Author Topic: Myth or fact > F8F  (Read 16214 times)

Offline Angus

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10057
Myth or fact > F8F
« Reply #165 on: December 09, 2005, 04:43:24 AM »
Some say that the LA cowling was the finest of them all. Wonder who copied who though? Were the radial Lala's not on the test bed before Barbarossa? Was it the same idea? Really don't have a clue.
Anyway, designs from somebody else are always an inspiration as Widewing put it.

Then from Ack-Ack:
"Why is it so hard to believe that the FW190 influenced some of the design of the Bearcat?"

I find it rather logical, if it fits in time, which there has been some debait about. You can also see some claims that the F8F was very much based on the 190 rather than a normal step forward of the Grumman lines.
What I put my money on is that after the Grumman guys looked at the 190 they knew what they were already doing was a right thing ;)
It was very interesting to carry out the flight trials at Rechlin with the Spitfire and the Hurricane. Both types are very simple to fly compared to our aircraft, and childishly easy to take-off and land. (Werner Mölders)

Offline Crumpp

  • Parolee
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3671
Myth or fact > F8F
« Reply #166 on: December 09, 2005, 08:35:53 AM »
Quote
Wonder who copied who though?


Angus...think for just a second.

When was the FW190 first flown operationally?  

When did the first radial engine Lavochkin test prototype appear?  April 1942.

Kind of hard for the Lavochkin to be inspirational when it was not around.

Quote
What I put my money on is that after the Grumman guys looked at the 190 they knew what they were already doing was a right thing


Certainly, they had almost the exact same goals in mind that Kurt Tank's design team.  Smallest, lightest fighter around the most powerful motor available.  Make the whole package easy to maintain in rough primative conditions.

Focke Wulf came up with some excellent ideas on how to get there.  Some are still in use today.  The modular cockpit and weapons array is pretty much industry standard now.

Grumman was smart to incorporate lessons learned from any aircraft designer to achieve the designs stated goals.

Why folks have such a hard time thinking they did not use good ideas from Focke Wulf is beyond me.

All the best,

Crumpp

Offline Neil Stirling1

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 105
Myth or fact > F8F
« Reply #167 on: December 09, 2005, 10:04:55 AM »
Hi Crump

Yes it is would you like other FW-190A9 data?

Yes please, I will see what I can do for you in return.

Neil.

Offline Squire

  • Aces High CM Staff (Retired)
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7683
Myth or fact > F8F
« Reply #168 on: December 09, 2005, 10:12:39 AM »
As far as inspiration, they would have gone over many of the US and other European radial designs from the 30s, and would have sought to improve upon what they liked. The same process anybody took in any a/c design, bomber, fighter, whatever. They all stole, borrowed and modified, sometimes they had to change designs because of economic factors, or any other host of things that would crop up.

Remember too that many designs on both sides of the atlantic were followed to prototype, only to to terminated.

Choices in engines and armament tended to be "off the shelf", what can we put in our design next month? they didnt have the time to design totally new engines and guns, they sometimes did of course. If you were a US fighter designer for example, in 1940, you had two main choices, Allison inline, or PW radial, for armament, .30 or .50 caliber. Unless you wanted to seriously delay your design by coming up with a totally new engine and or gun. That could take a year or better.

Some "flukey" designs include the Mosquito, made of wood only because thats the material that the government would fund for it, and as it turned out, was the material that gave it its reduced weight and excellent performance, Fw190, if for only that it got its performance from the BMW radial, that was the only one they could get for it, P-51B/D, British design, built in the USA, and then later, a British engine, Hellcat was built in response to the Zero, and so it went.  

All the odd twists and turns some of them took, and any of them might never have seen combat had their governments kyboshed them...could have been P-43D vs He118 vs Wirblewind Mk. V who knows.
Warloc
Friday Squad Ops CM Team
1841 Squadron Fleet Air Arm
Aces High since Tour 24

Offline Angus

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10057
Myth or fact > F8F
« Reply #169 on: December 09, 2005, 04:08:31 PM »
Jeff Quill flew a prototype of some Bristol fighter (can't find the book in all my heap...) which looked almost exactly like the F4F.
The project was scrapped.
Will have a look if I can find it If I have the type, it can probably be googled.
It was very interesting to carry out the flight trials at Rechlin with the Spitfire and the Hurricane. Both types are very simple to fly compared to our aircraft, and childishly easy to take-off and land. (Werner Mölders)

Offline Debonair

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3488
Myth or fact > F8F
« Reply #170 on: December 09, 2005, 05:36:35 PM »
I'd have to bet that if Lavochkin was knocking off anyone's cowlings, it was Polikarpov's
I-180 from 1939


La-5fn



that first image wont link, copy & past the URL if you want to see it, metacharacters in the URL i guess, whatta nightmare...
« Last Edit: December 09, 2005, 05:45:05 PM by Debonair »

Offline Crumpp

  • Parolee
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3671
Myth or fact > F8F
« Reply #171 on: December 09, 2005, 05:47:50 PM »
With the exception of exhaust placement I see very little in common with the FW190 too.

All the best,

Crumpp

Offline HoHun

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2182
Myth or fact > F8F
« Reply #172 on: December 09, 2005, 06:19:18 PM »
Hi Debonair,

>I'd have to bet that if Lavochkin was knocking off anyone's cowlings, it was Polikarpov's I-180 from 1939

Belyakov/Marmain in their MiG book mention that the MiG OKB developed a cowling for a radial-engined derivative of the MiG-1/3 series, which after overcoming a lot of difficulties with the first attempt resulted in a very promising second attempt, but then was turned over to the Lavochkin OKB.

That would make sense as the MiG-1/3 series seems to have been a handful with regard to handling, while the LaGG-3 was at least fair. On the other hand, I have dim recollections of Tilt disagreeing with this version of Lavochkin history the last time around :-)

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)

Offline Debonair

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3488
Myth or fact > F8F
« Reply #173 on: December 09, 2005, 07:25:12 PM »
I wonder how much/if any of the 190a was derived from the BF109v21..anyone know anything about that?
109v21 with BMW801 engine

Offline Crumpp

  • Parolee
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3671
Myth or fact > F8F
« Reply #174 on: December 09, 2005, 08:42:21 PM »
Quote
I wonder how much/if any of the 190a


I don't think very much of the BF-109V21 influenced the FW-190.

Focke Wulf and Mtt are about as different as two companies can be.  The inner workings of the two companies are pretty interesting and the differences are dramatic.

In fact I think a book has been published of the cartoons the Focke Wulf employees used to make of each other and company events.

All the best,

Crumpp

Offline MiloMorai

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6865
Myth or fact > F8F
« Reply #175 on: December 09, 2005, 11:34:05 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Debonair
I wonder how much/if any of the 190a was derived from the BF109v21..anyone know anything about that?
109v21 with BMW801 engine


A drawing (Sk.Nr13-190) exists of the 190V1 dated 28-9-38. The V1 flew in the June of 1939 while the 109V21 was only 95% complete in late March 1939 and did not fly til Sept 1939.

The V21 was powered by a P&W Twin Wasp. The first flight powered by a 801 was in Sept 1940.

Offline Angus

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10057
Myth or fact > F8F
« Reply #176 on: December 10, 2005, 04:48:49 PM »
So, German designs, running paralell for years, does not influence each other, while the U.S. fall flat for the 190 and dart out with an uber naval fighter from the inspiration in a whiff????

p.s. edit was for spelling
It was very interesting to carry out the flight trials at Rechlin with the Spitfire and the Hurricane. Both types are very simple to fly compared to our aircraft, and childishly easy to take-off and land. (Werner Mölders)

Offline Angus

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10057
Myth or fact > F8F
« Reply #177 on: December 10, 2005, 04:50:52 PM »
funny, the spelling correction didn't work...:confused:
It was very interesting to carry out the flight trials at Rechlin with the Spitfire and the Hurricane. Both types are very simple to fly compared to our aircraft, and childishly easy to take-off and land. (Werner Mölders)

Offline Crumpp

  • Parolee
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3671
Myth or fact > F8F
« Reply #178 on: December 10, 2005, 05:32:23 PM »
Quote
So, German designs, running paralell for years, does not influence each other,


Yep.

I would not say they were parallel, however, more like competition.  

Quote
while the U.S. fall flat for the 190 and dart out with an uber naval fighter from the inspiration in a whiff????


Major exaggeration but if that is how you want to view it.

All the best,

Crumpp

Offline Angus

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10057
Myth or fact > F8F
« Reply #179 on: December 10, 2005, 05:40:42 PM »
hehe, I knew this would tickle ;)

I am well aware of the pre-war competition between German aero companies. Heinkel, Junkers, Messerchmitt and FW, as well as others. And the Politics were dirty.

However, I hope you saw my point.
It was very interesting to carry out the flight trials at Rechlin with the Spitfire and the Hurricane. Both types are very simple to fly compared to our aircraft, and childishly easy to take-off and land. (Werner Mölders)