Mistakes in Aviation

[SoD Stitch]

Originally Posted by Flyboy2

Just curious,
How did the He-100/112 stack up against the Me-109?

IIRC, my understanding is it was in many ways a superior aircraft to the Bf 109, but Heinkel rubbed somebody's feathers the wrong way (Milch? Udet?) and lost the contract to Willy, partly for political reasons (another instance of Nazi Germany's "crony favoritism").

[Glider]

Originally Posted by red admiral

The Martin-Baker MB.5 was too late, in 1944 it was a real dog, like Martin's other planes. The good comments on performance come from tests done in 1946 when all the problems were fixed.

If the MB5 was a dog then I would like to know how good an aircraft would have to be to be considered half decent.

[kool kitty89]

The only disadvantage of the He 100 to the 109 would have been turning ability and room for growth in weight, bith caused by the fairly small wing area and lack of LE slats. The smaller frame of the He 100 would hve offered better power loading though which would compensate somewhat. It would likely have been more than a match for the P-51 as well.

Feom what I've read Heinkel was known for not liking the Nazi regime and was particularly unhappy about loosing his Jewish workers and engineers. The RLM was also unhapy with Heinkel's "playing around" with private fighter projects as well as his jet and rocket programs when he was supposed to be focusing on development of the He 177 bomber and other bomber developments. (the 177 its self being flawed by the RLM mistakes) On a similar note Hans Von Ohain didn't much like the Nizis either and left his flying club after it came uner Nazi control.

I doubt Udet would have opposed the He 100 or Fw 187 as he didn't seem to share the same bias as many others.

And though Focke Wulf wasn't as antagonized as Heinkel, they still seemed to be marginalized by Messersmitt in the RLM's eyes.

The Fw-187 was too small for an extra crewman and would really need to be a bit bigger to comfortably accommodate the pilot.

It would still be roomier than the Bf 109 though, and it wasn't designed as a destroyer, but a single seat twin engined fighter, a contemproary of the P-38 and Whirlwind (albeit the P-38 was designed more as an interceptor) It could have made a good heavy fighter too, with plenty of room for nose armament, but it shouldn't have been a destroyer. A good miltirole fighter: interceptor, escort, fighter-bomber, support, but not a 2-seat destroyer! (and it would have been about as difficult to make a nightfighter as the P-38 due to lack of room for radar or radar operator)

[kool kitty89]

Agree on the MB.5



Another iron and interesting fact is that the first county to take a serious interest in gas turbine aircraft engines was also the last of the major powers in WWII to test one and the last to fly one.
The Soviets had been seriously working on turbojet and turboprop designs since the 1920's and in the early 30's thy received government funding to construct prototypes. The first Lyulka jet design was suposed to be ready along with a testbed (likely similar to the Gloster G.40 or He 178 ) by the end of 1940. But when Germany invaded the turboprop project and team was captured and Lyulka and the turbojet team were forced to evacuate. This set them back nearly 3 years and it wasn't untill early 1943 that their engine ran. (albeit somewhat improoved) By the time they evacuated Lyulka's team had tested several centrifugal compressor layouts and a 2-stage axial compressor with 1.25 compression per stage along with combustion and turbine testing. (all designed to run at fairly low temp to allow the use of available materials with production in mind)

See: Russian Aviation Page: Russian Jet Technology 1937-45

And also a nice article on the L133 and L-1000: Lockheed L-133 by Tom Conte (Scratchbuilt 1/72)

[Flyboy2]

Yeah I saw a documentary about the Russian design ideas and they defienatly where far ahead of everybody elses aircraft designs in the 1930's. They flew that huge airplane over the North Pole and landed it in America. If Stalin didn't hate aircraft so much, who knows what they would have done.

The German's defienatly did not have their head screwed on right when it came to some aerospace projects. Especially those by Heinkel. I'm thinking of the He-219 right now. That was possibly the best night fighter of the war.

[kool kitty89]

Alot of the designers were on the right track or ahead of their time (Heinkel with jets for example) but the RLM had some crazy mindsets. Like no real contingency for defensive weapons and heavy bombers which doubled as dive bombers! (hence the He 177)

And Heinkel may not have been that well liked by the RLM, but it was his projects that jump started jet development and led to independent projects at Jumo, Junkers, BMW, Diamer Benz, (engines) and Messersmitt.(Me 262)

[Flyboy2]

Yeah, but imagine what would have happened if his good designs saw more widespread use (He-219)

[kool kitty89]

I'd thought so too, but check some of the Nightfighter threads. The He 219 isn't all as good as it seems on paper.

The Ju 88 was probably the most practical and effective all around night fighter. Almost as fast as the Mossie, a prooven design long in use. Multiple roles. Beter than the Bf 110 IMO.

In fact if you've got the Ju 88 and the Fw 187, there's nothing the Bf 110 can compete with.

[Watanbe]

hmmm although it did see some limited service, i reckon the Westland Whirlwird should have been given more of a chance. Although to be fair its hard to argue that it was a mistake because other excellent planes filled its intented role and performed very well. The plane wasnt really needed but it could have been a ripper!

[red admiral]

Here is a quote from the early trials of the Martin-Baker MB.5 in 1944;

"Greensted[test pilot] however remembered very clearly his first flight in the MB5, and he recalled ; "Right from the very beginning I suppose you could say that it was a badly designed aircraft because it didn't work in the sense that it was directionally unstable. It was an absolute swine to fly because it wouldn't keep itself straight."..."I still don't understand why the thing wasn't right when I first flew it. After all, the theory of design of aircraft at that stage was pretty advanced and I don't understand how he could make a mistake about the directional stability..."

Hardly praise of the MB.5

The Heinkel He 100 was too late to compete with the Bf 109. Even the He 112 was too late to compete with it in the early versions. Maybe the He 100 could be produced in lieu of the Fw 190, but I'm not sure thats a good swap.

The Lyulka turbojets were a good achievement for the Russians, but were very large and very heavy. The RD-1 having a 1:1 thrust:weight ratio. The later TR-1 was better, with 1300kg thrust from 885kg weight, but a bit late, first running in 1944.

[kool kitty89]

Totally agree that the MB.5 was no good.

The Whirlwind may have been a bit unnecessary, but considder this: if they'd redesigned it to use Merlins very early on (in the prototype stage) which is plausible seeing the lack of Peregrines, it could have been available much sooner and in larger numbers with better performance. It also could easily have been developed into a capable long-range fighter with an increased fuel capacity and plumbing for drop tanks on it's wng racks. This could have allowd Bomber command to perform sucessful daylight precision bombing to be performed instead of switching to night bombing. Also it could have made long range fighter sweeps into Germany and perform long range recon similar to the Mossie, but earlier on. Considder that the early (single stage) Merlins weighed about 200 lbs more than a Peregrine each and increase with other changes adds another 800 lbs loaded. So 1000 lbs heavier, but with 1,280 hp in place of ~880 hp. With loaded weight going from ~10,300 to ~11,500 lbs power/weight would still go from a decent .17 hp/lb to an amazing .22+ hp/lb! And with much better altitude performance.



The He 112 was a complex mess of parts and compound curves and was outperformed by the 109. The He 100 was a bit late but much easier to produce. It should not replace the 190 though IMO. If posible the He 100 would replace the 109 as the standard fighter (once there were enough) with the 190 still as a heavy interceptor and multi-role fighter. But the He 100 really wouldn't have helped alot over the 109 either. It was fast and fuel efficient due to the sleek lines, which would be important with the fuel limitations. However, it's only practical if it can be produced in a similar manner as the 109.

THe Fw 187 would have been a better interceptor though. In single seat configuration. It would have similar multi-role capabillities as the 190, but with better performance (especially at altitude) in all except roll. It was around early enough to be developed on the same time scale as the Bf 109 was.

With the Fw 187 and Ju 88 there would be no need for the Bf 110 either, both being more capable in all the useful aspects of the 110. (the 187 being too narrow to carry proper radar, but could do everything else and didn't have use for or ability to carry a gunner, the Ju 88 was a competent Nightfighter and multirole craft as well)


Other than production of the Bf 109, Messersmitt could put more focus on its advanced projects like the Me 262 earlier on. And not focus on further developments of the 209-II, 309, 109Z etc.


It would have been better to focus on developing unguided interceptor rockets (R4M) earlier on than waste things on things like SAM's. Work on proximity fuze, improoved radar, lead gunsights, and improoved guns would be more important.

As for the jet engines, all work should have focused primarily on class-I designs and maybe some class-II designs once the class-I's were well established. (the HeS-30/006 and HeS-8/001 shouldn't have been cancelled)

Jets were not a waste of reasourses IMO, it it had been handeled better, even moreso. One major thing to considder is that German jets ran on J2 (bascicly diesel fuel) wihich was in ample supply even at the war's end. (albit with the no way to distribute it with the German transportation system bombed to hell)

[Denniss]

Originally Posted by DonL

@ Denniss

your statement about the DB 601A isn't accurate.

The DB 600 without fuel injection had an output performance of 990 PS, the DB 601A with fuel injection had an output performance of 1100 PS and the DB 601N had an output performance of 1300 PS.

We have calculated the Vmax of the evolution FW 187 1943 as a high altitude fighter with evolution air cooler and optimized for high altitudes.
The best outputperformance (Volldruckhöhe) of the DB 605 was 7200m for the ME 109G, so the 725km/h Vmax was a realistic value.

You should check your sources, no Bf 109G speed graph shows 7500m as having max speed, they always have max speed in the area of 6400 to 6700m. Volldruckhöhe (static) for the 605A was 5700m, with RAM effect at about 6200m.

The DB601A/Aa take-off power is as I gave you - the 1-minute rating was only intended for take-off and even blocked in the Bf 109. Most DB601A-1 power graphs have the 1-min line topping at about 1.5 km with 1150PS, the 601Aa tops at ~1250PS at 1km. The DB 601N had 1175 PS take-off power (5-min rating) topping out at ~1260 PS at just above 2.1km, this 5-min rating was blocked in most DB 601N engines below Volldruckhöhe. There's no serious graph providing 1300PS for the 601N or are you mixing it with the 1350PS DB601E?

[delcyros]

You should check your sources, no Bf 109G speed graph shows 7500m as having max speed, they always have max speed in the area of 6400 to 6700m. Volldruckhöhe (static) for the 605A was 5700m, with RAM effect at about 6200m.

Dennis, it appears that both, the DB 605AS and ASM do have a rated altitude of 7.800m and the DB-605D2 has even 8000m rated altitude. The DB-605AS/ASM was extensively used in late Bf-109G5/G6 and Bf-109G14. Check the following link:

The Luftwaffe page , Daimler-Benz DB 605

best regards,
delc

[kool kitty89]

Delcyros,

Now that you're on here, what do you think of the mounting of HeS-6 engines on the He 280 with altered wings in a Gloster Meteor style mid-wing mounting? Obviously not the most efficient layout, but it could have made a good intrim measure as the HeS-6 wasn't too much heavier than the HeS-8 and produced thrust in late '39 that the HeS-8 wasn't making until 1941.

And how about using HeS-3's (in standard mounting) for the initial testing of the 280, as the airframe was ready nearly a year before the HeS-8 was and at that time the HeS-8 was making the HeS-3's thrust. The HeS-3 was only modestly greater in diameter (~6 in or 15 cm) Certainly better than glider tests and the leaking HeS-8 prototypes couldn't use cowling and thus added alot of drag.

[Denniss]

Originally Posted by delcyros

Dennis, it appears that both, the DB 605AS and ASM do have a rated altitude of 7.800m and the DB-605D2 has even 8000m rated altitude. The DB-605AS/ASM was extensively used in late Bf-109G5/G6 and Bf-109G14. Check the following link:
best regards,
delc

I'm fully aware of the AS and D variants but as they were not specifically mentioned I assumed DonL talked about the standard 605A.