Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
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.
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.
I always wondered why the Hungarian Airforce were more than happy with the Me 210 while the Luftwaffe thought that they were very dangerous. As I understand it, they all came from the same production line with the Luftwaffe getting a share of the production. So both airforces would have had the same problem.
as I understand it the Hungarian 210s had the stretched fuselage.
I always wondered why the Hungarian Airforce were more than happy with the Me 210 while the Luftwaffe thought that they were very dangerous. As I understand it, they all came from the same production line with the Luftwaffe getting a share of the production. So both airforces would have had the same problem.
This is simply not true. They had heard about the American plans for a new superbomber and they noticed that the B-17 operated at altitudes which were too high for the Fw 190.In early 1943, the German leaders had zero idea regarding the upcoming disaster the Mustang would bring to the defense of Germany.
I would like to see a source proving that the Fw 190 was more succesful against bombers than the Bf 109. I have seen kill figures and what I recall from them is that one cannot prove from these figures that the Fw 190 was more effective. (Not including the Hoehengruppen.)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.
What about the DB603, Jumo213 and Jumo222? There were other engines in the pipeline as well which might have worked out after sufficent research and development.The BMW 801 had to continue development and production for the simple reason that it is a bad idea to bet on just one horse.
This is simply not true. They had heard about the American plans for a new superbomber and they noticed that the B-17 operated at altitudes which were too high for the Fw 190.
Also by 1943 they had experience with the P-38 which could escort bombers at least to the west of Germany. The writing was on the wall !
Kris - IMO 'Too High' is relative - the B-17 operated at altitudes in which the 190 performance was declining but nevertheless more than enough to climb, form and attack B-17's and certainly B-24's. The first P-38s performing escort missions in the ETO were the 55th FG P-38F's in mid Oct 1943. Had the 78th FG retained the first P-38s in Dec 1942 instead of having them taken away in Dec 1942 for North Africa - the 'warning' may have been more noticable, and the development of the P-38 may have been more accelerated.
The P-38Fs in the MTO were performing escort for both mediums and heavies and the LW may heve been lulled by not having that many high altitude enagements and the 109 was clearly equal to it at B-24 altitudes. IIRC there weren't that many 190s in the MTO, proportionately, to the Kanalfront.
Also, Galland told Goering in 1943 that American fighter planes had reached Cologne. Goering told him to stop this nonsense as this was simply impossible. After which Galland told him "I have seen the wrecks with my own eyes, and what's more, soon they will fly even deeper inland" after which Goering went into a rage and gave him a direct order to stop talking about it
So yeah, when talking about German leaders, you are in fact right!
I was, but also important is the imbedded notion that we (the Allies) did not have an airframe with both fuel capacity and performance to be a deep threat. They were quite right for the P-51A and P-47C and Spitfire and Typhoon. In addition, Koln and Coblenz were not exactly harbingers of Berlin, Merseburg and Munich.
Perhaps both the LW high command and the primary fighter manufacturers were blinded to the danger by virtue that ONLY the P-38 (and P-51A) had internal wing tanks and they could rightly deduce that neither had demonstrated superiority to either the 190 or th109 to date - at high altitudes.
I would like to see a source proving that the Fw 190 was more succesful against bombers than the Bf 109. I have seen kill figures and what I recall from them is that one cannot prove from these figures that the Fw 190 was more effective. (Not including the Hoehengruppen.)
I don't know what source you could look into. Perhaps Tony Woods lists can be broken down and units to a/c could then be matched to speculate. I do know the Fw 190 was more feared by 8th AF bomber crews, both from an armor and armament perspective.
The possible reason could be that LuftF 3 with JG2, JG 26 and ii./JG54 were dominantly Fw 190 and always met the 8th before the bombers ever got to Germany.. ditto LuftF 5 and JG5 before transitioning to Me 109s in late 1943 to 1944..Remember we are only discussing 1943?
2. When Tank had to design a high altitude fighter, his first reaction was to take on the Fw 187 design as he thought no single engined fighter could achieve the climb rate and ceiling needed. Of course this would have been quite different from the Fw 187. Yet, it means that if the Fw 187 had reached production back in 1939 it could have served as a basis for a new fighter. Just like the P-43 lead to the P-47, the Ju 88 to the Ju 388 or the Manchester to the Lancaster. In other words, it would have saved in development time.
Kris
In the video at 1:39 it shows Galland giving a briefing without his RK. Why?
Click here:View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g_8LCtMddPw
Bronc
Sure. But I am talking about 1938/1939. These engines were still far away.What about the DB603, Jumo213 and Jumo222? There were other engines in the pipeline as well which might have worked out after sufficent research and development.
I think this is the real reason RLM kept hammering away at the BMW801 engine and Fw-190A programs until they finally worked. They were determined to have a modern twin radial engine similiar to the Wright R-2600.radial engine would probably the logical choice as both have distinct advantages.
Although I agree with Tomo's ideas I also agree that it is perhaps too easy to suggest these engineerical improvements without complete understanding of the limitations of the time. I cannot count how many times I haven't wondered with endless amazement or even irritation why they simply didn't do this or that. So many of these ideas have been swept away as soon as I found some information about the specific circumstances of the situation.Why do people always draw the conclusion that the steps taken then were wrong and some jack-of-all-trades technology was the real answer? Doesn't seem plausible to me.
Quite right! Looking back the DB 603 would have been sufficient for all their fighters and night fighters. But just imagine that would have turned out another Jumo 222!I think this is the real reason RLM kept hammering away at the BMW801 engine and Fw-190A programs until they finally worked. They were determined to have a modern twin radial engine similiar to the Wright R-2600.
With the benefit of hindsight RLM would probably have been further ahead to design the Fw-190 for the DB603 engine right from the fall of 1937. But you don't get that benefit in the real world.
There is one thing I don't understand. What was the story behind the Mikulin engine of the MiG-3? That seems to have been optimalized for high altitude? And I also think Spitfire HFs had their engines tuned for high altitudes. Why couldn't the Germans have done the same with their DB 605s? (of course only for those Bf 109s in the Reichsverteidigung)The real problem was the lack of a good supercharger set-up on any production German engine before 1945.
A single stage supercharger just cannot supply air at a high enough pressure to maintain power at 25,000-35,000ft no matter how many gears or how it is driven.
But this should have been less of a problem with the BMWs on the Ju 88 nightfighters, right? The power egg would be altered but it would be no problem to install. And yet we never see a two-stage supercharger.There is no reason the BMW 801 could not have been give a mechanical drive aux supercharger stage and intercooler from AN ENGINE STAND POINT.
The problem is in fitting the extra bulk into existing aircraft designs. Or fitting the extra bulk into a standard "power egg".
Same with the V-12s.
About man hours required in year and after a production of n-number of aircraft - FW 190, Ju 88, Bf 109:
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.
.I disagree somewhat.
MK 108 vs something in between vs MK 103:
There is no in between.
Did I said there was something in between??
These guns are fundamentally different in operation, you cannot dictate the performance figures you mention into the design.
And why not? My proposal says:
Did you ever heard about flak 38, 2cm?perhaps 20mm flak 38 scaled up to 25mm, 200-250g M-geschoss, 700m/s, 60 round drum
The MK108 was cheap, light, fast firing and reliable due to the simple blowback operation. You can't easily scale that down,
Now when I proposed that??
and moreover you can't increase barrel length.
...says who?
The MK108 was as it was a perfect low-medium velocity gun for close to medium distance.
So MK 108 was a holy cow, and nothing could've replaced it. Nice.
If you want something in between you could probably scale up the MG151/20. What's the use? Is the increase in destructive power worth the increase in weight, retooling of your factories and logistical effort? I doubt it.
Already proposed what to scale up, so this is redundant.
Why do people always draw the conclusion that the steps taken then were wrong and some jack-of-all-trades technology was the real answer? Doesn't seem plausible to me.
WW2 bristles with machinery that made people that used it die because some engineer, or more likely, member of brass, screwed up. So it's perfectly plausible to me.
The DB603:
The engine was never discontinued by DB, it simply wasn't funded by the government anymore.
Who said it was discontinued?? 'Neglected' was my word.
How much that really impacted it's development time is pure speculation unless someone brings up some facts to support this. And about the "screw up" thing. That really is a 20/20 hindsight assertion that doesn't take into account the circumstances of the time. The DB603 was no longer funded because the RLM needed DB600 series engines now. So since they already had promising projects in that engine class with other companies they tried to force DB to continue on producing and improving the engine they needed really badly at that point.
What engines RLM really had to bolt to airframes prior late 1944, in class of DB 603? Junkers BMW managed to squeze the same power 2 years after DB managed the same. And DB 601/605 remained with same power from mid 1942 to mid 1944 (and still under the main rival, Merlin 60 series). I guess RLM failed to force DB to do that, don't you agree?