WI: Focke-Wulf Fw 190D arrived in early 1944?

(I think this has been discussed before)

As we all know, in the OTL, the Allied gained air superiority of the Luftwaffe because the P-51B/C Mustang with its excellent high altitude performance and 440 mph top speed was easily out-performing the Fw 190A's and Bf 109G models during the first half of 1944, which resulted in huge losses of experienced Luftwaffe pilots.

But what would have happened if Focke-Wulf had been able to secure a supply or Jumo 213 or DB 603 engines earlier for the Fw 190D series? Imagine what would have happened had the Luftwaffe gotten the Fw-190D into service at about the same time that the P-51B/C started to enter USAAF service in early 1944--given the Fw 190D-9's top speed of 422 mph, it would have made the D-9 and P-51B/C almost equals in combat, especially in straight line speed. As such, my guess is that it would have taken longer for the USAAF to establish air superiority, and North American may have needed to develop a "high performance" upgrade to the P-51B/C with a more boosted engine to better out-run the D-9's. (Republic probably would have done the same with a higher-boosted P-47D fitted with the "paddle blade" propellers.)
 

Andre27

Banned
Personally i don't think it would have made a bit of difference because in the end it was not the quality of the fighter escorts (though it did help) which tipped the scale but the sheer number. Germany lost too many pilots already.

Place that FW model in full scale production in 1940-1941 and it makes a difference, but end 1943/early 1944 the air war was already won by the allies.
 
It would make a diference. Osprey published the P51 vs Fw190 volume as the first of its "duel" series and the bottom line was that the Mustang was clearly superior to the Fw190A. Lots of good pilots were KIA in Fw190 because they were not better enough to their opponents to cancel the US fighter advantage. With the Fw190D, they would have had a fighting chance.
War changing difference, no. But the story of the battle for air superiority over Germany in late 43 early 44 would have been different.
 
One problem that faced German fighters was that their mission was to shoot down bombers which did not go down easily. They carried extra armor and armament which impaired their performance in fighter vs fighter. Just one of many problems.
 
One problem that faced German fighters was that their mission was to shoot down bombers which did not go down easily. They carried extra armor and armament which impaired their performance in fighter vs fighter. Just one of many problems.

In theory they worked in teams, with lighter fighters engaging the escorts, while the unarmed and uparmoured versions engaged the bombers. This worked a lot like the US tank destroyer concept and faced the same problem, enemy escorts, like enemy tanks, had their own agenda and didn't play by the Germans script, going after the "interceptors" as often as they could...
 
In early 1944, the mainline Luftwaffe fighters--the Fw 190A and Bf 109G-6--were both deficient against the P-51B/C for two reasons:

1. The Fw 190A had only a top speed to 404 mph and performance dropped off quite a bit above 26,000 feet--both obviously not issues with the Packard Merlin engines fitted to the P-51B/C.

2. The Bf 109G-6 had the altitude performance, but it only topped out at 387 mph, way below the 440 mph top speed of the P-51B/C.

It is because of these performance deficiencies that explained why Luftwaffe suffered heavy losses in combat during the first half of 1944, made worse when the P-47's switched to a new "paddle blade" propeller for dramatically improved climb and acceleration performance.
 
Pilot Quality

I'm not about to disagree with the stats provided above, but the major contributing factor here (and in almost any air combat) is the quality of the pilots.
Look at the Brewster Buffalo - Shot out of the skies by the Japanese in the Far East, yet handled very well by the Finns in the Winter War. Same plane, but pilot quality (or perhaps better called comparative pilot quality?) was vastly different.
Chances are a rookie in a P51D is still going to be shot down by an Experten in an Me109G6, although former has a better chance of evading given speed advantage.
 
But the Buffalos used in Malaya were much heavier than those used by the Finns IIRC. There was quite a difference in performance. Also as you say there was also a difference in the quality of their foes plus other factors like tactics and the general situation.
 
In early 1944, the mainline Luftwaffe fighters--the Fw 190A and Bf 109G-6--were both deficient against the P-51B/C for two reasons:

1. The Fw 190A had only a top speed to 404 mph and performance dropped off quite a bit above 26,000 feet--both obviously not issues with the Packard Merlin engines fitted to the P-51B/C.

2. The Bf 109G-6 had the altitude performance, but it only topped out at 387 mph, way below the 440 mph top speed of the P-51B/C.

It is because of these performance deficiencies that explained why Luftwaffe suffered heavy losses in combat during the first half of 1944, made worse when the P-47's switched to a new "paddle blade" propeller for dramatically improved climb and acceleration performance.


I'm going to had two more. The P51 could outmanouver both German fighters in just about every parameter except the Fw190 rate of roll and both US fighters could out dive both german fighters. German pilots had been fighting vertically for years and not being able to dive their way out of trouble was a serious handicap for them. To make matters worst, fightinga against the MkIX and later Sptifires demanded totaly different tactics than fighting against P47 or P51.
Galland tells in memoirs in detail an action he had in a Fw190 against a P47 when he was in charge of fighters and he went up to see what things were like up there.
For those who blame pilot quality for everything, read the memoirs of germans aces. The P51B/C was a better fighter than the 190A or any 109 and the Mustang was one of those acemaker aircraft.
 
I'm not about to disagree with the stats provided above, but the major contributing factor here (and in almost any air combat) is the quality of the pilots.
Look at the Brewster Buffalo - Shot out of the skies by the Japanese in the Far East, yet handled very well by the Finns in the Winter War. Same plane, but pilot quality (or perhaps better called comparative pilot quality?) was vastly different.
Chances are a rookie in a P51D is still going to be shot down by an Experten in an Me109G6, although former has a better chance of evading given speed advantage.

The USAF and RAF had a training program that left very litle of "rockieness" in its pilots and a core of experienced pilots to help them get started. The LW was experiencing in 44 what the Finns were experiencing at about the same time when the Soviets arrived in force with La5FN and Yak9.
To beat a inferior pilot either he must make a serious mistake or you must have some advantage in your aircraft flight envelope that you can exploit. When the enemy aircraft does everything better than yours, its game over. The P51 did everything better than the Bf109...
 
BY early 1944, the Luftwaffe would soon be facing at least two factors that would make it relatively irrelevant what fighters they had: (1) reduced fuel supplies, and (2) high attrition among the tranied pilots. Also, as Just Leo noted, by 1944 the number one priority of German fighters was to intercept bombers, not engage enemy fighters. In this context it really doesn't make a whole lot of difference whether or not the Dora was a significant improvement in fighter vs fighter combat over the Fw190A or Bf-109G, since it would share the same problems attacking bombers. The best option would be hordes of Me-262s - planes fast enough to swoop down at high speeds through fighter screens and well-armed enough to get in a good 30mm burst at a bomber on one pass and then high-tail it for home where Fw and Bfs provide the cover over airbases. The key is not beating the escorts but avoiding them.
 
BY early 1944, the Luftwaffe would soon be facing at least two factors that would make it relatively irrelevant what fighters they had: (1) reduced fuel supplies, and (2) high attrition among the tranied pilots. Also, as Just Leo noted, by 1944 the number one priority of German fighters was to intercept bombers, not engage enemy fighters. In this context it really doesn't make a whole lot of difference whether or not the Dora was a significant improvement in fighter vs fighter combat over the Fw190A or Bf-109G, since it would share the same problems attacking bombers. The best option would be hordes of Me-262s - planes fast enough to swoop down at high speeds through fighter screens and well-armed enough to get in a good 30mm burst at a bomber on one pass and then high-tail it for home where Fw and Bfs provide the cover over airbases. The key is not beating the escorts but avoiding them.

The escorts knew that, and used agressive tactics to deal with that. In war if you have a plan that assumes "you'll take on the escorts and I'll get the bombers" it invariably turns out the other way around. The USAF used both close escorts and advanced groups that (counter) intercepted the interceptors before they could get to the bombers.
As for the Me262, without a major jump in German engine tech, it's not going to be there in reliable numbers in late 43/early 44.
The issues with the Jumo 213 are much easier to solve.
 
It should be noted that the P-51 design was going to be great anyway because even with the low-altitude rated Allison engine, the early P-51A Mustangs could outrun German fighters up to 5,000 feet altitude. That impressive speed made the P-51A well-suited for low-altitude reconnaissance work; much of the mapping for the Normandy beaches were done with P-51A's fitted with cameras. But once fitted with the Merlin 61 engine, the Mustang came into its own. The P-51A fitted with the original Rolls-Royce designed engine installation (known as the Mustang X) topped out at 432 mph even with the higher-drag engine nacelle design; when North American engineer designed an even more sleek engine installation, the top speed reached 441 mph, an amazing achievement by 1943 standards.

Yet, had Focke-Wulf managed to get a supply of Jumo 213 engines earlier, the Fw 190D series would probably have started to reach Luftwaffe units by late winter 1944, just about the same time as the P-51B/C started to reach operational units in quantity. It would have made gaining air superiority over the Luftwaffe a lot harder, since unlike the Fw 190A or Bf 109G-6 the Fw 190D had the speed and altitude performance to fight against the P-51B/C on much more even terms.

(Interestingly, the Japanese Army Air Force had a similar conclusion with the Kawasaki Ki-61. The Ki-61--while a good fighter--suffered from innumerable problems with the Ha-40 and Ha-140 inline engines, and studies began to replace the Ha-140 with the much more reliable Mitsubishi Ha-112 radial engine. When the factory that built the Ha-140 engine was destroyed by a B-29 bombing raid at the beginning of 1945, Kawasaki had to accelerate this project quickly. The suitably-modified plane, the Ki-100, which flew in February 1945 surprised a lot of people; being much lighter than the Ki-61, the Ki-100 had superb flight characteristics and could easily fight on almost equal terms with a P-51 Mustang or F4U Corsair!)
 
Top