Time Machine Consultant : Maximizing the Bf-109 in January 1943

[tomo pauk]

The YP-38 was about 3,000lbs heavier not 4,000lbs. that is empty weight.

Almost 1,5 tons is still a pretty big difference.

It is quite likely that niether plane had armor or self sealing tanks.

Changing from Jumo 210s to DB 601s is going to add around 280lbs per engine, dry weight. It could easily be another 100lbs per propellor and so on for the cowlings, engine oil, radiators and so on. does it equel 3000lbs?
No but then we haven't doubled the engine power either. Just gone from 700hp to 1150hp. and at altitudes under 20,000ft.
The P-38 (early versions) could keep making 1150hp all the way to 25,000ft. Later versions could make 1100hp at 32500-34000ft at 2600rpm (high speed cruise). of course it took the heavy, bulky turbo-charger system to do it.

So the weight goes up 15%, while power jumps 60% (for DB-601A, 1939), or 90% (601E, 1941). Looks a bargain for me.

What altitude did you want the FW 187 to fight at?

From 0 to 30 000ft?

"Since I was never fond to evaporative cooling, the up-engined FW-187 would've used regular one."

Yep, but since they used that system to get less drag (more speed) it means that the plane with a regular system is slower.

The added power takes care about that.

And then we get to the CG and load factor problems. Most of the weight is in front of the CG which requires shifting items of equipment and/or ballast and/or a rear fuselage stretch to balance things out. Not impossiable but not done at zero cost to performance. Did the FW 187 V6 have any guns or did the lack of armament help the CG issue?

I'd mount radiators at the back of nacelle, and perhaps shift armament backward in order to compensate for added weight.

Load factor. what was the load factor of the original design? just for illistrations sake let's say the FW 187 had a load factor of 7 'G's. at 11,000lbs. Now if we up the weight to 12,000lbs the load factor drops to about 6.4 'G's and at 13,000lbs it drops to 5.92 'G's.

Now maybe the FW 187 had a reserve of strength and doesn't need any beefed up structure and maybe there is no reserve of strength.

We don't know that.

By the way, The P-38 carried 992lbs worth of guns and ammo. Heavy armament usually means heavy airplanes.
Agree.

.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

The original 1940 version would be primarily a bomber escort. Therefore it will operate at the same height as He-111s and Ju-88s.

Around 1943 a bomber killer version would appear. This would have engines rated for high altitude and 4 nose mounted cannon.

Would have, should have - by 43' you were better off going with a single engine fighter that could be produced quickly and had the maneuverability and performance to kill bombers and deal with fighters. The Fw 190 was the prime example and history shows us it had the armament to do the job. Additionally it didn't have the nasty landing habits of the 109.

A twin taildragger bring on other situations - engine out emergency procedures required additional training (this was experienced by the AAF with the P-38).

 

[Shortround6]

Just pointing out that the P-38 comparison is not quite as simple as it first appears.

And while the power has gone up by a very large amount and you will get a very good increase over the base FW 187 the question is will you get enough. Or do you get a 370-380mph fighter at 20,000ft.

If you use the extra power you will use extra fuel. The early P-38s had tankage for about 400 gallons. This dropped to 300 gallons with the introduction of self sealing tanks.

The base Bf 110C carried 280IMP gal of fuel (2100pounds) for the same engines and was soon fitted with a varity of extra fuel tank schemes to extend range. Granted the smaller FW 187 will cruise faster and further on the same amount of fuel compared to the 110 but still? one 110 arangement ws another 121IMP gal fitted in aux tanks IN the outer wings over another 900lbs of fuel NOT including tanks. Of course the 110 did have much bigger wings to both fit fuel in and to carry the load.

There are always trade offs.
Like ammo. While the FW 187 and the Bf 110 both carried the same nominal armament the 110 carried 180 rpg for it's cannon. It was able to do this by having one of the crewmen change the 60 round drums. If you want the FW 187 to be a single seat fighter then the early versions have 60 rpg for the 20mm guns unless you can come up with a new feed system for the guns. And we don't know if the FW 187 carried the 1000rpg for the MG 17s that the 110 did.

And more trade-offs.

"From 0 to 30 000ft?"

It is the last 5,000 ft that are the problem. While a twin DB 601 powered plane might be able to fight as well as anything else at 25,000-30,000 in 1940-42 by early 43 the supercharger system just hasn't kept up with the British Merlin or the American turbos.

I made a mistake on the weight of the P-38 armament

It is more like 1335lbs

 

[davebender]

better off going with a single engine fighter that could be produced quickly

That certainly is not the Fw-190. Development began during the fall of 1937. By January 1943 (over 5 years) a total of about 2,000 Fw-190s have been produced and the aircraft still has serious teething problems relating to the BMW801 engine.

If you want an additional single engine fighter type that can be produced quickly and at low cost I recommend the He-100. Like the Fw-187 it was production ready in 1940 and is powered by the inexpensive DB601 / DB605 engine. It will not interfere with Me-109 production as the He-100 would be built at a Heinkel factory.

 

[Civettone]

Would have, should have - by 43' you were better off going with a single engine fighter that could be produced quickly and had the maneuverability and performance to kill bombers and deal with fighters. The Fw 190 was the prime example and history shows us it had the armament to do the job. Additionally it didn't have the nasty landing habits of the 109.

I still would like to know why you consider the Fw 190 so superior? Plus, Hohun already showed that the Fw 190s had a similar amount of take off and landing accidents as the Bf 109.
As to the Fw 190 as a bomber interceptor ... the Bf 109 could carry 3 MK 108s while the Fw 190 could carry 2 MK 108s and 2 MG 151/20s. But most importantly, the Fw 190 failed to perform at the altitude of the B-17s! And when they did get a new engine for the Fw 190, they dropped the two outboard cannons.

And the Ta 152 wasn't around in 1944. Just because Tank was working on a prototype doesn't mean it was anywhere near ready. The Jumo 213E was not operational until early 1945. One cannot simply say that engine could have been available sooner. That reminds me of those people who say that if all priority would have gone into the Me 262 it could have been the standard fighter by 1943. It doesn't work that way.


I agree with Shortround that making the Fw 187 into an interceptor is not as easy as it seems. Though if it had been given a normal development it could probably have been developed into one, or even into a real night fighter. Just see how other fighter designs had evolved. From the Bf 109A till K, from the Fw 190A till Ta 152, from the Ju 88 to Ju 388.

Kris

 

[riacrato]

IIRC the underwing MK 108 pods were never actually fitted to Me 109s in combat. Moreover the Fw had a heavy armament by default. Add that extra weaponry to a 109 and you significantly decrease its performance. Come on, we all know the 190 was way superior to the 109 as a bomber interceptor.

 

[Shortround6]

That certainly is not the Fw-190. Development began during the fall of 1937. By January 1943 (over 5 years) a total of about 2,000 Fw-190s have been produced and the aircraft still has serious teething problems relating to the BMW801 engine.

If you want an additional single engine fighter type that can be produced quickly and at low cost I recommend the He-100. Like the Fw-187 it was production ready in 1940 and is powered by the inexpensive DB601 / DB605 engine. It will not interfere with Me-109 production as the He-100 would be built at a Heinkel factory.

The solution to the 109 problem is not going to be a plane that has most of the problems of the 109 only more so.
Granted the He 100 would probably been a bit easier to land and take off in some ways. wider track undercarrage and all that.
But it achieved a good part of it's performance by being smaller than the 109.
Since a good number of the 109s problems later in it's career stem from it's size I anm not sure how adopting an even smaller airframe solves any of them.

The He 100 was armed with a 20mm FF through the prop which didn't work on the service 109s all that well and a one MG 17 in each wing root. With little or no room in the outer wings this doesn't look good for alternative armament fits early in the He 100s service.
Maybe you can stuff MG 131s into the wing root WHEN they become available but that doesn't help things in 1941 much. Yes you can probably fit the MG 151 into the engine but again when does that become available?
so in 1942 sometime you can actually get something approaching effective anti-fighter armament into the He 100 (a single MG 151 and a pair of MG 131s) but since this isn't an effective anti-bomber armament what have you gained.
The He 100 won't really hold much more fuel so any advantage in range is just what the lower drag gives you.
Can you stuff the MW 50 tanks or Nitrous into the smaller airframe? And without the Nitrous why should the He 100 perform any better at altitude than the 109?

Since the Germans historicly had a SHORTAGE of DB engines in the early part of the war which did curtail a number of programs just where are all these cheap, easy to produce DB engines coming from?

It might help if a timeline was established as to just which versions of which engines were available when.

Otherwise there may (or maynot) be a gap in between late 1942 and 1944 when the only engine for ANY use over 1500hp is the DB 603 if the BMW is cut from production.
How long would it take to retool the BMW factory from radial production to inline engine production?

 

[Civettone]

IIRC the underwing MK 108 pods were never actually fitted to Me 109s in combat. Moreover the Fw had a heavy armament by default. Add that extra weaponry to a 109 and you significantly decrease its performance. Come on, we all know the 190 was way superior to the 109 as a bomber interceptor.

I read Erich saying something similar to the R4 gunpods. If it is like this it is hard to understand why or how. These pods were not bigger than the R6 pods and also the weight was not that much of a problem.

The standard 190 might have had better armament but in no way can it be considered to be a better interceptor! Its BMW engine performance dropped drastically at higher altitude!

The solution to the 109 problem is not going to be a plane that has most of the problems of the 109 only more so.
Granted the He 100 would probably been a bit easier to land and take off in some ways. wider track undercarrage and all that.
But it achieved a good part of it's performance by being smaller than the 109.
Since a good number of the 109s problems later in it's career stem from it's size I anm not sure how adopting an even smaller airframe solves any of them.

The He 100 was armed with a 20mm FF through the prop which didn't work on the service 109s all that well and a one MG 17 in each wing root. With little or no room in the outer wings this doesn't look good for alternative armament fits early in the He 100s service.
Maybe you can stuff MG 131s into the wing root WHEN they become available but that doesn't help things in 1941 much. Yes you can probably fit the MG 151 into the engine but again when does that become available?
so in 1942 sometime you can actually get something approaching effective anti-fighter armament into the He 100 (a single MG 151 and a pair of MG 131s) but since this isn't an effective anti-bomber armament what have you gained.
The He 100 won't really hold much more fuel so any advantage in range is just what the lower drag gives you.
Can you stuff the MW 50 tanks or Nitrous into the smaller airframe? And without the Nitrous why should the He 100 perform any better at altitude than the 109?

Since the Germans historicly had a SHORTAGE of DB engines in the early part of the war which did curtail a number of programs just where are all these cheap, easy to produce DB engines coming from?

It might help if a timeline was established as to just which versions of which engines were available when.

Otherwise there may (or maynot) be a gap in between late 1942 and 1944 when the only engine for ANY use over 1500hp is the DB 603 if the BMW is cut from production.
How long would it take to retool the BMW factory from radial production to inline engine production?

I agree, The He 100 had less development potential than the Bf 109. Also, using the same engine means you are completely relying on one engine which is just as dangerous as relying on one fighter aircraft.
So for that reason I would definitely continue the development of the Fw 190 and even put it into production. BUT only as a back up solution in case the Bf 109 or DB 600 series would run into serious development problems. Production emphasis must lie at one aircraft and engine!
So that is also the similar story with the He 100. I don't think anyone is really saying both the Bf 109 and He 100 should be taken in full scale production. They are too similar for that.

The Fw 187 is different though as it performed a different set of tasks: escort, night fighter, Jabo and heavy interceptor. Basically replacing the Bf 110.
But it is clear that the Fw 187 had to go through many changes just like the Bf 109 if it wanted to remain competitive and usable (especially as a night fighter). So the Fw 187 of 1943/1944 may well be a totally different aircraft than that of 1938. Just like the Bf 109K had hardly anything anymore in common with the Bf 109A.
Perhaps it would have evolved into an aircraft looking like the Ta 154?

Kris

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

That certainly is not the Fw-190. Development began during the fall of 1937. By January 1943 (over 5 years) a total of about 2,000 Fw-190s have been produced and the aircraft still has serious teething problems relating to the BMW801 engine.

I am not sure if that is a good way to decide if the Fw 190 was easier or harder to build than any other fighter.

Lets make some comparisons here between the Bf 109 and the Fw 190.

Time from drawing board to first flight.

Bf 109 - Late 1933 (it was fall of 1933 when the RLM issued Specs) to 29 may 1935

Fw 190 Late 1937 (it was in the fall of 1937 that the RLM issued Specs) to 1 June 1939 (first flight)

Both roughly 2 years to develop the first prototype. The Bf 109 took a little less time, because it was until 1934 that the Willy began design on what seriously would become the Bf 109.

Time from first flight to Production/Introduction to front line service.

Bf 109 - 29 May 1935 to 1937

Fw 190 - 1 June 1939 to August 1941

That means that both aircraft required about 2 years from first flight to introduction.

Average number produced per year since introduction (not including prototypes).

Bf 109 - 33,984 built from 1937 to 1945. That makes an average of 4248 per year.

Fw 190 - 20,000 (approx.) from 1941 to 1945. That makes an average of 5000 per year.

Technically more Fw 190s were produced per year since its introduction than the Bf 109. So how was the Fw 190 more difficult to build than the Bf 109?

Don't take me wrong, my little breakdown above is not really accurate or an accurate way of deciding which was more difficult. My point only being that the development time of an aircraft is not an indication of the difficulty of the production of an aircraft. There are just too many factors that come into play.

 

[Njaco]

Which AC was easier or more difficult to learn to fly in? Being that the training of pilots by '43 was starting to reduce in time, what ircraft would be easier to transition too? Would that be a factor in which is built?

 

[Glider]

There in a nutshell you have the problem at high altitude. Without a bomber escort the 109 with the extra guns made an effective bomber destroyer and the FW190 still had enough performance to attack the bombers. With escort fighters, both were very vulnerable. The only option being to take off the extra guns on the 109 which left you with a poor bomber interceptor and a fighter that was at best no better than the escorts.

The Germans didn't have a reply unless you either go for broke on the ME262 or concentrate on sorting out the 190 for altitude I believe the FW 190 A10 was dropped due to different priorities.

 

[davebender]

The He 100 had less development potential than the Bf 109.

I agree. I consider the Me-109 overall superior to the He-100. I'm just pointing out that if Germany wants a second fighter type during 1940 the He-100 is available whereas the Fw-190 is still two years in the future. In fact as of 1940 RLM does not know whether the BMW801 engine will ever work properly. The BMW801 design could end up on the scrap heap as happened to the Jumo222 and many other engine prototypes.

My preferred choice would be to mass produce the Fw-187 beginning during 1940 and fund continued development of the aircraft. You need to build another DB601 engine factory but that's much less risky then creating a new engine design.

Focke-Wulf does have the option to continue development of the Fw-190 airframe powered by the DB601 engine. This would be upgraded to the DB603, Jumo213 or Jumo222 when one of those engines enters mass production.

 

[Shortround6]

The Germans were fighting on two fronts from the summer of 1941 on. Just because the Fw 190 couldn't quite fight at the altitudes of some of the western fighters doesn't mean it wasn't a very valuable aircraft on the Eastern front. The vast majority of Soviet aircraft ran out of breath at altitudes lower than the FW 190.

The TA 154 wound up weighing around 70% more than the FW 187.

If what is wanted is a 3500hp, 19,000-20,000lb two seat fighter isn't it better to just design one rather than trying to convert a 1400-2000hp, 11,000lb single seat fighter?

Comparing the Fw 187 to the Bf 110 at different tasks.

Escort: quite probably better. After all it could hardly be worse, and most German bombers weren't that long ranged anyway.

Night fighter: I would have to give this one to the 110, without a total redesign of the fuselage there just isn't enough room in the 187 for the radar and electronics.

Jabo: another mark for the 110. The big wing means the ability to operate at higher weights and with some 110s carring a pair of 1100lb bombs AND drop tanks the smaller 187 might be hard pressed to equel it. Or getting out of small muddy fields with a lighter load might go to the 110.

Heavy interceptor. Back to the 187 for this one. the extra space and crewmen aren't needed for this mission and the smaller size means better performance and a smaller target.

Could a upgraded Fw 187 been useful?

Of course, but again size does matter and small airframes ussually aren't as adaptable as large airframes so for any job requiring the extra size the FW 187 might not have done as well as the Bf 110.

Of course if "Willy" and the boys hadn't screwed up so bad on the 210 the 110 might have just faded away.
But the 210 is also a cautionary tale about how areodynamics wasn't as well understood at the time and making major changes to an aircraft had elements of risk. A new forward fuselage might work out fine or it might affect airflow so that the modified aircraft becomes an evil brute. Betting that one basic design can be adopted to various roles in the future is a long shot gamble.

 

[Kurfürst]

Technically more Fw 190s were produced per year since its introduction than the Bf 109. So how was the Fw 190 more difficult to build than the Bf 109?

Don't take me wrong, my little breakdown above is not really accurate or an accurate way of deciding which was more difficult. My point only being that the development time of an aircraft is not an indication of the difficulty of the production of an aircraft. There are just too many factors that come into play.

About man hours required in year and after a production of n-number of aircraft - FW 190, Ju 88, Bf 109:

 

[Kurfürst]

Of course if "Willy" and the boys hadn't screwed up so bad on the 210 the 110 might have just faded away.

AFAIK Willy and co. didn't screw up on the 210. They knew the aircraft had bugs to be ironed out (which were, eventually), but the RLM pressed hard for the production, before it could be fully developed. In any case, it was the biggest fiasco for Willy M, the businessman.

 

[drgondog]

In early 1943, the German leaders had zero idea regarding the upcoming disaster the Mustang would bring to the defense of Germany. They rightly concluded that they could meet the daylight threat from the 8th AF with the inventory on hand and felt no sense of urgency in building a much better high altitude interceptor.

The Fw 190A was a superb bomber killer, better than the 109 and it was doing a very good job on unescorted B-17/B-24's where the drop off in performance was not critical as a bomber attacker.

So the question arises, "what in early 1943" drives the LW to upgrade either the 190 or 109 when they believed no high performance fighter would ever have the range to challenge the LW over Germany?

I submit - Nothing.

 

[Shortround6]

I agree. I consider the Me-109 overall superior to the He-100. I'm just pointing out that if Germany wants a second fighter type during 1940 the He-100 is available whereas the Fw-190 is still two years in the future. In fact as of 1940 RLM does not know whether the BMW801 engine will ever work properly.

Without a time traveler the RLM does not know that the BMW 139 will be a complete turkey.
What they do know at the time is that they are at least two years away from getting a substantial increase in power from the liquid cooled V-12s leaving BMW as the only game in town for a 1500+ class engine in the near future.
BMW then changes to the 801 and FW scrambles to adapt. The resulting "easy" conversion (after all it is radial to radial, right) entailed restressing the entire airframe, moving the cockpit back 6 in for CG reasons even though an armour plate was installed behind the pilots seat. After all was said and done the plane had grown 25% in weight from the BMW 139 version and required a new wing of over 21% more area to restore flying qualities.

Creating factories out of thin air doesn't really work in real life.

Even in the US in 1940-41 Allison was short over 800 machine tools to fit into existing factory space and was listed about 500 in priority out of all american companies.

P&W was more than a little miffed when 6 Sidestrand centerless grinders destined for their Kansas city plant would up on an Ocean liner for priority delivery to Napier for Saber production

It can take a year from ground breaking until first symbolic "production" engine makes it out the door and a number of months after that until anywhere near full production is reached.
Less risky than a totally new engine but then the BMW 801 was little more than a rather tightly cowled 14cylinder radial. No trick superchargers or sleeve valves or 42 cylinders or any other real weirdness.

 

[Glider]

Re Drgondog's posting, A fair point I admit.
The only reply I could give was that they knew that the USAAF Bombers were going to come in at altitude and that they had had inflicted heavy losses on the bombers during deep penetration raids. Whilst they may not have appreciated the danger to Germany there was a clear danger of high altitude raids on occupied Europe escorted by shorter range fighters.
Some form of contingency planning should have been in place.

The RAF had aircraft developed to the point of production, had a high level threat developed. In somce cases they were not actually built or they were built in small numbers but plans were in place.

 

[tomo pauk]

I see the issue from another angle, Bill.

When doing it's business, Luftwaffe always had an edge in performance against the opposition. 109E was fastest in 1939, 1940 (okay, Spit II comes close, but 95% of others are distinctively slower), in 1941 109F is in a class of its own (honorable mention for Mig-1/3), with FW-190 and 109G taking over in 1942. The tactics and quality of pilots is mostly in German hands.

Now, with 1943 starting, Spitfire VIII/IX/XII, Typhoon, P-38, P-47 arose. Japs talk about US fighter that has bent wings and it's faster then anything they have. Russian fighters are still slightly slower, but the advantage shrinks when flying low. Shortly, Germans do not poses edge in performance anymore.
Further, the allies begin to field tough multi-engined and/or armoured planes that require good punch to ensure a kill. The quality doctrine of Allied air forces becomes close to what Germans have to offer. The overall quality of new pilots for LW declines. The German armies have been soundly defeated in Russia and N. Africa, with Southern front wide opened by Torch landings.
In top of that, Germans are outproduced by each of 3 major opponents.

If I was the chief of Luftwaffe, I'd feel driven to come with something both good easy to produce, ASAP.

 

[davebender]

So the question arises, "what in early 1943" drives the LW to upgrade either the 190 or 109 when they believed no high performance fighter would ever have the range to challenge the LW over Germany?

By 1943 both Britain and the USA have made a huge committment to heavy bomber production. It stands to reason they will not allow Germany to keep slaughtering these very expensive aircraft. Germany cannot predict the P-51D but they can predict that U.S. 8th Air Force will come up with some sort of very long range escort fighter.