AHC: post-1942 Luftwaffe 'sanity options'
- Thread starter Paolo Giusti
- Start date
Eh eh eh, I bait you all out as snails with a cup of beer.
Also, it seems there is consensus only on fuel issue and also on its inevitability (
Your Jumo proposal is an earlier Jumo 213, isn't it? In fact, I always find a lot of trust in DB and a lot less in Jumo engine: why?
What is this?
I do not understand this too...
Also, it seems there is consensus only on fuel issue and also on its inevitability (
), because synfuel plants require a lot of steel. But do you think this:
i.e. coal-water slurry fuel for diesel tank engine and spare syn-plant for avgas (AFAIK, hydrogenation can be used to produce only a type of fuel, contrary to craking that refines oil in its parts) would work?
Last edited:
Deleted member 94680
I believe it’s sanity inasmuch as it is designed to end the war sooner.
As in trying to get Germany lose as soon as possible and me without getting shot - at least immediately
No, not the Jumo 213, but a major improvement for the 211 series so the engine power is competitive with what the WAllies will be throwing at luftwaffe.
I don't know why do you have more or less trust in one stuff vs. another.
In short, a video by Calum Douglas: link
Long video, going into theory: link
If you want to read, not by Calum: link
What exactly?
I'll elaborate a bit. Like all engine designers, people at BMW were making changes and improvement on their 801 engine. The BMW 801E was a major modification of the 801D, with improved, more efficient supercharger and improved intake leading towards the supercharger, among other things. Since it was judged that change from 801D to the 801E will cut engine production by a large margin, the 801E never entered production. By 1944, the situation was dire for Luftwaffe, so BMW mated the improved supercharger and intake from the 801E to the 'rest' of the 801D engine, thus creating 801S. The BMW 801S was installed in the Fw 190A-9 in late 1944. useful chart
External air intakes for supercharger were far less restrictive than internal air intakes used on majority of the Fw 190As, meaning less turbulent air enters the supercharger, and smaller pressure losses in the intake. All together it was beneficial for altitude power and thus altitude performance, but external intakes were draggy and impacted speed at lower altitudes. Check here for tests of the Fw 190/783.
External intakes also allowed for air filters to be installed, addition was especially needed for fighter-bomber and attack versions of the Fw 190.
And it would work easily!As in trying to get Germany lose as soon as possible and me without getting shot - at least immediately
I was misunderstood: I found a lot of WI about DB engine and very few about Jumo: I thought there was a bias from you expert against Junkers engine and I did not understand why.
EDIT: I said "an earlier Jumo 213" because Jumo 213 fit an autocannon between the pistons, like you proposed for the Jumo 211.
So, this is an earlier Jumo 213, with Mikulin's reverse-engineered variable-geometry blower inlet, isn't it?
EDIT: so an earlier Jumo 213 with central autocannon and v.g.b.i..
This is more clear, thank you!. But I still do not understand if you suggest an internal or external intakes.
Last edited:
I'm perhaps more informed about ww2 technology than the average person, but I'm no expert.
Most of the what-ifs indeed revolve round DB engines, like the 'daimlerized' Fw 187 or/and He 100 entering service, or the Fw 190C. On the other hand, many DB engines have had often a long 'gestation' period, sometimes it took more than year to actually achieve original factory specs before engines destructed themselves in mid air. The DB 605A killed Marseille, for example, while it took more than a whole year of 1943 to remedy the reliability issues on the DB 603A.
Yes for the later, no for the former - the Jumo 213 was a whole new engine vs. the 211 series, for example the 213 was 30-40% heavier than the 211, resulting with much increased RPM and power.
What I'm proposing is basically the German equivalent of Merlin 60/70 series - low weight & drag, high power at all altitudes but especially at high altitudes, easy to switch production to make these so 'we' canhave them by 1943.
For Eastern front - keep the internal intakes. For other fronts, external intakes.
So a Jumo 211 with central autocannon and v.g.b.i.: was it feasable? I think a v.g.b.i. was easy to be added, but where was Junkers going to find space for an autocannon?
Less drag at lower altitude.
Better performance at higher altitude.
The early Jumo 211s have had a provision for the central autocannon, but since the 211 never gotten to power 1-engined fighters, the opening at engine back was replaced/'filled' with other engine anciliaries from the 211F on, and prop shaft was not hollow anymore. Receiver of the autocannon still goes behind the engine (as it was on the Jumo 210, 213E and DB engines), only the outer part of barrel is within the engine.
Actually I think I want to write an ASB AH story in which Nazi fanboy ends up providing information for Führer via time machine - with some rather unexpected results...
I'd guess that a 'big MG FFM' of, say, 25mm should be able to emulate the results of the Ho-155. No going overboard with gun's weight and size also allows for placing them within the wings of Fw 190, and it facilitates installation of multiple cannons in the nose where possible. Also as a Schrage Musik, where one does not need a whacking big gun to kill a bomber.
The OTL MK 103 can trade propellant charge for shell lenght/weight. The round with M-shell of 330g contained 110g of propellant for 860 m/s from a long barrel, compared with MK 108 with same shell that contained 30 g (!) of propellant for 500-525 m/s from a short barrel. The 450 g heavy API-T went 700 m/s with 98 g of propellant.
So we can probably go with 60-70g of propellant and 400g shell at perhaps 700 m/s for the MK 103 of historical 140 kg? RoF around 400 rd/min as per OTL gun.
Why? It avoided a lot of infight about "who man the gun between us and Heer?". It was also a good way to use foot divisions (dear God...Air Force infantry division...).
At least, two sub-Force (Defence LW with flak and interceptor Vs Attack LW with bomber and JaBos).
I know Germany lost on 7th of December 1941.
Rationality does not mean war-winning: a rational solution that simply stopgap the Allies enough for a white peace / nuked Berlin is exactly what I am looking for.
What my proposals can buy to the Luftwaffe 15-18 monhts after the start from winter of 1941/42? Probably a 'classic' day fighter force capable to for 670-700 km/h at hi alt, each fighter armed with 3-4 cannons, and more numerous than in OTL due to removing a lot of trash in early 1942. Long range Fw 190s probably. More numerous night fighters (mostly Bf 110s and Ju 88s; no Do 217s) capable for 550-600 km/h in full trim.
For 1944, jet fighters and bombers need to enter service in the West. I'd settle for minimaly 750 km/h 1-engined fighter armed with 2x30 mm in early 1944, 800 km/h by the end of 1944.
Bombers are still in dire need to overhaul, however. Jet bomber that can out-pace anything piston-powered for 1944 - something no worse than Ar 234. Until then, a proper piston-engined bomber is needed.
'Rehash' in a sense of what improvements are needed. Since the investment in manufacturing of the AA guns is already made, the most needed improvement might be development and introduction of proximity-fused shells for 88mm and bigger guns. Radars need to be improved as much as possible.
I'd also introduce the 30mm AA gun ASAP, start with MK 101 and continue with 103 when developed.
Next step is AA missile, whether guided or not. Both will need proximity fuse, especially the unguided.
For 1944, jet fighters and bombers need to enter service in the West. I'd settle for minimaly 750 km/h 1-engined fighter armed with 2x30 mm in early 1944, 800 km/h by the end of 1944.
Bombers are still in dire need to overhaul, however. Jet bomber that can out-pace anything piston-powered for 1944 - something no worse than Ar 234. Until then, a proper piston-engined bomber is needed.
'Rehash' in a sense of what improvements are needed. Since the investment in manufacturing of the AA guns is already made, the most needed improvement might be development and introduction of proximity-fused shells for 88mm and bigger guns. Radars need to be improved as much as possible.
I'd also introduce the 30mm AA gun ASAP, start with MK 101 and continue with 103 when developed.
Next step is AA missile, whether guided or not. Both will need proximity fuse, especially the unguided.
I am a fan of Flak Towers. But I think that 1942 was to late to develop valve glass thick enough to withstan AA Gs: maybe electrostatic fuze? Did they use valves? Or @wiking suggestion of cancelling time fuze to spare copper and going all for base-bleeding contact-fuzed precise shot.
I am also a huge fan of unguided Wasserfall salvos against Doolittle's bomber boxes. Also, there was no need of thick valves for the proximity fuzes.
Last edited:
Then that's what I gave you. It might buy some time, it might not. But it's about the best that can be done.