Luftwaffe "sanity options 2.0", 1935-43

I... honestly give up trying to understand the He 100. Everything I've read on is contradictory. (Though the document you graciously shared probably will shine some light on it so for that thank you)
No He 100 specimens survived the war.
And almost all the documents and blueprints concerning it were destroying in a bombing raid on the Heinkel plant where they were stored.

The pdf I posted had a few pages that seemed burnt, perhaps they were salvaged from the bombing raid.
There's precious little genuine info on the He 100, hence all the hearsay and rumors.

Don't use the Luftwaffe as a political instrument. Use it as an extension of the Army. You simply cannot use the Luftwaffe as a means to capitulate the enemy outside of a decisive battle.
Impossible with Goering in charge.
The worst example of this is what happened with the Luftwaffe Field Divisions.
Untrained, underequipped units of largely technical professionals (meterologists, radio personnel, cooks, etc.) through into frontline combat and completely devastated, all because Goering refused to hand them over to the Heer.

Fw187 instead of the Bf110 and Ju88. Use the DB601 engine. It'll need a few changes, a bubble canopy for better vision for one. Realistically, this is the only fighter you'll intensively train pilots for.
The original single seat Fw 187 had a sort of bubble canopy.
Udet's stupidity was the reason why the Bf 110 was chosen instead.
Wolfram von Richthofen was in favor of its development and would have chosen it had he not been replaced and his suggested successor rejected.

I seem to recall reading at least one account of the ME109 machine guns being used to help aim cannon. I am a bit skeptical as to how that might have worked out in practice but thought I would mention it. In some ways the later single Cannon and dual MG ME109 variants might be a bit of a special case. Pilot training (or lack thereof ?) might also play a role ?
Later models had a single Motorkanone (usually a MG 151/20, later a MK 108) and 2x Mg 131 on top of the engine.
The MG 131 and MG 151/20 had similar muzzle velocities and ballistic performance, hence why Jagdwaffe pilots used the MG 131 (it had much more ammo) first as an aiming aid.

Okay but presuming the early results with 200 hour life times were at least somewhat due to rare alloying elements being used, would that have been a worthwhile improvement assuming the necessary rare alloying elements were available in 1944-45 ? Maybe build two streams of engines (one stream with a long life that are fitted to the air craft in the factory, another stream with a short life for use as emergency spares to get aircraft combat worthy again after battle damage or what not ?)
The early results were with the use of rare rawmat that the Germans no longer had in 1944/45 due to the changing strategic situation.
Hence, the performance of early prototypes were much better than the actual production models.

Perhaps, though I will have to read on it again to see what were the problems with using rare elements. I know that Krupp offered a 'better' alloy to their Tinidur, one that contained 60% nickel to the 30% of Tinidur but I am unsure if it was worth it, the Tinidur from my memory, because of the 2% Titanium in it, was unweld-able and had problems of fabrication that took time to the no-nickel, chromium alloy with the stamped blades.

I am also not sure how much was the fault of the alloys used and how much the fault of the engine design.

Edit: Also please note that it wasn't that big of a problem the low lifespan of the engine, for the Me 262, it took 30 minutes to replace the engines and they had more spare parts and aircrafts than pilots to fly them anyway.
Indeed.
Only 25% of all Me 262s produced actually saw service.
The reason?
Fuel shortage.
If Germany cannot secure enough fuel, then even the best aircraft (jet or prop) will be completely useless.

Yes, there was a late-war report or two where Germans claimed that impact-fused shells have had higher chances of downing Allied A/C than it was the case with time-fused ammo.



There were a couple of ways to improve hit probability, at least what Germans were experimenting with, concentrated on achieving greater muzzle velocities. Like sub-caliber shells, 'arrow' shells to be fired from smooth-bore cannons, and squeeze-bore cannons. Expectations were high on these, both due to the improved hit and destruction probablility, as well as for the expected savings in usage of raw materials (in 1944 it took 16000 - 16 thousand - of heavy shells to kill Allied bomber).



Alloy 'Chromadur' was supposed to be used for the turbine blades. It contained no nickel, but a lot of chromium.
The Germans should have focused development of VT/proximity fuses.
The Oslo Report and later captured documents stated the Germans began developments but they were never a priority and thus never completed.

On the other hand, Allied developments were completed and were deployed to great success against kamikazes in the Pacific and German V-1s over England.
 
Last edited:
Only 25% of all Me 262s produced actually saw service.
The reason?
Fuel shortage.
If Germany cannot secure enough fuel, then even the best aircraft (jet or prop) will be completely useless.

One way to make a better use of jet engine technology is to start out with 1-engined aircraft. Just remember to change engines a bit more often than on the 2-engined types.

The Germans should have focused development of VT/proximity fuses.
The Oslo Report and later captured documents stated the Germans began developments but they were never a priority and thus never completed.

On the other hand, Allied developments were completed and were deployed to great success against kamikazes in the Pacific and German V-1s over England.

Good call on the need to develop the proximity fuses.
We'd probably see the see-saw bettle between Allies trying to jam the fuses and Germans trying to find the ways of frequency-hoping. Acoustic proximity fuses were also tested in Germany, so that is perhaps another thing worth pursuing.
Proximity fuses might also be a way to make effcient all the unguided AA rockets Germany was developing.

Another thing of interest are the AA missiles.
 
One way to make a better use of jet engine technology is to start out with 1-engined aircraft. Just remember to change engines a bit more often than on the 2-engined types.
The Me 163 as a jet would work very well.
Combine that with the Jagdfaust system, and they would have a fast, almost invincible bomber killer.
Too fast to be caught, with a highly effective weapon system.

Good call on the need to develop the proximity fuses.
We'd probably see the see-saw bettle between Allies trying to jam the fuses and Germans trying to find the ways of frequency-hoping. Acoustic proximity fuses were also tested in Germany, so that is perhaps another thing worth pursuing.
They'd have to find the right proximity first.
The Germans had far too many different ongoing VT fuze projects, some 30-50.
Acoustic fuzes would work, but wouldn't that be vulnerable to pilots manipulating the RPM in an attempt to throw off fuzes?
The Hs 123 was capable of doing this and pilots would often use this to make a machine gun like sound as a psychological weapon.

Proximity fuses might also be a way to make effcient all the unguided AA rockets Germany was developing.

Another thing of interest are the AA missiles.
The AA missiles with VT fuzes would be terrifying for any Allied bomber.
A larger one fired from a launch rail would be able to bring down B-29s.
 
Guided weapons' heap, incomplete:
- wire-guided subsonic anti-aircraft missile for short ranges (comparable to what 37mm Flak can reach)
- similar, but aircraft-launched, like the X-4 (here 2-seat fighters might have advantage, like the Fw 187)
- anti-radiation missile
- radio-guided no-nonsense anti-aircraft missile (don't go overboard, start with, say 300 kg missile and work from there)
 
It would be more worthwhile if they pursued jet engines earlier and completely avoided high octane piston engines. The jets would be easier and cheaper to manufacture and consume the more common fuel instead of the C-1/C-3/C-3 fuels.
I see the virtues of the ability to use lower spec fuel, but engine life will be as poor as in the Me262 because Germany has limited access to chromium and nickel which are needed for corrosion resistance and high temperature stability.
One of the drivers for high temperature is that fuel efficiency improves at higher temperatures, but lack of nickel and chromium forces you to work at lower temperatures, and thus lower efficiency.
 
I see the virtues of the ability to use lower spec fuel, but engine life will be as poor as in the Me262 because Germany has limited access to chromium and nickel which are needed for corrosion resistance and high temperature stability.
One of the drivers for high temperature is that fuel efficiency improves at higher temperatures, but lack of nickel and chromium forces you to work at lower temperatures, and thus lower efficiency.
Air-cooled turbine blades were a workaround vs. the lack of nickel. LW needs to make peace with jet engines lasting 20 hours on a good day, replace them every 15-20 flights, with a caveat that jet-engined fighters need to be 1-engined 1st and foremost - halves both fuel consumption and 'consumption' of engines.
Jet power has a lot of advantages, not juts from the German point of view: engines are cheaper and lighter thus smaller and lighter fighters can be made, no need to produce propeller, single handle engines' operation, no torque reaction, by default jet aircraft are with tricycle.
 
Air-cooled turbine blades were a workaround vs. the lack of nickel. LW needs to make peace with jet engines lasting 20 hours on a good day, replace them every 15-20 flights, with a caveat that jet-engined fighters need to be 1-engined 1st and foremost - halves both fuel consumption and 'consumption' of engines.
Jet power has a lot of advantages, not juts from the German point of view: engines are cheaper and lighter thus smaller and lighter fighters can be made, no need to produce propeller, single handle engines' operation, no torque reaction, by default jet aircraft are with tricycle.
Not sure about a single engine at this point, it cannot be the Jumo 004B/D or BMW 003B/D, it would require a class 2, perhaps a class 3 engine to make it worthwhile, you will also get rid of the use of changing the engine in a 1 engine configuration.

Your only hope for a good, powerful engine is to have Muller upscale his HeS 30 engine to a 12-20 kN thrust range, leaving the Jumo 004 and BMW 003 as the sole class 1 engines while Heinkel-Hirth goes with a class 2 (HeS 011) and class 3 one.

Edit: Class I-IV refers to a system of classification for gas turbines.
Class I - up to 1000 kg of thrust
Class II - 1300-1700 kg of thrust
Class III - 2500-3000 kg of thrust
Class IV - 3500-4000 kg of thrust
 
Last edited:
Not sure about a single engine at this point, it cannot be the Jumo 004B/D or BMW 003B/D, it would require a class 2, perhaps a class 3 engine to make it worthwhile, you will also get rid of the use of changing the engine in a 1 engine configuration.
I'm completely okay with 004 or 003 powering a 1-engined fighter. If/when the better engines can be had, even better.
 
I'm completely okay with 004 or 003 powering a 1-engined fighter. If/when the better engines can be had, even better.
I mean, in terms of performance it would be pretty underpowered and not have the redundancy of having another engine in case the second one malfunctions. It would also increase the complexity of changing the engine if it is situated inside the airframe.

Only P.15 could perhaps perform adequate with a Jumo 004D but it would be limited by size (endurance, ammunition) and other unseen factors.
 
I mean, in terms of performance it would be pretty underpowered and not have the redundancy of having another engine in case the second one malfunctions. It would also increase the complexity of changing the engine if it is situated inside the airframe.

Only P.15 could perhaps perform adequate with a Jumo 004D but it would be limited by size (endurance, ammunition) and other unseen factors.

Every aircraft is compromise.
I don't expect that a 1-engined jet fighter will be well suited for 600-700 km escort ranges, but it will be head and shoulders wrt. usability & survivabilty above the Continent when compared with 109 and 190 in 1943-45. For 1943, already a 50 km/h surplus over these two puts it above P-47 or Spitfire IX at any altitude, and specifically at 8-9 km, where P-47 and Spit IX were at home, and where B-17s were cruising. It should also be easier to catch PR Spitfires and Mosquitoes, a task where piston-engined German fighters were struggling at best.
Jet-engined fighter will also be at less of disadvantage come 1944 and Merlin Mustang with it, plus Tempest and Spitfire XIV.
 
Every aircraft is compromise.
I don't expect that a 1-engined jet fighter will be well suited for 600-700 km escort ranges, but it will be head and shoulders wrt. usability & survivabilty above the Continent when compared with 109 and 190 in 1943-45. For 1943, already a 50 km/h surplus over these two puts it above P-47 or Spitfire IX at any altitude, and specifically at 8-9 km, where P-47 and Spit IX were at home, and where B-17s were cruising. It should also be easier to catch PR Spitfires and Mosquitoes, a task where piston-engined German fighters were struggling at best.
Jet-engined fighter will also be at less of disadvantage come 1944 and Merlin Mustang with it, plus Tempest and Spitfire XIV.
The Germans could have tried something the Soviets did post war and stuck a Jumoo-004 turbo jet engine in a single engine prop fighter like the Me-109.
The Soviets did this with a Yak-15, top speed was about 490 mph.

800px-Yakovlev_Yak-15_3-view_line_drawing.svg.png


Germans could have used a modified Me-109 and gotten a similar performance and would have been able to easily mass produce the plane.
Me-109Z+--.png


The plane would be armed with four 20mm cannons, two in the nose and one in each wing.
 
Last edited:
Idle musing on different Flak weapons (Flak was mostly Luftwaffe's 'territory'):
Introduce the 30mm Flak early on; something like the MK 101 or 103 were the most powerful 30mm guns of ww2, while the German Flak 3.7cm was one of the weakes of 37-40mm AA guns. I'd favor a 2-barreled set-up in lieu of 4-barreled 20mm, since this will offer at least double the range and ceiling. Also offers greater interlocking of fire zones, or leaves possibility of covering the same chunk of territory with lower number of the guns.Tone down production of 20mm weapons to 'pay' for this, leave 20mm Flak fo the the platforms that don't have a motorized transport, and on a lightweight carriage only.
37mm should move a step up, towards firing the Navy's 37mm ammo that was much more powerful (heavier shell fired at greater MV); will require a new gun, or a 'mechanization' of the navy's gun itself that was originally a slow firing type. A result should something as capable as the 40 mm Bofors. Navy's ammo will also be capable for killing the tanks better than the LW's 'legacy' ammo.

Earlier entry into high-speed AA Flak: test the Pak 41 squeeze-bore with it's HE shell for the AA task and act accordingly; under-caliber shells or smooth bore guns will also work. Rheinmetall noted that altitude of 10 km was reachable with under-caliber shell for the legacy 88mm Flak at 19 seconds, or at 17 seconds with it modified for firing of squeze-bore ammo, while the gun firing the old, full-calibe ammo was incapable of reaching 10 km altitude, and needed 34 second for it's ceiling. Devising the Littlejohn adapter for 7.5cm would've also been interesting, ditto for under-caliber shells, so that caliber can also work for AA.
 
Idle musing on different Flak weapons (Flak was mostly Luftwaffe's 'territory'):
Introduce the 30mm Flak early on; something like the MK 101 or 103 were the most powerful 30mm guns of ww2, while the German Flak 3.7cm was one of the weakes of 37-40mm AA guns. I'd favor a 2-barreled set-up in lieu of 4-barreled 20mm, since this will offer at least double the range and ceiling. Also offers greater interlocking of fire zones, or leaves possibility of covering the same chunk of territory with lower number of the guns.Tone down production of 20mm weapons to 'pay' for this, leave 20mm Flak fo the the platforms that don't have a motorized transport, and on a lightweight carriage only.
37mm should move a step up, towards firing the Navy's 37mm ammo that was much more powerful (heavier shell fired at greater MV); will require a new gun, or a 'mechanization' of the navy's gun itself that was originally a slow firing type. A result should something as capable as the 40 mm Bofors. Navy's ammo will also be capable for killing the tanks better than the LW's 'legacy' ammo.

Earlier entry into high-speed AA Flak: test the Pak 41 squeeze-bore with it's HE shell for the AA task and act accordingly; under-caliber shells or smooth bore guns will also work. Rheinmetall noted that altitude of 10 km was reachable with under-caliber shell for the legacy 88mm Flak at 19 seconds, or at 17 seconds with it modified for firing of squeze-bore ammo, while the gun firing the old, full-calibe ammo was incapable of reaching 10 km altitude, and needed 34 second for it's ceiling. Devising the Littlejohn adapter for 7.5cm would've also been interesting, ditto for under-caliber shells, so that caliber can also work for AA.
First off, why was the text color white for your post?

Second the German 37mm Flaks weren't that bad, especially the Flak 43 which was one of the best 37-40mm Flaks of the war.
I'd argue that Germany needed to create the Flak 43 ASAP, which also had a Zwilling option.

The squeezebore requires both tungsten and aluminum is copious amounts, and barrel life is significantly reduced.
Hence its OTL fate as a blind alley in terms of gun construction.
 
Didn't the Yak have problems with inhaling weapon exhaust?
That's news to me but it does sound plausible.
The gun on the Yak-15 has it's barrel's muzzle right on the edge of the jet's intake, the plane I drew has all it's guns further back so it might not have the same problem.
 
Last edited:
Not My full entry, but ressource allocation needs to be looked into. Chomium and Nickel was used in various amounts everywhere. How about stretching dumb armor a little more so difficult stuff like engines get more.
Engines would use very little compared to a tank,
 
I have a pdf of the documentation made by Heinkel regarding the He 100.
The evap cooling system (Kuhlmaschine) was successfully removed and replaced with a larger retractable radiator (Blockkuhler).
I've looked at the doc you've kindly provided.
The retractable condenser/radiator was a already a feature as early as the He 100 V2 per pg. 9 of your doc (retrofit of the condenser was considered for the V1, as well as all of the cooling system freom the V2, per pg. 47 - role of that device was to help out at low speeds, like at taking off, slow cruising, or landing). Indicated speed at ~4.4 km was 520 km/h, with retracted condenser and on 1.43 ata and 2560 rpm (over-revving much the poor 601A? ); 520 IAS at that altitude works to about 620 km/h true air speed.
Seems like that Udet did 650 km/h with the V2 during the 100 km record flight (pg. 58) in the mid 1938, with engine pushed to 1200 HP.

The small-wing V3 was noted to still posses good take off and landing qualities, despite the small wing (and thus higher wing-loading); my comment - hmm, small-wing He 100 spin off combat aircraft with a light V12, and obviously normal cooling?
V3 was doing 550 km/h indicated air speed at 1600-2000m on modest engine settings (2300 rpm, 1.30 ata => 950-1000 HP there), again works out to 600+ km/h at these altitudes.
Tests note repeated problems with undercarriage retraction/extension. Also the DB 601A was probably pushed beyond what manufacturer was stipulating, judging by high RPM and often too high coolant or/and oil temperatures.

V4 was considered as a pattern aircraft for series production in 1938, featuring a simplified and big-sized surface cooling system.
There was a suggestion to make an even smaller wing - 8-9 sqm (!!!) - for the record He 100, also with smaller tail unit, shorter fuselage, less coolant carried etc, but still with the retractable condenser. Aim was 800 km/h.

Heinkel notes that the fast development of the He 100 left some details being not as strong/reliable as needed, like whole engine section or undercarriage.

And, finally at 7th Sept 1939, we get to a He 100 with the 'blockölkühler' - 'block oil cooler' - that one pre-series He 100 was to get. Per the discussion here, seems that was indeed done. However, the cooling system for the engine remained the same. The 'blockkühler' is indeed mentioned on pg. 66 - perhaps a typo that omitted the 'öl' part? They say that of 19 pre-series machines, the last 6 are to be cancelled, being competed at 10%.
Heinkel were also to receive 15 cannon mounts on 15th Sept 1939, and can start installing the 8 MG 151s (that they already have) on the pre-series machines (my comment - each as a motor cannon?).
Same report notes that IJA (Japanese army) was interested in He 100s with 'blockkühler', while IJN was interested in the "Okü-machine" - what that means I don't know, neither does the Google translate. Japanse interest in the He 100 was reported months prior Sept 1939.
Report from Berlin dated 1st Dec 1939 noting that problems with small pumps -for coolant? - are solved, and that He 100 is a mature aircraft.

I can't find anywhere in the text that V7 was outfitted with any guns, let alone such a heavy battery (4 LMGs, 2 cannons).

Sorry for the wall of text :)

My take after all 74 pages - no, He 100 was probably never outfitted with 'normal' cooling, nor it was ever that heavily armed.
 
I assume from the “Wall of text” that the He-100 was equipped with evaporation cooling AND a retractable cooler for take off. I suppose this could do double duty as emergency cooling if the evaporation cooling Saw combat damage?
 
Top