Westland Whirlwind vs Fw-187 vs P-38

davebender said:

I'm confused as to why the Jumo 210 engine keeps appearing in this discussion. The Fw-187 was designed for the DB600 / DB601 engine and that is almost certainly how it would have been mass produced. Which is why my very first post states the Fw-187 will have the same engine current in the Me-109 series.

Click to expand...

Except you gave the weights of the Whirlwind and the FW 187 with the Peregrine and Jumo 210 engines in your comparison.
you also may be in error on the P-38s weight. Empty weight for a J is 12,780lbs. only 80 lbs more for the "J" than th e"E"?

You also gave the fuel capacity of the FW 187 AO in post #19. That is the Jumo powered version. While the fuel capacity might not change (selfsealing tanks?) in a DB powered version the "lightweight" part might. Especially if you go past the early DB601 engines.

davebender said:

One can argue that the RR Merlin might not have made it into the Whirlwind due to redesign problems. No such arguement exists for the Fw-187.

Click to expand...

You are correct but then a DB powered FW 187 isn't going to weigh 8157lbs empty either.

While an up-engined FW 187 may match a P-38 in some respects the Whirlwind is too small to match the other two aircraft. It may have speed( with upgraded Peregrine engines) and armament but it won't have the range (even with the fuselage tanks) of the other two. Without a serious upgrade of the engines the Whirlwind won't have the high altitude performance either. While a later model supercharger (like a Merlin 460 and a two speed gearbox would help there may not be room for a two stage supercharger and the associated intercooler system. Designed as a short ranged interceptor the range issue isn't too surprising

An early FW 187 (pre MG 151) has an armament problem, even if it is fitted with different engines. Once the Mg 151s show up things get a lot better but trying to extrapolate performance gets tricky since this airplane has the most modifications. While it was noted for it's maneuverability that is for the under engined, lightly loaded prototypes. Adding several thousand kilograms as some of the proposals call for is going to seriously raise the wing loading and hurt that maneuverability, it may still be a bit better than the heavier P-38 however. While the German engines may not suffer some of the maintenance issues of the Turbo-charged P-38 engines, they are not going to offer the high altitude altitude performance either.

With the P-38 you know what you are getting, pick your year and model.
Please note however the high altitude performance (F model was supposed to still climb at 1000ft per minute at 33,000ft according to one source)
Also designed as an interceptor the large size of the United states meant that most US planes had longer ranges than their contemporary European counterparts. the versions before the "D" model carried 400-410 US gallons internally which dropped to 300 gallons with the advent of self sealing tanks. The self sealing tanks also weighed more which might have to factored into the weight's of the other two planes. The Js and Ls went back to 410 US gallons in protected tanks.
The P-38 also had a rather large armament weight. Something that doesn't show up in a brief comparison of calibers and numbers of guns. The .50 cal ammo alone weighed on the order of 622lbs. This is more than the four 7.92mg and their 1000rpg and the 20MG FF guns and ONE set of drums in the Bf 110.

How many rpg for the 7.9mm MGs in the FW 187?

davebender said:

The F7F was not certified ready for combat until July 1945. By then the competition consists of Me-262 jet fighters plus late model piston engine fighters like the Spitfire XIV, Do-335, P-51H and Ta-152H.

Click to expand...

Yeah, but try flying those airplanes from a carrier deck.............at night.

@ Shortround6

What is your argument?

An early FW 187 (pre MG 151) has an armament problem, even if it is fitted with different engines. Once the Mg 151s show up things get a lot better but trying to extrapolate performance gets tricky since this airplane has the most modifications. While it was noted for it's maneuverability that is for the under engined, lightly loaded prototypes. Adding several thousand kilograms as some of the proposals call for is going to seriously raise the wing loading and hurt that maneuverability, it may still be a bit better than the heavier P-38 however. While the German engines may not suffer some of the maintenance issues of the Turbo-charged P-38 engines, they are not going to offer the high altitude altitude performance either.

Click to expand...

We can speculate a lot, but a single seater escort fighter will be at 5800 to 6400kg with DB 601 (all variations and DB 605a) full loaded. Or do you have other data that the weight increase from the A0 serial with loaded weight: 5,000 kg much more? Then please show or post us!

This supposed a maximal wingloading of 213,33 kg/m².
That is much less from the 260 kg/m² of the P38.

While the German engines may not suffer some of the maintenance issues of the Turbo-charged P-38 engines, they are not going to offer the high altitude altitude performance either.

Click to expand...

With reduced surface cooler the FW 187 with DB 605a engines had a much better performance between 6000-7000m then the P38. It is the question how much performance will be lost at high altitudes.

What I have written about the tanks of the FW 187 are real!
The Fw 187 had one 880 Ltr tank in the fuselage and in each wing one 210 Ltr.tank. That were the improvements right from the A0 series. So she can carry something about 1200-1300Ltr. internal fuel, it depends if you have other plans with MW 50 or GM1.

That are facts and not what if's

Just showing of my ignorance, but did the Tigercat see any serious flying opposition before te end of WW2?

What German aircraft carriers would you have the Ta-152H, Do-335 and Me-262 operate from?

I like the F7F. However like the Mosquito and Ju-88G it has no business engaging high performance day fighters available during mid 1945.

On the Anson incidence, I once checked it by using BC Losses, CC Losses and Prien's Jagdwaffe etc and yes, Anson got IIRC one Bf 109, Germans claimed a Blenheim but none were lost at right time at right place.

Anson was really nice and easy plane to fly, that's why it wasn't a good twin engine trainer, real twin bombers were so much more difficult.

Juha

davebender said:

What German aircraft carriers would you have the Ta-152H, Do-335 and Me-262 operate from?

Click to expand...

They were designed to do different jobs with different requirements.
Claiming plane "A" isn't up to par because part of it's performance envelope doesn't match plane "B"s performance level when plane "B" can't even begin to perform Plane "A"s main job seems a little bogus.

Juha said:

On the Anson incidence, I once checked it by using BC Losses, CC Losses and Prien's Jagdwaffe etc and yes, Anson got IIRC one Bf 109, Germans claimed a Blenheim but none were lost at right time at right place.
Anson was really nice and easy plane to fly, that's why it wasn't a good twin engine trainer, real twin bombers were so much more difficult.
Juha

Click to expand...

I suppose given the right scenario, a huge amount skill and bit of luck anything is possible. As a boy the anson was the best aeroplane ever because on the airfix model I made of it the propellors spun around so quickly that it looked like a real engine in there, impressive when you are 10

DonL said:

This is one of the key questions!!!

I think the FW 187 beats the Me 110 in most of the important issues. The only points she can't match is weight loading and punch! But she is faster, can turn, climb and increase speed better and had the same endurance. The punch and weight loading are minimally worse for the missions!

And with the DB 605, to my opinion she is superior to the Bf 109 G6 from speed, climbing and increase speed and equal in turning. So if you watch the problems of the LW with nightfighters (Mosquito Plague) and the disadvantage at speed and high altitudes at 1943/44 what will be your technical decision?.

Click to expand...

Don

In terms of a night fighter you are probably right, however the night fighter conflicts were a mixture of aeroplane capability and radar, jamming and homing technologies. Of all the qualities a plane had at night speed and range were maybe the most important, I cant imagine a turning fight in the dark.

Hello, on the Anson, from my old messages.
in fact it seem that P/O Peters and his crew got one Bf 109E from I/JG 20, Uffz. Werner Bielefeldt (WIA) had to made a crash-landing near Dunkirk, Bf 109E 100% loss.
I looked on this case in 2003 while reading Ross McNeill's excellent CC Losses. I compared info from Ross's and Chorley's loss books with info from of Prien's Jagdfliegerverbände Teil 3 and also got help from Chris Goss, Frank Olynyk and David Pausey who answered my questions in one other forum.

I/JG 20 reported a clash with a Blenheim unit, made one claim (Oblt Walter Oesau, 11:35 20km N of Ostende, later confirmed) but suffered one loss, Uffz. Werner Bielefeldt (WIA) had to made a crash-landing near Dunkirk, Bf 109E 100% loss.
There were no BC Blenheim losses on June 1st and the two CC Blenheim losses were too early. No relevant FC Blenheim loss either. So it seems that we have a near match in time and place. Both sides were using summertime at that time. So the Germans were using time one hour ahead the British time.

Annie was much slower than Blenheim but at least both were twin engine monoplanes with a mid upper turret,so German identification error was understandable.

Juha

Operation Vengeance: the interception and shooting down of Yamamoto's Betty. Accomplished by P-38 fighter aircraft. A tour de force of what the fighter could do, and also of our ability to read encrypted Japanese cyphers. I offer you now a link to a good read:

Operation Vengeance - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Juha said:

Hello, on the Anson, from my old messages.
in fact it seem that P/O Peters and his crew got one Bf 109E from I/JG 20, Uffz. Werner Bielefeldt (WIA) had to made a crash-landing near Dunkirk, Bf 109E 100% loss.
I looked on this case in 2003 while reading Ross McNeill's excellent CC Losses. I compared info from Ross's and Chorley's loss books with info from of Prien's Jagdfliegerverbände Teil 3 and also got help from Chris Goss, Frank Olynyk and David Pausey who answered my questions in one other forum.

I/JG 20 reported a clash with a Blenheim unit, made one claim (Oblt Walter Oesau, 11:35 20km N of Ostende, later confirmed) but suffered one loss, Uffz. Werner Bielefeldt (WIA) had to made a crash-landing near Dunkirk, Bf 109E 100% loss.
There were no BC Blenheim losses on June 1st and the two CC Blenheim losses were too early. No relevant FC Blenheim loss either. So it seems that we have a near match in time and place. Both sides were using summertime at that time. So the Germans were using time one hour ahead the British time.

Annie was much slower than Blenheim but at least both were twin engine monoplanes with a mid upper turret,so German identification error was understandable.

Juha

Click to expand...

well thanks for the verification, if the reports I read were correct it was a great feat just to get out alive let alone bring down a 109.

skeeter said:

Operation Vengeance: the interception and shooting down of Yamamoto's Betty. Accomplished by P-38 fighter aircraft. A tour de force of what the fighter could do, and also of our ability to read encrypted Japanese cyphers. I offer you now a link to a good read:

Operation Vengeance - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Click to expand...

Much of what happened in code braking was still secret when I was young, I remember when it was made public with claims that it shortened the war by two years Ii found it hard to believe. However since reading about various operations in all theatres I think that is a fair claim. What I find hard to understand is how it remained so secret for so long and how both the Japanese and Germans never took action, they may have suspected but never proved it.

In the Pacific especially given the size of the area of operations and speed of a fleet the Japanese were particularly screwed from the outset.

Those were rare. I would guess no more then a couple hundred night fighter aircraft were shot down by enemy night fighter aircraft during the entire war. Far more night fighters were lost to bomber tail gunners and night landing accidents. Hence requirements for day fighters and night fighters are entirely different.