more radial fans like fw190?

"Geoffrey Sinclair" wrote in message
...
The Enlightenment wrote in message ...

The 801 had a innovations such as a multipoint direct in cylinder
injection
of the fuel and completely automatic control of mixture and boost. The
pilot only had a throttle to opperate. It's installation in the 190
was
excellent: the engine was tightly cowled to improve aerodynamics with
airflow being provided by a geared fan opperating at about 3:1 to provide
cooling. The exhausts were beautifully installed and provided an
ejector
effect to induce cooling and thrust. I believe that only one Soviet
fighter
is regarded to have achieved this level of perfection. Around the cowl
was a
circular oil tank that was armoured and thus protected the cylinder
heads.
It was thus a very tough battle damage resistent engine that provided the
pilot with a massive piece of armour when going in head on against an
american bombers 50s.

The trouble is the initial trials were very bad thanks to engine
over heating, at one point this threatened to have the entire
program cancelled. It also seems the engineers in JG26
did most of the work in coming up with a good fix.

The problem of this ambitious and effective installation were solved somehow
then. The original had the cooling intake through a hollow of an enlarged
propeller boss while the pilot suffered hot foot. The solution was to
lenghten the nose and compromise by using a gear driven fan to reduce
cowling inlet area to a minimum.



Note the oil tank in radials was often armoured, since the oil
also acted as a coolant, and a bullet through the oil tank was
almost as bad as a bullet through the radiator of an inline engine.

The much loved US Gruman Bearcat for instance was inspired and the P47
was
built specifically to deal with the 190.

The design brief for the Bearcat was heavily into fast climb, to
intercept the incoming strikes, using the advances in ship's radar
to quickly intercept hostiles. It was the response of the USN to
carrier warfare in the Pacific not the FW190.

The designers certainly inspected and flew a captured FW190 and were
inspired to improve upon it. Yes there may have been a tactical reason for
developing a high power to weight ratio aircraft but the FW190 demonstrated
the concept of having excess power.



The P-47B was ordered in September 1940 and first flew on
6 May 1941. This was before the RAF encountered the FW190
on 27 September 1941 and over a year before one was captured,
in July 1942. The first production P-47B was in December
1941. Rather hard to see the P-47 as built specifically unless
the US was given all the information in 1940, and knew despite
the major engine cooling problems the FW190A had that the
program would be continued.

Also note the P-47B was optimised to fight above 20,000 feet,
the FW190A below 20,000 feet.

Water injection was needed to cope with the FW at low altitude and perhaps
this is what I am thinking of.



It's weakness was that its performance dropped of at altitude. The
answer
to this was the BMW801T which was turbo supercharged version.
Focke-Wulf
built some 190s with the turbo supercharger built into the belly as a
bulge
(unlike the P47 it wouldn't fit in the compact fueselage) but they did
not
persue the idea perhaps it was inelegant and the turbo metals were in
short
supply for such as massively produced aircraft.

The FW190B was the pressure cabin version of the FW190A, with
the BMW801D-2, and a longer span wing, giving around 20% more
wing area, this was not turbo supercharged.

The FW190C used the DB600 series engines in various combinations,
with the turbo supercharger, when fitted, being in a ventral housing, the
so called Kangaruh or Kangaroo look. Longer span wings and pressure
cabins were also fitted.

About 600 of these engines
with a very neat intercooler installation ended up on the Ju388L high
altitude reconaisence bomber where they were very neatly installed with
the
intercooler as 5 segments behind the engine. (The Ju388 also had a
night
fighter version built to deal with B29s attacking at night)

The Ju388L was in production for around 6 months in 1944, with
around 10 converted from Ju188 and 60 built new. Those 600
engines must have had a very short lifetime if all they did was power
the Ju388L. The night fighter version appears to be more prototypes
than production.

Not all aircraft entered service. All the sources i have seen credit it
with a production run of 300.

The night fighter did not enter service as the BMW801T version was no faster
than a standard Ju 88G7 with BMW801D at the altitudes British bombers could
fly at. It was an iron in the fire should the B29 appear.


(The Ju 388 seems to have had the same type of periscopic sighting system
as
used on the A26 invader only it had twin 13.1mm MG in a remote tail
turret)

However Fock-Wulf decided to install water cooled V12s into the Fw 190 to
get high altitude performance. The 432 mph Fw 190D9 had a jumo 213A
enigine but the Fw190D11 and Fw190D12 (only 70 entered service) had a
Jumo
213E engine with the same two stage intercooler arrangement as the Merlin
in
the Mustang and could manage 460mph.

Be careful here, the later versions of the D series are mainly paper
projects or prototypes. And the WWII engines used a water glycol
cooling mixture, rather like many modern motor vehicles, hence
liquid cooled, not water cooled.

A few dozen of the FW190D-12 entered service. Deliveries started in Feb
1945 so there is little record of them. Even less entered service than the
Ta 152H



The D-10 replaced the fuselage machine guns with a 30mm cannon
firing through the propeller spinner. Couple of prototypes

The D-11 was a D-9 with the Jumo213F with MW-50, several prototypes
built.

The D-12 was the ground attack version, the D-10 armament, with
an armoured installation of the Jumo 213F, production began in
March 1945. It is doubtful any actually entered service. Fw190A/D
production in March 1945 is said to be 204, and zero in April.

The D-13 with the Jumo213EB and 2 20 mm cannon, 2 prototypes
built.

3 x 20mm canon. Models after the D9 series dropped the cowling guns but
added a propellor hub guns either 20mm, 30mm.


The D-14 with the DB603A engine, 2 built.

Jumo 213 and DB603 engines had interchangeable mounts and were available as
'power eggs' complete with integrated anular radiators.


The D-15 with the DB603EB engine, paper project.

Oddly for such an engine seems to have
been heavily armoured for ground attack and torpedo bombing (they were
used
by the Soviets after the war for this) Apparently the annular radiators
of
the German V12s were quite battle damage tollerant as well as
aerodynanic.

It seems unlikely the designers would put lots of high altitude
features into a ground attack version.

It seems to have been intended to be a multirole combat aircraft.



The same type of engine jumo 213E with more performance ended up in the
475mph TA 152 H0 and TA 152H1 (H-1 had wet fuel tanks in its wooden
wings
for greater range) as this had very large wings it could not only fly
extremely high it could out turn any Allied fighter.

The Ta152H-1 had an empty weight of around 8,900 pounds supported
by a wing area of 251 square feet, The Spitfire XIV had an empty weight
of around 6,600 pounds and wing area of 242 square feet. I doubt the
TA152H with its long wings would win a turning contest with a Spitfire
XIV except at very high altitudes.

When comparing "empty weights", you have to be careful about what is
included in the figures. Depending on the definition, weapons, radio gear
and other operational equipment might be included or not. I'd only seriously
compare empty weights if I have a complete weight break-down where every
item is listed seperately. Unfortunately, for some types such data is hard
to find.

The long wings of the Ta 152H reduced the fantastic roll rate compared to
the Fw 190A and Fw 190D.

Assuming that the wing loading of the TA 152H was higher than the Spit XIV
(assuming Griffon 65 variant to allow the spit half a chance to match speed)
then the higher aspect ratio wings of the TA152 might still be more
efficient. Because of the higher aspect ratio they would be more efficient
and probably have less induced drag so the aircraft would wash of less
airspeed.

Turning circle is usually measured at sustained speed without loosing
altitude. For instance a Spit might turn inside a Me 109F but the 109
pilot could pull G, use his automatic slats to warn him of incipient stall
and bleed of speed faster to turn inside the spit anyway. Of course you
don't get to play this trick indefinetly.





Most sources rate the Ta152H series top speed in the 460 to 470mph
range, the using MW-50 and GM-1. What is the source that claims the
wings were wooden as opposed to metal?

You can tell a Fw 190D9 from a Fw 190D11/D12/D13 by the latter lacking
cowl
guns and having an oval air intage instead of round and using a cannon
firing through the propeller boss. One of these (The Fw 190 D13 I
think)
was to end up with a long barreled Mk 103 30mm cannon as a tank buster.
It
was this aircraft that I guess would have finaly replaced the Stuka.


The D-12 would be the replacement for the G model.

Geoffrey Sinclair
Remove the nb for email.

"Mailman" wrote in message
...
The Enlightenment wrote:
After the war Tempests were built, flown and tested with Germanic anular

Not to pick too many nits, but would you mind dropping the silly
"Germanic"?
Hint: it is NOT the same as "German" - actually quite different.

They did not use German radiators, they used German style annular radiators.
Presumably there was something special about the way they recovered waste
heat effectively.

That was the term used in what I think was an issue of Air-International on
the history of the type. So F you.




--
Mailman


-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

"Keith Willshaw" wrote in message
...

"The Enlightenment" wrote in message
...

"Geoffrey Sinclair" wrote in message
...
The Enlightenment wrote in message
...

I think the FW 190 installation was well studied. It was excellent.
A
few
of the Typhoon/Tempest dervatives also used Germanic style radiators
a'la
FW190D series and also achieved a speed improvement.

The Typhoon always used the chin radiator. It first flew about
9 months after the Fw190

The Typhoon "derivative", the Tempest used wing radiators in the
mark I, the fastest, a radial engine in the mark II, a chin radiator
in the mark V and a combination of chin and wing radiators for the
mark VI.

The Fury, the Tempest "derivative" used a radial engine.
Hawkers had a good look at the FW190 before the Fury
was designed.

Nothing like the radiator arrangement used in the FW190D series.

After the war Tempests were built, flown and tested with Germanic anular
radiators. This gave about a 20mph speed advantage over the chin
installation with the same sabre engine.



As I recall Napier's designed and tested several different types of
annular
radiator annular radiator for the Sabre and tested it on a Typhoon IB
and a Tempest V

None were chosen for production.

Keith


That's because production of the entire typhoon tempest line ceased after
the war.

Some Photos he
http://user.tninet.se/~ytm843e/annular.htm

"The Enlightenment" wrote in message
...

"Mailman" wrote in message
...
The Enlightenment wrote:
After the war Tempests were built, flown and tested with Germanic
anular

Not to pick too many nits, but would you mind dropping the silly
"Germanic"?
Hint: it is NOT the same as "German" - actually quite different.

They did not use German radiators, they used German style annular
radiators.
Presumably there was something special about the way they recovered waste
heat effectively.


They used them BEFORE they knew the Germans used them
and radiators are designed to get rid of heat, not recover it.
The reason for the testing was simply to try and reduce drag.
Annular radiators werent exctly a new idea. They hd been used
on numerous aircraft including the Ju-88 and Fiat CR-32

Keith





----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

"Keith Willshaw" wrote in message
...

"The Enlightenment" wrote in message
...

"Mailman" wrote in message
...
The Enlightenment wrote:
After the war Tempests were built, flown and tested with Germanic
anular

Not to pick too many nits, but would you mind dropping the silly
"Germanic"?
Hint: it is NOT the same as "German" - actually quite different.

They did not use German radiators, they used German style annular
radiators.
Presumably there was something special about the way they recovered
waste
heat effectively.


They used them BEFORE they knew the Germans used them

Perhaps on the Typhoon IB. The article I alluded to talked of tests with
"Germanic style radiators" and I had the distinct impression this was late
or post war. Perhaps they were inspired to look at them again becuase they
restarted testing on the latest model from this series the Tempest V to see
if they could improve upon the chin intake. (The whole chronology of the
Tornado, Tempest,Typphoon series is extremely confusingly enumerated).
Perhaps they were inspired to review their work becuase of the success of
the German implementation.

Perhaps not.

Most engineering developement did not occur in a vacuum of theory but was
reactive to what the enemy was achieving. Though suprisingly arrogance was
such that both sides sometimes ignored each others better ideas. I can see
that tendancy in these NG in fact.

and radiators are designed to get rid of heat, not recover it.
The reason for the testing was simply to try and reduce drag.
Annular radiators werent exctly a new idea. They hd been used
on numerous aircraft including the Ju-88 and Fiat CR-32

Specifically I ostensibly mean't to say that the "German" annular radiators
recovered waste energy (in the form of engine heat) very effectively and
converted it to kinetic energy to obtain a small amount of thrust: usually
sufficient enough to overcome the drag of the installation.

The air enters the inlet, the area is increased which has the effect of
increasing pressure and slowing the air down, the air is then heated by the
radiator which has the effect of expanding it and accelerating it, the cross
sectional area is then decreased slightly usualy by some type of adjustable
flap arrangement so that it is ejected slightly faster than it entered.
This produces thrust according to the formmula: mass flow x (exhaust
velocity - inlet velocity)

It isn't the annular radiator that does this but the combination of inlet,
interanl cowling and the hot air exhaust. The annular arrangement simply
allows this to be implemented very effectively.

The Spitfire, Me 109 also did this quite well but not so effectively. The
P51 had a famous installation that was reputedly very effective but also
very vulnerable due to the long plumbing runs. It is very difficult to get
this correct: the japanese had great difficulty with their liscence produced
Daimler Benz engines despite help from the Germans.

The advantage of the annular installation was that the engine eg Jumo 213,
DB603 etc could be produced in a 'power egg' that was easy to manufacture
and exchange on aircraft even with radials . The German engines had common
mounting points. British engines also did this which is why you sometimes
saw Merlins and Bristol radials exchanged on Beaufighters, Lancasters etc.

The minimised plumbing and the ease of armouring also gave advantages to the
annular arrangement in battle damage tollerance.

The radial installations were not regarded as anywhere near as effective as
liquid cooled ones. The NACA cowling introduced over radials in the late
1920s reduced drag by minimising turbulence over the cylinder heads.

On the BMW801 installation on the FW190A the ram effect as used on liquid
cooled engines was used with great effect for the first time on a radial
engine; the necessary small inlet being obtained by a geared fan. In
addition the exhausts were piped in such a way that they gave not only gaved
jet thrust but and an ejector induction effect and helped increase airflow
through the engine.

Thus the BMW/FW190 installation shattered illusions that water cooled
engines were always going to be faster. (they seem to have been about 15mph
in the 470mph region when P47M was compared to Spitefull and P51H)

So to clarity. It wasn't so much the annular intake but the way the air was
handelled before and after this annular intake. The annular arrangement
seems to have been more effective than the chin arrangement in neatly
integrating into the airframe and taking advantage of this ram effect becaue
Napiers tests showed such an improvement. The annular radiators had been
tested after work had already comenced on the standard chin installation.

What few images I have seem to show that there seens to have been a
significant geometrical change or refinement in inlet Geometry seen on the
Jumo 211 of the Ju 88 and the Jumo 213 of late model Ju 88s, Ta 152s.




Keith





----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet
News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000
Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption
=---

The Enlightenment wrote in message ...

"Geoffrey Sinclair" wrote in message
...
The Enlightenment wrote in message
...

I think the FW 190 installation was well studied. It was excellent. A
few
of the Typhoon/Tempest dervatives also used Germanic style radiators a'la
FW190D series and also achieved a speed improvement.

The Typhoon always used the chin radiator. It first flew about
9 months after the Fw190

The Typhoon "derivative", the Tempest used wing radiators in the
mark I, the fastest, a radial engine in the mark II, a chin radiator
in the mark V and a combination of chin and wing radiators for the
mark VI.

The Fury, the Tempest "derivative" used a radial engine.
Hawkers had a good look at the FW190 before the Fury
was designed.

Nothing like the radiator arrangement used in the FW190D series.

After the war Tempests were built, flown and tested with Germanic anular
radiators. This gave about a 20mph speed advantage over the chin
installation with the same sabre engine.

By the way Germanic is usually defined in historical terms,
the confederation and empire and earlier.

It seems you need to provide some facts as opposed to simply
trying to state the preferred conclusions. So we go from the
fighters using the technique to some experiments were run,
can we note the Fw190 used the "Mustang" radiator system
the C models? Perhaps the "Thunderbolt" supercharging
system as well? Or the "Hurricane" or "Fury" radiator system?

The Bf109 used the "Spitfire" radiator system, given the E
model prototype flew after the Spitfire? And so on.

Napiers investigated annular cooling systems during the war, which
in effect meant bolting the radiator onto the front of the engine. This
caused centre of gravity problems. You would hope the reduction
in frontal area would improve top speed.

For example Tempest EJ518 from May 1944 for a few months, it
ended up in 3 squadron in late 1944, apparently back to standard
configuration.

Typhoon R8694 was another modification, main testing was
apparently done with Tempest NV768.

So this all started well before the Fw190D appeared. The British
had been exposed to the Jumo's idea of radiators from the JU88A
in 1940. The Tempest I had the "Britannic", radiators in the
wing, arrangement shown so well to advantage by the Mosquito, it
was around 30 mph faster than the Tempest V.

Oh yes, the Germans were using "Americanic" systems, given the
credit for the first powered flight. Oh yes, the "Italianic" system
also contributed given Da Vinci's glider design appears to have
been airworthy when a modern team built a replica.

Personally I blame it all on the insects and then things like the
Pterosaurs, like Pterodactylus, which brings the "Antarticans"
into the picture.

Geoffrey Sinclair
Remove the nb for email.

The Enlightenment wrote in message ...

"Geoffrey Sinclair" wrote in message
...
The Enlightenment wrote in message ...

The 801 had a innovations such as a multipoint direct in cylinder
injection
of the fuel and completely automatic control of mixture and boost. The
pilot only had a throttle to opperate. It's installation in the 190
was
excellent: the engine was tightly cowled to improve aerodynamics with
airflow being provided by a geared fan opperating at about 3:1 to provide
cooling. The exhausts were beautifully installed and provided an
ejector
effect to induce cooling and thrust. I believe that only one Soviet
fighter
is regarded to have achieved this level of perfection. Around the cowl
was a
circular oil tank that was armoured and thus protected the cylinder
heads.
It was thus a very tough battle damage resistent engine that provided the
pilot with a massive piece of armour when going in head on against an
american bombers 50s.

The trouble is the initial trials were very bad thanks to engine
over heating, at one point this threatened to have the entire
program cancelled. It also seems the engineers in JG26
did most of the work in coming up with a good fix.

The problem of this ambitious and effective installation were solved somehow
then. The original had the cooling intake through a hollow of an enlarged
propeller boss while the pilot suffered hot foot. The solution was to
lenghten the nose and compromise by using a gear driven fan to reduce
cowling inlet area to a minimum.

You really are lacking in knowledge of the Fw190 development,
the original prototype pilot landed complaining he felt he had
his feet in the fire. Then came the cancellation of the preferred
engine, the resultant redesign moved the cockpit further away from
the engine. The extra weight caused a deterioration of handling
characteristics, solved by increasing the wing area, the V5k and
V5g prototypes. The larger wings were standardised in the
tenth Fw190A-0 pre production model. Things like ducted
spinners were tried early as well, the first prototype and then
discarded.

By the time JG26 had received Fw190s the "lengthening" of
the nose had been done (which was actually moving the cockpit
further aft) and the increase in wing size was being done.

Note the oil tank in radials was often armoured, since the oil
also acted as a coolant, and a bullet through the oil tank was
almost as bad as a bullet through the radiator of an inline engine.

The much loved US Gruman Bearcat for instance was inspired and the P47
was
built specifically to deal with the 190.

The design brief for the Bearcat was heavily into fast climb, to
intercept the incoming strikes, using the advances in ship's radar
to quickly intercept hostiles. It was the response of the USN to
carrier warfare in the Pacific not the FW190.

The designers certainly inspected and flew a captured FW190 and were
inspired to improve upon it. Yes there may have been a tactical reason for
developing a high power to weight ratio aircraft but the FW190 demonstrated
the concept of having excess power.

I know this is really silly but the designers, if they did make a
trip to Europe, saw more than the Fw190, they would have
been exposed to other captured aircraft and the latest in
British designs. North American was interested for example
to design a lighter weight P-51, which emerged as the H model.
But somehow it all comes back to the Fw190 alone.

I like the "excess power" claim, the Fw190A had 1,600 HP
pulling around 7,500 pounds empty weight, the Spitfire V
had around 1,500 HP pulling around 5,100 pounds of empty
weight. The Fw190 was faster thanks to better aerodynamics,
the sort of thing that made the Spitfire 30 to 40 mph faster than
the Hurricane with the same engine and the P-51B around the
same speed faster than the Spitfire with effectively the same
engine. On the other hand the Spitfire could beat the Fw190
to 20,000 feet. Like all aircraft you had your trade offs.

The Bearcat, as it appeared, was very much in the Spitfire
sort of arrangement, with a very high climb rate. It was
designed to fight the war in the Pacific, largely below 20,000
feet, with characteristics optimised to defend its base willing
to sacrifice range for example.

The P-47B was ordered in September 1940 and first flew on
6 May 1941. This was before the RAF encountered the FW190
on 27 September 1941 and over a year before one was captured,
in July 1942. The first production P-47B was in December
1941. Rather hard to see the P-47 as built specifically unless
the US was given all the information in 1940, and knew despite
the major engine cooling problems the FW190A had that the
program would be continued.

Also note the P-47B was optimised to fight above 20,000 feet,
the FW190A below 20,000 feet.

Water injection was needed to cope with the FW at low altitude and perhaps
this is what I am thinking of.

As far as I can tell what is being thought of is an idealised view
of the Fw190 which then becomes a benchmark with everyone
else altering to fight it, but the Fw190 continually leading the way,
despite being out performed.

Presumably the introduction of paddle bladed propellers to the
P-47 was a reaction to the outstanding rate of climb of the Fw190,
particularly above 20,000 feet, correct?

It's weakness was that its performance dropped of at altitude. The
answer
to this was the BMW801T which was turbo supercharged version.
Focke-Wulf
built some 190s with the turbo supercharger built into the belly as a
bulge
(unlike the P47 it wouldn't fit in the compact fueselage) but they did
not
persue the idea perhaps it was inelegant and the turbo metals were in
short
supply for such as massively produced aircraft.

The FW190B was the pressure cabin version of the FW190A, with
the BMW801D-2, and a longer span wing, giving around 20% more
wing area, this was not turbo supercharged.

The FW190C used the DB600 series engines in various combinations,
with the turbo supercharger, when fitted, being in a ventral housing, the
so called Kangaruh or Kangaroo look. Longer span wings and pressure
cabins were also fitted.

About 600 of these engines
with a very neat intercooler installation ended up on the Ju388L high
altitude reconaisence bomber where they were very neatly installed with
the
intercooler as 5 segments behind the engine. (The Ju388 also had a
night
fighter version built to deal with B29s attacking at night)

The Ju388L was in production for around 6 months in 1944, with
around 10 converted from Ju188 and 60 built new. Those 600
engines must have had a very short lifetime if all they did was power
the Ju388L. The night fighter version appears to be more prototypes
than production.

Not all aircraft entered service. All the sources i have seen credit it
with a production run of 300.

I note none of the "sources" are provided, only the claim of
multiple sources, the Ju388L was not a high priority item in
1944, the need was for fighters, the jets could take over
reconnaissance, production numbers were of the order of
60 to 70.

The night fighter did not enter service as the BMW801T version was no faster
than a standard Ju 88G7 with BMW801D at the altitudes British bombers could
fly at. It was an iron in the fire should the B29 appear.

The US could have deployed hundreds of B-29s in Europe
in 1944, given what appeared in the Pacific. The JU388J
prototype did not fly until early 1944 and needed a new type
of pressure cabin given the radar being fitted. The Germans
had considerable problems designing good pressure cabins,
and work was slow. The J version was not an iron in the fire,
more like the metal to make the axe to chop down the tree to
build the fire to put the iron in.


(The Ju 388 seems to have had the same type of periscopic sighting system
as
used on the A26 invader only it had twin 13.1mm MG in a remote tail
turret)

However Fock-Wulf decided to install water cooled V12s into the Fw 190 to
get high altitude performance. The 432 mph Fw 190D9 had a jumo 213A
enigine but the Fw190D11 and Fw190D12 (only 70 entered service) had a
Jumo
213E engine with the same two stage intercooler arrangement as the Merlin
in
the Mustang and could manage 460mph.

Be careful here, the later versions of the D series are mainly paper
projects or prototypes. And the WWII engines used a water glycol
cooling mixture, rather like many modern motor vehicles, hence
liquid cooled, not water cooled.

A few dozen of the FW190D-12 entered service. Deliveries started in Feb
1945 so there is little record of them. Even less entered service than the
Ta 152H

It would be good to actually back this up, the information I
have is they were first made in March 1945 which means
they missed service.

The D-10 replaced the fuselage machine guns with a 30mm cannon
firing through the propeller spinner. Couple of prototypes

The D-11 was a D-9 with the Jumo213F with MW-50, several prototypes
built.

It apparently had 2 20mm and 2 30 mm cannon.

The D-12 was the ground attack version, the D-10 armament, with
an armoured installation of the Jumo 213F, production began in
March 1945. It is doubtful any actually entered service. Fw190A/D
production in March 1945 is said to be 204, and zero in April.

The D-13 with the Jumo213EB and 2 20 mm cannon, 2 prototypes
built.

3 x 20mm canon. Models after the D9 series dropped the cowling guns but
added a propellor hub guns either 20mm, 30mm.

Sorry, typo the 2 should have been a 3 20 mm cannon.

The D-14 with the DB603A engine, 2 built.

Jumo 213 and DB603 engines had interchangeable mounts and were available as
'power eggs' complete with integrated anular radiators.


The D-15 with the DB603EB engine, paper project.

Oddly for such an engine seems to have
been heavily armoured for ground attack and torpedo bombing (they were
used
by the Soviets after the war for this) Apparently the annular radiators
of
the German V12s were quite battle damage tollerant as well as
aerodynanic.

It seems unlikely the designers would put lots of high altitude
features into a ground attack version.

It seems to have been intended to be a multirole combat aircraft.

Alternatively the information being presented is faulty.

The same type of engine jumo 213E with more performance ended up in the
475mph TA 152 H0 and TA 152H1 (H-1 had wet fuel tanks in its wooden
wings
for greater range) as this had very large wings it could not only fly
extremely high it could out turn any Allied fighter.

The Ta152H-1 had an empty weight of around 8,900 pounds supported
by a wing area of 251 square feet, The Spitfire XIV had an empty weight
of around 6,600 pounds and wing area of 242 square feet. I doubt the
TA152H with its long wings would win a turning contest with a Spitfire
XIV except at very high altitudes.

When comparing "empty weights", you have to be careful about what is
included in the figures. Depending on the definition, weapons, radio gear
and other operational equipment might be included or not. I'd only seriously
compare empty weights if I have a complete weight break-down where every
item is listed seperately. Unfortunately, for some types such data is hard
to find.

In other words rather than note it the Ta152H-1 had an empty
weight around a ton lower than the Spitfire and indeed around
the loaded weight of the Spitfire XIV you will announce that shock
horror, the Spitfire could have weighed a little more empty. Anything
but actually confront the problems with the "best turning" claim.

The long wings of the Ta 152H reduced the fantastic roll rate compared to
the Fw 190A and Fw 190D.

To put it mildly, given the inevitable effects of long wings and the
need to watch wing loadings.

Assuming that the wing loading of the TA 152H was higher than the Spit XIV
(assuming Griffon 65 variant to allow the spit half a chance to match speed)
then the higher aspect ratio wings of the TA152 might still be more
efficient. Because of the higher aspect ratio they would be more efficient
and probably have less induced drag so the aircraft would wash of less
airspeed.

Ah I see, the claim of always is now "might" no real information
just a whole lot of I hopes.

By the way just how much faster was the Ta152 after it had used
it MW-50 and GM-1, say compared to the Spitfire HF IX? Or for
that matter the Spitfire VII?

Turning circle is usually measured at sustained speed without loosing
altitude. For instance a Spit might turn inside a Me 109F but the 109
pilot could pull G, use his automatic slats to warn him of incipient stall
and bleed of speed faster to turn inside the spit anyway. Of course you
don't get to play this trick indefinetly.

I like this, please show all those Bf109 pilots that survived turning
contests with a Spitfire. How many did so regularly. The Bf109
was easily out turned by the Spitfire, unless the Bf109 was moving
much slower, end of story. The Spitfire had the further advantage
of a much better signalled stall than either the Fw190 of Bf109.
The Bf109 wing slats had a habit of deploying asymmetrically,
which caused aiming problems and was a fun effect near the stall.

By the way what is stopping the Spitfire pulling G as well?

Most sources rate the Ta152H series top speed in the 460 to 470mph
range, the using MW-50 and GM-1. What is the source that claims the
wings were wooden as opposed to metal?

You can tell a Fw 190D9 from a Fw 190D11/D12/D13 by the latter lacking
cowl
guns and having an oval air intage instead of round and using a cannon
firing through the propeller boss. One of these (The Fw 190 D13 I
think)
was to end up with a long barreled Mk 103 30mm cannon as a tank buster.
It
was this aircraft that I guess would have finaly replaced the Stuka.


The D-12 would be the replacement for the G model.

Geoffrey Sinclair
Remove the nb for email.

On Sat, 21 Aug 2004 17:34:17 +1000, "Geoffrey Sinclair"
wrote:

By the way what is stopping the Spitfire pulling G as well?

The emotional need to have a Nazi superweapon beat the degenerate
allies by means of the customary subjective distortion.

Gavin Bailey

--

Apply three phase AC 415V direct to MB. This work real good. How you know, you
ask? Simple, chip get real HOT. System not work, but no can tell from this.
Exactly same as before. Do it now. - Bart Kwan En

"Presidente" == Presidente Alcazar writes:

El Presidente On Sat, 21 Aug 2004 17:34:17 +1000, "Geoffrey
Presidente Sinclair"
El Presidente wrote:

By the way what is stopping the Spitfire pulling G as well?

El Presidente The emotional need to have a Nazi superweapon beat the
El Presidente degenerate allies by means of the customary subjective
El Presidente distortion.

El Presidente Gavin Bailey

Noooo! gasp

Nice sig. salutes, and falls off chair backward pulling notepad
and tangled earphones and cup of tea along

El Presidente Apply three phase AC 415V direct to MB. This work
El Presidente real good. How you know, you ask? Simple, chip get
El Presidente real HOT. System not work, but no can tell from this.
El Presidente Exactly same as before. Do it now. - Bart Kwan En

--
G Hassenpflug * IJN & JMSDF equipment/history fan

"Geoffrey Sinclair" wrote in message
...
The Enlightenment wrote in message ...

..

The P-47B was ordered in September 1940 and first flew on
6 May 1941. This was before the RAF encountered the FW190
on 27 September 1941 and over a year before one was captured,
in July 1942. The first production P-47B was in December
1941. Rather hard to see the P-47 as built specifically unless
the US was given all the information in 1940, and knew despite
the major engine cooling problems the FW190A had that the
program would be continued.

First combat was 10 March 1943. This was the P47C. The P47B models appear
to have only been used for training.