He112 V10 vs Bf109E

The argument in favor of the Me-109, as I understand it, is the same one that would have favored the Hurry over the Spit: it was easier to build. The He-112 was a better performer in all realms, tho more difficult and expensive to produce.

Which would you pick: Hurry or Spit?:rolleyes:
 
There was a hilarious comic I ran into a while back on the process of Nazi procurement polices. It had Hermann Goering demanding more guns be mounted on some over armored jet monstrosity that never took off, then being distracted by Messerschmitt offering him cake.

Subnormality. Possibly #96.

Saphroneth gave a link in post #20 of the German Viper Rocket interceptor thread.
 
The argument in favor of the Me-109, as I understand it, is the same one that would have favored the Hurry over the Spit: it was easier to build. The He-112 was a better performer in all realms, tho more difficult and expensive to produce.

Which would you pick: Hurry or Spit?:rolleyes:

Not quite true. Both German aircraft were built using "modern" techniques, with the 109 being twice as "easy". The Hurricane was built largely with the same techniques as the Hawker Hart, steel tube, wire braced, covered with fabric. It was a thick monoplane and with retractable main gear and enclosed canopy. The Spitfire used the "modern" technique which required the slow-to-modernize industry to live in the present, which was accomplished rather well, apart from the wing leading edge, which gave some troubles to the sub-contractor.

The Messerschmitt Bf-109 largely outperformed the He-112A with similar engines, except in ground handling and cockpit visibility. Comparisons with the He-112B, with the 29 ft wingspan, are largely undocumented, but there is no viable reason to presume superiority over the existing Bf-109. By the way, while the He-112A and the Spitfire wings were somewhat similar in planform, examination of comparative thickness will partially explain why one became a legend and the other, a footnote.
 
Much superior? It was pretty much topped out in terms of development, while the BF109 was only getting into its grove.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heinkel_He_100#He_100_D-1
.

That's a statment that needs to be clarified, IMHO...
In all aircraft that used the DB601 and upgraded to the DB605 there were few if any problems. The engine was a little bit heavier, not much bulkier. All the Italian aircraft that got it got better.
I don't really see why the He100D couldn't get the 1350HP DB601N, and get faster, or later the DB605. A DB601N powered He100E would not be much heavier than the D, and would be even faster while loosing little in other atributes, much as the Bf109F-4 was all around better than earlier Bf109 variants.
Much of the development on the Bf109 from the G-4 on was more specialiazation than evolution, with each improvement in one area forcing a trade off.
 
That's a statment that needs to be clarified, IMHO...
In all aircraft that used the DB601 and upgraded to the DB605 there were few if any problems. The engine was a little bit heavier, not much bulkier. All the Italian aircraft that got it got better.
I don't really see why the He100D couldn't get the 1350HP DB601N, and get faster, or later the DB605. A DB601N powered He100E would not be much heavier than the D, and would be even faster while loosing little in other atributes, much as the Bf109F-4 was all around better than earlier Bf109 variants.
Much of the development on the Bf109 from the G-4 on was more specialiazation than evolution, with each improvement in one area forcing a trade off.

The He-100D had a wing span of 9.4m and an area of 14.6m2. It suffered from high landing speed and undercarriage collapse. Any weight increase would exacerbate this condition. The Bf-109 had a nifty cooling system, the He-100D didn't. By comparison with the -109, the wing was only somewhat more heavily loaded, but compared to Italian and Japanese versions, much more so.

It's not All the Italian aircraft, but both. Gabrielli didn't do a -601 version.
 
The He-100D had a wing span of 9.4m and an area of 14.6m2. It suffered from high landing speed and undercarriage collapse. Any weight increase would exacerbate this condition. The Bf-109 had a nifty cooling system, the He-100D didn't. By comparison with the -109, the wing was only somewhat more heavily loaded, but compared to Italian and Japanese versions, much more so.

It's not All the Italian aircraft, but both. Gabrielli didn't do a -601 version.

"By 1939, all the main Italian aircraft factories had begun designing a new series of fighter, with inline engines as opposed to the radial engines that powered the Italian fighters in early World War II. This process brought to the first generation of Italian fighters equipped with the Italian-built copy of the Daimler-Benz DB 601 engine, the so-called Serie 1/2, whose most prominent representative was the Macchi C.202 Folgore. However, the process didn't stop, and already in 1941, designers shifted their attention on the new Daimler-Benz DB 605. Fiat designer Giuseppe Gabrielli, while experimenting a new version of his Fiat G.50 fighter, equipped with the DB 601, started a new design that was to be powered by the Daimler-Benz DB 605."

That's from wiki. Seems FIAT took so long to jump on the DB601 band wagon it went for the next wagon. Two out of two still makes a 100% success rate:)
To be fair, the Re2005 is not really a re engined Re2001 but a new aircraft, much as the definitive Macchi would have been the 205N-2 not the Velcro. The DB605 might work better with redesigned aircraft.

Regarding the H100D-1, did the DB601N weighted enough or had big enough cooling requirements compared to the DB601A to prevent its successful use?
The DB605 would in that case require a major redesign which would, in hindsight, be a factor against the He100 being adopted.
 
The Velcro is an amazing fastener, but the Veltro was an amazing replacement for the Folgore. It went so far as to remove the oil cooler from its location upstream of the coolant radiator, on the Folgore, and replace it with two circular coolers on either side of the nose. The Reggianne oil/coolant radiator system was also even further altered in the transformation from 2001 to 2005. The G.55 had a Folgore style layout, which was not exactly efficient.

The cooling system on the He-100D was similar to that employed on the MS.406, in that it was clumsy, but retraction reduced the clumsiness, along with the cooling. A point may be that the overall function of a service-ready He-100D as a functional weapon of war was deemed insufficiently advantageous to warrant further interest. I have pointed out before that the Kawasaki company used the Heinkel as a guideline in the design of the Ki-60, but they used real radiators, and started off with a bit more wing, and quickly determined that they needed more wing. They subsequently determined that they needed a lot more wing, and made the Ki-61. Had Heinkel made a decision to use a proper coolant system with more wing, the performance might have proved that it warranted further investigation and evaluation with better engines. He didn't, and they didn't, so it ended there, except for here.
 
Top