Some stuff about Tank's rare fighters

Discussion in 'Aviation' started by tomo pauk, Mar 15, 2014.

  1. tomo pauk

    tomo pauk Creator of Interesting Threads

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2008
    Messages:
    7,996
    Likes Received:
    440
    Trophy Points:
    83
    • Like Like x 2
  2. wiking85

    wiking85 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2012
    Messages:
    1,321
    Likes Received:
    32
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Chicagoland Area
    My take away: the FW190C should have been built! And the DB603 project not cancelled in 1937...
     
  3. davebender

    davebender Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2009
    Messages:
    6,418
    Likes Received:
    64
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Michigan, USA
    RLM bet the farm on BMW801 engine. Not a losing decision but perhaps not the best possible choice.
     
  4. tomo pauk

    tomo pauk Creator of Interesting Threads

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2008
    Messages:
    7,996
    Likes Received:
    440
    Trophy Points:
    83
    IMO, the RLM wanted to cover it's bets. Even the problematic 801A and 801C were capable for considerably more power than contemporary DB or Jumo engines, until the DB-603 emerged. Few could disagree that, between late 1941 and late 1943, the Fw-190 was, if not the best, then between 3 best fighters in the world.
    But then, the Fw-190 with even more power would've been an even more a formidable fighter, hence the LW failed when not taking the chances with DB-603 in the 190 in 1943.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  5. bobbysocks

    bobbysocks Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2010
    Messages:
    3,811
    Likes Received:
    181
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    how would building the C affected building the D? would it have been a good stop gap or forstalled the Ds production?
     
  6. davebender

    davebender Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2009
    Messages:
    6,418
    Likes Received:
    64
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Michigan, USA
    Fw-190C = DB603 engine
    Fw-190D = Jumo213 engine

    Otherwise they are essentially the same aircraft.
     
  7. tomo pauk

    tomo pauk Creator of Interesting Threads

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2008
    Messages:
    7,996
    Likes Received:
    440
    Trophy Points:
    83
    In case the Focke Wulf gets to build the Fw-190C, the LW basically gets the Fw-190D-9 equivalent more than a year earlier.
     
  8. wiking85

    wiking85 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2012
    Messages:
    1,321
    Likes Received:
    32
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Chicagoland Area
    Why didn't they historically though? AFAIK there were too many problems with the C-series to implement, not necessarily due to lack of engines.
    https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Focke-Wulf_Fw_190_B_und_C
     
  9. davebender

    davebender Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2009
    Messages:
    6,418
    Likes Received:
    64
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Michigan, USA
    I don't believe that for one minute.

    Provide Focke Wulf with an adequate supply of DB603 engines and Dr. Tank will modify his aircraft to make the engines fit. That holds true even if DB603 engines were available during 1941.
     
  10. Denniss

    Denniss Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2006
    Messages:
    835
    Likes Received:
    46
    Trophy Points:
    28
    The DB 603 in 41-43 was not really deemed reliable enough for fighter use with the long use of high powersettings in combat.
    And again, it's a myth you would get the 43/44 DB 603A several years earlier without the continuous improvements and developments done for the 601/605 series.
     
  11. wiking85

    wiking85 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2012
    Messages:
    1,321
    Likes Received:
    32
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Chicagoland Area
    Again you repeat that as an article of faith without realizing the the DB601/5 improvements had little relevance to the much larger DB603, which had unique engineering issues that made the smaller engine's developments useless for it. It required its own fuel injector and cooling system due to having larger displacement, which caused specific cooling issues that simply scaling up the DB601/5's developments wasn't enough. If it were than the 603 would have been ready to go in 1941/42 instead of taking until late 1943 to even approach, not reach, 100 hours between overhauls. Having 603 specific development from 1936-1941 would have resulted in 603 specific design solutions that wouldn't have been put off and worked out later when funding was restored and prototypes built. As I mentioned in the Ideal LW thread the prototypes weren't ready until 1940-41, so when they tested the 601 developments on it they weren't good enough; they were able to skip some steps in the meantime to force it into production, but they weren't able to get it to work right until they had enough time to work on the 603 specifically, which was historically some time in late 1940-late 1943. Those years wasted from 1937-1940 would have been enough to figure out the specific engineering issues of the 603 and developed in parallel with the 601, which if anything would have offered help with the bigger 605's cooling issues.
     
  12. tomo pauk

    tomo pauk Creator of Interesting Threads

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2008
    Messages:
    7,996
    Likes Received:
    440
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Possibly we would never know why the DB-603A-powered Fw-190 was not pursued in a more resolute effort. Many creditable sources say that engines was still having issues, even in 1943. But then, the Jumo-213A was not exactly known quality in 1942-1943 either; the DB-603A at least powered some aircraft considerably sooner than that was true for the 213. Maybe RLM was lulled in a sense of false security, believing that current fighters will be more than adequate until jets are available?
    One of the shortcoming in an early installation of the DB-603A on the Fw-190V13 was the attempt to use internal air intake ('Offenrohr') instead of usual external one. Someone at Fw or DB was being too smart, counting that some amount of drag might be saved? The internal air intake was installed from inside of the ring cooler, going behind the engine and then to the supercharger. At the end, it denied any appreciable gain of ram - the German Wiki mentions 1500m was lost in the rated altitude on high speed? The lower rated altitude, lower speed at higher altitudes. We don't know if, or how much the 'Offenrohr' heated the intake air traveling through it? The V15 used 'plain vanilla' external air intake, and offered good performance. Neither V13 nor V15 carried any weaponry?
    The engine troubles were culprit(s) for a forced landing, however.
     
  13. Shortround6

    Shortround6 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2009
    Messages:
    9,771
    Likes Received:
    801
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    retired Firefighter
    Location:
    Central Florida Highlands
    The Fuel injection isn't an issue, once you have a working system you can enlarge the injector pumps/plungers for the fuel flow desired. Some of the "cooling" issues are things like a the bigger pistons are harder to cool on ANY engine than smaller pistons. DB 603 used about the biggest pistons of any "common" WW II engine ( Ok only 2 mm bigger than the Russian AM series). Now if you can't keep the center of a 154mm piston to stay 'cool' then expecting a 162mm piston to stay cool is asking a bit much, especially if you are burning more fuel above each sq. cm. of piston area. (12.5% longer stroke). This is plain physics and geometry and has nothing to do with the coolant passages, coolant flow, or pressure the cooling system is operating at. These things can help solve the cooling problem but big cylinders are harder to cool.
     
  14. wiking85

    wiking85 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2012
    Messages:
    1,321
    Likes Received:
    32
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Chicagoland Area
    Which only reinforces the point that DB601 developments aren't going to help the 603; they needed uninterrupted time to work on the specific cooling issues of the 603, rather than relying on 601 research.
     
  15. Shortround6

    Shortround6 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2009
    Messages:
    9,771
    Likes Received:
    801
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    retired Firefighter
    Location:
    Central Florida Highlands
    But the 601-605 "research" may very well have helped with supercharger design, bearings, cam timing, materials and heat treatment of parts.

    Cooling problems of pistons and cylinder heads also go up with the amount of fuel/air burned in the cylinder (boost) so a smaller cylinder with high boost can give some (but not all) of the same problems as a big cylinder with low boost.

    People keep wanting the 603 to show up in 1940-41 using the same boost the 605 had trouble with in 1942 and claiming that 1937-40 "development" would have solved the problem/s.

    Was DB sitting back fat, dumb and happy with the 601 from 1938-41 or were they constantly working to improve the 601 series, with higher rpm, better superchargers, more compression and other changes? How many of these changes and changes done to the 605 were they able to apply to the 603?
     
  16. wiking85

    wiking85 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2012
    Messages:
    1,321
    Likes Received:
    32
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Chicagoland Area
    Operative word: may. Can you provide evidence that it did?


    Again 601 development is not the same as 603, so 603 specific development time is necessary. Unless you can provide evidence that 601/5 developments positively influenced 603 development, it cannot be inferred that 601/5 research shortened the development cycle of the 603; the only thing that would have given it a chance to be ready by 1941-42 was uninterrupted development of the 603 from 1936-1941. I'm not claiming it was a sure thing, other than using the historical timeline of 603 development, which was from 1936-1937 with one prototype, with another built in 1939 for the racing stunt that never happened, then prototype construction through 1940 into 1941 and development from late 1940-to late 1943 when it became reliable. Added up that's about 5 years of development, which from mid-1936 through mid-1941 is the same timeframe, 5 years; generally in the 1930s and 40s it took about 5-6 years to develop an engine into reliability, so the 603 fits into the model.
     
  17. Denniss

    Denniss Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2006
    Messages:
    835
    Likes Received:
    46
    Trophy Points:
    28
    600/601 development is the basic work required for any larger engine. The 603, being larger with more displacement may have more and unexpected problems but a lot of them could be avoided by learning from development done for the 601. Especially the major step from 601A to the 601E saw lots of internal changes to allow for more rpm and boost without reducing reliability + the new pressurized water cooling. But even this took time to sort out as the maximum power had to be restricted for some time.
     
  18. wiking85

    wiking85 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2012
    Messages:
    1,321
    Likes Received:
    32
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Chicagoland Area
    Denniss can you provide evidence that DB601 developments actually influenced 603 development? Just repeating something over and over does not make it true. You are making a statement about 603 development, so I'm going to request some documentation that the 601 actually shortened the 603's development after 1940. If not then it isn't necessarily true.

    We might be able to use the Merlin/Griffon as a model for 601/603 development, though the first two were not related in the same way the 601-603 were. How much did the Griffon rely on Merlin developments? AFAIK not much.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rolls-Royce_Griffon
     
  19. Denniss

    Denniss Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2006
    Messages:
    835
    Likes Received:
    46
    Trophy Points:
    28
    And you come up with a hypothetical 603 in 41 that will run on the same power level and reliability of the real 603 in late 43 which is unlikely at best, more highly questionable. DB did not have endless engineering capacity, without sacrifying other projects they couldn't simultaneously work on 600/601, 603 and 605.
    The 603 would not have started with pressurized water cooling for sure as DB had no real experience with it (which it gained from the 601E). A lot of effort was made to improve the fuel burn efficiency by changes to the pistons and related components, AFAIR this helped with the 601N used in the Bf 109F but most changes again appeared with the 601E.
     
  20. DonL

    DonL Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2007
    Messages:
    986
    Likes Received:
    32
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Occupation:
    IT
    Location:
    Niedersachsen
    I agree Denniss,

    but two points:

    The basics for the pressurized water cooling came frome the record engines between 1937-1939 and,
    I think without the DB 604 and the coupled stuff DB 606 etc., it was possible for Daimler to develop the DB 603 from 1937 till 1942 ready for mass production and near the same performance and reliability as the DB 603 from end of 1943
     
Loading...

Share This Page