Author Topic: What WW2 fighter had the most versions? (Read 1567 times)

SunTracker · « **Reply #15 on:** February 02, 2005, 06:43:30 PM »

joining of two XP-51F fuselages
Both rudders and outer wing panels were from the P-51H.

Lengthening a fuselage does not make it an entirely different aircraft. Most fighters in WW2 went through a lengethening process.

GRUNHERZ · « **Reply #16 on:** February 02, 2005, 06:50:43 PM »

Even the P51H is not at all related to P51D, they have nothing in common except general appearence, nothing.

Compare that to the Bf109 which kept practically an identical rear fuselage assembly from the prototype A model in 1935 to the last K's produced in Spring 45 or the ones after the war in Spain, the only things that changed were access hatches.

Bodhi · « **Reply #17 on:** February 02, 2005, 06:55:34 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by SunTracker
Lengthening a fuselage does not make it an entirely different aircraft. Most fighters in WW2 went through a lengethening process. [/B]

The P-82 fuselage is an ENTIRELY new design. No formers, no ribs, nothing, notta matchs, not even the stringer material is the same.

What you are reading was the concept for the XP-82 (NA was trying to quicken the development time by using existing P-51 parts) which did indeed use the P-51H fuselages and wings, but was found that the fuselages were not strong enough to support the weight of the entire aircraft with all ord expected, so, the fuselage is a completely different design now, which necitated all new tooling to manufacture the aircraft. The wings are new designs too, the landing gear is different, the engines are different, the props are different, the spinners are different, ad finiteum.

The F-82 IS NOT a version of the 51.

Rafe35 · « **Reply #18 on:** February 02, 2005, 06:57:52 PM »

Vought

XF4U-1
F4U-1
F4U-1 WM
F4U-1A
F4U-1B
F4U-1C
F4U-1D
F4U-1P
XF4U-2
F4U-2
XF4U-3
XF4U-3B
XF4U-4
F4U-4
F4U-4B
F4U-4C
F4U-4P
F4U-4N

Goodyear

FG-1
FG-1A
FG-1D
FG-1E
FG-3 (Unknown If Prototype, same as F4U-3)
XF2G-1
F2G-1
F2G-2

Brewster

F3A-1
F3A-1D

Wolfala · « **Reply #19 on:** February 02, 2005, 11:37:48 PM »

BF-109 - for once I agree with GS. Hell it went upto the BF-109Z for christ sakes.

MiloMorai · « **Reply #20 on:** February 03, 2005, 12:12:49 AM »

Even though I basically agree with Scholzi that the109 had the most, his inclusion of a/c that were only paper designs I think should not qualify. If 109 V a/c are included then the X and Y American a/c should be included. The inclusion of U and R as well should be disqualified as other a/c had equipment additions as well. Should the various dash numbers (-1, -5, -10, -15, etc) for American a/c be seen as different?

GScholz · « **Reply #21 on:** February 03, 2005, 03:20:43 AM »

Pointing out the obvious here Milo; the American X and Y planes are already included in this thread.

Angus · « **Reply #22 on:** February 03, 2005, 03:25:31 AM »

Scholzie definately has this right.
The Spit probably comes in second

And the 190?

MiloMorai · « **Reply #23 on:** February 03, 2005, 04:01:47 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by GScholz
Pointing out the obvious here Milo; the American X and Y planes are already included in this thread.

Only the X models of the Corsair are in any thread I can see. Who made posts for the other X and Y models of American a/c? Sure is not any in the list of Mustangs.

GScholz · « **Reply #24 on:** February 03, 2005, 05:53:44 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by MiloMorai
Only the X models of the Corsair are in any thread I can see. Who made posts for the other X and Y models of American a/c? Sure is not any in the list of Mustangs.

It is the first one listed in the whole thread:

NA-73X

That is the Mustang prototype.

I do however agree with you that the 109 R designations should not count as they were field modifications, and the allies did much of that as well without making separate designations. The U designations however were factory modifications and does count. Also it is true that some of those 109 models never flew; however the vast majority of them did, and most of them flew operationally.

MiloMorai · « **Reply #25 on:** February 03, 2005, 06:59:44 AM »

NA-73 was for the British contract. There was aslo the XP-51 for the Americans which was a slightly different a/c.

GScholz · « **Reply #26 on:** February 03, 2005, 07:22:48 AM »

Then add the XP-51, obviously experimental versions are included since the NA-73X is listed.

HoHun · « **Reply #27 on:** February 04, 2005, 01:32:43 PM »

Hi GScholz,

>I do however agree with you that the 109 R designations should not count as they were field modifications

Actually, many R-designated aircraft came right off the production lines. In some cases, field modification kits that were identical to the factory-applied hardware were shipped out, but I'm not even convinced that was more common than factory production.

The 20 mm wing cannon armament for the Ju 87D is an example for equipment that was both factory-installed and field-installed.

With regard to the most versions, it's obviously the Me 109 that takes this superlative.

Note that this was a bug and not a feature!

Ludwig Bölkow was tasked with cleaning up Messerschmitt production because in 1943, 16 factories were producing 82 different Me 109 versions. Interchangability of spare parts had gone to hell, and logistics were a nightmare. Bölkow was given a 140 man crew to create a standard Me 109 while improving handling and performance at the same time - all without disturbing series production.

The end result of his work was the Me 109K, of which at least two major versions - the K-4 and the K-6 (with integral wing cannon) were planned. Only the K-4 made it into production, though.

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)