WI: the Me 210 cancelled early enough

The people at RLM, in their own 'sanity moment', decide that Me 210 is more trouble than it's worth it and decide to cancel it. Date might be, say, a day in September 1940, just afterthe second prototype crashed.
So what the resources saved on the Me 210 (and by extension on the Me 410) could buy for the RLM/LW/Axis AFs? Some options include better/different/more of:
- Bf 109
- Bf 110
- Ju 88
- Fw 190
or a combination. Almost 4000 of DB engines are freed with 210/410 out of picture, some might end in, say, Italian fighters.
Of course, people might add their proposals.
 
Thanks for the link.
Posting in that thread is a no-no due to the age of it, so perhaps people might add a thing or two here, and widen it a bit re. other options? Eg. no Me 410 frees many hundreds, if not thousands for the Fw 190C.
 

Deleted member 1487

Thanks for the link.
Posting in that thread is a no-no due to the age of it, so perhaps people might add a thing or two here, and widen it a bit re. other options? Eg. no Me 410 frees many hundreds, if not thousands for the Fw 190C.
https://www.alternatehistory.com/forum/threads/what-if-fw190c-instead-of-d.264859/
AFAIK the problem was the FW190C was dropped because the Turbo-supercharger it was based around didn't get into production.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Focke-Wulf_Fw_190_variants#High_altitude_improvements
https://forum.warthunder.com/index.php?/topic/123593-fw-190-v18-variant/
But from reading, the bottom part is mentioned as being a turbocharger:
Focke-Wulf then concentrated on an improved high-altitude fighter variant, the "FW-190C", with the DB-603 inline engine. Following an initial prototype adapted from an FW-190B, six FW-190C prototypes were built. They featured a DB-603 inline engine, an annular radiator that gave the engine some appearance of a radial installation, and a four-bladed propeller. The six final prototypes featured an elaborate turbocharger installation, with two fitted with a Hirth 9-2281 turbocharger and four with a DVL TK-11 turbocharger.

The turbocharger scheme had some similarities to that on the US Republic P-47 Thunderbolt but wasn't as clean, resulting in a large assembly on the belly that gave the type the nickname "Kangaruh (Kangaroo)", since it suggested a kangaroo's pouch. The program was finally abandoned in the fall of 1943, the turbocharger systems having proved unreliable.

A 'just' supercharged FW190C in 1943 would have been an enormously important aircraft, finally being the heavy bomber killer that was able to perform at altitude in a way that other SE fighters could not while still bearing heavy armament, plus being able to go toe to toe with the P-47 and -51D at altitude.

The more I learn about all the screw ups and missed opportunities of the Luftwaffe, I realize just how much the Wallies lucked out, as the air war could have been MUCH bloodier for them.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

The problem of today's talk about the Fw 190C involving English-language sources and 'sources' is that those imediately paint the aircraft as turbocharged ram-shackle. The German-language sources start the 190C story without turbo system, like this Wikipedia entry.
Unfortunately, the English-language sources also list the Fw 190B as turboed, while German sources do not; their 190B fetures GM-1 and some weight savings.

A 'just' supercharged FW190C in 1943 would have been an enormously important aircraft, finally being the heavy bomber killer that was able to perform at altitude in a way that other SE fighters could not while still bearing heavy armament, plus being able to go toe to toe with the P-47 and -51D at altitude.

This thread, that unfortunately has plenty of pics (taken from Herman's book about the Focke-Wulf hi-alt fighters) removed, has the unarmed V16 prototype making 720+ km/h on Notleistung (5 min engine rating), and 700+ km/h on Kampfleistung (30 min engine rating). Granted, the weapons that would've been installed in the series-produced 190Cs would've slowed it a bit, but still we'd see a Fw 190D-equivalent some time in second half of 1943.
The benefits of almost 200 PS more, the much lower drag vs. BMW 801, better layout of ram air intake do show. The 'soft' advantages would also be the ability to carry a prop cannon (= the draggy MG 131 installation can be dispensed with), lower specific consumption and ability to make much better use of MW 50 than the BMW 801.
Shortcoming being that Db 603A in 1943 was sometimes experiencing the reliability issues.

The more I learn about all the screw ups and missed opportunities of the Luftwaffe, I realize just how much the Wallies lucked out, as the air war could have been MUCH bloodier for them.

Nah, the luck was on the Axis side during the 1st war years. The Allies also made plenty of mistakes, but having big, powerful and reasonably rich allies counts for something.
 

Deleted member 1487

The problem of today's talk about the Fw 190C involving English-language sources and 'sources' is that those imediately paint the aircraft as turbocharged ram-shackle. The German-language sources start the 190C story without turbo system, like this Wikipedia entry.
Unfortunately, the English-language sources also list the Fw 190B as turboed, while German sources do not; their 190B fetures GM-1 and some weight savings.
The Fw190B with two air scoops on the fuselage and GM boost should have been ready in early 1943, it is a pretty simple fix and could have been available even before a supercharged FW190C, as the basic A-3 configuration with some longer wings and the fuselage scoops are the major changes.

This thread, that unfortunately has plenty of pics (taken from Herman's book about the Focke-Wulf hi-alt fighters) removed, has the unarmed V16 prototype making 720+ km/h on Notleistung (5 min engine rating), and 700+ km/h on Kampfleistung (30 min engine rating). Granted, the weapons that would've been installed in the series-produced 190Cs would've slowed it a bit, but still we'd see a Fw 190D-equivalent some time in second half of 1943.
The benefits of almost 200 PS more, the much lower drag vs. BMW 801, better layout of ram air intake do show. The 'soft' advantages would also be the ability to carry a prop cannon (= the draggy MG 131 installation can be dispensed with), lower specific consumption and ability to make much better use of MW 50 than the BMW 801.
Shortcoming being that Db 603A in 1943 was sometimes experiencing the reliability issues.
Drag matters less at high altitudes. But I'd think late 1943 is way too late to really make that much of a difference. Mid-early 1943 would have been a lot more helpful. Still, better than OTL for the Luftwaffe. The MG131 installation was more a problem of layout that I thought was fixed in 1943 with the elimination of the 'boil' arrangement.

Nah, the luck was on the Axis side during the 1st war years. The Allies also made plenty of mistakes, but having big, powerful and reasonably rich allies counts for something.
Sure, luck was on their side early on, but the seeds of their technological fuck ups was laid by Udet right before the start of the war, which is why the 2nd generation of war aircraft never really materialized properly and came with major waste of resources (like the Ju288 project, the Me210 fiasco, and the HE177 mess). Certainly though the fact that the war went long enough for the next generation of aircraft to even be an issue is a function of the have-nots trying to take from the haves.
 
The reason the Me 210 flew like such a pig to start with was that Messerschmitt himself, who was obsessed with saving weight, took out a one metre section of the fuselage length and it screwed the aerodynamics. It was only when that section was put back in did the Me 210 fly with any sort normality.

I've always fancied building an Me 210 as intended, with a correct length fuselage and the twin fins. It's quite an attractive design.


TBH, Willi Messerschmitt as a designer is vastly overrated. As an engineer, he was a moron. He was invited to one design conference at Airbus as a courtesy as they wanted his expertise. As ever, he wanted to get the weight of the design under consideration down to a certain limit. He suggested using just four bolts to hold the wing in place, as that was all the Bf 109 had needed. The other engineers were incredulous - they'd designed in a considerable safety margin and tore him a new one. He was asked "how long was a 109 expected to fly?" and he said something like ten hours. He was told that they expected the Airbus to fly more than a thousand, hence the safety structures in place. He wasn't invited again.
 

Deleted member 1487

The reason the Me 210 flew like such a pig to start with was that Messerschmitt himself, who was obsessed with saving weight, took out a one metre section of the fuselage length and it screwed the aerodynamics. It was only when that section was put back in did the Me 210 fly with any sort normality.

I've always fancied building an Me 210 as intended, with a correct length fuselage and the twin fins. It's quite an attractive design.
AFAIK that even with the original full length design it wasn't easy to fly or particularly great.

TBH, Willi Messerschmitt as a designer is vastly overrated. As an engineer, he was a moron. He was invited to one design conference at Airbus as a courtesy as they wanted his expertise. As ever, he wanted to get the weight of the design under consideration down to a certain limit. He suggested using just four bolts to hold the wing in place, as that was all the Bf 109 had needed. The other engineers were incredulous - they'd designed in a considerable safety margin and tore him a new one. He was asked "how long was a 109 expected to fly?" and he said something like ten hours. He was told that they expected the Airbus to fly more than a thousand, hence the safety structures in place. He wasn't invited again.
Yes, Willy got all his fame from the Bf109 and later Me262, but AFAIK he didn't really have much to do with the jet. Willy certainly had more misses than hits when it came to aircraft, the Me209/309 for instance, but also the 'revised' Me210. There was a reason beyond just politics that Messerschmitt lost control over his own company after the Me210 issue.
 
The Fw190B with two air scoops on the fuselage and GM boost should have been ready in early 1943, it is a pretty simple fix and could have been available even before a supercharged FW190C, as the basic A-3 configuration with some longer wings and the fuselage scoops are the major changes.

The external ram air intakes on the Fw 190A/B were indeed easy fix for a better high-altitude performance. I'd also delete any cowl MGs - the LMGs don's add anything against anything capabe from the Allied inventory, while the HMG installation was too draggy. Some variants, mostly from the dedicated bomber-destroyer units, with MK 108s inside the outer wings, were flying with MGs removed in OTL.
The 'scoops' were part of the cowling, and it was easy to retro-fit them on the 190A/B.

Drag matters less at high altitudes. But I'd think late 1943 is way too late to really make that much of a difference. Mid-early 1943 would have been a lot more helpful. Still, better than OTL for the Luftwaffe. The MG131 installation was more a problem of layout that I thought was fixed in 1943 with the elimination of the 'boil' arrangement.

Drag matters at all altitudes. The Spit VIII/IX HF was still 30 mph slower above 20000 ft than the P-51B with similar engine, on same engine settings/power. The MG 131 was added in late 1943/early 1944, immediate cost was 10 km/h in speed, or same as two wing cannons. The same installation was retained for the 190D. Eg. the MK 108 as a prop gun was far less draggy than the cowl MG 131 installation.
 
Messerschmitt 210 aft fuselage length is a classic case of structural engineers winning out over aerodynamic engineers.

Structural engineers always want the shortest possible fuselage because it is lighter and simpler to build.
OTOH aerodynamic engineers always ask for the longest aft fuselage because increasing the distance between the wing and tail allows for better streamlining, smaller tail surfaces, greater control authority and improved stability.

A classic case of structural engineers winning is the 1950s-vintage Pilatus P-3 trainer. Before the first prototype flew, Pilatus structural engineers succeeded in shortening the aft fuselage by 2 or 3 feet (60 to 100 centimetres). Early P-3s spun visciously, so Pilatus embarked on an exhaustive series of spin testing and finally added a massive ventral (underneath) tail fin to improve directional stable and tame spins.
Most subsequent Pilatus trainers have extra vertical fins to tame spin characteristics.
Similar extra fins are seen on Aerospatial Epsilon, CF Beechcraft Musketeer, Beech Turbo Mentor, etc. military trainers. All those trainers could have solved their spin problems by extending tail cones another metre.

Messerschmitt eventually solved 410 stability problems by extending the aft fuselage.
 
Last edited:

Deleted member 1487

The external ram air intakes on the Fw 190A/B were indeed easy fix for a better high-altitude performance. I'd also delete any cowl MGs - the LMGs don's add anything against anything capabe from the Allied inventory, while the HMG installation was too draggy. Some variants, mostly from the dedicated bomber-destroyer units, with MK 108s inside the outer wings, were flying with MGs removed in OTL.
The 'scoops' were part of the cowling, and it was easy to retro-fit them on the 190A/B.

Drag matters at all altitudes. The Spit VIII/IX HF was still 30 mph slower above 20000 ft than the P-51B with similar engine, on same engine settings/power. The MG 131 was added in late 1943/early 1944, immediate cost was 10 km/h in speed, or same as two wing cannons. The same installation was retained for the 190D. Eg. the MK 108 as a prop gun was far less draggy than the cowl MG 131 installation.
I think you've got a strong case about the MG131 for bomber killing; if they were as draggy as extra wing cannons, you're better off with the heavier wing cannons. But like the Me410/Me262 the job of this sort of fighter would be primarily a bomber killer and try to not engage enemy fighters if possible, replacing the Sturmböcke and Me410 for the role. With their extra speed they should be able to fight without escort, so eliminate the need for 'Big Wings'. Really though what they'd need is these plus R4M rockets in 1943.
 
I think you've got a strong case about the MG131 for bomber killing; if they were as draggy as extra wing cannons, you're better off with the heavier wing cannons. But like the Me410/Me262 the job of this sort of fighter would be primarily a bomber killer and try to not engage enemy fighters if possible, replacing the Sturmböcke and Me410 for the role. With their extra speed they should be able to fight without escort, so eliminate the need for 'Big Wings'. Really though what they'd need is these plus R4M rockets in 1943.

The MG 131 was pretty much unsuitable for downing the bombers LW was facing. For example, LW calculated that it was required 5 hits with 30mm mine shells to kill a 4-engined bomber, 20 hits by the usual, 92g Mine shell from 20mm cannons, and 75 hits by 15mm cannon. Two 30mm cannons will fire 5-7 sec with 5% hit probablity to kill a 4-mot, four MG 151/20 cannons will need 9.5 sec to do the same, while six MG151/15 will need almost 30 sec.And we know that LW was even trying to get 50mm cannons in service by 1945.
As for the use - I'd try to hit anything. Avoiding escorts in order to hit bombers sounds great, but the escorts will try to do their job, plus what the loose escort does on the appraoch avenues.
 

Deleted member 1487

The MG 131 was pretty much unsuitable for downing the bombers LW was facing. For example, LW calculated that it was required 5 hits with 30mm mine shells to kill a 4-engined bomber, 20 hits by the usual, 92g Mine shell from 20mm cannons, and 75 hits by 15mm cannon. Two 30mm cannons will fire 5-7 sec with 5% hit probablity to kill a 4-mot, four MG 151/20 cannons will need 9.5 sec to do the same, while six MG151/15 will need almost 30 sec.And we know that LW was even trying to get 50mm cannons in service by 1945.
As for the use - I'd try to hit anything. Avoiding escorts in order to hit bombers sounds great, but the escorts will try to do their job, plus what the loose escort does on the appraoch avenues.
Then you're back to the failed 'Big Wing' idea of massing escorting fighters with bomber killers.
 
Then you're back to the failed 'Big Wing' idea of massing escorting fighters with bomber killers.

Nope. The OTL bomber-killers did not have the performance required to avoid a reliable interception by P-47s initially, and lter by P-51. Especially the hi-alt performance was lacking. The Fw 190 with a big V12 from OTL can both take it on bombers and escorts.
 

Deleted member 1487

Nope. The OTL bomber-killers did not have the performance required to avoid a reliable interception by P-47s initially, and lter by P-51. Especially the hi-alt performance was lacking. The Fw 190 with a big V12 from OTL can both take it on bombers and escorts.
Sure, it might have to, but against the numbers it was facing it wouldn't matter and they'd get tied down avoiding/fighting escorts rather than bomber killing in 1944. Which leaves the Me262 as the only viable bomber killer by 1944, as the Do335 wasn't ready.
 
Sure, it might have to, but against the numbers it was facing it wouldn't matter and they'd get tied down avoiding/fighting escorts rather than bomber killing in 1944. Which leaves the Me262 as the only viable bomber killer by 1944, as the Do335 wasn't ready.

There was a lot of bombers killing to be done in 1943, same with their escorts in second half of 1943. The Fw 190 was good (not great) for the 1st task, and unsuitable for the second, due to considerable performance disadvantage. A better 190 will be even better in bomber killing, while without problems vs. P-47s.
As for 1944 - there is a difference in having a 10-15 mph performance disadvantage vs. 30-50 mph disadvantage. Above Germany proper in the 1st half of 1944, it was Luftwaffe that was with numbers advantage, not USAF escorts. USAF escorts have had performance advantage, that all but dissapears with a better Fw 190.
For 1944, the better performing DB 603 should've been hopefully available, like the 603E (better at high altitudes), plus introduction of MW 50 system.
 

Deleted member 1487

Above Germany proper in the 1st half of 1944, it was Luftwaffe that was with numbers advantage, not USAF escorts.
Huh?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Week
http://www.secondworldwarhistory.com/big-week-bombing-campaign.asp
https://books.google.com/books?id=1...#v=onepage&q=big week fighter numbers&f=false
The 8th Air Force alone had an average daily operational force of 1000 bombers and 678 long range escort fighters. What sort of numbers did the Luftwaffe had operational for daily use despite casualties and downtime?

For 1944, the better performing DB 603 should've been hopefully available, like the 603E (better at high altitudes), plus introduction of MW 50 system.
Which should give it the ability to make attacks on bombers and outrun escorts....or else.
 

You will note the qualifier 'above Germany proper' in my post above. Meaning: before and during the Big Week, and for some time after that, that P-47 can't contribute there. That leaves 94 of P-38s and 73 P-51s available for LR escort, ie. over Germany proper at Feb 20th 1944. SItuation improved for the USAF as the Big Week progressed, eg. with 73 P-38s and 139 P-51s at Feb 25th. Thing also being that P-38 was experiencing reliability problems, it was unable to catch 109s and 190s that started their dives, and poor cabin heating was taking the toll on capability of the pilots. So the P-38s claimed barely a LW aircraft per day, thus leaving only the P-51s as actual LW killers (plus what bomber gunners will do).
However, the Luftwaffe also tried to compete with P-47s West of Germany, that claimed about as much as P-51 units, despite USAF deploying 5-10 more P-47s than P-51s during the big week.
 
scratch the ME-210/410 and Kurt Tank slips in with TA-154 (all you need is another POD of Tego Film factory not being destroyed)

( have more faith in Tank being able to solve design problems than Messerschmitt)
 
Top