It didn't, that's why it wasn't put into production.
I have some photos of the actual prototype in one of my files somewhere but I'm having trouble finding them right now.
Luftwaffe "sanity options 2.0", 1935-43
- Thread starter tomo pauk
- Start date
I have some photos of the actual prototype in one of my files somewhere but I'm having trouble finding them right now.
And you'd have to be suicidal to try to get the thing off the ground with that narrow landing gear and the torque from the engine.
For the He-100 discussion on sanity options. This is AH after all and it seems the sanity option for the super fast he-100 is to install a retractable back-up radiator that may also help when overheating during climbing . Maybe sectionalize the evap a bit too. It’s not unreasonable to prepare backups when it is clearly damage prone.
I have always liked this aircraft because it has opportunities for improvements while staying competitive. Eg. It could extend the wings just a bit with some tanks, guns, and it would be a fast, long-range/long loiter carrier (add extra trailing edge flaps) or air superiority fighter watching the excellent/effective Ju-87 from above.
This would cost some speed, but it had speed to give.
I have always liked this aircraft because it has opportunities for improvements while staying competitive. Eg. It could extend the wings just a bit with some tanks, guns, and it would be a fast, long-range/long loiter carrier (add extra trailing edge flaps) or air superiority fighter watching the excellent/effective Ju-87 from above.
This would cost some speed, but it had speed to give.
Last edited:
Sanity options part 1: Another good thing for Luftwaffe sanity is that only one person has to change. Goering defines the hierarchy with Wev/Richthofen on top with Milch in charge of giving them what they want. Not in charge of Wever /Richthofen.
Let’s imagine the calls for aircraft in 1934 is moved forward a bit to mid 1933, the requirements are specified as guidelines. This favors He and Bf with their He-70 and bf108 experience so probably goes as OTL. Difference is that He112 goes into limited production as the aircraft carrier fighter and for exports, and more importantly, a New Call is to be made in 1937 to remedy the deficiencies. We might also here imagine Bf110 the winner for heavy fighter. Not to worry though.
The next calls are likely to be won by the improved He-100 of TTL for performance, range and loiter time with FW-190 for ruggedness and flexibility (its seen as a JU87 supplement/replacement at the get-go as it enters that competition too in a different version. A strike of brilliance from Kurt Tank). FW-187 wins the next heavy fighter whereas Bf-110 continues its part into a Ground attack aircraft and night fighter (which in this TL is prioritized from the late 1930’s when radar and knickebaum demonstrate the potential).
Obviously, a couple hundred million RM are invested in factories for inlines and radials in 1933 which changes a lot in the late 1930’s, early 1940’s. ITTL the Luftwaffe plans for Hitlers plan of conquest.
Let’s imagine the calls for aircraft in 1934 is moved forward a bit to mid 1933, the requirements are specified as guidelines. This favors He and Bf with their He-70 and bf108 experience so probably goes as OTL. Difference is that He112 goes into limited production as the aircraft carrier fighter and for exports, and more importantly, a New Call is to be made in 1937 to remedy the deficiencies. We might also here imagine Bf110 the winner for heavy fighter. Not to worry though.
The next calls are likely to be won by the improved He-100 of TTL for performance, range and loiter time with FW-190 for ruggedness and flexibility (its seen as a JU87 supplement/replacement at the get-go as it enters that competition too in a different version. A strike of brilliance from Kurt Tank). FW-187 wins the next heavy fighter whereas Bf-110 continues its part into a Ground attack aircraft and night fighter (which in this TL is prioritized from the late 1930’s when radar and knickebaum demonstrate the potential).
Obviously, a couple hundred million RM are invested in factories for inlines and radials in 1933 which changes a lot in the late 1930’s, early 1940’s. ITTL the Luftwaffe plans for Hitlers plan of conquest.
Track grew from ~2m with the 'normal' Bf 109, to 2.5m with the 109X due to the new, wider fuselage as dictated by a wider engine (it also allowed for a bigger fuel tank now, 485L vs. 400). Worth taking a look.
Compare with Spitfire, 1.74 m (68.5 in), including the Mk.XIV with 2200 HP Griffon; jumped to 1.96m (77in) with the late/post war 20 series and 40 series Seafires and their new wing. FWIW
added: seems like the reason of the late Spits having wider track was due to the more slant angle of the struts, at least going on by this
Germany was ill able to produce the BMW 801s for their needs, so something got to go; Fw 190 was a superior 'platform' anyway.
Even going just with 'normal' radiator gives a fighter that is as fast at least as the MC.202 for 1939-40, or that is faster than Bf 109E by some 30-40 km/h; what is more important is that Spitfire is no longer the fastest fighter in 1939-40. Speed differential vs. Hurricane and most of French fighters is huge.
Not having the cooling system that took the best part of internal volume allows for installation of more fuel - couple that with better streamlining and the fighter is also much more rangy than the 109E.
Last edited:
Do you think the Me-109X could have evolved into a decent carrier fighter or would that just be a waste of time and resources?
It would've been a waste if Germany never gotten the carriers
Otherwise, why not go for it.A bit grown-up radial powered 109, from at least using the G&R 14N (1000-1180 HP), 14R (power comparable to the BMW 801, but probably a good deal lighter), or even the 801 if these can be spared. Note that while fuselage is from the 109X, wing is from the 109T (minus the radiators, for obvious reasons) making it less of a handful with the heavy engines and payload; 4 cannons:
Something very old - He 162 with wings from the Me 163 (with the OTL 162 for comparison). Benefits - less compressibility drag (important once beyond 700 km/h, give or take), wooden wing that actually worked, lower wing loading so the new pilots, greater internal volume for fuel and/or guns and ammo.
Yes, someone actually needs to push for 1-engined jet fighters 1st for this to happen in 1943.
(click on the pics for hi-res)
The He-162 with a butterfly tail would've made tighter turns safer, one of the planes biggest weakness was the tail ripping off in tight turns but this was also due to cheap glue being used in it's construction.It would've been a waste if Germany never gotten the carriers
A bit grown-up radial powered 109, from at least using the G&R 14N (1000-1180 HP), 14R (power comparable to the BMW 801, but probably a good deal lighter), or even the 801 if these can be spared. Note that while fuselage is from the 109X, wing is from the 109T (minus the radiators, for obvious reasons) making it less of a handful with the heavy engines and payload; 4 cannons:
View attachment 871777
Something very old - He 162 with wings from the Me 163 (with the OTL 162 for comparison). Benefits - less compressibility drag (important once beyond 700 km/h, give or take), wooden wing that actually worked, lower wing loading so the new pilots, greater internal volume for fuel and/or guns and ammo.
Yes, someone actually needs to push for 1-engined jet fighters 1st for this to happen in 1943.
View attachment 871779
(click on the pics for hi-res)
Build the Salamander with better glue or use metal and give the plane swept wings.
Below a prototype He-162 that never made it off the drawing board.
Reverse the wings and this might have made a great fighter.
Care to post the details about the tail ripping off?
For reasons unknown to me, wooden wings worked on the, much faster, Me 163.
But, I don't have anything agains the He 162 with metal wings, even if these are nicked from the Fw 190 or Bf 109 (loose a bit of wing at the root in the process for lower max thickness and less drag).
I don't have a link to any particular site that discusses the problem with the tail but I have read that this was a problem in some books I had on Luftwaffe aircraft.
The problem was due to an inferior wood glue the Germans were forced to use after a bombing raid destroyed the factory that made a much superior glue, this was the same reason why the Focke Wulf Ta. 154 Moskito never entered mass production.
Famed British test pilot Eric Brown mentioned that of all the WWII era jets he test flew, the Salamander was by far his favorite, when asked about the problem with the tail he said that the problem only occurred when pilots made too tight a turn but that shouldn't have been a major problem because one doesn't have to make tight turns with a jet plane but unfortunately old habits die hard for veteran fighter pilots.
As long as it wasn't still a dive bomber.
Edit.
Although think of the awesomeness of a Lanc precision placing a Grand Slam on Maus Superschwerer Abteilung 601....
Last edited:
Wolf1965
Donor
The very first FW190 flew with a BMW 139, a twin-row 132. It gave terrible overheating problems, which is why FW changed to the BMW 801, an engine that was also simpler to make as it had two valves per cylinder instead of four.
Using a radial on the 109T would make it even worse. The tail is way too small and it doesn’t address the real problem of the narrow track u/c - a third of 109s were written off in landing accidents and that’s on land, not on a pitching carrier. Seafires had a marginally wider track and most of those had landing issues.
Heinkel designed swept wings for the 162, the C with swept back, the D swept forward. Supposedly some B variants had the swept forward wing but I’ve yet to see a reference.