Aces High Bulletin Board

General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: GRUNHERZ on August 18, 2004, 05:17:45 PM

Title: Was the RLM working for the allies?
Post by: GRUNHERZ on August 18, 2004, 05:17:45 PM
The reason I ask is because of what I can only call the Fw190C debacle.

This was an early 1941/42  Focke-Wulf project which mated FW190 with the DB603. The project went quite far, there were minimal problems as it was very similar to 190A, and by late 1942 FW was ready to enter production with the following machine.

When you read this remember that this thing was to enter service in very early 1943.

Armament:

2 X MG131 over engine
2X MG151/20 in wing roots
1X MG151 or MK108 or MK103 in engine

Speed on C3 fuel -  start und notleistung.

Deck: 373mph  
10K: 423mph
22K: 453mph
30K: 435mph

NO MW50 use mentioned in speed tests!!!

Climb:

3,300 on climb/military power

No indication what emergency climb was but later test versions got 4,300 fpm with MW50

Weight was 9500lbs...  


The RLM decided this was less useful than the Me410 destroyer so FW got no more DB603 and they project was ended in late 1942..

What other explaination is there except that the RLM was working for the allies?
Title: Was the RLM working for the allies?
Post by: Karnak on August 18, 2004, 05:40:00 PM
Must have been recruited to work for the Allies by that other Luftwaffe Allied mole, Goering.
Title: Was the RLM working for the allies?
Post by: Pongo on August 18, 2004, 05:53:23 PM
And the db603 was prod ready at that time?
Title: Was the RLM working for the allies?
Post by: GRUNHERZ on August 18, 2004, 05:59:07 PM
Yes I think so, the DB603 project started in 1936 so by late 42 early 43 it was available for production.

For example the Me410 started production in January 43 using the DB603.. So no DB603 for FW..

I've always wondered why the Luftwaffe fell behind the allies  1 full year in fighter performance by early 44, only to catch up by late 44 early 45. Now I think I see why, they passed up on a tremendous opportunity with this FW190C...
Title: Was the RLM working for the allies?
Post by: ra on August 18, 2004, 06:18:56 PM
Another big screwup was requiring all new bomber designs to be capable of dive-bombing.
Title: Was the RLM working for the allies?
Post by: Angus on August 18, 2004, 06:34:44 PM
I would be very nice to know more about the db603  design and production.
Was there a problem producing them? why?

Crumpp has been doing a lot of study on the 190. Maybe he will have something for us.
Anyway, nice stuff!
Title: Was the RLM working for the allies?
Post by: HoHun on August 18, 2004, 07:00:58 PM
Hi Ra,

>Another big screwup was requiring all new bomber designs to be capable of dive-bombing.

That's just what the RAF required from the Avro Manchester, too :-)

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)
Title: Was the RLM working for the allies?
Post by: Angus on August 18, 2004, 07:29:20 PM
And the Germans from the HE 177.
Bottom line though, the ideas were not that bad, but the reality was a bit far from theory.
Title: Was the RLM working for the allies?
Post by: Crumpp on August 18, 2004, 07:42:42 PM
Hey guys!

I have wondered the same thing myself.  The DB603 was the original engine for the FW-190D series.  It was 300 pounds lighter than the BMW 801 series and developed as much Horsepower as the Jumo.  When engine feasibility study was completed on the Dora the DB603 equipped Dora was 200 lbs lighter than the Jumo 213 Dora.  I have to look up exactly why but it was lighter.  I think the DB 603 equipped Dora did not have to have such a radical extension.  The RLM simply told Tank, "NO", he couldn't have DB603 engines for the type.

It was used in the Do 335, Ta152C, Ta154H, and He 219.  From what I know there was simply a shortage of these engines and they were allocated to other projects.

The FW-190C's High Altitude performance was not up to expectations.  The Ta-152 was in the works and expected to be a leap in performance at the target altitudes over the FW-190C.  Additionally the exhaust extensions on the FW-190C caused problems.  In the end, with better stuff in the works, it was deemed a waste of time and effort to perfect.

DB 603
Technical Data:

Type:      12 cylinder inverted-vee
Bore:      162 mm (6.38 in)
Stroke:      180 mm (7.09 in)
Volume:      44.5 l (2715 cu in)
Weight:      920 kg (2030 lb)
Power  (A):   1290 kW (1750 HP) at 2700 rpm
       (G):   1395 kW (1900 HP) at 2700 rpm
       (N):   2060 kW (2800 HP) at 3000 rpm
Continuous (A):   1190 kw (1620 HP) at 2700 rpm
           (G): 1145 kW (1560 HP) at 2700 rpm
           (N): 1420 kW (1930 HP) at 3000 rpm


Jumo 213A
Technical Data:

Type:      12 cylinder inverted-vee
Bore:      150 mm  (5.90 in)
Stroke:      165 mm  (6.50 in)
Volume:      34.97 l (2135 cu in)
Weight:      920 kg  (2030 lb)
Power:      1280 kW (1740 HP) at 3000 rpm
Continuous:    880 kW (1200 HP)


Crumpp
Title: Was the RLM working for the allies?
Post by: GRUNHERZ on August 18, 2004, 08:05:27 PM
Crumpp I think you have the later weird Fw190s with the big pipes outside in mind. The FW190C of 1942 had normal exhausts.
Title: Was the RLM working for the allies?
Post by: Glasses on August 18, 2004, 09:42:43 PM
Wouldn't it be if they mated the Db engine with the Fw airframe MR tank and Fw would've gotten priority over Willi's machine and thus would cut his revenue in turn,since If I recall the  GHC had a much better relationship with Messerchmitt than it had with Fw,thus even though the plane would have  performed much much better than it's Me cousin priority was given to the 109s to continue using the engine instead.
Title: Was the RLM working for the allies?
Post by: Crumpp on August 18, 2004, 10:04:18 PM
http://www.asd05.com/default_zone/fr/html/page-1285.html


Great Picture of it down the page.

http://www.frenkenstein.com/ww2/germany/Germany.htm

Nope it's the one.  Although there are conflicting stories out there as to why it was dropped.  You can see the exhaust extentions.

Deitmarr Hermann says they were having trouble with the exhaust system melting the side of the turbocharger.  Some sights just say they were having problems with the turbocharger.  Other info says the pressure cabin.  

Crumpp
Title: Was the RLM working for the allies?
Post by: Mitsu on August 18, 2004, 10:07:05 PM
Didn't it cancel because it had much troubles?
Title: Was the RLM working for the allies?
Post by: GRUNHERZ on August 18, 2004, 10:30:47 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Crumpp
http://www.asd05.com/default_zone/fr/html/page-1285.html


Great Picture of it down the page.

http://www.frenkenstein.com/ww2/germany/Germany.htm

Nope it's the one.  Although there are conflicting stories out there as to why it was dropped.  You can see the exhaust extentions.

Deitmarr Hermann says they were having trouble with the exhaust system melting the side of the turbocharger.  Some sights just say they were having problems with the turbocharger.  Other info says the pressure cabin.  

Crumpp


That's a later version Crumpp.

The 190C I mentoned above was the initial version from 1942. Just a straight DB603A with standard exhausts and standard airscoop supercharger intake on the left fuselage side.
Title: Was the RLM working for the allies?
Post by: Sable on August 18, 2004, 10:33:19 PM
Keep in mind too that in late '42, early '43 the Germans weren't too worried about their single-engined day fighters.  The 109G and 190A were some of the best fighters in the world at the time.  The big concerns of the future were the huge numbers of the Russians, and the growing bomber strength of the Americans and British.  Twin engined bomber destroyers were showing a lot of promise (which really played out over Schweinfurt) and the need for improved nightfighters was there as well.  Plus it would be easier to ramp up production on the existing fighters then to go through development of a new type and then try to bring production to the same level.  Also remember that the idea of a fighter with enough range to escort bombers from Britain to Germany seemed fantastic to most - the Luftwaffe's own attempts at long range escorts during the Battle of Britain was less the successful.  And the Jets were in the pipeline at this point.  

I'd imagine it was a case where some planner said "Why work so hard for a 450mph fighter we don't need too much at the moment, and that is going to compromise the production of bomber destroyers and night fighters that we need.  And look, this 560mph fighter is just around the corner.

Meanwhile the US, Britain, and Russia all face one big hurdle in attaining airpower - overcoming Luftwaffe fighter strength.  So not suprisingly their efforts went more towards making the most, best performing aircraft they could.
Title: Was the RLM working for the allies?
Post by: GRUNHERZ on August 18, 2004, 10:44:36 PM
This thing could have mounted an additonal 2 MG151 in the wings like standard 190s.

So its total armament could be:

2 x 13mm MG
4 x 20mm Cannon
1 x 30mm Mk103 Cannon

Which is as good as any Zerstores at the the time and nearly 100mph faster and much better climbing.
Title: Was the RLM working for the allies?
Post by: BUG_EAF322 on August 19, 2004, 03:00:40 AM
their  biggest screw up was having their jets to late. while they could have been there much earlier.
Title: Was the RLM working for the allies?
Post by: GScholz on August 19, 2004, 03:59:36 AM
They screwed up so much it's difficult to choose which was the biggest.
Title: Was the RLM working for the allies?
Post by: MiloMorai on August 19, 2004, 07:53:24 AM
The DB603 was a private venture by DB. Those in charge did not like DB developing this engine as it took resources away from further development of the 605. It was 'blackballed' by the RLM.

The DB603 was first installed in Fw190V13, W.Nr 0036 which crashed 30-7-42.

@ Cumpp

The Fw190V15 (W.Nr 0037), V16 (W.Nr 0037) and V18 (W.Nr 0040) were the prototypes for the Fw190C. The V18 became the V18/U1 Kanguruh when the Hirth tc was added. It was later modified, /U2, to become the prototype for the Ta152H-1.
Title: Was the RLM working for the allies?
Post by: Angus on August 19, 2004, 10:31:32 AM
From Scholzie:
"They screwed up so much it's difficult to choose which was the biggest."

LOL, took the word out of my mouth.
Well, EVERYBODY screwed up, when you come to think of it.
Anyway, that DB603 stuff is really interesting, and I just wonder like the rest of you, why not?
Teething problems? Or problems when they tried increasing the power further, i.e. turbine heating?
Did they try intercooler?
Title: Was the RLM working for the allies?
Post by: Pongo on August 19, 2004, 11:23:18 AM
You could do way worse then fielding a fighter force of planes that were not produced for political or logistical(political) reasons.

MB5
190C
P38K
I185

There must be a Japanese one
Title: Was the RLM working for the allies?
Post by: GRUNHERZ on August 19, 2004, 11:38:58 AM
Quote
Originally posted by MiloMorai
The DB603 was a private venture by DB. Those in charge did not like DB developing this engine as it took resources away from further development of the 605. It was 'blackballed' by the RLM.

The DB603 was first installed in Fw190V13, W.Nr 0036 which crashed 30-7-42.

@ Cumpp

The Fw190V15 (W.Nr 0037), V16 (W.Nr 0037) and V18 (W.Nr 0040) were the prototypes for the Fw190C. The V18 became the V18/U1 Kanguruh when the Hirth tc was added. It was later modified, /U2, to become the prototype for the Ta152H-1.


Yep V13, V15, V16 were the prototypes of this normal FW190C I'm talking about.
Title: Was the RLM working for the allies?
Post by: GRUNHERZ on August 19, 2004, 11:44:36 AM
Quote
Originally posted by Angus
From Scholzie:
"They screwed up so much it's difficult to choose which was the biggest."

LOL, took the word out of my mouth.
Well, EVERYBODY screwed up, when you come to think of it.
Anyway, that DB603 stuff is really interesting, and I just wonder like the rest of you, why not?
Teething problems? Or problems when they tried increasing the power further, i.e. turbine heating?
Did they try intercooler?


This is why FW did not get to put DB603 into 190s until late 1944.

(http://cipres.cec.uchile.cl/~bebustos/jpg/me410a1.jpg)

The Me410 went into production in January 1943 and needed 2 DB603. FW was ready to produce the 190C at the same time but the RLM wanted the 410 more.. :rolleyes:

This 1942 190C design had no turbocahrger, no intercooler, none of the carzy stuff FW tried later. It was a straight up "normaljager" with a standard supercharged DB603A. And it made 453mph on C3 fuel at 22K in 1942..   :mad:
Title: Was the RLM working for the allies?
Post by: Karnak on August 19, 2004, 11:51:14 AM
The Tempest with a Bristol Centarus wasn't even allowed to fly because one of the higher ups (I don't have my books here) hated Bristol radial engines and ordered it removed from the airframe before they could even test it.  The Tempest powered by the Bristol Centarus became the Fury and Sea Fury, and the British could have had it in 1944.


Pongo,

The A7M suffered from idiotic decisions.  First, Mitsubishi kept taking Horikoshi off the project to update his A6M rather than hand the A6M upgrade path off to junior engineer.  Second the Imperial Japanese Navy ordered Mitsubishi to use the 1,900hp Nakajima Ha-45 engine (same as in the N1K and Ki-84) instead of the 2,200hp Mitsubishi Ha-43-11 engine despite Horikoshi's statement that the Ha-45 was not powerful enough.  The A7M1 powered by the Ha-45 engine flew in (IIRC) 1943 and tested by the IJN proved to be underpowered.  The IJN then ordered it to be redesigned to use the Ha-43-11 that Horikoshi had originally planned on using.  The A7M2 with the Ha-43-11 flew in 1944, performed beyond the IJN's requirements and was ordered into production.  Tooling up was delayed by an earthquake and then stopped after only one production airframe by USAAF bombing efforts.

Without the interference by Mitsubishi and, mostly, the IJN I think that the Japanese could have fielded the A7M in mid to late 1944, maybe early '44.  It wouldn't have changed the outcome, but it would have made the cost a bit higher for the US.



Aside from that specific example, there was the whole antagonistic competition between the Army and Navy that led to near complete duplication of resources and capabilities between the two and occasional sabotage of the other service branch's efforts.
Title: Was the RLM working for the allies?
Post by: VO101_Isegrim on August 19, 2004, 11:54:53 AM
Hmm, the DB 603A itself wasn`t any better than the Jumo213A that was fitted to the Doras. Not anymore powerful, but perhaps the nose could be better with it. Had quite a big development potential, though, see DB 603L and N...

One thing we should not forget that the whole FW 190 project was about stading on two legs, ie. not just the Daimler Benz factories for fighters. Also I`d say they didn`t really feel the need for an uber-fighter in 42/43, with the 109G and FW 190A around. It`s understandable why a fast bomber like the 410 was more preferred, if you look at the picture from the air war point of view. Fighters are just one branch.

BTW, I have seen some drawing on the LEMB on a Bf 309B, don`t know if the drawing is authentic, but that`s one heck of beutiful DB 603 project, too :

(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v386/brotrob/Me309B3men.png)


Über lines !
Title: Was the RLM working for the allies?
Post by: Karnak on August 19, 2004, 12:03:36 PM
That's a nice looking airplane Isegrim.
Title: Was the RLM working for the allies?
Post by: GRUNHERZ on August 19, 2004, 12:04:51 PM
It's a sci-fi model made by somr japanese modeler.

http://www.warbirds.jp/kakuki/kyosaku/17ki/01.htm
Title: Was the RLM working for the allies?
Post by: MiloMorai on August 19, 2004, 12:15:24 PM
Quote
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
Yep V13, V15, V16 were the prototypes of this normal FW190C I'm talking about.


Crumpp can see a pic of the V13, SK+JS on pg 63 in the  G. Swanborough/W. Green 190 book (ISBN 0-668-04001-7) or in K. Tank's bio book on pg 153.

Angus, initially there was a cooling problem. The Technische Amt was not 'thrilled' with the DB603. Then there was the manufacturing capacity of DB to consider with the DB605 required by so many a/c. This is part of the reason the Jumo 213 was later used in the Dora. Then there was concern about high altitude Allied bombers (ie B-29) which the RLM did not think the current a/c then in development, would not be good enough > result change to the Ta152 a/c.
Title: Was the RLM working for the allies?
Post by: Angus on August 19, 2004, 12:39:50 PM
Izzy: Got more on that plane? It's a beauty!

Milo, Turbo-problem was what crossed my mind from some text before,  - i.e. heating problems.

How well were those problems solved with the DB605 for instance, and at what margin? The 603 is a bigger thing, so it may have called for extra cooling, hence my speculation of an intercooler or turbine cooler.

As a comparison, weren't the first griffons just single stage?
Same problems?
Title: Was the RLM working for the allies?
Post by: MiloMorai on August 19, 2004, 02:45:40 PM
With the TK11, the /U1 was very tail heavy, unstable on its axis and heavy on the controls (pilot Sanders), the tc would not reach its correct rpm (not rising over 20k rpm), the oil cooler was in-efficient, blades fractured in the turbo. After 30 hrs of flight, though some of the problems could have been fixed,  the plug was pulled on the /U1. No mention in Tank's bio of exhaust feed pipes problems.
Title: Was the RLM working for the allies?
Post by: GScholz on August 19, 2004, 03:04:38 PM
Quote
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
It was a straight up "normaljager" with a standard supercharged DB603A. And it made 453mph on C3 fuel at 22K in 1942..   :mad:



I would suggest you put a :) or even a :D after that sentence rather than the :mad:.

Unless of course you'd rather we have this conversation in German.
Title: Was the RLM working for the allies?
Post by: Karnak on August 19, 2004, 03:15:03 PM
Ja, sprechen sie deutsche.
Title: Was the RLM working for the allies?
Post by: GScholz on August 19, 2004, 03:20:33 PM
Ja, aber sehr schlecht.

Edit: Dank Gott!
Title: Was the RLM working for the allies?
Post by: GRUNHERZ on August 19, 2004, 03:26:14 PM
Quote
Originally posted by GScholz
I would suggest you put a :) or even a :D after that sentence rather than the :mad:.

Unless of course you'd rather we have this conversation in German.


:mad:   Is what I feel when all we get in 1943 scenarios is a 400 mph 190. :)
Title: Was the RLM working for the allies?
Post by: GScholz on August 19, 2004, 03:48:34 PM
Jawohl Grun, aber die Fw190A-5 ist aus 1943 noch die überlegen Jagdflugzeuge.


Pardon my French ... er, German.
Title: Was the RLM working for the allies?
Post by: Angus on August 19, 2004, 04:12:27 PM
Jeeez Scholzie, you German spelling is so bad that even I can see it?

Und, in drei-und-fierzich, der feinste Jager der welt is die verdammte Britische Spitfire Mk VIII. ACHTUNG!!


But seriously, would this engine, which was used on the Me410 easily be fitted within the 190A series airframe and give that performance with no problems?
Title: Was the RLM working for the allies?
Post by: GScholz on August 19, 2004, 04:30:37 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Angus
Und, in drei-und-fierzich, der feinste Jager der welt is die verdammte Britische Spitfire Mk VIII. ACHTUNG!!


Nein! Niemals!  (Isländische Schweinhund!) ;)



... and I know my German suxors.
Title: Was the RLM working for the allies?
Post by: Pongo on August 19, 2004, 04:40:15 PM
Lets not start the "germans might have won "nonsense

If the germans had done better the US would have just pulled the other hand out from behind its back.
Title: Was the RLM working for the allies?
Post by: MiloMorai on August 19, 2004, 04:45:04 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Angus

But seriously, would this engine, which was used on the Me410 easily be fitted within the 190A series airframe and give that performance with no problems?


The D-14 and D-15 were to use the DB603 engine. The Ta152C also used the DB603 engine.
Title: Was the RLM working for the allies?
Post by: GRUNHERZ on August 19, 2004, 04:51:50 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Angus
But seriously, would this engine, which was used on the Me410 easily be fitted within the 190A series airframe and give that performance with no problems?


Yes Angus. By early summer of 1942 they had several protypes which were working wonderfully. The plane had no serious issues as it was a fairly simple conversion and the plane was ready for production. By late 42 Fockewulf even came up with a production schedule for this 190C through 1944. All that had had to happend was for the RLM to give its approval and this 450mph+ machine would have entered service in early 1943..
Title: Was the RLM working for the allies?
Post by: Karnak on August 19, 2004, 05:23:41 PM
Why was the Me410 so slow with two of them and why was the Fw190C not ressurected in 1944 when the 450mph Spit XIV and 440mph P-51 showed up without a German answer?
Title: Was the RLM working for the allies?
Post by: GRUNHERZ on August 19, 2004, 05:27:19 PM
Drag, lots of drag. :)

The DB603 190 program was brought back once the Me410 was taken out of production.  In the meantime FW had to do with Jumos and so came the D9, althought that was too late..

Think of it this way, FW was not allowed to use the DB603 in FW190 from late 1942 till late 1944. A full two years of the most critical fighting in the air..
Title: Was the RLM working for the allies?
Post by: Pongo on August 19, 2004, 05:32:51 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Karnak
Why was the Me410 so slow with two of them and why was the Fw190C not ressurected in 1944 when the 450mph Spit XIV and 440mph P-51 showed up without a German answer?


the me262 is a great answer to either if we are talking about top speed.

The problem faced in mid 44 as percieved by the LW was not how to defeat the single engine enemy fighters..but how to take down a 4 engine bomber.
Title: Was the RLM working for the allies?
Post by: GRUNHERZ on August 19, 2004, 05:40:07 PM
And a 450mph fighter with 5 20/30mm cannon and 2 mg would do that really really well. RLM had to be working for the allies. :)
Title: Was the RLM working for the allies?
Post by: Angus on August 19, 2004, 06:16:43 PM
Boils down to politics then?

Why were there no Griffon engined Mosquitos????
Title: Was the RLM working for the allies?
Post by: MiloMorai on August 19, 2004, 09:44:17 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Angus
Boils down to politics then?

Why were there no Griffon engined Mosquitos????


No need as the Merlins were good enough.;)
Title: Was the RLM working for the allies?
Post by: Charge on August 20, 2004, 04:18:42 AM
OR the Griffon production was already stretched so tight that there was barely enough of them for newer Spitfires and, of course, the Mossies were thought to do just fine with Merlins as they did.

-C+
Title: Was the RLM working for the allies?
Post by: VO101_Isegrim on August 20, 2004, 05:52:39 AM
Considering how few Griffons were built... they couldn`t even produce enough for the Griffon Spits, see how few of those were built during the war (2stage ones, I mean, the single stage Griffon would have been no better at low altitudes than the Merlins). Besides Griffons were a lot heavier and thirstier - > less useful load possible.
Title: Was the RLM working for the allies?
Post by: MiloMorai on August 20, 2004, 06:17:03 AM
Since there was no real pressing need for the Griffons as the Merlin/Packard powered a/c were dealing with the LW quite successfully, why interupt production?

Development of the Griffon began in 1939 and progressed much better than did the Merlin development.
Title: Was the RLM working for the allies?
Post by: Charge on August 20, 2004, 07:38:15 AM
Why produce Griffon engined a/c if the Merlin engined a/c were already doing the job well enough?

-C+
Title: Was the RLM working for the allies?
Post by: Pongo on August 20, 2004, 10:28:44 AM
So squadron trials of the 190C would have begun when?
And full squadron service when?
So it would have beat the 190A8 into service then?
Title: Was the RLM working for the allies?
Post by: GRUNHERZ on August 20, 2004, 11:32:43 AM
Quote
Originally posted by Pongo
So squadron trials of the 190C would have begun when?
And full squadron service when?
So it would have beat the 190A8 into service then?


FW was ready to produce in late 1942, would have started building the machines in first months of 43.

So I think its safe to say service would be sometime in early 43... It would be a year ealier than A8.

But the 190C production was canceled because the DB603's were to be used for Me410 which went into production in January 43..
Title: Was the RLM working for the allies?
Post by: Crumpp on August 20, 2004, 01:07:00 PM
Quote
@ Cumpp
  The Fw190V15 (W.Nr 0037), V16 (W.Nr 0037) and V18 (W.Nr 0040) were the prototypes for the Fw190C. The V18 became the V18/U1 Kanguruh when the Hirth tc was added. It was later modified, /U2, to become the prototype for the Ta152H-1.



The whole story is laid out including all the performance graphs in here:

http://www.schifferbooks.com/newschiffer/book_template.php?isbn=0764318764

Basically all the prototypes started out as the V series.  At a later point they were are redesignated FW-190B, C, and D.  There is a complete list of what was designated what included along with the fate of the prototype.  Interesting read.  My copy is loaned out at the moment to a friend at work.

Crumpp
Title: Was the RLM working for the allies?
Post by: GRUNHERZ on August 20, 2004, 01:08:36 PM
Crumpp I have that book. The 190C I'm talking about is the one FW was ready to produce by late 1942.
Title: Was the RLM working for the allies?
Post by: Crumpp on August 20, 2004, 01:24:52 PM
It's a good book.

Crumpp
Title: Was the RLM working for the allies?
Post by: GRUNHERZ on August 20, 2004, 03:26:52 PM
Excellent one, I got his 152 study too. I also just ordered the 190A series book from the same author.  So I should have all the bases covered, 190A, 190D and Ta152H. :)
Title: Was the RLM working for the allies?
Post by: Crumpp on August 20, 2004, 04:54:41 PM
The 190A is a good book too.  I was rather disappointed in his coverage of the later A series.  His info dies out after the FW-190A3.  It is a great book though on the development of the 190A up until that point.  

For the 109 series, this book just recently made it here to the USA.  It is one of the best books I have found for technical data on the 109.

It's the first WWII book I have seen that uses archealogical evidence to back up it's conclusions.  

http://www.ipmsusa.org/Reviews/Books/Aircraft/Specialty_Bf-109_Recognition_Manual/Specialty_bf-109_Recognition_Manual.htm

Crumpp
Title: Was the RLM working for the allies?
Post by: GRUNHERZ on August 20, 2004, 05:11:40 PM
Just what I wanted Crumpp, I know next to nothing about the intial 190A development.  How much coverage is there about the BMW139 and the early small wing 190s?

The 109 book looks fascinating, I will keep it in mind for later.  Thanks.
Title: Was the RLM working for the allies?
Post by: Crumpp on August 20, 2004, 05:24:05 PM
Most of the book is on the early development.  1/3 of it is on the V1 itself.  It goes into great detail about the BMW139 and the small wings.  

It is worth the money especially if you are interested in the early development and testing.

Crumpp
Title: Re: Was the RLM working for the allies?
Post by: HoHun on August 21, 2004, 04:57:09 AM
Hi Grünherz,

>When you read this remember that this thing was to enter service in very early 1943.

Well, that means the RLM had to decide the issue Fw 190C vs. Me 410 in 1942.

What was the situation in 1942? The Fw 190A was vastly superior to the Spitfire V  (as, in the contemporary race for altitude, was the Me 109G). The Spitfire IX with Merlin 61 had excellent high-altitude capabilities, but was deployed in penny packet numbers only, and it's low and medium altitude performance was nothing to worry he Luftwaffe anyway.

On the other hand, two other important Luftwaffe types, the Ju 87 and Me 110, were completely obsolete, and air-to-ground was a great concern for the Luftwaffe on the Eastern Front.

The DB603A was a low-to-medium altitude engine anyway, so it didn't really help in the 1942 race for altitude, but on the other hand, it was great for a fast dive bomber and Zerstörer like the Me 410.

(With regard to the speed numbers, are they from actual test documents? Note that prototype speeds often are considerably higher than speeds achievable by aircraft with complete operational equipment.)

With regard to the DB603 vs. Jumo 213 comparison: The engines were very close to each other in performance. In all Focke-Wulf performance comparisons for Fw 190D and Ta 152 aircraft, similarly equipped DB603 and Jumo 213 versions gave very similar performance. I'd expect that the DB603-engined Fw 190C would have had virtually the same performance as the Fw 190D.

Of course it's impressive to think about the availability of Fw 190D-style performance in early 1943, but I'd say the RLM decision not to build the Fw 190C was perfectly logical at that time, and I'm not even convinced that it was a bad decision after all.

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)
Title: Was the RLM working for the allies?
Post by: GRUNHERZ on August 21, 2004, 11:18:33 AM
Speed numbers were with full equipment.

As for altitude the chart I have shows 435mph at 30K, I dont think there are any better planes than that till 1945..
Title: Was the RLM working for the allies?
Post by: MiloMorai on August 21, 2004, 11:44:23 AM
In Aug 1942, V16 (CF+OW) went to Rechlin for testing, being flown by Ellenrieder. The best he could do was 725kphTAS @ 7km. With the aid of MW50, the best climb was ~22m/s. This a/c was not fitted with full armament. He also found that the coolant system was still unstable which was re-built with flight testing being continued in late Sept.
Title: Was the RLM working for the allies?
Post by: HoHun on August 21, 2004, 01:19:09 PM
Hi Grünherz,

>As for altitude the chart I have shows 435mph at 30K, I dont think there are any better planes than that till 1945..

Well, I haven't seen the report so I can't really comment on it. Still, I'd be suprised if the final production aircraft would have been significantly superior to the Fw 190D-9.

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)
Title: Was the RLM working for the allies?
Post by: GRUNHERZ on August 21, 2004, 01:40:23 PM
The chart I have shows better speed than 190D9 just on start und notleistung - no mmention of MW50.

But lets say it just matched 190D9 performance. That would have given the LW such a plane in early 1943 instead of late 1944 or even early 1945..  Almost 2 years of the most vital air combat in the west.

A 450mph fighter coming into service by early 1943 armed with up to five 20mm and 30mm cannon in addition to two 13mm MG would have significantly changed the trouble faced by the US bomber force and especially it's escorts who would be facing 50mph faster german interceptors than they really did.