Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Good.Do-17 production stopped in 1940 (?)
I disagree, get the ju88 instead.You need as many He 111s as you can get until you get your He-177 - 4 flown, tooled up and in production.
I wonder if they could get away with Jumo 211s or db601s until the bmw 801 could get it together, earlier variants produced only 1600hp on take-off, i don`t think a 1400 liquid cooled engine with less drag would be much worse off and you could get them by mid 1941.They were getting into production. Problem is that it needs engines. The BMW 801 was a minimum
Why? they were several years from getting anything useful.
OK, that is a given.
The Ju 88 was almost as overhyped as the Ju 87. The He 111 was not fast but it could carry a decent bombload a fair distance.I disagree, get the ju88 instead.
The Problem with the 217 is not the drag, it is getting the darn thing off the Runway. Do-217 went about 33,000lbs normal load and and just over 36,000lbs max overload. With a 623 sq ft wing. We are in Martin B-26 territory here, except the B-26 started with 1850hp engines. Ju-88A-4s had problems with max load take-offs, solved by strapping rockets under the wings.I wonder if they could get away with Jumo 211s or db601s until the bmw 801 could get it together, earlier variants produced only 1600hp on take-off, i don`t think a 1400 liquid cooled engine with less drag would be much worse off and you could get them by mid 1941.
And yet they hardly sold any after the war, the advertised power output dropped, even using 100/130 fuel and they gained weight.1400-1600Hp class engines, basically ready to produce by 1940,
If the Germans had built something like the Ki-61 with the DB 601E (18% more power and higher up) engine in early 1942 it might have solved a few problems. 35-40% more fuel without the drop tank.
Something along the lines of the Ki61 is a good suggestion and others would include the Fiat G55. These are all a little bit bigger, used the same engine and had the additional weapons needed for combating later allied aircraft, plus the ability to carry a decent bombload.
Stick the DB 601E on the Fw 190 and Bob's your uncle?
If they wait to see the Ki-61 or G55 they are too late.Starting a new single engine prop fighter project, even one largely inspired by Ki-61 or Fiat G55, would still mean a wait of several years until we have something combat ready and available in volume.
Alternative German guns were suggested up-thread, including 25mm types and mid-power 30 mm. Ditto for the Fw 190 and Bf 109 loosing cowl MGs of any type that was historically used, leaving just to up to two gun types on one A/C.The Germans had enough trouble fitting 2 and 3 different guns with different ballistics (times of flight) to their aircraft.
The 20mm Hispano and the .50 cal Browning actually have pretty similar ballistics, at least out to 600yds or so.
The German guns are all over the place.
The MG FFM was a crap gun after the first few years. The MG 151 isn't that much heavier. 14-16kg? For that you get around 25% higher fire rate and you get around 100m/s more velocity for shorter times of flight.
The German mine shell had some very good advantages, long range gunner was not one of them. It retained velocity like a ping-pong ball.
I didn't make myself clear. The Me109F was in many ways a totally new aircraft, the original Me109 B-E series had run its course. What I think Germany needed was something like the G55 as it was a little bit bigger giving development potential instead of the later Me109 G series. However we have to be realistic, Germany needed something to fill the gap whilst this was developed and the 109F and G2 which were similar in many ways could fill that gap.I think these suggestions are not workable if we're to remain true to the original topic of the thread, that is what could LW/RLM/etc. do differently post-BoB. Starting a new single engine prop fighter project, even one largely inspired by Ki-61 or Fiat G55, would still mean a wait of several years until we have something combat ready and available in volume. We're pretty much stuck with the Bf109 and FW190, for better or worse. All is not bleak however, the FW190 has enough legroom to be an excellent plane until jets take over, particularly in the long-nosed variants (Fw190D & Ta152).
Germany didn't have to wait for the G55 to develop the equivalent, they needed to recognise by mid 1939 that the 109 wasn't the long term future for the Luftwaffe and something was needed by early 1941.
Partly but they didn't replace the 109. Germany needed a higher altitude fighter. But I agree putting everything into the Fw190 and leaving the 109 would have been a good moveWell, isn't that exactly what was done? Autumn 1937, RLM launches a new tender for a fighter aircraft to complement the Bf 109 (the winner of an earlier tender), eventually Kurt Tank's radial engined proposal is accepted, first flight of the FW190 prototype in June 1939, enters squadron use in August 1941. Supposedly Tank submitted many proposals including inline engined ones, the radial one was apparently interesting since DB inlines were earmarked for Bf 109/110. Perhaps they could instead have ordered an increase in production of inlines, and the FW would have been equipped with such from the get-go.
I think you can try and get a earlier ju-188/JU-88S, add the wooden bomb pannier and remove that horrible draggy lower gunnerThe Ju 88 was almost as overhyped as the Ju 87. The He 111 was not fast but it could carry a decent bombload a fair distance.
The JU 88 could carry a heavy load a short distance or light load a fair distance, not both. Add after you filled up the bomb bays with fuel and hung the bombs outside you aren't than much faster than the He 111. Ok the Ju-88 was faster on the way home.
I think you could shave off a lot of weight by removing the dive bombing strengthening, they welded shut the dive brakes anyway when they received from the factory.The Problem with the 217 is not the drag, it is getting the darn thing off the Runway. Do-217 went about 33,000lbs normal load and and just over 36,000lbs max overload. With a 623 sq ft wing. We are in Martin B-26 territory here, except the B-26 started with 1850hp engines. Ju-88A-4s had problems with max load take-offs, solved by strapping rockets under the wings.
Okay, but what can be done about the french industry?, Gutting it and sending it all to Germany will take months if not years to see a production increase of German engines.And yet they hardly sold any after the war, the advertised power output dropped, even using 100/130 fuel and they gained weight.
the "Basically ready to be produced" is a myth.
I wondered when the might JU-88S was going to show up in the discussion.I think you can try and get a earlier ju-188/JU-88S, add the wooden bomb pannier and remove that horrible draggy lower gunner
Thing is you can't just cut the extra weight out. You have to restress the whole thing, and you may not like what you get. Cut too much weight and you may break the plane doing night fighter or ground staffing maneuvers (Or anti-ship). If you want He 111 type structural weight you have to use He 111 type maneuvers.I think you could shave off a lot of weight by removing the dive bombing strengthening, they welded shut the dive brakes anyway when they received from the factory.
French were actually building BMW 801s and Jumo 213s, just not a lot of them. They also built Argus V-12 air cooled engines and maybe V-8s?Okay, but what can be done about the french industry?, Gutting it and sending it all to Germany will take months if not years to see a production increase of German engines.
Would it be better if Germany focused on the 802 instead of the 222?
Japan got reliable high output 18 cylinders with worse fuel, same as the soviets, I don't see why Germany couldn't get a 1800hp class radial by 1942.
I see, i guess the best option would to develop something similar to a ki-49/ki-67/p1y1 ginga then.I wondered when the might JU-88S was going to show up in the discussion.
1. You need the 1700hp BM 801G2 engines.
2. You really need to figure out what you want this thing to do. Normal internal fuel is 369 IMP gallons
A, carry 14 143lbs in the forward bay and ?????in the rear bay?
1. 149imp gallon tank.. Top speed 340mph range
2. Fit the GM-1 boost equipment in the rear bay, keep the bombs, Speed hits 379mph Range goes in the toilet.
B, fit the 268imp gal tank in the forward bay, keep the GM-1 in the rear bay, range is good, Speed is good, except the bombs (two of them) have to outside cutting some of the speed off.
1. Take the GM-1 out of the rear bay, stick the 149 gal tank in the rear bay, go for the range, hang the two big bombs on the outside and accept the speed loss on the run in.
DB-603 got canned before ww2, i wonder what would've happened if it got prioritized instead, also the 213 first ran in 1940, but only entered production by late 43, i think we could had saved a lot of time by canning the 222 early on.The options aren't really that good.
JU-188 uses Jumo 213 engines, If you can get Jumo 213s a lot earlier a lot the German problems get easier
How about b-25/b-26 levels of stressing? would that save weight? i'm grasping at straws here lolThing is you can't just cut the extra weight out. You have to restress the whole thing, and you may not like what you get. Cut too much weight and you may break the plane doing night fighter or ground staffing maneuvers (Or anti-ship). If you want He 111 type structural weight you have to use He 111 type maneuvers.
Ship it out to Romania and Italy then, but i guess that would need a much more resistant france early on.French were actually building BMW 801s and Jumo 213s, just not a lot of them. They also built Argus V-12 air cooled engines and maybe V-8s?
A lot of the French machinery was not sitting in empty factories. The French workers were trying to build as little as possible without getting shot.
Changing what they were making doesn't change that part of the equation.
I don't think it was really feasible to shut down 109 production just like that. What could have been feasible would be to ramp FW190 production faster, and then start ramping down 109 production, plus a sharper dive when jets start to enter the scene (which should and could have been done sooner had the leadership seen the transformative potential of jets). But it seems for a very long time the German leadership were thinking it was going to be a short war, and thus they prioritized current production over introducing new types.Partly but they didn't replace the 109. Germany needed a higher altitude fighter. But I agree putting everything into the Fw190 and leaving the 109 would have been a good move
Would it be better if Germany focused on the 802 instead of the 222?
Japan got reliable high output 18 cylinders with worse fuel, same as the soviets, I don't see why Germany couldn't get a 1800hp class radial by 1942.
I actually agree with what you say. The only reason for developing the 109F to G2 is that they need something to tide themselves over in the high altitude area's until the later aircraft are on streamI don't think it was really feasible to shut down 109 production just like that. What could have been feasible would be to ramp FW190 production faster, and then start ramping down 109 production, plus a sharper dive when jets start to enter the scene (which should and could have been done sooner had the leadership seen the transformative potential of jets). But it seems for a very long time the German leadership were thinking it was going to be a short war, and thus they prioritized current production over introducing new types.
As for a high altitude fighter, they got there eventually in the guise of the Ta152, which by all accounts seems to have been a formidable aircraft. Though of course by then it was far too little too late to matter. They should have absolutely fast-tracked the long-nosed FW190 with two stage supercharger with intercooler much earlier, to replace both FW190A (in fighter roles) and Bf109 and complement the jets.
I think some people are trying to go too fast.
You can't go from walking to running at the Olympic level in just a few years, you have to actually run and the then run fast before you get near Olympic levels.
As far as pressure cabins go, they found that not only does the Human body have troubles at over 40,000ft trying to use oxygen the problem actually starts in the low 30s or even just about 30,000ft. It is not a switch, above altitude XXX you need such and such and below that everything is OK. It is a sliding-progressive problem, a lot like diving, The higher you go the less time you can speed there. You can cruise at 28-30,000ft and then get vectored on to plane/formation operating had higher altitude (mid 30s) and climb up, intercept, shoot and come back down with usually no physical effects to the pilot/crew without pressurization. Trying to cruise around at 35,000ft for number of hours brings a lot of problems, everybody is a bit different. B-29s had ceiling that were all over the place but they didn't have pressure cabins because the US crews were lazy/weak and wanted to fly around in their shirtsleeves.
If you try large scale 3-6 hours missions at high altitudes you are going to make a number of the crews sick. If you want to fly around at over 40,000ft you need to be suited up in such a way that you can survive a pressurization leak and get down to an altitude that you can survive with just oxygen.
Just like the Luftwaffe tried to from manually operated defensive guns right to remote control barbettes and skip the manned turret, trying to jump from the 350-390mph aircraft of 1940 to 500mph jets (or 450mph high altitude piston planes) may have been too much of a jump. You have to figure out the stuff you need in-between along the way. Like compressibility?
And aileron control at 400-500mph so the plane doesn't turn into a high speed brick with little or no controllability hat high speeds (they already had that in 1940 with the 109)
Yes the 190 was not be-all and end-all but then the 190 was NOT pushing the envelope a high altitude either.
The US backed off what they were planning for high altitude, for one thing the Germans were not operating much higher than the B-17s and the P-51s could use lower altitude rated engines, And the B-17s could not operate at the designed for/hoped for altitudes over 30,000ft even after 2-3 years. They could not get the crews to survive for hours at time at the higher altitudes, even with electric heated suits and large supplies of oxygen.