What was the best stop-gap fighter of WWII?

Gixxerman · Jul 24, 2012

Spit IX all day long for me.
I think DonL has a point about the FW190D.

I can't agree with Dave's mention of the He162, too desperate too late, a stopgap to nothing......but the thing I really wanted to comment on on this one is the often repeated claim about a 3.5 month/90 day design period.
I'm open to correction, of course, but as I understand it this ignores the design study Heinkel is known to have carried out well before the He 162 requirement was issued which the He 162 borrowed from.
I believe it is referred to as the Heinkel P1073.

Of course the He 162 was designed constructed very quickly, I'm not denying that, but as with all the post Me262/Ar234 LW jet plane designs of this period it was hardly a properly tested developed design neither was it a truly 'clean sheet' design either.

stona · Jul 24, 2012

Gixxerman said:
I think DonL has a point about the FW190D.

Yes,I agree,despite my earler scepticism.

The "Construction Description No. 285 Jagdfluzeug Fw 190 D-9" issued by Focke-Wulf on 23 September 1944 makes this clear.

"The Fw 190D-9 represents an intermediate solution until the series start of the Fw 190 D-12 or the Ta 152 and will be issued in limited numbers..."

If that is not a definition of a stop gap I don't know what is.

I'll still vote for the Spitfire IX but the Fw 190 D-9 runs it a very close second.

Cheers

Steve

Shortround6 · Jul 24, 2012

stona said:
Surely not. It met a specification for a single engined fighter for the RAF and was intended to operate alogside the Spitfire,not to plug a gap until the Spitfire production could be increased. The performance gap between the Spitfire MkI and Hurricane MkI is not as great as the common assumption. In 1940 it was the preferred mount of several successful pilots.......

Until 1940 the difference may have been even smaller. Fitted with fixed pitch props and running 87 octane fuel the difference between the two planes may not have been as marked. With more power available (at least at lower altitudes) and with the constant speed propellers the lighter, lower drag Spitfire improved more rapidly than the Hurricane.

Edgar Brooks · Jul 24, 2012

Shortround6 said:
Yes and no. The British had often purchased more than one fighter at a time. Hawker Fury and Gloster biplane series. Was one a stop gap for the other?.

No, it was to spread the load, and keep both work forces occupied; don't forget Gloster were part of the Hawker Group, so it was really one company.

In 1937-39 I am not sure the British appreciated the limitations of the Hurricane. If they had they wouldn't have stuck that thick wing on the Typhoon. By the time the difference is realized they have too much invested in Hurricane production to stop. Giving the Hurricane the Merlin XX first is a real hint they knew it was falling behind and it might be considered that the MK II was a stop gap

When the Spitfire and Hurricane tendered (for the same Ministry specification, incidentally, so neither was a stop-gap for the other,) all thoughts were on countering enemy bombers, with as heavy firepower as possible, so there weren't any real limitations to the Hurricane.
There were factions, in Whitehall, who wanted to see the Spitfire fail, largely because they felt that Supermarine couldn't cope (which was true,) and it was only when K5054 got a burst of extra speed, from a different propeller, that its future was secure. Likewise, the Typhoon was a 1937 design, seen as a bomber-destroyer, with 12 machine guns, rather than the other pair's 8.
Everything fell apart, with the defeat of France, and the need to cope with fighters like the 109, which is when the Hurricane's "failings" were exposed, along with the Tornado/Typhoon, which led, inevitably, to the Tempest. Luckily (or thanks to Mitchell's genius,) the Spitfire proved adaptable over the next 10 years.

H_K · Jul 24, 2012

Here's an intriguing stop gap from 1940... the Morane M.S.410

Morane MS406 "Charlie-Fox" | Swiss Aviation Photography

The M.S. 410 was an urgent 3-week conversion of the bulk of the French fighter force (600 M.S.406s), in a desperate attempt to fix serious performance and reliability issues. The M.S.406 simply lagged too far behind the BF-109E and Hurricane*, and it was therefore decided to stop any further development and shift production to all-new fighters such as the Dewoitine D520, Arsenal VG33 and Bloch 155. But a stop gap was needed in the meantime... without diverting any high-performance engines or 20mm cannons from the higher priority fighters coming down the production line.

The solution: a new wing structure and much improved radiator/exhaust on the M.S.406. The resulting Morane 410 was suddenly *slightly* faster [CORRECTION: about as fast, actually**] than a Hurricane Mk I (315mph), with improved climb performance. More importantly, the weapons were finally effective, with two more 7.5mm guns in the wings, AND better feed systems (to fix jamming issues) as well as a better gunsight (the hub 20mm canon was unchanged). The new wing also allowed for the carriage of drop tanks, improving the M.S.406's already good endurance. The conversion only required 400 man-hours of work (vs. 8,000 hours for a new D.520).

All-in-all, probably not the best stop-gap of the entire war, but not bad in terms of bang-for-your-buck...

The Morane 410 now was able to climb faster to a favorable intercept position, loiter there longer, overtake enemy bombers, and actually shoot them down... a world of a difference from the 406. Given the chance, it should have been effective through the end of 1940, even to some degree against the 109E. Unfortunately the Battle of France turned south while the conversion were still underway, and it's hard to find any info on whether the few aircraft that did make it to the front fulfilled their 'stop-gap' promise...

* The MS 406 achieved a respectable ~4-1 kill ratio in Finnish hands against enemy fighters, despite having none of the 410's weapons reliability fixes or performance improvements. In detail:

1941: 26 fighter kills to 5 losses, against mostly Mig-3s and I-16s. There was only 1 experienced pilot in the entire Morane squadron, and he had never dogfighted before (1 victory against a bomber)
1943: 10 fighter kills to zero losses, against I-16s, P-40s and Hurricanes.
1944: 7 fighter kills to 6 losses, against much more modern opposition (P-40s, P-39s, La-5s, Yak-9s)

** EDITED: My mistake, the MS 410 was actually within 2-3mph of the Hurricane Mk I above ~12,000ft. Below 12,000ft, it depended on the Hurricane's boost settings. The MS 410 being slightly faster than the 6lb boosted Hurricane I but ~20mph slower than the same Hurricane I using 12lb boost.

MS 410 #1035 speeds were:
285 mph @ 6,500ft
316 mph @ 13,000ft
308 mph @ 23,000ft

CobberKane · Jul 25, 2012

Shortround6 said:
Nice try.

Yes the P-38 was designed as a bomber interceptor and then "forced" into other roles. But then many other 1930s and early war fighters and interceptors were "forced" into other roles or, one might say, adapted to other roles.

I am not one to argue that the P-38 was better than the P-51, it wasn't. That does not mean the P-38 was a "stop gap". The P-38 never really got a fair shot at operating in the ETO. Being the premier US fighter of the time the operational P-38 groups were set to where the action was hottest. The First operational P-38 groups in Europe were sent to cover the North African invasion with just a few months. One american general claiming (campaigning for more P-38s for his command ?) that if the pacific got priority for the P-38 the NA Invasion would have to be postponed. After the North African campaign the P-38s cover the invasions of Sicily and Italy before building up back in England to help with the bomber offensive.

AS I mentioned and you did not answer, How is a plane a "stop gap" for another plane that does not exist when the first plane goes into service?

By that definition every aircraft is a stop gap for a later airplane in the same role. The Spitfire being a stop gap for the Meteor and Vampire?

AS to your last thought. It is part right. One engine was not enough to meet the performance specification. Kelly Johnson and crew thought that it would take a single 1500hp engine to meet the specification or two 1000 hp engines. This is in 1938. When does a 1500hp Merlin show up? And not a Merlin that offers 1500hp for take off but one that offers 1500hp at 20,000ft. You are correct, if Kelly Johnson had access to engines from the future the P-38 might have been designed very differently. But then many aircraft would have been designed differently if their designers had access to engines 4-5 years in the future.

Again, I'm thinking of a stop-gap fighter as one that is pressed into service in a role it was not designed for in the absence of anything better. Of course the Spitfire wasn't a stop-gap for the Vampire or Meteor - all those aircraft occupied roles they were specifically designed for and the jets supplanted the prop driven fighter becuase of the march of technology, not because of any shortcomming on the spitfire's part. The P38, I think we agree, admirably held the fort in a role it was not designed for and was largely supplanted when purpose built alternatives came along, at least in the ETO

As for US commanders clamouring for P-38s, that's hardly surprising when the alternatives were P-39s and P40s. If someone had been offering the contemporary Spit IX as an alternative I suspect the P 38 might have been relatively less appealing

I'm aware that I'm sounding like a Lightning-basher here and really that's not what I mean. I think it was a fine aircraft with some serious drawbacks that gave stirling service when it was needed. There were of course many pilots who loved the plane and wouldn't hear a word against it - but there were also Luftwaffe Aces like Galland and others who considered it an easy kill, and Eric Winkle was very critical of it's handling in a dive and described it rather harshly as 'useless' in the ETO. I have a video of one Lightning pilot who flew against the Luftwaffe in a P 38H - his verdict? "We couldn't out turn-them, we couldn't out-dive them, we couldn't outrun them. it was their game for quite a while, there"

Shortround6 · Jul 25, 2012

CobberKane said:
The P38, I think we agree, admirably held the fort in a role it was not designed for and was largely supplanted when purpose built alternatives came along, at least in the ETO

And the role the P-38 was not designed for? The P-38 was either a long range "interceptor" or a long endurance "interceptor", the main difference between the initial P-38 and P-39 specifications was that the P-38 was supposed to everything the P-39 was except do it for twice as long. The early versions before self sealing tanks carried 400 US gallons of fuel, 200 per engine.

CobberKane said:
As for US commanders clamouring for P-38s, that's hardly surprising when the alternatives were P-39s and P40s. If someone had been offering the contemporary Spit IX as an alternative I suspect the P 38 might have been relatively less appealing

The US did fly some Spitfires, but no matter how good the Spitfire was the P-38 could do somethings the Spitfire couldn't do. Like cover the Sicily landings from bases in North Africa?

The P-38 wasn't perfect, it was the oldest USAAF fighter in production at the end of the war and the knowledge of aerodynamics ( and structures) had advances considerably.

BTW, the Mustang was NOT designed for the role of escort fighter, it was just a "better" P-40 and even when the First Merlin was shoved in one the escort mission wasn't the goal. A high altitude Mustang was.

parsifal · Jul 27, 2012

oh dear.....what bedraggled cat just wandered in.....

CobberKane · Jul 27, 2012

zigawen6 said:
06
06I think it considers Los Angeles Escort American piopulation Los Angeles Escorts only (Except Asian counries of course) as Los Angeles Asian Escort most young girls in America are crazy about their chastity.
I know one girl who was dating Los Angeles Asian Escorts with her boyfriend about 5 years but they did not have sex and she is still virgin.

My God, if the above contribution isn't a solid indication that it's time for everybody to move on to another thread, it's time for us all to get a life...

fastmongrel · Jul 27, 2012

Los Angeles Asian Escort. Was that an experimental Zero designed to fly from Japan to America.

vinnye · Jul 31, 2012

The Spitfire IX. It was a solution that was needed and needed quickly in response to the FW190 whose appearance came as a very unwelcome surprise to any Allied pilots whatever they were flying. The use of an engine meant for a mark not yet in production in a current frame makes it a stop gap in my book. It turned out quite well didnt it!

hurricane55 · Aug 3, 2012

Could the Me 262 be considered stopgap?

DerAdlerIstGelandet · Aug 4, 2012

What was it a stop-gap to? It was the first fully operational jet fighter. There were other aircraft in development, but the 262 was not a stop-gap to any of them, at least in my opinion.

wmaxt · Aug 4, 2012

The P-38 was both a stop gap and a regular in the war but several others like the Spitfire IX can to.

As to performance here is what the commander of JG-77 on Sicily told Galland;

"The Luftwaffe no longer had the the quantitative or qualitative advantage. The fact that American P-38s could and would turn up any where at any time was very troubling. Moreover the clear superiority of the Lightning, in both speed and maneuverability, was especially disconcerting." This statement was made by Johanne Stienhoff with 176 kills.

Franze Stiger 28 Kills;

P-38s could turn inside us with ease and they could go from level flight to a climb almost instantaneously.We lost quite a few pilots who tried to attack and then pull up. The P-38s were on them at once. They closed so quickly that there was little one could do except roll quickly and dive down, for while the P-38 could turn inside us, it rolled very slowly through the first 5 to 10 deg of bank.

Adolf Galland once got into a fight over who won the battle of Brittan his claims must be taken with a grain of salt. On the other hand in a fighter ace conference a story by one pilot John Lowell about a dogfight with a Fw-190D from very high to a gravel pit made Galland turn white and to admit he flew the 190 that day and that no matter what he did he couldn't shake the P-38. They broke off the engagement when both were low on fuel. From Top Guns by Joe Foss and Mathew Brennan, its also in Eric Hamil's book Aces over Germany.

stona · Aug 4, 2012

Anyone have any evidence that Galland ever flew the Fw 190 D ?

Steve

wmaxt · Aug 4, 2012

Galland frequently flew aircraft in combat even when he was General of fighters for the Luftwaffe, after he was demoted back into the ranks he flew Fw-190Ds and then Me-262s. I'm not going to vouch for the accuracy of that story, it was reportedly told in front of a large group of pilots - but in the world of fighter pilot stories who can tell. The only thing that lends possible truth to this story is that Galland admitted to being in the 190 and Foss, a fighter pilots pilot vouches for it..

More to the point of this thread the P-38 was a front line fighter from day one the real stopgap fighters;

Spitfire V - battle of Brittan
F4F - South Pacific and Guadalcanal
P-39 - Ground attack South Pacific.
P-40 - China, North Africa and Pacific
Hurricane - The real Battle of Brittan Fighter
SBD - Pacific

These aircraft ate not presented in any particular order they all did far more than any aircraft in those particular situation deserved. Without them the war picture in 1943 would have been much different.

Bill

iron man · Aug 4, 2012

As a "stop-gap"?

I'm leaning hard towards the Fw 190D...K Tank's immediate solution to getting the latest generation of high performance inlines mated up to his airframe.
Given the chaotic situation extant in German aircraft production at this late stage of the game, and all of the attendant "issues" that challenged production/employment...it still stands as a testament to the inherent capablities of the initial design. (Unlike the Bf 109 which was ultimately limited by its wing loading limitations).

Fw 190D was a "work around solution" of the highest order, particularily when one gives due consideration to the deteriorating situation in which it was carried out.

To extemporise...?

"Ok guys...what we need to do here is take this basic A-8 airframe, redesign the front end. Add a filler to the rear fuselage to increase the moment arm of the rudder, and redraw the rudder to offset the torque.

Can we fix it? Yes we can...!

And it was done...and there was much rejoicing! RAY!

wmaxt · Aug 5, 2012

Iron Man, The Fw-190 was, in my opinion not a stop gap fighter. According to everything I've read it was designed and built to, if not replace the Bf-109 then to fly as it contemporary/alternative fighter. Like the P-38 it was a front line fighter.

Stop gap in my view would be an aircraft that really did not have the performance of its adversary but had to fill on until another aircraft could be procured to fight the enemy on more equal terms.

Bill

Shortround6 · Aug 5, 2012

The Fw 190A was not a stop gap. the FW 190D may have been if it was a short term solution while the TA 152 was sorted out. Much like the Spitfire V was not a Stopgap and neither was the MK VIII but the MK IX was. Stick engine from the MK VIII into the MK V airframe so as to get a better performing fighter with the least amount of retooling/disruption of production. P-40 was a stop gap from day 1, It was what could be gotten into production the quickest. F4F was NOT a stop gap as it was designed and purchased as the best available naval fighter at the time. The Fact that the enemy comes up with a better performing fighter and an older fighter has to "hold the line" until a new allied fighter becomes available doesn't make the old fighter a "stop gap". A true stop gap is a fighter ( or other airplane) that is designed or purchased with the knowledge that it is not the best solution at the time but the solution that can be manufactured/put into service, even with shortcomings, in the least amount of time or with the least effort while the better solution is worked on.

stona · Aug 5, 2012

The Fw 190 D was a stop gap and a very impressive one.
This was made clear in the "Construction Description No. 285 Jagdfluzeug Fw 190 D-9" issued by Focke-Wulf on 23 September 1944,which I posted in post #62. That is evidence.

I still don't see any evidence that Galland ever flew a Dora

Cheers

Steve

What was the best stop-gap fighter of WWII?

Senior Airman

Major

Major General

Senior Airman

Airman

Banned

Major General

Colonel

Banned

1st Sergeant

Senior Airman

Airman

Private Chemtrail Disperser

Staff Sergeant

Major

Staff Sergeant

Airman

Staff Sergeant

Major General

Major

Users who are viewing this thread

Similar threads