If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
"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. |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
"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! =----- |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
"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 |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
"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 =--- |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
"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 =--- |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
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. |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
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. |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
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 |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
"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 |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
"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. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Wanted 5-cylinder B-75 Lawrence radial | Chris Wertman | Home Built | 5 | April 8th 10 02:11 AM |
Help ! SMALL Radial engine | Chris Wertman | Home Built | 12 | July 18th 05 02:46 PM |
Lead Radial Question | Stan Prevost | Instrument Flight Rules | 4 | November 25th 04 06:20 PM |
World War Two Era U.S. Radial Engines (Curtiss and Pratt&Whitney) | Lincoln Brown | Military Aviation | 10 | February 13th 04 04:30 AM |
Help ! SMALL Radial engine | Chris Wertman | Military Aviation | 11 | January 4th 04 08:22 AM |