Why no Fw 190H but the Ta 152H?

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

Given that Germany could not compete on engines powers with the allies, due to lack of raw materials and high octane fuel the Ta 152 was a strange choice. The longer fuselage permitted heavier armament but was useless since added more weight in an aircraft that was already outperformed by the escort fighters. It also reduced a bit rate of roll.
They also were able to fit the jumo213eb on the Dora, so the extension was no benefit in this regard
I have read that the drum radiator was less druggy than the axial one
Also some of the weight of the ta 152 may have been caused by the use of non aviation alloys due to lack of raw materials
In my opinion the ultimate German piston fighter would be a Dora fuselage,Ta152c wings and tail unit, no pressurised cockpit, 3 mg151/20 in combination with the Ez42 sight and the most powerful engine available.
But it really was hopeless. They could not built properly even the existing versions.
 

German V12s were, in aggregate, bigger than the Allied V12s - that will cover a lot of the handicap vs. the Allied V12s running at high oct fuel. Plus, the MW 50 system was helping a lot with regard to the high boost achieved. All in all, German engines were making 1750+ HP by early 1944, but there were other problems attached to these engines. 1st, the too late installation of big V12s on the Fw 190 airframe (at least 10 months too late), and, 2nd, generally inferior superchargers on the German engines (both on V12s and BMW 801s). Having to put up the fight against the enemy that is out-numbering the LW was of no help, either.

dedalos said:
They also were able to fit the jumo213eb on the Dora, so the extension was no benefit in this regard
Click to expand...

Did the Dora powered with 213EB ever flew?


Kicker was that the best piston-engined fighter was a worse choice than a decent jet engined fighter. LW was not helped by a fighter that can outperform the best Allied fighters by 5% (give or take), but by a far greater margin, while carrying a more serious firepower, so it can also do the bomber killing
 
My thoughts. The steel wing spar alone weighed 250 kg more than the duralumin one.
Care to tell where you read about the drum radiator being less draggy?
 


Obviously nothing could compare with the Me 262. So perhaps,after July 1944, it would be better to cancel all piston engines development except jumo 213a and db605d , mainly for service against the soviets. On the western front only jets had a chance to operate
 
dedalos said:
Obviously nothing could compare with the Me 262. So perhaps,after July 1944, it would be better to cancel all piston engines development except jumo 213a and db605d , mainly for service against the soviets.
Click to expand...

July 1944 is way, way too late to do that.
Fw 190 needs a much better engine than the BMW 801D in the noise by late 1943 (and the 109 needing a much better engine than the DB 605A), so it can make a difference not just against the P-47s, but also against P-51s.

dedalos said:
On the western front only jets had a chance to operate
Click to expand...

Pretty much.
 
To make a substantial difference, they'd really need something like second-gen jets like Me P.1101 or FW Ta 183 in volume usage replacing single-engine fighters by, say, early 1944. And something like early SAM's to bring those bomber armadas down.

Of course, without an equally magical reversal of fortunes on the Eastern front, they're still going to lose the war, badly.
 
z42 said:
Of course, without an equally magical reversal of fortunes on the Eastern front, they're still going to lose the war, badly.
Click to expand...
Writing was at the wall by the time 1941 ended - neither UK nor the Soviet Union were defeated (not at least some kind of an uneasy peace was attained with either of the two countries), and Hitler managed to declare the war against the USA.
 
Speaking generally of the fw190 , it was needing a better engine than the bmw801 from day one. And certainly after mid 1942. The early war choices of the rlm proved disastrous
I refer specifically in July 44 because by that time it was clear that the me 262 was entering operational trials and was vastly superior. Why spent further development resources in two stage piston engines? They should have done it three years before.
I
 
spicmart said:
Idk.
But it is a step backwards, quite a weight penalty.
Click to expand...
Do you have a source for the 250 kg weight penalty for the wing spar (spars?), steel vs. light alloy?

dedalos said:
Speaking generally of the fw190 , it was needing a better engine than the bmw801 from day one. And certainly after mid 1942. The early war choices of the rlm proved disastrous
Click to expand...

Germany have had the problems in making a more powerful and still a reliable engine than the BMW 801 until the winter of 1943/44.
IMO, what they probably missed was going on with the initial, small and light Fw 190 prototype to be also powered by a DB 601 engine, talk a few prototypes of both BMW and DB versions. Cuts a lot of reliability issues in 1941, while also making the fighter smaller, more streamlined and much lighter, plus much improving the mileage. The great rate of roll, excellent U/C and cockpit still remain.

Again IMO, German approach towards engine development left a lot to be desired, with companies making huge number of versions of numerous engine types, with a lot of overlap and attempts to reinvent the wheel, while indeed failing to develop the next-gen superchargers for the 1st line engines until too late. A Fw 190 with the BMW 801 that has a good/great S/C would've still been a tough costumer for the Allies in 1944.

But even as-is, Fw 190 was disastrous to the Allies in the 1st two years of it's service. That RLM failed to make a substantial step up with their fighter designs(s) by late 1943 is not 190's fault.
 
tomo pauk said:
Do you have a source for the 250 kg weight penalty for the wing spar (spars?), steel vs. light alloy?
Click to expand...
Not an original source. In a German issue of the aviation Aeroplane years ago. Possibly my first read about the 190 except for the text on the model kit boxes.

I wonder if Rodeike who also listed scheduled euipment of the Focke Wulf machines might have it in his book.
 
Last edited:
tomo pauk said:
Writing was at the wall by the time 1941 ended - neither UK nor the Soviet Union were defeated (not at least some kind of an uneasy peace was attained with either of the two countries), and Hitler managed to declare the war against the USA.
Click to expand...

Well, opening fronts to the north, south, east, and west, without access to strategical resources like, say, petroleum, and then on top of it all declare war on the US, what could possibly go wrong?

By 1944, nothing but a miracle could have saved them. Like, say, achieving complete air superiority over Germany and occupied territories with jets and SAM's, and rolling back the red army in the east. Then kick out moustache guy and his nazi scum in a coup, and maybe (just maybe?) there's a slight chance of negotiating a peace treaty? Of course, in reality none of this was possible.
 
Last edited:
dedalos said:
Speaking generally of the fw190 , it was needing a better engine than the bmw801 from day one. And certainly after mid 1942.
Click to expand...

IDK. Apart from the reliability issues the 801 seems to me an decent enough engine when it was introduced in autumn 1941. Perhaps a bit on the heavy side, but not fatally so. The big problem was more the failure to develop the engine further. They got the versions using C3, which improved performance somewhat, but was a bit of a mixed blessing given their fuel situation. But apart from that, seems no major improvement entered large scale service. In particular, no 2-stage supercharger etc.


Their failure to replace piston fighters with jets suggests that it probably wasn't that easy. The early jet engines had a very short service life (to an extent made up by being a lot cheaper to manufacture than the mid-late war piston engines for fighters), and were very finicky to handle in order to avoid flameouts.
 

Yes. An evergreen topic, we've been through this in multiple threads. Beyond pruning the various projects that were mostly just a suck on resources, perhaps even having three major engine manufacturers was too much for their resources? You probably want two, to have some degree of competition, though one can of course argue that in a totalitarian state like Nazi Germany it wasn't as much a "healthy" market competition, but rather competition for political attention from the party leadership. So who do you take out? BMW, perhaps the 801 could have been replaced by the 601/605/213? Jumo, considering that except for some details like the crankshaft lubrication system and the late-war 213J prototype that never saw service, it was in most respects worse than the competing DB engines? Resources freed from such a pruning to be spent on better testing to avoid the valve debacle, and of course supercharger and jet development?
 
Last edited:
z42 said:
So who do you take out?
Click to expand...

BMW 802 and 803 (spend the resources in making the 801 better instead, including the more serious development of the hollow-bladed turbine for the turbo at BMW, that has knock-on effects on the jet engines when these became a thing). Even the 801E is a boon, and perhaps combine the S/C from it with the rest of the 801C to have an overall good performer that still uses the B4 fuel.
A host of liquid-cooled engines with more than 12 cylinders; rather make the 2-stage supercharged versions of the DB 601/605/603, as well as of the Jumo 211 and 213 by 1942-43.
Curiously enough, DB was fiddling with half a dozen of different S/C options for their V12s, that bore no fruit. Already the DB 601E with the S/C from the DB 603 is a boon, let alone with a 2-stage S/C. Keep the compression ratios under 7:1 (preferably under 6.5:1; 6:1 is a nice, round number if we ask people at RR ).

Again, all of this needs to be in the pipeline much earlier than 1944 in order for the Allies to have a tougher nut to crack.
 

No disagreement here, but my question was actually "who", as in which manufacturer, if you want to go a step further.
 
tomo pauk said:
Do you have a source for the 250 kg weight penalty for the wing spar (spars?), steel vs. light alloy?
Click to expand...
It certainly looks out of line unless some moron simply used the dimensions of the alloy spar/s and copied them in steel. And added some extra "beef".
The entire wing of a P-40 or P-51 or P-63 was under 525kg.
Steel is about 2.9 times heavier than aluminum for volume. But many aircraft used steel spars or steel spar components or steel joints, mounts where the extra strength of steel over aluminum allowed for lighter parts in those locations than aluminum would.
Not saying that steel would be lighter but 250kg seems heavy for a properly engineered steel spar conversion.
 
tomo pauk said:
I don't want to take out any manufacturer.
Click to expand...
To expand on that.
time to "take out" a manufacturer is before the shooting starts.
Once the shooting starts (or at least by 1941) it is too late for the Germans. Trying to retool either V-12 company to make radials or retool BMW to make V-12s is going to mean months of lost production. How long before the 'increased efficiency" of higher mass production catches up to the lost production from the change over?
To further this, there were 3 companies, not 3 factories. BMWs and Jumos were built in France and Jumos were built in Czechoslovakia.
In 1941-42 the BMW can do things the DB 601-605 and Jumo 211s cannot do, means you need to get the DB 603/Jumo 213 into production sooner.
Maybe the Jumo 213 could have been speeded up some, maybe by a year? Wide spread introduction in 1943? But killing off BMW 801 production in 1943? or stopping DB 605 in 1943?
The whole Jumo 222 fiasco may have slowed development of 211/213.
And the best is the enemy of good. With limited high octane fuel perhaps more attention should have been paid to inter-cooling/after cooling on existing engines for a modest improvement in performance instead of the using tricks like nitrous oxide, which did give great performance but at the cost of weight/volume and logistics/servicing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

A
Why Luftwaffe and Kreigsmarine diesels but petrol Wehrmacht?
2 3
Replies
45
Views
4K
EwenS
E
S
Day fighter Ta 154
Replies
0
Views
454
spicmart
S
M
Why Didn't The RAF use Beaufighters Instead of Typhoons In The ETO
2
Replies
29
Views
3K
MIflyer
M
A
Why no heavier RAF machine gun calibres?
2 3
Replies
50
Views
4K
vandee
V
S
Why airplanes were designed the way they were.
3 4 5
Replies
90
Views
7K
EwenS
E
Menu
Log in
Register