What if Germany had access to large Nickel reserves in WWII?

[Icorps1970]

There is no "THE problem", and nobody said there was.

But it is irrefutable that the lack of (specifically Nickel) had a dramatic impact on the actual operational performance and effectiveness of a huge
portion of the military machines Germany produced. This was particularly pronounced in the case of aero engines, where it had such a bad impact
that it would have made no difference if Germany had better fuels because the performance of German aircraft was being capped by the
low nickel exhaust valves, at a level far below the knock limit of the fuels they already had. (The British tested a BMW801 on Allied 100/130, at the
Thornton Aero Engine Laboratory operated by Shell scientists, and it made less peak power than when on German C3).

First by the time the P-51D was in service in Europe the standard fuel for US fighter A/C was 150 octane not 130. So a test with 130 octane was irrelevant especially if they did not run the full MP the 130 could tolerate. AND the 801 was a low altitude engine and once above its critical altitude the octane rating bacame less and less important since it could not make enough MP to use higher octane fuel. Given the automatic controls on the 801 at least in the FW190 it might not have allowed MP over 42" which means it could not make use of higher octane fuel if it was set for 95 octane. Did the Shell scientists consider this.
Rather than try to explain ALL the problems the Germans had to over come due to lower octane fuels you might look to Gregs Airplanes and Automobiles videos on Youtube. The one on why the P51 was faster than the 109G and the one on C-3 fuel (which was about 95-100 octane). The P51, P38 and P47 could run FAR FAR higher boost levels than the Germans could as a result the 109G-6 with a FAR larger engine (about 600 cubic inches larger IIRC) made less power than the Merlin -7 at 67 inches of MP or -3 which could run 75" of manifold pressure vs 42 inches for the German fighter AND the -3 merlin could make 75" to about 28000 ft and the 109 increasingly ran out of breath once past their peak about about 18000. The -7 (67 inches MP) equipped Mustangs, set up for 130 octane, were upgraded to -3 in the UK because the -7 was not a high altitude engine and was short of power at 25000. The MANUALS and PLACARDS for the P-51 all were written for the lower octane 130 fuel. But they used 150 and 75" MP in Europe. This is explained in the videos.

 

[Deleted member 68059]

First by the time the P-51D was in service in Europe the standard fuel for US fighter A/C was 150 octane not 130. So a test with 130 octane was irrelevant especially if they did not run the full MP the 130 could tolerate. AND the 801 was a low altitude engine and once above its critical altitude the octane rating bacame less and less important since it could not make enough MP to use higher octane fuel. Given the automatic controls on the 801 at least in the FW190 it might not have allowed MP over 42" which means it could not make use of higher octane fuel if it was set for 95 octane. Did the Shell scientists consider this.
Rather than try to explain ALL the problems the Germans had to over come due to lower octane fuels you might look to Gregs Airplanes and Automobiles videos on Youtube. The one on why the P51 was faster than the 109G and the one on C-3 fuel (which was about 95-100 octane). The P51, P38 and P47 could run FAR FAR higher boost levels than the Germans could as a result the 109G-6 with a FAR larger engine (about 600 cubic inches larger IIRC) made less power than the Merlin -7 at 67 inches of MP or -3 which could run 75" of manifold pressure vs 42 inches for the German fighter AND the -3 merlin could make 75" to about 28000 ft and the 109 increasingly ran out of breath once past their peak about about 18000. The -7 (67 inches MP) equipped Mustangs, set up for 130 octane, were upgraded to -3 in the UK because the -7 was not a high altitude engine and was short of power at 25000. The MANUALS and PLACARDS for the P-51 all were written for the lower octane 130 fuel. But they used 150 and 75" MP in Europe. This is explained in the videos.

Greg makes lovely videos which are great fun. but it would be my advice not to watch those kinds of videos and think you`re watching anything other than some lighthearted "fireside chat" when it comes to German aero engines.

Now, on with your post.

1) What do P-51`s have to do with you refusing to accept that materials shortages were a key impediment to German aircraft performance in WW2 ?

Nothing.

(FYI - If you`re really interested in fuels, actual ISSUES of 150PN to squadrons compared to stocks, were tiny. The fuel had a very high TEL content (about 60% more than AN-F-28) and this caused a lot of fairly serious reliabilty issues in the field.)

2) Of course Shell scientsists know how to vary engine load - They put the BMW cylinder on a variable compression single cylinder test rig, there is no
other way you can make mixture response loops, unless you run Oppau or DVL test method which use variable boost supercharging to determine
knock and not variable compression.

3) I see you`ve dropped talking about Nickel, which is the entire purpose of this thread.

4) Oh, you want to ACTUALLY know how 150 PN compares with C3, across the full range of Lambda values ?
Depends on the test method in fact, if you use Oppau then C3 and 150 PN are identical in peak performance potential
at rich mixtures. If you use the DVL method the 150PN is better than C3, but C2 beats even 150 PN under Lambda 0.9.

Of course it woudnt have mattered much if Germany had had enough C2 to make it operational, as the engines were
knock limited by the exhaust valve induced pre-ignition/detonation.

 

[Deleted member 68059]

First by the time the P-51D was in service in Europe the standard fuel for US fighter A/C was 150 octane not 130. So a test with 130 octane was irrelevant especially if they did not run the full MP the 130 could tolerate. AND the 801 was a low altitude engine and once above its critical altitude the octane rating bacame less and less important since it could not make enough MP to use higher octane fuel. Given the automatic controls on the 801 at least in the FW190 it might not have allowed MP over 42" which means it could not make use of higher octane fuel if it was set for 95 octane. Did the Shell scientists consider this.
Rather than try to explain ALL the problems the Germans had to over come due to lower octane fuels you might look to Gregs Airplanes and Automobiles videos on Youtube. The one on why the P51 was faster than the 109G and the one on C-3 fuel (which was about 95-100 octane). The P51, P38 and P47 could run FAR FAR higher boost levels than the Germans could as a result the 109G-6 with a FAR larger engine (about 600 cubic inches larger IIRC) made less power than the Merlin -7 at 67 inches of MP or -3 which could run 75" of manifold pressure vs 42 inches for the German fighter AND the -3 merlin could make 75" to about 28000 ft and the 109 increasingly ran out of breath once past their peak about about 18000. The -7 (67 inches MP) equipped Mustangs, set up for 130 octane, were upgraded to -3 in the UK because the -7 was not a high altitude engine and was short of power at 25000. The MANUALS and PLACARDS for the P-51 all were written for the lower octane 130 fuel. But they used 150 and 75" MP in Europe. This is explained in the videos.

The reason I know this happened, with the Nickel, is that I have all the surviving German air ministry stenographic record on microfilm, I was the first person to ever have it digitised to text searchable pdf.

Unsurprisingly, some fairly revelatory material was to be found.

"Das Triebwerk hat in der Erprobung mit Serienmotoren DB 605 ungenügende Betriebssicherheit ergeben. Infolge der Herabsetzung des Nickelgehaltes der Ventile von 15% auf 8% in der Serie verzundern die Ventile und verursachen Durchbrennen der Kolben. Ein sofortiges zurückschalten auf den alten Werkstoff ist aus Termingründen nicht möglich. Schnellere Abhilfe wird vom Verchromen der Ventile erwartet, dass sich beim BMW 801 gut bewährt hat. Außerdem sind seit April 42 stärkere Kolben in die Serie eingeführt worden. Die Leistung des Motors wird zunächst so weit begrenzt, dass die Me 109 G bis zur Volldruckhöhe die Leistung der Me 109 F 4 hat....Es wäre jedoch nach wie vor erwünscht, wenn trotz alledem das international übliche Material mit ca. 15% Nickel (1440) Verwendung finden könnte. Ist dies nicht möglich, so muss durch überzählige von Chrome oder durch Panzerung der Ventilteller-Oberfläche mit stark nickelhaltigen Material versucht werden, wiederum gleichwertige Ergebnisse zu erzielen wie mit dem früher verfügbaren 15% Nickelmaterial 1440."

(16th May 1942, RLM Meeting, Berlin)

Paste it into google translate yourself, its more fun than me doing it all for you.

 

[ThomasP]

Hey Snowygrouch,

Thanks for the original source docs you have been posting.

 

[Deleted member 68059]

Hey Snowygrouch,

Thanks for the original source docs you have been posting.

Welcome

 

[steveinns]

Nickel indeed would have been very beneficial to Germany's desire to develop reliable gas turbine technology. Nickel alloys are essential for high temperature components such as combustion chambers nozzle guide vanes & turbine blades. As we know without these alloys, life expectancy of of a gas turbine was little more than 25 hrs, hardly sparkling time between overhauls !

 

[Dimlee]

As I remember, nickel production in Norilsk began in 1939.
If Molotov's visit to Berlin is more successful, Germany can get a lot of nickel from the de-facto ally.
Another what-if