Westland Whirlwind vs Fw-187 vs P-38

[FLYBOYJ]

For FlyboyJ:

How true it is I don't know but in the book "Vee's for Victory" the author describes 2 if not 3 different P-38/Merlin proposals. In no case does it make any real difference to performance (except in some cases the Merlin versions had shorter estimated range). These are all paper studies.
How much difference it would have made to maintenance or service issues I don't know.
For the early part of the war the P-38 was the ONLY premier US fighter and was in chronic short supply in all theaters. Delays in production would have seriously hampered US efforts at the time.

This might have been true as I do know there was also 'rumor' that along with these engine proposals was a proposal to get rid of the yoke and go with a stick. I read somewhere that during an interview Kelly Johnson was quoted verifying this, but again never found any documented proof of these proposals.

When the Burbank facility was shut down in 1990, there were tons of old documents tossed. Buried benith those piles was probably the answer we are now looking for.

 

[davebender]

low drag surface evaporative cooling system

That feature was eliminated before the A0 (i.e. pre-production) version.

increase fuel capacity needed for the bigger engines

Kurfurst posted DB601 / DB605 fuel consumption data awhile back. As I recall newer versions of the DB601 engine got as good or better fuel economy then the early model.

Germans were stuck with the MG FF cannon

Which worked just fine on early Me-109s. They will work just as well on early Fw-187s.

non-adaptability to the night fighter role
slightly less suitability for the fast bomber role.

Those are Ju-88 missions. They do not matter for single seat day fighters like the Me-109 and Fw-187.

 

[tail end charlie]

I don't think so. The Hornet was over twice as heavy. A light bomber / attack aircraft rather then a long range fighter.

.

The hornet had much more than 2x the horse power and rate of climb with more than 100mph on top speed compared to the whirlwind.

with regard to the thread comparing two planes that hardly made it into service with one that served from start to finish is a bit unfair, the actual limitations of the P38 are known and are being compared with theoretical improvements to unsuccessful designs with engines etc that probably wouldnt have worked.

 

[davebender]

Lockheed P-38 Lightning - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The first Lightning to see active service was the F-4 version, a P-38E in which the guns were replaced by four K17 cameras.[48] They joined the 8th Photographic Squadron out of Australia on 4 April 1942

The P-38 did not enter active service until 1942. Two years after Whirlwinds and Fw-187 pre-production aircraft served in combat. So you are right about the comparison being unfair. The Whirlwind and Fw-187A0 should probably be compared to the YP-38s flying during 1940.

 

[Shortround6]

That feature was eliminated before the A0 (i.e. pre-production) version.

Yes it was but it also means that a FW 187 with twin 1000hp engines and regular radiators won't do 391-395mph.

Kurfurst posted DB601 / DB605 fuel consumption data awhile back. As I recall newer versions of the DB601 engine got as good or better fuel economy then the early model.

You are comparing apples to oranges. the DB 601-605 is not going get fuel consumption than the Ju 210 of 700hp.

Which worked just fine on early Me-109s. They will work just as well on early Fw-187s.

They worked just fine for about 8 seconds and then the ammo ran out. ME 110s had two extra drums per gun and a radio operator to change them.

Those are Ju-88 missions. They do not matter for single seat day fighters like the Me-109 and Fw-187.

That is the problem with the FW 187. It doesn't work that well as an escort fighter in the early part of the war and it isn't as adaptable to other missions. In other words why bother with it if resourses are stretched thin.

 

[tail end charlie]

Lockheed P-38 Lightning - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The P-38 did not enter active service until 1942. Two years after Whirlwinds and Fw-187 pre-production aircraft served in combat. So you are right about the comparison being unfair. The Whirlwind and Fw-187A0 should probably be compared to the YP-38s flying during 1940.

The whirlwind was withdrawn very shortly after its introduction, in its one major engagement during the channel dash of the Scharnhorst it was decimated by bf 109s (OK the P39 suffered in Europe too) but the P39 served from start to finish for the forces it was commisioned by the Americans. The P39 was well suited to Pacific operations but not to European ones. The Whirlwind wasnt suited to any, although it could have been. If it was designed from the outset to have merlins it may have worked but the cancellation of the peregrine cancelled the whirlwind, as I said a merlin whirlind would be as close to a mosquito/hornet as makes no difference. That is ifs and buts, what the P39 did is historical fact, the rest is conjecture.

 

[DonL]

Hi,

i will put some data in to the discussion.

The most information come from; Focke-Wulf FW 187: An Illustrated History by Dietmar Harmann, Peter Petrick
And i have done a lot of research for this bird.

are being compared with theoretical improvements to unsuccessful designs with engines etc that probably wouldnt have worked.

For the FW 187 this statement is completely wrong. And I also think for the Westland Whirlwind but for the Whirlwind I don't have enough data to proof it, for the FW 187 I have.

First some general Informations about the FW 187.

The FW 187 was designed from the edge for the DB 600/601. This was a clear specification from the RLM in the announcement for a destroyer/escort fighter.
The only real chance for the FW 187 to enter mass production was at autumm/winter 1940 as the RLM has two major problems with Messerschmitt. First the ME 110 was a total flop for escort fighting at the battle of britain and second the Me 210 had major design problems. The FW 187 was the alternative.
But with a FW 187 in mass production, the two other birds must be cancelled completely, because there were not enough DB engines two produce more then one twin engine aircraft. Two aircrafts would be reduce the output of the ME 109.
So the personal relation from Willy Messerschmitt to Göring, Ernst Udet and Erhard Milch and the problem with not enough DB engines were the only facts that the FW 187 wasn't going in mass production.
The design was outstanding and many people said this to Göring from 1940 till end of the war.
At 1942 Göring had a rage attack because someone was sarcasticaly comparing the ME 110/210 to the FW 187 and he had forbidden that anybody ever talked about the FW 187 in his presence.

Now to the specs.

There are serious data sheets from three different FW 187; THe FW 187 V4, V6 and the A0 prepoduction series. The V4 and V6 both were flown with the "evaporative" cooling system.

General characteristics

* Crew: 2
* Length: 11.12 m (36 ft 6 in)
* Wingspan: 15.30 m (50 ft 2 ⅓ in)
* Height: 3.85 m (12 ft 7 ⅔ in)
* Wing area: 30.40 m² (327.22 ft²)
* Empty weight: 3,700 kg (8,157 lb)
* Loaded weight: 5,000 kg (11,023 lb)
* Powerplant: 2× Junkers Jumo 210G 12-cylinder inverted-V piston, 515 kW (700 PS) each

Performance

* Maximum speed: 525 km/h at 4,200 m (329 mph at 13,780 ft)
* Service ceiling: 10,000 m (32,810 ft)
* Rate of climb: 1,050 m/min (3,445 ft/min)
* Wing loading: 164.14 kg/m² (33.62 lb/ft²)
* range: 1450km with 1100l B4
Armament

* 4 × 7.92 mm (.312 in) MG 17 machine guns in fuselage sides
* 2 × 20 mm MG FF cannon in lower fuselage

Both the the V4 and V6 were flawn with full armament

V4: date: 27.10.1938
with 2× Junkers Jumo 210G 12-cylinder inverted-V piston, 515 kW (700 PS) each and the "evaporative" cooling system and 545 km/h at 3600m
V6; date: October 1939
with 2 x DB 600a with 1000 PS each and the "evaporativ"e cooling system; 635 km/h at 4000m

The "evaporative" cooling system from the FW 187:

I don't know if the evaporative cooling system is the proper translation for the cooling System of the FW 187. In the englisch Wiki is claimed, that is was the same as in the Heinkel HE 100.
This is totaly wrong.
At the HE 100 System (Oberflächen Verdampfungskühlung) the cooling liquid is running through the wings and will evaporate at the wing surface. Also there is an extra wheel away cooler for the ground.
The cooling system from the FW 187 (Dampfheißkühlung) were only very low drag surface cooler for enegines with pressure water/glycol cooling systems. This cooling system was combat ready and had no problems itself.
The problem was the DB 600/601 and Junkers Jumo 210G/211weren't pressure water/glycol enegines, they had normal water cooling and there were problems with the cooling system of the the FW 187 at very low speed cruising (<250km/h) and ground action.
Pressure water/glycol engine 125 degree celsius limit; normal watercooling engine 90-100 dergree celsius limit.
This was solved in the A0 serie with a more normal cooler.
But later for the pressure water/glycol enegines DB 605, DB 603 and Jumo 213 this system is ready for intoduction.

Speculative data's with serious basic data sheets:

For reality I think the first combat ready FW 187 would have seen service at summer/autum 1941 with following speculative specs.
Based to the facts that the ME 110 B0 with 2× Junkers Jumo 210G increase weight from 6200kg- to 6800kg full loaded to the ME 110 C-4 with 2 x DB 601a.
The weight difference between the two engines are 170kg each.
With all this facts and the normal increasing weight from a preproduction or prototype aircraf to a full ready combat aircraft, I think the FW 187 will be increase weight of 800-900kg.

General characteristics
* Crew: 2
* Length: 11.12 m (36 ft 6 in)
* Wingspan: 15.30 m (50 ft 2 ⅓ in)
* Height: 3.85 m (12 ft 7 ⅔ in)
* Wing area: 30.40 m² (327.22 ft²)
* Empty weight: ~4,500 kg (9,921 lb)
* Loaded weight: ~5,800 kg (12,787 lb)
* Powerplant: 2× DB 601a 12-cylinder V piston, 1100 PS each
Performance
* Maximum speed:
* Service ceiling: 10,000 m (32,810 ft)
* Rate of climb:
* Wing loading: ~190.79 kg/m² (38.35 lb/ft²)
* fuel: 1200l B4 (claimed from Dietmar Harmann, Peter Petrick for the pre production serie as first measures to increase range)
Armament
* 4 × 7.92 mm (.312 in) MG 17 machine guns in fuselage sides
* 2 × 20 mm MG FF cannon in lower fuselage

I think this would be the basics for a first mass production series with the DB 601a engine and later for the DB 601N (1175 PS) and the DB 601E (1350PS at 1.42 ata) .
This aircraft would be used as a multirole aircraft for destroyer-, nightfighter- and escort fighter missions.

To estimate the maxium speed is a little difficult, compared to the V6 flight, because with this engine there is only the option to use the low surface cooler from Messerschmitt with the little boost till 650 km/h ((Meredith Effect)
To my opinion and conservative, 620km/h (DB 601a), 635km/h (DB 601N) and 660-670km/h (DB601E)

With the development of the DB 605 and the circumstances of the war, I think the FW 187 would be devolped in two different directions. One aircraft as a single seater for escort and longerange missions and the other aircraft as a double seater for destroyer and nightfighter missions.
Apropos the nightfighter version was back in reality and serious discussion at 1942 at the RLM.
But the Ju 88 G and the Heinkel He 219 were preferred because of their higher weightloading and the development of the the DB 603 and Jumo 213.

At this thread the discussion is going for escort fighters so I only post the data sheet for the single seater escort fighter version .
Data sheet from Focke-Wulf FW 187: An Illustrated History by Dietmar Harmann, Peter Petrick.

single seater highaltitude escort fighter version Fw187 from 1942
General characteristics
* Crew: 1
* Length: 11.12 m (36 ft 6 in)
* Wingspan: 15.30 m (50 ft 2 ⅓ in)
* Height: 3.85 m (12 ft 7 ⅔ in)
* Wing area: 30.00 m² (322.91 ft²)
* Empty weight:
* Loaded weight: 6.050 kg (13,338 lb)
* Powerplant: 2× DB 605a 12-cylinder-V piston, 1475 PS each
Performance
* Maximum speed: 725 km/h at 8100m
* Service ceiling: 13.300 m (43637, ft)
* Rate of climb: 21,2 m/s / 10,6 min/10 km
* Wing loading: 202 kg/m² (40.60 lb/ft²)
* fuel:
Armament
4xMG151 or 2xMG151+ 4xMG131 or 1xMK03+2xMG151+2xMG131

To my opinion with all shown data from reality the sheet would be very near reality.
The DB 605 only increase weight of 140kg per engine and with the "evaporative" cooling system from the FW 187 for pressure water/glycol cooling engines, the above datas are possible for the full ata performance of the DB 605.
So I think with the reduced performance of the the DB 605 in 1943 a maximum speed of 700-705km/h is still possible.
When we look at this single seater version it would be a real energy fighter with an outstanding weight per horsepower ratio, a very good plane for increasing speed and a devil of a climber.

My Opinion for the Westland Whirlwind i will post tomorrow

 

[fastmongrel]

The whirlwind was withdrawn very shortly after its introduction, in its one major engagement during the channel dash of the Scharnhorst it was decimated by bf 109s .

The Whirlwind was intrroduced into squadron service in July 1940 and became operational in December 1940 getting the types first victory in February 1941. It was withdrawn from operational service in December 1943 mainly due to the fact that engine and airframe spares were running out. Not bad for a run of 112 aircraft that were only ever flown by 2 squadrons and were virtually unmodified throughout there service life.

During the Channel Dash 4 Whirlwinds were sent to escort a flotilla of destroyers but they were bounced by 20 BF 109s and all 4 were shot down, it seems the pilots were unaware of what was occurring and werent forewarned to expect to meet fighters.

A sensible what if instead of the usual fit Merlins what if, would be for Rolls Royce to have had the time and resources to develop the Peregrine in a similar fashion to the Merlin. The Peregrine was a 21 litre engine roughly 3/4 the size the size of a Merlin, all the upgrades for the Merlin could inspire similar approx 3/4 sized developments for the Peregrine. If Rolls Royce had built a Merlin 60 equivalent Using the Merlin Supercharger as the first stage in a similar fashion to the way the Vulture blower was used for the Merlin you could have a 1100 to 1200hp Peregrine with a decent altitude performance.

 

[Colin1]

A sensible what if instead of the usual fit Merlins what if, would be for Rolls Royce to have had the time and resources to develop the Peregrine in a similar fashion to the Merlin. The Peregrine was a 21 litre engine roughly 3/4 the size the size of a Merlin, all the upgrades for the Merlin could inspire similar approx 3/4 sized developments for the Peregrine.

If Rolls Royce had built a Merlin 60 equivalent Using the Merlin Supercharger as the first stage in a similar fashion to the way the Vulture blower was used for the Merlin you could have a 1100 to 1200hp Peregrine with a decent altitude performance.

Rolls-Royce DID have the time and resources to concentrate on one type, at a time when they had around four programs on the boil, so why do you think they would choose a 21-litre engine over a 27-litre engine? Cubes count and Rolls-Royce saw the Merlin as the principal breadwinner; the Peregrine was axed and the Griffon and Vulture were put on the backburner.

What would be the dimensional constraints imposed on your supercharger theory wrt to a tight ship like the Whirlwind?

 

[NZTyphoon]

Not really
the Whirlwind wasn't just built with the Peregrines in mind, it was physically tailored to the Peregrines; changes to the powerplant would have resulted in considerable changes elsewhere to accommodate the new weight/size/CoG/fuel demand/you name it.

Westland had a crack at a Merlin-powered bird, it was called the Welkin but it had one or two problems of its own and the advent of the Spitfire HF VII put paid to any requirement for it.

The Peregrine engine was a development of the Kestrel engine and to fit the Merlin into the Whirlwind would have required a complete structural reworking to cater for the increased power and weight. That said it would have been physically possible to fit the Merlin III because it was actually slightly shorter and only slightly wider, albeit heavier, than the Peregrine:

(From Whirlwind: The Westland Whirlwind Fighter Victor Bingham and British Piston Engines and Their Aircraft Alec Lumsden):

Bore 5.0 in (Merlin: 5.4 in)

Stroke 5.0 in (Merlin: 6.0 in)

Displacement 1,296 cu in (21.1 Litres) (Merlin 1,649 cu in (27 L)

Length 73.6 in (Merlin III 69 in)

Width 27.1 in (29.8 in)

Height 41 in (41.2 in)

Weight (dry) 1,140 lbs (1,375 lbs)

Power rating:
860 hp @ 2,850 rpm +6 ¾ psi boost @ 13,500 ft (rated altitude) (1,030 hp @ 3,000 rpm + 6 psi boost @ 5,500 ft)

885 hp @ 3,000 " " " " @ 15,000 ft (1,310 hp @ 3,000 rpm +12 psi boost @ 9,000 ft with 100 octane fuel)

The priority for Rolls-Royce was to develop the Merlin; as a consequence the Peregrine languished. Where the Merlin III was adapted to be able to run on 100 octane petrol for a maximum of 5 minutes, and later Merlins were able to use 100 octane routinely, the Peregrine continued with 87 octane and moderate supercharger boost right through the Whirlwind's career.

There was some thought to developing the Peregrine to run on 100 octane with increased supercharger boost able to put out 1,015 hp @ 20,000 ft which (it was thought) would have increased the top speed of the Whirlwind to 422 mph - probably somewhat optimistic.

 

[NZTyphoon]

306 gallons. P-38 through H model.
290 gallons (1,100 liters). Fw-187 A0.
134 gallons. Whirlwind.

Looks like the Whirlwind is a poor third place in combat radius. Perhaps that explains why RAF Bomber Command didn't use it as an escort fighter.

The lightweight Fw-187 probably had a greater combat radius then the P-38. An ideal bomber escort.

Maximum range of the Whirlwind was 800 miles. One of the major problems is that the fuel tanks were not cross linked, meaning that in the event of an engine failure or damage to a fuel tank the pilot couldn't transfer fuel from one tank to another - the fuel tanks (67 imp gallons each) were in the wings outboard of the engines, each feeding one engine.
Because they weren't linked in the event of an engine failure the remaining fuel stayed in the relevant tank and could not be used to feed the remaining engine, while the pilot was forced to fly home with dead weight of fuel in the wing, as well as a dead engine.

 

[davebender]

I expect that problem could have been fixed. However the small fuel capacity might not be so easy to solve. Whirlwind internal fuel capacity must be at least doubled if the aircraft is to be taken seriously as a bomber escort. Add in redesign for RR Merlin engines and the airframe starts to look like a dead end. Which is too bad because RAF Bomber Command desperately needed a long range escort fighter during 1939.

 

[fastmongrel]

Rolls-Royce DID have the time and resources to concentrate on one type, at a time when they had around four programs on the boil, so why do you think they would choose a 21-litre engine over a 27-litre engine? Cubes count and Rolls-Royce saw the Merlin as the principal breadwinner;

Sorry didnt make myself clear. I didnt mean develop the Peregrine in place of the Merlin. I meant develop the Peregrine concurrently using the same technology as the real life Merlin, a mini me Merlin in other word. Obviously we know in real life Rolls Royce didnt have the capacity and it would have been a waste to develop an engine for just one aircraft but its nice to dream.

 

[Shortround6]

Sorry didnt make myself clear. I didnt mean develop the Peregrine in place of the Merlin. I meant develop the Peregrine concurrently using the same technology as the real life Merlin, a mini me Merlin in other word. Obviously we know in real life Rolls Royce didnt have the capacity and it would have been a waste to develop an engine for just one aircraft but its nice to dream.

In my dream somebody shoots the Vulture engine in the head while it is still on the drawing board (although that does hurt the two stage Merlin ) which frees up design staff and production capability for around 800-1000 Peregrines.
Designing a two stage system for it would probably take up too much time though. as would modifying the airframe to take it.

Simply putting a two speed drive to the existing super charger would free up a fair amount of power at sea level and for take-off though. And if you could use the Merlin 45-47 supercharger design and 9lbs of boost you might get close to 900hp at 23,000ft instead of 15,000ft like the originals. You might have around 1000hp per engine at sea level instead of the 775hp of the original too.
You wouldn't have to design and fit the 1st stage and the intercooler and you wouldn't have to find space for the inter-cooler radiators.
They were scheming a MK II version with a fuselage tank ( I believe 37 Gals?) .
I believe the fuel tank capacities for the Whirlwind that have been given are in Imperial gallons would should close the gap somewhat but not enough to turn it into a true long range escort although a pair of 44 gallon drop tanks might have helped there.
There were 2 different trials installations of 4 belt fed cannon.

 

[NZTyphoon]

In my dream somebody shoots the Vulture engine in the head while it is still on the drawing board (although that does hurt the two stage Merlin ) which frees up design staff and production capability for around 800-1000 Peregrines.
Designing a two stage system for it would probably take up too much time though. as would modifying the airframe to take it.

Simply putting a two speed drive to the existing super charger would free up a fair amount of power at sea level and for take-off though. And if you could use the Merlin 45-47 supercharger design and 9lbs of boost you might get close to 900hp at 23,000ft instead of 15,000ft like the originals. You might have around 1000hp per engine at sea level instead of the 775hp of the original too.
You wouldn't have to design and fit the 1st stage and the intercooler and you wouldn't have to find space for the inter-cooler radiators.
They were scheming a MK II version with a fuselage tank ( I believe 37 Gals?) .
I believe the fuel tank capacities for the Whirlwind that have been given are in Imperial gallons would should close the gap somewhat but not enough to turn it into a true long range escort although a pair of 44 gallon drop tanks might have helped there.
There were 2 different trials installations of 4 belt fed cannon.

The problem with the Peregrine was that its design was half a generation behind that of the Merlin; essentially it was a developed Kestral. Physically there wasn't much difference in size between the Peregine and Merlin although the capacity of the engine was only 21 Litres. Overall the Merlin was a more efficient engine. I guess the question the AM and R-R needed to ask was was it worth developing a less efficient, older engine, which was used operationally on one aircraft type, alongside of a more efficient design which was used on lots of operational aircraft?

There were two extra fuel tanks mooted for the Whirlwind II; one of 27 gallons in the forward fuselage, and one of 33 gal in the rear fuselage which made a total capacity of 194 gal. A couple of 44 gallon drop tanks would have increased fuel capacity to 282 gallons (290 Fw 187).

Another twin Peregrine/Bristol Taurus fighter which flew was the Gloster F9/37:
Wingspan: 50ft
Length: 37ft
Wing Area: 386 Sq Ft
Weight Maximum Loaded: 11,615 lb
Fuel: 170 gallons
Max Speed: 330 mph (Peregrines) 361 Mph (Taurus)
Armament: 4 x .303 + 2x 20mm Hispano with an alternative 4 x 20 mm Hispano
Apparently this aircraft was extremely manouevrable and much easier to fly than the Whirlwind.

 

[tail end charlie]

Historically RAF Bomber Command conducted daytime bombing through December 1939 and then switched to night bombing to avoid being shot to pieces by German fighter aircraft. This kept bomber losses down until the Luftwaffe developed an effective night fighter force but also rendered RAF Bomber Command ineffective for the next several years. During the early war period the average RAF bomber crew couldn't find a factory at night, much less hit it.

But what if RAF heavy bombers of 1939 to 1942 were escorted by sizable numbers of Whirlwind fighter aircraft? With drop tanks the Whirlwind can probably escort as far as the Ruhr. The bombers might hit something of military value if bombing during the daytime.

This is a fanciful view on history, 1939/40 saw the RAF pre occupied with the BEF, Dunkerque and B of B, the idea of sending massed formations of fighters to escort daylight bombers is a complete fantasy. Fighter command at that time hardly had the aircraft to defend its own airspace. Since we could hardly make enough single engined planes to replace losses where would we get the resources for twin engined fighters?

 

[davebender]

I don't think so.

RAF Bomber Command flew their first mission against Germany one day after Britain declared war. The final mission against Germany was flown 4 May 1945. For almost 6 years there were bombing raids every month. In fact the so called "Battle of Britain" was not a one sided affair. Britain was bombing Germany at the same time Germany was bombing Britain. RAF Bomber Command lost more aircrew during the BoB then RAF Fighter Command.

Given the massive and continuous British effort to operate heavy bombers I think it quite reasonable to spend a bit on a long range escort fighter.

 

[davebender]

The Whirlwind is a nice looking aircraft. That Gloster F.9/37 is ugly as sin.

 

[Milosh]

I don't think so.

RAF Bomber Command flew their first mission against Germany one day after Britain declared war. The final mission against Germany was flown 4 May 1945. For almost 6 years there were bombing raids every month. In fact the so called "Battle of Britain" was not a one sided affair. Britain was bombing Germany at the same time Germany was bombing Britain. RAF Bomber Command lost more aircrew during the BoB then RAF Fighter Command.

Given the massive and continuous British effort to operate heavy bombers I think it quite reasonable to spend a bit on a long range escort fighter.

That is understandable since a bomber carried at least 4 times the crew a fighter did.

From Sept 3 1939 til Sept 2 1940 RAF BC lost 1800 KIA, MIA, POW.

From July 15 1940 til Oct 31 1940 RAF BC lost 300 bombers, including Battles.

Lost Bombers - World War II Lost Bombers

Yes the LW did a wonderful job.

Summary Of Operational Statistics

Number of nights with operations - 1,481 (71.4%)

Number of days with operations - 1,089 (52.9%)

Total Sorties - 336,037

Total Tonnage Dropped - 995,044

Total Aircraft Lost - 8,655 (2.58%)

Ave. Sorties for 24 hours period - 162.02

Ave. Tons of bombers per 24 hours period - 479.77

Ave. Aircraft lost for 24 hour period - 4.17

 

[Kurfürst]

Total Aircraft Lost - 8,655 (2.58%)

Actually a bit over 10000.. the numbers u quote are Daventry figures, "fake" British radio reports to the British public about losses (aircraft lost over the sea or Britain were not reported), about 20% lower than the actual losses.