smaller than that of the He 177, it can still carry a max of 7200 kg.
     
  15. wiking85

    wiking85 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2012
    Messages:
    1,321
    Likes Received:
    32
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Chicagoland Area
    I think that's with external loadout too.
     
  16. SpicyJuan11

    SpicyJuan11 Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2015
    Messages:
    235
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    Luxemburg
    #16 SpicyJuan11, Jun 26, 2015
    Last edited: Jun 27, 2015
    Nope, it's 4 x SC 1800 fitted internally.
     
  17. tomo pauk

    tomo pauk Creator of Interesting Threads

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2008
    Messages:
    7,988
    Likes Received:
    433
    Trophy Points:
    83
    #17 tomo pauk, Jun 27, 2015
    Last edited: Jun 27, 2015
    A bit about real He 177: GL/C card
    Also this.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  18. SpicyJuan11

    SpicyJuan11 Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2015
    Messages:
    235
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    Luxemburg
    #18 SpicyJuan11, Jun 27, 2015
    Last edited: Jun 27, 2015
    Interesting, where is this from? Also, I'm not sure if that's a He 177 B-5 as in Griehl's book it states that this is a B-5 (although it seems like a typo and looks like a He 277 to me):

    [​IMG]

    EDIT: Wait, now this is also a B-5:confused::

    [​IMG]
     
  19. stona

    stona Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2009
    Messages:
    7,519
    Likes Received:
    946
    Trophy Points:
    113
    #19 stona, Jun 27, 2015
    Last edited: Jun 27, 2015
    Most of those 'rustzust' were never built :)

    He 177 loading:

    [​IMG]

    A couple of SC 1800s could be carried in a heavier mixed load, 'mischlast-sonderfall' which I would translate as 'mixed load-special case' which is self explanatory and not a normal load.

    Cheers

    Steve
     
  20. JAG88

    JAG88 New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2012
    Messages:
    25
    Likes Received:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    3
    Well, the load on the manual for a A-0s has this:

    [​IMG]

    Indicating it could carry 4xSC1700, the prior pic indicated 2xSC1800 plus an assortment of other loads up to 2xSC1700s which would bring the total load to 7t.

    AFAIK the heaviest load I could find a reference for was 5,6t 2xSC1800 plus 2xSC1000. I think the engine issues can easily explain the difference.
     
Loading...

Share This Page