The Best Anti-Tank Aircraft of World War 2....

[lesofprimus]

Solid answer....

 

[dennis420b]

Well if nothing else, at least they didn't have to pay for the R&D for the engines. Nothing like war prizes. I never knew the Gnome Rhône was that small. I thought they would have been comparable to the BMW Bramo in size. Thanks again, any info I get on this plane is a little gift. I have to say I really love this forum at last I can say DB 601, and not get stared at like I am crazy.

 

[kool kitty89]

Probably not.

The French engines were low powered because they were small.

Less than a meter in diameter, under 420kg and just about 19 liters in displacement.

And since they were replacing the Argus 410 V-12s used on the prototypes that were 450hp, 11.9 liter engines of 315kg weight one has to wonder just how much stretch was left in the design?

Using BMW 132 9 cylinder engines would have upped take off power to 900-1000hp but also upped engine weight to 530kg and increased engine diameter by over 400mm causing an even more restricted view from the cockpit.
Using the BMW 801s (already in short supply for everything else) gives you a much heavier engine. Larger engines also need larger heavier propellers and installations.

I'd gotten the impression that simple lower priority of the project (by the RLM) forced the low-power low-priority powerplants on the design, not necessarily fundamental limits of the airframe. (and the 14Ms also had reliability issues on top of low power)

But, yes, the BMW 801 would be way overkill for the HS-129, if anything the BMW 132 or Bramo 323 would be the most practical alternatives. Both are similar sized and the 323 is a bit heavier, but the model supporting MW/50 allowed 1200 hp. The 132 is probably best though given the significantly better fuel consumption and better power/weight ratio outside of MW/50 (for the 132N and K models at least -comparing max/takeoff ratings).
Even going to the 132 could have a significant impact on range/endurance unless it had significantly better fuel consumption than the 14Ms. (higher weight and drag from the larger engines -maybe reduced somewhat if 801 style fan cooling could be implemented) Unless they could increase fuel capacity, but then that adds weight and if it's too much you're not really any better off. (and even if not excessive, wingloading and roll rate would suffer)

The diameter difference from the 14M to the 132/323 is huge, but weight not nearly as much (power/weight ratio is considerably higher for the latter 2), so that would probably be the biggest factor in physically adapting it to the frame. (had something in the power and size range of R1830 or Bristol Taurus been available, that would have been preferable -the taurus had maintenance/reliability issues, but the R-1830 would seem great)

 

[Shortround6]

I'd gotten the impression that simple lower priority of the project (by the RLM) forced the low-power low-priority powerplants on the design, not necessarily fundamental limits of the airframe. (and the 14Ms also had reliability issues on top of low power)

But, yes, the BMW 801 would be way overkill for the HS-129, if anything the BMW 132 or Bramo 323 would be the most practical alternatives. Both are similar sized and the 323 is a bit heavier, but the model supporting MW/50 allowed 1200 hp. The 132 is probably best though given the significantly better fuel consumption and better power/weight ratio outside of MW/50 (for the 132N and K models at least -comparing max/takeoff ratings).
Even going to the 132 could have a significant impact on range/endurance unless it had significantly better fuel consumption than the 14Ms. (higher weight and drag from the larger engines -maybe reduced somewhat if 801 style fan cooling could be implemented) Unless they could increase fuel capacity, but then that adds weight and if it's too much you're not really any better off. (and even if not excessive, wingloading and roll rate would suffer)

The diameter difference from the 14M to the 132/323 is huge, but weight not nearly as much (power/weight ratio is considerably higher for the latter 2), so that would probably be the biggest factor in physically adapting it to the frame. (had something in the power and size range of R1830 or Bristol Taurus been available, that would have been preferable -the taurus had maintenance/reliability issues, but the R-1830 would seem great)

For engines in the 1000hp category they could have used the Gnome-Rhone 14N.

Gnome-Rhône 14N - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Available to the Germans in much more numbers than the R-1830, It would be my opinion that if this engine could have been used instead they probably would have.
This engine was also being built under licence in Romania and possibly Hungary giving two possible sources of supply less subject to sabotage. It is also the engine the Russians copied as the M-88 but I wouldn't count on being able to swap parts.

 

[Erich]

check out your blog .........why ? none of the A/C you depict would even be mentioned as the best of Ground attack A/C

 

[SamPZLP.7]

Il-2 has my vote because it was mass-produced at some 36,000.