Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: Hawco on May 03, 2006, 11:01:09 AM
-
Hi guys
I'm interested to hear from anyone that could shine some light on the above ?
I often read on here about the Spit such and such being introduced with a different engine to counter the 109 such and such.
Was this a constant development battle between the 2 ? Were they reacting to each other ? i.e. The 190 A5 makes an appearence and then it's backs to the wall in blighty developing something to take it on ?
Or was it mostly a case of each side doing their own thing and letting fate decide?
-
Fighter development was certainly both proactive and reactive. The introduction of the 190 is a perfect example. Totally caught the RAF by surprise. Certainly the Tiffie was already in development, but it was rushed in and had problems with things like tails falling off.
Spit IX was a lash up of the Merlin 61 to the Spitfire V and put into action to counter the 190. The VIII was already on the board too but the IX went into the line faster to basically hold the line and ended up being produced in far greater numbers then the VIII which was the most refined Merlin Spit.
The Griffon Spit XII was also a reaction to low level 190 raids on the south coast of England. Only 100 built but done to counter that threat.
On the flip side the Spit XIV and Tempest got into the game before the 190 D9 which was in essence the counterpart to those fighters along with the P51.
It went back and forth on both sides. That isn't to say that there weren't independent development projects going on with both the Allies and Axis. The development of the jet fighters is a good example of that.
-
What Guppy said.
They kept overlapping and/or countering each other.
-
Thanks for that guys, I can only imagine the production and procurement process, they must have been able to go from zero to a protoype in weeks.
No way on Earth they could do that now. Maybe that's why there is so many 109 varients that are always debated on here, by my last count, I think there was 6 different 109 G6's? go knows how many others there must be on different 109s.190's and spits etc.
All very interesting though, I do find the debates on spit boost levels interesting, escpecially in the context of this thread, msut have been all sorts of different boost ratings for different threats.
-
Just search this section of the forums. This has been discussed / argued over many times.
Just a few things,
The 190A-5 had one of the lowest production runs of any of the 190A series. It used quite often as a fighter-bomber. The 190A-3s and A-4s are what the RAF originally had problems with.
The 190D-9 development had little to do with the Spit XIV or Tempest. It was developed in an attempt give the FW series better performance at altitude. D-9s were most often used to escort the bomber killers. They were to deal with the P-51s. As it turned out the D-9s FTH wasn't much better then the A series. Ultimately, the need for a high alt fighter lead to the Ta-152H series. Like the 109s and the D-9s, the Ta-152 was meant to combat escort fighters giving the bomber killers space to attack bombers.
Once the Ami bomber campaign ramped up the LW in the west were more focused on shooting down bombers and dealing with Ami long range escorts then countering the newest Spitfire variant.
-
And yet, after D-Day...those Spitties were all over the Axis held territory.
And of course before...N-Africa, Malta, N-Fronts...
-
and that has f' all to do with anything I posted above...
-
Oh really?
" It was developed in an attempt give the FW series better performance at altitude"
Why would they want that? Oh, because they weren't up to the game at altitude.
When did they find that out in the first place. There was only one serious enemy through the beginning year of the 190A series...
-
Me bad. Forgot odd things like Mossies..
-
It was developed in an attempt give the FW series better performance at altitude
Has f'all to with D-day, N. Africa, Malta or Norway...
Why would they want that?
I said why:
It was developed in an attempt give the FW series better performance at altitude. D-9s were most often used to escort the bomber killers. They were to deal with the P-51s.
Here you go playing the clown at every occassion...
-
Originally posted by Angus
Me bad. Forgot odd things like Mossies..
D-9s were not intercepting Mosquitos.
You just make stuff up, don't you?
-
Hi Hawco,
>Was this a constant development battle between the 2 ? Were they reacting to each other ?
It's important to realize that the main development battle was not between the airframe makers but rather between the engine makers. Performance was determined by the power plants, and normally, performance aspects were overriding all other concerns.
There were some instances when the sides reacted to each others' technological advances, but in my opinion, the long development lead times meant that they mostly had to rely on anticipating the enemy's progress, and that they occasionally missed the mark.
Regards,
Henning (HoHun)
-
Originally posted by HoHun
Hi Hawco,
>Was this a constant development battle between the 2 ? Were they reacting to each other ?
It's important to realize that the main development battle was not between the airframe makers but rather between the engine makers. Performance was determined by the power plants, and normally, performance aspects were overriding all other concerns.
There were some instances when the sides reacted to each others' technological advances, but in my opinion, the long development lead times meant that they mostly had to rely on anticipating the enemy's progress, and that they occasionally missed the mark.
Regards,
Henning (HoHun)
Think you got the nail on the head there sir, Engines were probably the life blood of any development, I just find it very very interesting to think about Engineers working on both sides to counter the next development, it truely was a constant battle of the brains.
Hawco
-
Well, in the most cases the developement of the engines used during WWII was started long before the war and the Brits seem to be have been far more succesfull to put their advanced designs to service than the Germans.
Of course one could argue about the jets but those reached quite limited service and very limited succes.
griepn
-
If there was no problem with high alt stellar performers (Maybe better to quote engines rather than aircraft types) why bother about improving the 190's alt performance?
-
Hm... They were trying to improve altitude performance of the Fw 190 since 1942, several engines and various systems were tested but the only thing to reach service was the Ta 152H which saw very limited use 1945.
gripen
-
"I often read on here about the Spit such and such being introduced with a different engine to counter the 109 such and such."
Heh, isn't it is clear that after the intruduction of Spit IX there was no actual need to counter anything. They prolly developed Griffons just to have something to do for the rest of the wartime. :D
-C+
-
Originally posted by Angus
If there was no problem with high alt stellar performers (Maybe better to quote engines rather than aircraft types) why bother about improving the 190's alt performance?
What are you talking about? I said the development of the D-9 began with the attempt to improve high altitude performance of the 190 series. Ultimately, ending up with the Ta-152H as pointed out above.
This had little to do with the Spit XIV or Tempest development, again as I said above.
-
Yes, because their altitude performance wasn't good enough.
-
Does anyone have an idea of how long the drawing board to protoype process was ? I'm trying to get a handle on how they were able to churn out various models and sub models.
I'm sure that Factories were busy making parts for model A and then suddenly told to change thier prcoess to make parts for model B.
I assume it was more difficult for the Germans as they were under constant bombardment from the air and also had to contend with other difficulties such as supply etc ?
-
iirc, the original Mustang was put together abnormally fast, about 120 days.
-
Wasn't the He 162 quite quickly done as well?
-
Yes, because their altitude performance wasn't good enough.
Yes, what..?
Just typing to type again..?
The quest for better high performance on the part of the 190 series had little to due with the Spitfire or Tempest. In fact the direct opposite was the case with the Spitfire in that variants were pushed into production to specifically deal with the Fw 190As superiority at altitudes at lower altitude bands.
Where the altitude performance of the Fw 190A, and ultimately the D was in adequate, was in dealing with Ami high altitude long range escorts. This ultimately lead to the Ta-152H. The Dora development had nothing to do with D-day, Norway, N. Afrika, Spitfire XIVs or Tempest or anything else you have bothered to type out.
irc, the original Mustang was put together abnormally fast, about 120 days.
Airframes typically aren't what is time consuming. It's developing the power plant / egg. While 120 days is impressive, it's certainly no miracle.
-
Ah, yes:
"Where the altitude performance of the Fw 190A, and ultimately the D was in adequate, was in dealing with Ami high altitude long range escorts"
Notably the Merlin powered P51 perhaps? Or the P&W? Or the Allisons?
Like I said:
"Maybe better to quote engines rather than aircraft types"
-
Maybe better to quote engines rather than aircraft types
It maybe better for you as you go through the thread stumbling around trying to find a point. However, my reply was in response to Dan stating:
On the flip side the Spit XIV and Tempest got into the game before the 190 D9 which was in essence the counterpart to those fighters along with the P51.
Neither the Spitfire XIV or Tempest utilized P & Ws or Merlin's. The D-9 development was not due to the development either of those aircraft. Whatever other nonsense you try to 'slip' into the discussion has nothing to do with my point.
You always resort to this, post crap completely irrelevant to the line of discussion, and when that doesn't stick you build some strawman in attempt to avoid replying to exactly what was written.
First it was D-day and N. Afrika, now it's 'well Spitfires had Merlin's and Merlin's were in P-51s:
Eureka! I have may something...
I can hardly wait to see what's next...
-
This is next since you can't grasp it.
The development of the 109D and Ta series has it roots in many of their allied counterparts having better engine performans than the 190A series at high altitude.
-
The development of the 109D and Ta series has it roots in many of their allied counterparts having better engine performans than the 190A series at high altitude.
And again that has F'all to do with what I originally posted, go back and re-read it.
You went from:
And yet, after D-Day...those Spitties were all over the Axis held territory.
And of course before...N-Africa, Malta, N-Fronts...
to:
Me bad. Forgot odd things like Mossies..
to:
Maybe better to quote engines rather than aircraft types
to:
Notably the Merlin powered P51 perhaps? Or the P&W? Or the Allisons?
You are all over the map trying to find something you can cling to.
Dan wrote:
On the flip side the Spit XIV and Tempest got into the game before the 190 D9 which was in essence the counterpart to those fighters along with the P51.
and I replied:
The 190D-9 development had little to do with the Spit XIV or Tempest. It was developed in an attempt give the FW series better performance at altitude. D-9s were most often used to escort the bomber killers. They were to deal with the P-51s. As it turned out the D-9s FTH wasn't much better then the A series. Ultimately, the need for a high alt fighter lead to the Ta-152H series. Like the 109s and the D-9s, the Ta-152 was meant to combat escort fighters giving the bomber killers space to attack bombers.
Nothing you posted in this thread deals directly with, or contradicts, my point.
-
Not really.
So stop growling.
-
the BB has a new TOOL
-
Interesting question. Good answers. By in large I enjoyed reading y'alls responses.
Why are some fussy?
hap
-
The purpose for Luftwaffe and RAF fighter development was the same as Bruno and Angus thread development.
(http://www.geocities.com/johnvan52/itchy.gif)
;)
-
Thanks for all the contributions guys, I do enjoy finding things like this out.
Thanks a lot :aok
-
Originally posted by Shifty
The purpose for Luftwaffe and RAF fighter development was the same as Bruno and Angus thread development.
(http://www.geocities.com/johnvan52/itchy.gif)
;)
:aok
-
Buhh, please scroll up and read :D
-
Just search for past threads by Angus. There's a reason he is on so many ignore lists.
There will be a straight line of discussion then he shows and make a post completely about nothing. Some how D-day, N. Afika, Norway and Merlin engines mean that the Spitfire XIV, Tempests and the Dora were 'counterparts'. Or that the Dora was developed to intercept Mosquitos...
That his major source on all things WW2 air combat related is 'some one told me...'
-
Many?
I remember HoHun's, but it turned out that It was about a debate where I turned out to be right. After he put me there though.
(look for the slats thread)
But are there more? Sure would like to know ;)
Oh, someone at least, but he got banned.....
-
Originally posted by Angus
And yet, after D-Day...those Spitties were all over the Axis held territory.
And of course before...N-Africa, Malta, N-Fronts...
The thread turned bad with that post. No valuable information, just emotional impact.
Angus is a troll.
-
Call it what you like.
Point is, that the 190A series had plenty of combat with aircraft that had better altitude performance, beginning with the Spit IX.
What was going through the heads of the German high command?
There were multiple Allied aircraft with better high alt performance then the 190A series around when the Dora was introduced, and that was known since 1942. From that point in time (Spit IX & PR units then perhaps P38, Spit VIII then P51 - 1943 now) So, when the main fight was taken high again (with the daylight bombing campaign) the 190A needed more performance up high. That is the deal.
BTW I've got one acount of the leader of a 190 unit flying a long-noser while the others flew conventional 190's.
If that is a troll, well, so be it.
-
Point is, that the 190A series had plenty of combat with aircraft that had better altitude performance, beginning with the Spit IX.
That's not the point and never was. I have quoted you the line of discussion.
Even what you typed out above is nonsense. The 190A altitude performance was perfect for the altitude that combat was taking place at at the time it was introduced. In fact with the LF.MK IXs the Spits FTH was brought down to better compete with the 190A.
The search for better altitude performance with the 190A was being looked at since '42 but with little urgency. This had little to do with Spitfires and wasn't a major issue until the bomber campaign and high flying long range escorts were regularly flying over the Reich (read as P-51).
With the 190 they were looking at 3 different engines configurations to improve altitude performance:
B - BMW-801 w./ GM-1
C - DB-603A
D - Jumo 213A
GM1 was problematic and it was only really used around 2k meters above FTH.
The DB603 was preferred by KT but there were problems with the engine (the weight with SC was less then ideal for a fighter). Also, there were aircraft were slated to use Db603s and production of this engine was far behind meeting demand.
What was left was the Jumo. Ultimately, it was an improvement over the BMW but it didn't a deliver a much better FTH.
The Dora was a stop gap solution. It had the best engine at the time coupled to a 190 airframe to get something better to the front line. It had little to do with Spit XIVs or Tempests.
LW bomber killers were at the mercy of high flying, free ranging allied escorts (read as P-51). As pointed out above this is what ultimately lead to the Ta-152Hs.
But the above has F'all to do with my original post.
Dan wrote:
On the flip side the Spit XIV and Tempest got into the game before the 190 D9 which was in essence the counterpart to those fighters along with the P51.
and my reply was:
The 190D-9 development had little to do with the Spit XIV or Tempest. It was developed in an attempt give the FW series better performance at altitude. D-9s were most often used to escort the bomber killers. They were to deal with the P-51s. As it turned out the D-9s FTH wasn't much better then the A series. Ultimately, the need for a high alt fighter lead to the Ta-152H series. Like the 109s and the D-9s, the Ta-152 was meant to combat escort fighters giving the bomber killers space to attack bombers.
I don't think you are a troll but if you can't follow the logical line of discussion and stick to it then you are far worse off then I already think. Which is most likely the case seeing how you have done this type of thing in many other threads.
Stick to the topic at hand, don't build strawmen and make stuff up if you can't come up with anything to say.
-
Any idea why it took them so long to realise they needed something to deal with the high alt ally escorts?
After all it wasn't as though they suddenly appeared the last few months of the war.
I know little about the Ta-152 apart from around 67 of ALL versions (H and C produced).
No idea how many may have made to front line units.
By close to the end of the war only 2 'C' models remained and they had been grounded.
Anyone fill in from there?
Just seems like another too little too late, they were really needed about a year earlier. Or at least something with some high alt performance.
-
The LW focus in the west was the bombers and as such there wasn't an overwhelming need for a high altitude fighter until such time that the Ami long range escorts showed up en mass, late '43 or so. Up to this time development on improving the FTH of the 190A series wasn't much of a priority.
As an example that the development of the DB603 was plagued with problems see Manfred Griehl's Dornier Do 217-317-417: An Operational History. Griehl repeats many times the problems with the DB603.
Coupling the 190 with a DB603 was even more problematic. The DB603 was slated for the Me 309, Me 410, Do-335 and He 219 as well. It was an engine in demand and but it had a long development time. In fact the DB 603 was developed by Daimler-Benz without the go ahead from RLM. It had low priority until sometime in '44
For the 109 the solution was to couple the DB603 SC to the DB605. For the 190 it wasn't as simple. As I pointed out above the 190D was an interim solution, coupling the 190 airframe with the best pwoer plant available, the Jumo 213. The D-9 didn't get to the front until Sept-Oct '44. While the D-9 was brought on line the Ta was under development. As for how many Ta's saw combat I have typed it many times. Just get Reschke's book Jagdgeschwader 301/302 'Wilde Sau'.
So yes, like with many other things, it was too little, too late but it wasn't the lack of a high altitude fighter that cost the LW the war.
-
Sigh.
Bruno:
"The 190A altitude performance was perfect for the altitude that combat was taking place at at the time it was introduced"
Yes it was. And their alt performance was as good as needed too, until 1942. I said it, now you said it:
"The search for better altitude performance with the 190A was being looked at since '42 but with little urgency"
And logically, for the fights were taking place lower.
In the med they started getting higher again (Torch) where the Allies start going very high, and as you point out when the daylight bombing campaign starts as well. But the P51 is not the first escort with good performance up high. So, do I understand it right that it really took the LW so long to grasp the reality, or was it just technical delays?
-
Yes it was. And their alt performance was as good as needed too, until 1942. I said it, now you said it:
No you didn't. You claimed among other things:
the 190A series had plenty of combat with aircraft that had better altitude performance, beginning with the Spit IX.
The implication here is that the Spit IX outclassed the 190A at altitude as if it mattered. The F.IX was followed up by the LF.IX which brought the LF.IXs FTH down so it could better compete with the FW.
The LW basically nly kept 2 units in France to deal with the RAF:
JG 2 and JG 26.
In the med they started getting higher again (Torch) where the Allies start going very high
That has nothing to do with the LWs attempt at improving the FTH of the 190A.
See Focke-Wulf 190 In North Africa by Andrew Arthy, Morten Jessen
Here's some information from one of the author's (Andrew Arthy) website:
Focke-Wulf 190 in North Africa (http://fw190.hobbyvista.com/afrika.htm)
II./JG 2 was the only 'fighter gruppe' flying the 190 in NA.
III./ZG. 2, III./SKG 10, Stab and II./Sch.G. 2 were flying Jabo.
P51 is not the first escort with good performance up high.
No shyte but it was this aircraft which was of concern to the LW late in the war. While Spitfires did escort bombers the LW was far less likely to encounter Spits deep in German territory. They were much likely to engage 2TAF Spitfires, Typhoon sand Tempests low as these aircraft were flying fighter-bomber missions.
So, do I understand it right that it really took the LW so long to grasp the reality, or was it just technical delays?
You are free to make any assumption you want. Development takes time. Aircraft maneufacturers were competing for resources. The German war economy was late to fully moblize and re-organize for total war. Not to mention politics. There was no one reason but like I said the lack of a high altitude fighter didn't cost the LW the war.
Again none of this has anything to do with my original post in this thread.
-
"Any idea why it took them so long to realise they needed something to deal with the high alt ally escorts?"
They where either morons, or there wasn't really a need for one until later on? Or maybe there wasn't even need to "deal" with the escorts? They needed to deal with the bombers. Eg. the TA152 carries a bigger punch than a destrucion of a fighter escort would require...
"Anyone fill in from there?"
They had 190A8, 109 G(late) and K? They all catch a B17 handily and can dive away from any allied fighter if need be (especially over their own turf).
Critical alt for G14 seems to be 23k, 26k for K4, 20k for A8 and 23k for D9. TA152 wasn't really an impovement at those altitudes over K4 and D9. Even the ME262 peaks at 20k, not higher. Is that because of early jet engine capabilities or a conscious design choise?
BTW, you can find typical B17 bombing altitudes eg. from here:
http://www.jouster.com/cgi-bin/guntalk/config.pl?noframes;read=28774
The engine power may peak at some altitude but that doesn't tell the truth about the usefulness of certain a/c at those altitudes because it is affected by the airframe, too. A greater speed is generally the biggest asset and the maneuverability comes second, but the speed advantage can be equalized by diving when the airframe integrity and aerodynamic capabilites become the deciding factor.
I don't think you can find a major deciding überness factor in speed/ altitude charts. Looking those charts the 262 is obviously a king, but how "effective" is it after all?
But I understand why you are tempted to focus only on "how high and how fast"... ;)
-C+
-
the TA152 carries a bigger punch than a destrucion of a fighter escort would require...
Have you read Reschke's book? He describes the Ta-152 as a 'high altitude and escort fighter'. By escort he means escorting bomber killers.
He goes on the state:
..but now the small force of Ta-152s would have to form part of the fighter escort. The pilots were looking forward to their first encounters with the Mustang.
On this occassion the Ta-152s were attacked by 109s at 8000m and never made contact with the enemy. No Ta-152s were damaged but they were forced to scatter.
This was when Reschke was in III./JG 301 originally a 'heavy gruppe' (bomber killers) but when they recieved their first Ta-152s they switched to escort. III./JG 301 flew a mixed bag of 12 ta-152s and the rest in A-8s and A-9s.
Later the Ta-152s and Reschke were transferred to the Geschwaderstab. No high cambat was ever fought in the Ta-152s. However, Reschke (still with III./JG 301) on another occasion intercepted a Mosquito but his SC failed (third stage failed) and the Mosquito got away.
After that the only other combat was with Tempests and Yaks at low level.
They didn't need a high altitude bomber interceptor. Bombers flew in stacked formations. There were high groups, middle groups and low groups. Over the Ruhr some bomb groups were as low as 9000ft. The A-8s and A-9s could handle that. What the LW needed was a fighter that could better tangle with the high altitude escort while the bomber killers did their thing. With the big wing and better performance overall the Ta-152H was more maneuverable then the A series 190s and much better suited for fighter vs. fighter combat at altitude.
Critical alt for G14 seems to be 23k
The FTH of a standard non-AS G-14 is 164000 (as modeled in AH). For the G-14/AS FTH would be the similiar to the G-10 and K-4. While the G-10 and K-4s having the DB605D, the G-14/AS having the DB605AM. All three having the DB603A supercharger.
-
Well, Bruno, we agree to slightly disagree. Anyway, this you brought from your link:
"C.F. Shores, H. Ring, & W.N. Hess, Fighters Over Tunisia, Neville Spearman, 1975"
On the shopping list ;)
-
Fighters Over Tunisia
Its hard to find and relatively expensive but worth it IMHO...
-
Bruno, could you clarify this statement . . .
On this occassion the Ta-152s were attacked by 109s at 8000m and never made contact with the enemy. No Ta-152s were damaged but they were forced to scatter.
Not that it makes much difference other than it confuses me.
Thanks. Great info in here! :aok
-
The 109 pilots were unfamiliar with the Ta-152 profile and attacked them thinking they were enemy aircraft.
-
Thanks -- guess confusion gets around.
Would have hated to explain that one to Goering . . .
-
Originally posted by Bruno
The 109 pilots were unfamiliar with the Ta-152 profile and attacked them thinking they were enemy aircraft.
Not the 1st time -
During the BoB Spits fired on Hurricanes, the Hurris thought they were captured Spits and returned fire.
Became known as "The Battle of Barking Creek".
-
From Bruno:
"Fighters Over Tunisia
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Its hard to find and relatively expensive but worth it IMHO..."
There's another one I think, Fighters over the desert, also available in German, with a title like Luftkampf zwischen Sand und Sonne (approximately,- from memory). Is that the same one republished or is it a different project?
(Been on the hunt for it with no luck)
Oh Kev, if you're into the BoB, I recall a description of the Battle of Barking Creek from Al Deere's "Nine Lives".
The best read I have about the structure, command, problems and so on is John Ray's Battle of Britain. Just Splendid.
-
Luftkampf zwischen Sand und Sonne (approximately,- from memory). Is that the same one republished or is it a different project?
Luftkampf zwischen Sand und Sonne is the German edition of Fighters over the desert: The air battles in the Western Desert. June 1940 to December 1942 by Shores and Ring original published in 1969. Its 256 pages (US edition). If you want to read about Marseille this is where to find info.
Fighters over Tunisia is also by Shores and Ring (and of course Hess) but was published in 1975 and is 491 pages.
Both are great reads but can be expensive.
-
THX, now I owe you one ;)
Do you have them? Tunisia is my particular interest (Algeria-Tunisia), but I am poor of material about it apart from autobiographies that relate to it.
D.Smith, Neville Duke, Anthony Bartley, T.E.Jonsson "Mackie" Evans and perhaps more.
-
Yes I own copies of both in English...
-
Awwwffffrrrr...bastige :D
I am particularly interested in the 22nd of november of 1942.
Algiers-Annaba (Bone).