Which aircraft could be adapted easier for long range naval recon: Do19 or Ju89?

Discussion in 'Aviation' started by wiking85, Dec 1, 2012.

  1. wiking85

    wiking85 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2012
    Messages:
    1,321
    Likes Received:
    32
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Chicagoland Area
    Junkers Ju 89 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    Dornier Do 19 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Junkers Ju 290 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    The Luftwaffe had two military aircraft in 1936 that could have continued development for other roles like long range naval reconnaissance, which the late FW200 filled badly. Historically the Ju89 was developed into the Ju290 after several detours, demonstrating that it could have been done and produced a much more effective aircraft than the Fw200.

    So of the two potential options in 1936 that could have continued development, which had more potential, the Ju89 or Do19?
    The Ju89 was heavier, but seemed to require less development of the fuselage, nose, and tail, but had a much higher weight and and larger wing, while also requiring more fuel tanks for increased range.

    The Do19 had a smaller fuselage, lower weight, and smaller wings, but clearly needed a larger fuselage for more fuel tanks and better payload, a more aerodynamic tail and nose, while only having been provided with very low powered engines.

    Both types had room for development, but which could have been operational by June 1940 with the best performance?
     
  2. davebender

    davebender Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2009
    Messages:
    6,418
    Likes Received:
    64
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Michigan, USA
    Neither aircraft.

    Your scenerio allows 4 years for development. With proper funding I suspect Germany could design and produce a purpose built maritime recon aircraft superior to both the Do-19 and Ju-89. It will be powered by Jumo 211 engines as that's the only 1,000+ hp engine RLM funded for production in large numbers. Otherwise start with a clean sheet of paper.
     
  3. Njaco

    Njaco The Pop-Tart Whisperer
    Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2007
    Messages:
    23,059
    Likes Received:
    994
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Animal Control Officer
    Location:
    Southern New Jersey
    What was wrong with the Fw 200 in that role?
     
  4. wiking85

    wiking85 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2012
    Messages:
    1,321
    Likes Received:
    32
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Chicagoland Area
    #4 wiking85, Dec 1, 2012
    Last edited: Dec 1, 2012
    Focke-Wulf Fw 200 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    Focke-Wulf Fw 200 Condor - Technical pages - German U-boats of WWII - Kriegsmarine - uboat.net
    The problem is that 1936 is the year that the prototypes flew at the end of the year and the aircraft needed to be in production at least by mid-1939 for it to be operational by June 1940. So that really leaves about 2.75 years of development. Basically a purpose-designed aircraft needed to start its design at the same time as the Do19 and Ju89, which was 1934. At that time there was no though given to long range land based offensive naval reconnaissance. In fact the idea to create that roll was only decided on in 1939, and Kurt Tank started designing a reconnaissance only military version (not bomb carrying) in 1938 of his own accord. A bomb carrying version wasn't presented until after the war started after the RLM asked for it and it could only hurriedly be provided by just adding the bombs without taking time to strengthen the airframe to handle the extra weight.

    I do realize my suggested change begins before the RLM was thinking in this direction, but if the two aircraft remained in development instead of having their development cancelled shortly after Walter Wever's death, they could provide a better platform than the FW200 for that role when it is suggested. I'm wondering which aircraft offered better development potential in this regard.

    Remember too that the contemporary B17 was also developed as an offensive naval reconnaissance bomber, so there is no reason not to standardize four engine bombers for multiple roles, which the HE177 was intended to do when it became operational.
     
  5. tomo pauk

    tomo pauk Creator of Interesting Threads

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2008
    Messages:
    8,006
    Likes Received:
    441
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Thanks for the excerpts.
     
  6. wiking85

    wiking85 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2012
    Messages:
    1,321
    Likes Received:
    32
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Chicagoland Area
    No problem.
     
  7. davebender

    davebender Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2009
    Messages:
    6,418
    Likes Received:
    64
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Michigan, USA
    I disagree.

    You specified a maritime recon aircraft, not a heavy bomber. Plenty of aircraft which might work for that purpose were designed in less then 4 years. Here's one:
    junkers-ju-252-transport-01.png

    Dec 1938. Ju-252 development begins.
    Oct 1941. Ju-252 prototype first flight. Prototype was delayed due to specification changes.

    Everything I have read suggests the Ju-252 was relatively trouble free and could have been in mass production by 1942. A recon variant would carry a bunch of additional fuel in the cargo compartment. Start development two years earlier (i.e. 1936) and it will be operational during 1940.

    There are plenty of other possibilities. Ju-88H (stretched fuselage for longer range) can be built anytime someone decides to give Junkers a purchase order. A stretched He-111 might be possible too.

    How about the Hs-127 light bomber? Perhaps it could be modified into a long range recon aircraft.
    hs127-1.jpg
     
  8. Aurum

    Aurum Member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2009
    Messages:
    122
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    18
    #8 Aurum, Dec 1, 2012
    Last edited: Dec 1, 2012
    What about Do 26? Seems to me it could be one of the best.

    BTW does anybody have good drawing of it?
     
  9. wiking85

    wiking85 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2012
    Messages:
    1,321
    Likes Received:
    32
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Chicagoland Area
    #9 wiking85, Dec 1, 2012
    Last edited: Dec 1, 2012
    The problem with the Ju88H was that it was dependent on the existence of the BMW801 engine, which means 1942, far too late.
    The He111 is heavier and would require a stronger engine, again, not good enough for 1940.
    Part of the problem with the Ju252 is that there is no evidence that it would be ready in 3 years. Roughly a year is needed between the start of production and a unit becoming operational, as it takes time to get sufficient numbers produced and then train a unit in the type, which takes longer for bigger aircraft, not to mention this is pretty much the first 4 engine bomber in Luftwaffe operation, so there will be doctrine to be worked out, ground crews to be trained in the type, and familiarization with the quirks of the type.

    Nothing as far as reconnaissance goes, though there are a number of ports that are not usable in winter to sea planes. The problem is long range offensive reconnaissance; sea planes have limited amounts of bombs that they can carry and are somewhat less versatile than land based aircraft. The Do26 is somewhat limited in the bombing role and having two different aircraft for attack and reconnaissance is somewhat wasteful of resources. Its best to have one for both. If we are just looking for reconnaissance without the bombing capability, then the FW200 is probably sufficient, as it was only the addition of a bomb load and quick combat maneuvers that caused it problems; if it just had to stand off and perform recon and guidance for Uboats then the type is within the original mission Kurt Tank designed it for. Then it is also pretty cheap (IIRC about 300k reichs marks, which we can thank Dave Bender for posting in another thread) and relatively easy to produce for the most part, though maintenance is still somewhat problematic (Hitler's personal FW200 had all sorts of problems) even if it doesn't break up on landing.

    Also not sure if the Do 26 can mount Hohentwiel radar, though I know the BV138 sea plane could and did.

    dornier_do_26_kep.jpg
     
  10. Aurum

    Aurum Member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2009
    Messages:
    122
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    18
    #10 Aurum, Dec 1, 2012
    Last edited: Dec 1, 2012
    I meant drawing i.e. plan, plot, not painting :)

    In the first post you wished long range naval reconnaissance nothing said about bombing role.

    What ports are not usable in winter to sea planes in Atlantic? Or where are you going to use german planes?
     
  11. wiking85

    wiking85 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2012
    Messages:
    1,321
    Likes Received:
    32
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Chicagoland Area
    Very true, I forgot to make that clear.

    I'm talking about along the North Sea and Baltic Sea, which were Germany's pre-war coasts. The Atlantic wasn't expected to be part of Germany's launch platform, so if they are searching out offensive naval recon aircraft, they have to plan pre-war as to what they needs will be. When France falls they won't have to worry about winter restrictions, but they won't know that they will be an option or that the Atlantic will be the critical battle zone that they will need to have forces to cover. German naval planning pretty much focused on the North and Baltic Seas pre-war and were only thinking that their Uboats and commerce raiders would operate in the Atlantic.

    Sorry, should have made that clear that part of the restrictions that Germany is dealing with is what its pre-war planning suggests will be the battle zones.
     
  12. davebender

    davebender Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2009
    Messages:
    6,418
    Likes Received:
    64
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Michigan, USA
    What makes you say that? Ju-88A could be quite a bit heavier and still have a power to weight ratio as good as many other large WWII era aircraft.

    Do-18D. 10,000 kg max weight (catapult launch). 1,210 total hp.

    Ju-88A. 14,000 kg max weight. 2,400 total hp (early war Jumo 211 engines producing 1,200 hp).
     
  13. wiking85

    wiking85 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2012
    Messages:
    1,321
    Likes Received:
    32
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Chicagoland Area
    #13 wiking85, Dec 2, 2012
    Last edited: Dec 2, 2012
    To get the range it needed it required a more powerful engine to travel quickly relative to its fuel capacity.
     
  14. wiking85

    wiking85 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2012
    Messages:
    1,321
    Likes Received:
    32
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Chicagoland Area
    dornier-do-26-2.gif
     
  15. davebender

    davebender Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2009
    Messages:
    6,418
    Likes Received:
    64
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Michigan, USA
    Me-210C had long range and fast cruise speed powered by two DB605 engines similiar in size to Jumo 211.

    Large internal fuel capacity and good aerodynamics are key for this aircraft. Do-19 and Ju-89 can carry plenty of fuel but cruise speed wasn't particularly fast. I think Germany can design something better if the navy is willing to pay development costs and the resulting aircraft will require only two engines.


    How about a development of the Fw-187? Production version was to have 1,300 liters of internal fuel. Add three 300 liter drop tanks and you are up to 2,200 liters. I suspect it could fly a long way and cruise speed would be among the fastest for any WWII era aircraft. You would need a different canopy to improve visibility for the observer. Perhaps a stepped up arrangement similiar to the Do-335 night fighter proposal.
    do335pur.jpg
     
  16. Shortround6

    Shortround6 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2009
    Messages:
    9,781
    Likes Received:
    802
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    retired Firefighter
    Location:
    Central Florida Highlands
    And the guy in the second seat of the Do-335 would see what on the ground/ocean surface???

    Just about the worst possible place for an observer in a recon-plane.

    If you want an over water reconnaissance aircraft in the early part of the war better plan on a crew of 4-6 in order to have enough "eyes" to actually see things. Radar is in it's infancy so the MK I eyeball is the sensor of choice. You want one or more pairs of eyes in each direction without having to fly snake-like courses or rock wings from side to side to side. At least one rear facing observer (or large blisters on sides) is useful in order to see behind and catch things from a different perspective or different light.
     
  17. johnbr

    johnbr Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2006
    Messages:
    2,534
    Likes Received:
    401
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Retired
    Location:
    London Ontario Canada
    How about the Me-261 with Ju-222 or DB-604.
     
  18. wiking85

    wiking85 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2012
    Messages:
    1,321
    Likes Received:
    32
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Chicagoland Area
    Way too late and the Ju222 never was operational. The DB604 was cancelled long before it had a chance to be viable.
    I'm looking for an aircraft for the 1940-2 period.
     
  19. davebender

    davebender Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2009
    Messages:
    6,418
    Likes Received:
    64
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Michigan, USA
    It's my understanding maritime recon aircraft flew relatively low. The intent was to search the horizon rather then look straight down. Ships were easier to spot that way.
     
  20. wiking85

    wiking85 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2012
    Messages:
    1,321
    Likes Received:
    32
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Chicagoland Area
    Hohentwiel radar with 80km range was available by 1941 and was technologically feasible by 1938. So they wouldn't need to be that far down at all.

    Of course it would be much easier with a bombardier blister like the Ju89 had.
     
Loading...

Share This Page