Aircraft Development vs Performance

[FuriousMeow]

Sounds like fun to me!!!

 

Fast planes and faster planes, highly maneuverable planes, planes with lots of firepower! What's not to like?

 

Constantly being outrun and outclimb over distance, being unable to provide any sort of offense and the only hope to win is by constant head ons when in the "fast" planes that are very manueverable.

 

It's bascially 109G vs LaGG3, if the LaGG3 could turn faster and take less damage.

[Frequent_Flyer]

Constantly being outrun and outclimb over distance, being unable to provide any sort of offense and the only hope to win is by constant head ons when in the "fast" planes that are very manueverable.

 

It's bascially 109G vs LaGG3, if the LaGG3 could turn faster and take less damage.

 

The US aircraft outperformed the Luftwaffe aircraft as well, so Western Europe does not interest you either ?

[FuriousMeow]

Yeah, they did. No wait, they didn't. They outnumbered the Luftwaffe.

Edited March 15, 2014 by FuriousMeow

[=LD=INCYP3R]

Yeah, they did. No wait, they didn't. They outnumbered the Luftwaffe.

 

 

And i say they did :D

 

 

 

 

listen to the first few seconds of the following video...

 

Edited March 15, 2014 by =LD=INCYP3R

[FuriousMeow]

I'm not saying they did or didn't, the pilots that flew the planes said that the US aircraft didn't dominate and weren't better. It was at best a tug of war, each new iteration from either side was slightly better in a particular aspect but not at all in whole. Faster, could climb better, had a higher ceiling, but none of it was a total and complete domination and what was there lasted until the next development cycle from the other side.

 

History Channel and Military Channel in the US are at best dubious, and the Dogfight series a complete joke.

[Frequent_Flyer]

Yeah, they did. No wait, they didn't. They outnumbered the Luftwaffe.

Not historically accurate statement. The Luftwaffe consistently had a higher concentration of fighters at the point of attack in the bomber stream. But I will play along, The VVS also out numbered the Luftwaffe . However , the Luftwaffe suffered the majority of their losses on the Western Front. So, the East and West presented a target rich environment for the LW, but they suffered more losses in considerable less time.

I'm not saying they did or didn't, the pilots that flew the planes said that the US aircraft didn't dominate and weren't better. It was at best a tug of war, each new iteration from either side was slightly better in a particular aspect but not at all in whole. Faster, could climb better, had a higher ceiling, but none of it was a total and complete domination and what was there lasted until the next development cycle from the other side.

 

History Channel and Military Channel in the US are at best dubious, and the Dogfight series a complete joke.

The high altitude performance ( where the bomber stream was) of the US craft was far superior to the German aircraft. So much so they Germans  had to put an inline engine( they never figure out how to get the performance from a radial engine the US did) in the FW-190 airframe  and still could not match the performance.

[FuriousMeow]

Not historically accurate statement. The Luftwaffe consistently had a higher concentration of fighters at the point of attack in the bomber stream. But I will play along, The VVS also out numbered the Luftwaffe . However , the Luftwaffe suffered the majority of their losses on the Western Front. So, the East and West presented a target rich environment for the LW, but they suffered more losses in considerable less time.

The high altitude performance ( where the bomber stream was) of the US craft was far superior to the German aircraft. So much so they Germans  had to put an inline engine( they never figure out how to get the performance from a radial engine the US did) in the FW-190 airframe  and still could not match the performance.

 

I'm going to hope that Jonathan Toews (pronounced Taves) put a slapshot across your frontal lobe and that has caused the above statements.

[Bladderburst]

The US aircraft outperformed the Luftwaffe aircraft as well, so Western Europe does not interest you either ?

 

ME262 was outperformed by what US aircraft? Yes they were few but it's the factories that did outperform, not the airplanes. Even in 1945 I don't call German fighters crappy rides. Even the 109K could hold its own and it was really at the end of its greatness. 190D or the rare Ta152 are not obsolescent by the end of the war.

Edited March 16, 2014 by Boussourir

[PBS_Big_Peck]

I want to see this and have the same experience in a dlc for il2 :D 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EXLO34drwbc

[Frequent_Flyer]

ME262 was outperformed by what US aircraft? Yes they were few but it's the factories that did outperform, not the airplanes. Even in 1945 I don't call German fighters crappy rides. Even the 109K could hold its own and it was really at the end of its greatness. 190D or the rare Ta152 are not obsolescent by the end of the war.

The FW-190D was designed out of necessity and still was inferior to the P-51D and the P-47D. The US already had in production in 1944 the P-51 H with a top speed of 487MPH and the P-47M top speed of 470 MPH. They also had a XP-47J that achieved 505 MPH in August of 1944. All this was done with no need, the performance of  P-51D and P-47D was still better than the FW-190D so why interrupt production with any new variants ? By the time the 262 came out the US new the war with Germany was won and focused on Japan. The most sophisticated and technologically advanced aircraft designed and produced during WWI was the B-29 Superfortress. Germany is lucky the did not have to endure what Japan had to.

[II/JG17_HerrMurf]

FF, I think you are taking things a bit out of context. If you can pick and choose aircraft data at random then so can the Jagdwaffe.

 

Dornier Do. 335 outperforms the P-51/47 for sheer speed. Fw Ta 152 H/C outperform both for speed and altitude. It is hard to argue that the B-29 is more technologically advanced than either the Me 262 or the He 219. The Fw190 was a wholly capable dogfighter, as well as interceptor, with a fearsome weapons load and only gives up maximum altitude to its adversaries. Considering the bomber stream operated at 25k and that was the primary focus of the German design teams, that is what their aircraft were optimized for.

 

It is more about design considerations, operational necessity, and the fact that one was able to design/build several thousand miles from the front and one was in the thick of it.

 

You said the experimental aircraft were designed without need. I'm pretty sure there was a war on and the US recognized a need or the funding would have gone elsewhere. The tech was leapfrogging every few months and the United States held a very small edge even at the end of the war. In terms of material weight, only, "the bomb," which, fortunately was out of reach for the Nazi's, would have changed the outcome.

 

I'm glad the outcome is what it was but please let us not disparage the efforts by either side from a technological standpoint. To do so diminishes our American space effort considerably.

Edited March 17, 2014 by A1FltTrn=HerrMurf

[Bladderburst]

It's called cherry picking stats. Despite your efforts at it there is no fighter plane that saw active service that topped the 262.

And don't tell me again that the allies did not actually want a better plane, that is utter rubbish. If the allies were so advanced and totally eclipsed their primitive foes in flying coffins, tell me why there was actually a race to secure their technology at the end of the war. If they totally dominated their foes that much, tell me why it took so long to bring them to their knees while outnumbering them 20 to 1?
 

I don't think that the Germans had superior armement that eclipsed the competition in terms of performance, I don't believe that it was the opposite either.

[FlatSpinMan]

Is this little debate really that relevant?

[Rama]

No it's not, and I made this new thread from the off-topic posts.

 

If someone has a good suggestion to change the tittle of this new thread, tell me and I'll change it.

[Bassly]

I suggest "Beating a dead horse part 2459".

[JtD]

The most numerous fighters in 1944 were on the German side the Bf 109G, for the most part without MW50 injection carrying gun pods, and the Fw 190A-8, for the most part with increased emergency power. On the US side there were mostly P-47D with water injection and P-51 with -7 Packard Merlins at 18lb boost. Usually they were coming in with drop tanks, which were dropped when entering combat. The P-47, with water injection and the P-51 outperformed non MW-50 109's with gondolas and Fw 190A-8 without boost increase in pretty much every aspect, the added boost of the Fw 190 only gave it near parity at low altitudes. It is a fact that the Western Allies enjoyed performance advantages in 1944 the Luftwaffe had been enjoying up to 1942. This is a logical consequence of the Western Allies developing better performing fighters, whereas the Germans were focussing on making their fighters more versatile, cheaper to produce and better armed between 1942 and 1944. As a result, the Bf 109G-6 of early 1944 was a worse performer than the F-4 in 1941, and the Fw 190A-8 of early 1944 was worse than the A-3 in 1942. However, the P-51 of 1944 was 100 km/h faster than the P-40 of 1942.

[Bladderburst]

That's a dumb pissing contest as far as I am concerned.

But I always fall for misplaced patrotism on forums, my sincere apologies for opening that can of worms.

[II/JG17_HerrMurf]

Sorry Rama,

 

Even as I was hitting, 'post,' I was thinking this had gone pretty far astray of the OP. Also, I think a good title would be Aircraft Development vs Performance.

[AX2]

The most numerous fighters in 1944 were on the German side the Bf 109G, for the most part without MW50 injection carrying gun pods, and the Fw 190A-8, for the most part with increased emergency power. On the US side there were mostly P-47D with water injection and P-51 with -7 Packard Merlins at 18lb boost. Usually they were coming in with drop tanks, which were dropped when entering combat. The P-47, with water injection and the P-51 outperformed non MW-50 109's with gondolas and Fw 190A-8 without boost increase in pretty much every aspect, the added boost of the Fw 190 only gave it near parity at low altitudes. It is a fact that the Western Allies enjoyed performance advantages in 1944 the Luftwaffe had been enjoying up to 1942. This is a logical consequence of the Western Allies developing better performing fighters, whereas the Germans were focussing on making their fighters more versatile, cheaper to produce and better armed between 1942 and 1944. As a result, the Bf 109G-6 of early 1944 was a worse performer than the F-4 in 1941, and the Fw 190A-8 of early 1944 was worse than the A-3 in 1942. However, the P-51 of 1944 was 100 km/h faster than the P-40 of 1942.

+1000

What you say is something that too many of people take a lot years to understand.

[II/JG17_HerrMurf]

I find these debates interesting and ocassionally very informative as long as they stay civil. Makes me pull volumes from my library and crack the books. Sometimes to make a point, refute a point or just go, 'Huh! Well I'll be darned. That guy was right." I'm always down for a good argument. Just wish I could share a pint over a hardwood table while doing flapping our gums.

[Crump]

 

The P-47, with water injection and the P-51 outperformed non MW-50 109's with gondolas and Fw 190A-8 without boost increase in pretty much every aspect, the added boost of the Fw 190 only gave it near parity at low altitudes.

 

 

Exactly, the airplanes using over boosted ratings outperformed aircraft not using over boosted ratings. 

[GOAT-ACEOFACES]

The most numerous fighters in 1944 were on the German side the Bf 109G, for the most part without MW50 injection carrying gun pods, and the Fw 190A-8, for the most part with increased emergency power. On the US side there were mostly P-47D with water injection and P-51 with -7 Packard Merlins at 18lb boost. Usually they were coming in with drop tanks, which were dropped when entering combat. The P-47, with water injection and the P-51 outperformed non MW-50 109's with gondolas and Fw 190A-8 without boost increase in pretty much every aspect, the added boost of the Fw 190 only gave it near parity at low altitudes. It is a fact that the Western Allies enjoyed performance advantages in 1944 the Luftwaffe had been enjoying up to 1942. This is a logical consequence of the Western Allies developing better performing fighters, whereas the Germans were focussing on making their fighters more versatile, cheaper to produce and better armed between 1942 and 1944. As a result, the Bf 109G-6 of early 1944 was a worse performer than the F-4 in 1941, and the Fw 190A-8 of early 1944 was worse than the A-3 in 1942. However, the P-51 of 1944 was 100 km/h faster than the P-40 of 1942.

Bingo!

[RR1357]

To be honest the Germans where ahead of the Americans on almost every front.

 

When it comes to aircraft development; 

 

Captured Me 262 were studied and flight tested by the major powers, and ultimately influenced the designs of a number of post-war aircraft such as the North American F-86 Sabre and Boeing B-47 Stratojet.

[wastel]

The LW had everytime an airframe/engine combination to counter the allied developments.

Big problem..these combnation have never been built..or just in minor numbers at the end of the war.

 

The LW was heavily restricted by the decissions of the RLM.

 

1940! FW had an design look about an 190 with DB603 with following results:

-engine is very easy to implement

-50km/h more top speed

-less weight

 

Both..DB and FW asked the RLM to go on with this development. RLM said NO.

So no Fw190 with DB603 in 42/43 (when the 603 was introduced in high numbers)

 

The RLM hat too much engine developments in the pipeline with allways changing priorities.

Same for the airframe development (chaos there)

A big failur in the early pre war time was to go on with the 110 instead of the FW187 for example.

 

So even without the 262..the LW could have been able to have very competetive piston engine driven

planes during the war in high numbers, without any miracle. 

But we all know,  what the result was.

[RR1357]

The American/British/Russian aircraft where certainly combat proven, that has to be said. 

[RR1357]

The Fw190 came as a shock for the spitfire pilots for sure.

 

Also this shows the design capability of the German engineers at that time:

 

On 26 April 1939, Flugkapitän Fritz Wendel, flying the Me209 V1, set a new record of 755.14 km/h (469.22 mph). For propaganda purposes, the machine was called the Bf 109R, suggesting it was just another variant of the standard fighter, but in fact it was a racing aircraft having little in common with the Bf 109. It was powered by the DB 601ARJ, producing 1,156 kW (1,550 hp), but capable of reaching 1,715 kW (2,300 hp). This world record for a piston-engined aircraft was to stand until 1969.

Edited June 2, 2014 by ImpalerNL

[wastel]

Well..this was a simple race engine, not usable for combat.

 

But did you know this:

FW190V15, around May 42! test flights in Rechlin, engine DB603A0

Speed with climb&combat power in 6950m, 696km/h, in 400m, 575km/h.

 

Fw190V16, August 42 flight test in Stuttgart done by DB:

DB603A, emergency power, 7000m, speed of 724km/h.

After upgrading to the bigger G charger, top speed 722km/h at 9000m,

 

Serial production was planed as 190-C1 and 190-C2 with 727 planes delivered

between march 43 and march 44.

 

Projekt was cancelled early 43 by RLM

 

around 8700 engines built, with only half of it built in in airframes. Mostly Me410,Do217, he219, Me309, Do335.

After most of these projects have been canceled in mid 44, several thousands of unused DB603's stood around.

 

Fw190C series would have been able to fight the P51  from mid 43 on!

 

RLM skrewed it up....

[JtD]

I disagree with that assessment. First, neither the DB603 nor the Fw 190C were anywhere near front line ready during the 1942 tests. It was difficult enough to press the DB603 into service with bombers, it would have been an even bigger task to satisfactory do this with a fighter. Second, the flight test results were done with specially prepared aircraft, and are not representative for in service performance. So the performance increase wouldn't have been nearly as large as the figures suggest. But most importantly, the German aircraft industry had to, it really had to, focus on making their mass production more efficient. An Fw 190B/C would have had to come at the expense of either the Bf 109 or the Fw 190A, none of which was a viable option, since it would reduce the total number of fighters available. By the end of 1942, the German fighter force was smaller than it was in the summer of 1940, or the summer of 1941, and industry was unable to replace the losses from the most recent event in the East and in the Mediterranean. Imho, the RLM had no other choice here.

[wastel]

In  mid 1943 the DB603 was more reliable than the DB605.

 

It would have been possible to built a 190C in large numbers from mid 43 on. If the result would have been to cancel the 109, why not? the 190C was far more capable when looking to 44 and 45 engine developmentes of the 603 than the 109 with any 605 ever was.

 

Over all too much man, tooling an production power was wasted in projects without future (Me209, me309, Me210/410 and lots of others).

 

From technical side on the LW could have had an plane without technical problems to fight the P47/51 and Spit XIV , it just was not built.