Critique of 1945 German aircraft designs - where were the mistakes?

[Avimimus]

I heard rumour that TsAGI analysis found that the Ta-183 Design II would have shed its tail (although the IAe 33 Pulqui II seems to have eventually managed to make a somewhat similar t-tail work). What other issues did late war WWII designs have?

Ju EF 128 intakes might have had a lot of duct losses, the Gotha P.60 upper intake might have had issues with air-pressure fluctuations with variations in angle-of-attack, the later Messerschmidt P.1112 design intakes seem even more dubious... would any of these have worked adequately? It is interesting to think about.

With more than 75 years of hindsight - what other ideas can we rule out? Which aircraft might have gotten off the ground?

 

[Nik]

The end-game reminds me of the French pre-war chaos: Sundry wondrous designs, but totally out of lead-time, resources etc to resolve / de-bug / mass-produce...
whimsy:
France equipped with DeLannes and Payen Darts could have been a very nasty shock to the Blitzkrieg air-cover. Losing dozens of Stukas per sortie, having precious Me 109 and 110 crews culled, getting the Panzers' logistics strafed would have allowed time for some 'Joined-Up Thinking'...
/

 

[Michel Van]

How can i explaint this situation in 1945 simple ?
TOTAL CHAOS !
end 1944 the German industry collapsed
They were using presst particle board als replacement for Aluminum in Aircraft !
on the other side the German Aircraft industry spit fast our one Wunderwaffe after another

WHY ?
The NAZI gave order after order, in despair hope that one of those bring the final victory.
on other side suddenly allot engineers were involved in Wunderwaffen projects.
and can't be call in for deadly frontline duty
if that project was realistic or not they worked on it until capitulation of Third Reich
leading to stuff like Ta-183, Gotha P.60, Ju EF 128, Maus and other far fetch projects
it was literally life assurance for the engineers in 1944/45

 

[HoHun]

Hi,

it was literally life assurance for the engineers in 1944/45

Well, we had a discussion on that on a German forum, and it turned out that in July of 1944, the Jägerstab had all projects stopped that were not part of the official program. So any engineer working on a project not based on a Jägerstab or later Rüstungsstab requirement wouldn't have gained any protection from that ...

Reine Papierprojekte der deutschen Luftrüstung

Keine Ahnung, wie das administrativ ablief. Ich weiß nur, das der Uk-Antrag für jeden einzelnen Mitarbeiter von der Firma an die betreffende Dienstelle der Wehrmacht gesandt wurde und diese den Antrag genehmigte oder eben ablehnte. Meine konkreten Fälle betreffen auch nicht das Entwurfsbüro...

www.flugzeugforum.de

Here's an order to Blohm & Voss, requesting the development of a jet fighter with a He S 011 engine, based on 1) Blohm & Voss' Volkjäger design, 2) based on the designs Blohm & Voss had previously submitted for a high-performance piston-engined fighter, in the configuration of a flying wing with wingtip stabilizers:

Reine Papierprojekte der deutschen Luftrüstung

Keine Ahnung, wie das administrativ ablief. Ich weiß nur, das der Uk-Antrag für jeden einzelnen Mitarbeiter von der Firma an die betreffende Dienstelle der Wehrmacht gesandt wurde und diese den Antrag genehmigte oder eben ablehnte. Meine konkreten Fälle betreffen auch nicht das Entwurfsbüro...

www.flugzeugforum.de

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)

 

[Antonio]

would any of these have worked adequately?

Some concepts were actually tested or studied just after WWII, thus offering clues about its viability.

 

[red admiral]

Some concepts were actually tested or studied just after WWII, thus offering clues about its viability.

I think it's telling that the postwar aircraft that had most input from the German (or ex German) designers don't really seem to have been that successful, even when paired with more powerful and reliable engines. E.g. Pulqui II, XF-92

 

[paralay]

Countries that win wars postpone promising developments "for later". During the escalation, you need a lot of proven weapons, it brings victory

 

[Scott Kenny]

My critique of WW2 German aircraft designs is that they kept old designs in service long past their best-by date.

Me109? Designed in 1936. Should have been replaced by 1942 at the latest, 1941 would be better.
Fw190? Designed in 1939. Should have been replaced by 1944.

In comparison, the P-40 Warhawk was introduced in 1939, replaced by P-51 and P-47 in late 1943 and late 1942, respectively.

 

[_Del_]

My critique of WW2 German aircraft designs is that they kept old designs in service long past their best-by date.

To get a new design into service takes time and engineer-work. Even once it is essentially ready, after all the testing, it takes time to convert a factory, uninstall tooling, install the new stuff, train your line workers, etc. All that time is time you could be manufacturing airplanes that are considered "good enough".
Then once they start coming off the line you have to train aircrew, maintainers, build a logistics train, etc.
Unless a new design represented a substantial improvement, it's going to lose on the basis of opportunity cost.

 

[Antonio]

@Avimimus

The answer to your question comes from different factors which are being summarised in the precedent posts. You can find out more from the contents in the forum and then going to the books: Justo Miranda, Dan Sharp, Smith & Creek, Luftwaffe Secret Projects... for the German projects and Early post WWII secret projects from Tony Buttler (British/USA/Soviet), JC Carbonel (French) and also in minor countries where German designers were hired, to find how the III Reich tech was studied/tested/adopted or rejected according to their viability

 

[HoHun]

Hi Scott,

My critique of WW2 German aircraft designs is that they kept old designs in service long past their best-by date.

Me109? Designed in 1936. Should have been replaced by 1942 at the latest, 1941 would be better.
Fw190? Designed in 1939. Should have been replaced by 1944.

In comparison, the P-40 Warhawk was introduced in 1939, replaced by P-51 and P-47 in late 1943 and late 1942, respectively.

I'd argue that generally, it only pays off to replace a fighter aircraft with a better type if you have a new engine type available.

As we know thanks to Calum's "Secret Horsepower Race", the development of new engines took quite unexpectedly long in Germany (and not only in Germany).

The Fw 190 was, for a while, considered to be the Me 109 replacement, but as the BMW 801D required C3 fuel, which was a limited resource, this turned out not to be feasible. The Me 309 was planned as an Me 109 replacement, but the DB 603 wasn't ready, and wasn't powerful enough. The Fw 190 was to be replaced by the Ta 152 (though that really was more of an evolutionary development), but shortly after production started, it was stopped again because the Red Army overran the fuselage and wing production site at Posen.

The Me 262 was a new design with new engines, obviously, and the He 162 had a new engine in the BMW 003 as well, though it can be argued that it was untypical in having less powerful engines than the Me 262. (The He 162 wasn't really a replacement for the Me 262 though, and the Focke-Wulf approach to the Volksjäger tender showed that they considered the "new fighter - new engine" paradigm valid too, as their suggestion was a fighter suitable for the HeS 011 engine, but feasible as a BMW 003 aircraft for as long as the HeS 011 wasn't available.)

I believe there are few fighters internationally in WW2 that had successors powered by the same engine, though I can think of at least one example

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)

 

[Scott Kenny]

I'd argue that generally, it only pays off to replace a fighter aircraft with a better type if you have a new engine type available.

As we know thanks to Calum's "Secret Horsepower Race", the development of new engines took quite unexpectedly long in Germany (and not only in Germany).

Fair point.

Especially about the lack of 100octane Avgas.

I believe there are few fighters internationally in WW2 that had successors powered by the same engine, though I can think of at least one example

Pretty sure most of the USN aircraft all ended up on R2800s, even the Bearcat.

 

[HoHun]

Hi Scott,

Pretty sure most of the USN aircraft all ended up on R2800s, even the Bearcat.

Spot on, I was thinking the same

It's a rather unsual situation in that the Vought F4U and Grumman F6F were acquired in parallel. I suspect the Navy really wanted the performance of the Corsair, but the Hellcat appears to have been much better designed for mass production (and accordingly was much cheaper), while having superior handling characteristics ...

That the F6F was (sort of) replaced with the F8F that used the same engine is unusual again, but it probably reflects the F6F's lack performance relative to its peers (not necessarily to the Japanese types it was actually fighting). However, one could argue that in order to achieve a meaningful improvement, the F8F perhaps went a bit too far with regard to light weight design ... combat radius decreased compared to the F6F, and the break-away wing tips never really worked as intended, and in the end were fixed in place and the Bearcat was given a fairly low G limit (for a fighter).

(There was also the F7F Tigercat with the same R-2800 engines of course, but I'd phrase the rule as "no single-engined fighter is replaced by a new single-engine design using the the same powerplant".)

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)