five engine FW 200 Condor

Discussions on alternate history, including events up to 20 years before today. Hosted by Terry Duncan.
thaddeus_c
Member
Posts: 816
Joined: 22 Jan 2014, 04:16

five engine FW 200 Condor

#1

Post by thaddeus_c » 17 Sep 2016, 15:20

one German project that got cancelled because "did not represent technological advance" was for five engine FW 200 Condor (with of course the fifth engine added to the nose of aircraft.)

but there was no real detail mentioned? for the aviation buffs, what might service ceiling and max. speed increase to?

(not an elegant solution but it plausibly matches the Piaggio P.108?)

User avatar
T. A. Gardner
Member
Posts: 3568
Joined: 02 Feb 2006, 01:23
Location: Arizona

Re: five engine FW-200 Condor

#2

Post by T. A. Gardner » 18 Sep 2016, 02:02

Well, one possibility is that the aircraft could cruise on 3 engines leaving two shut down to increase its range.


thaddeus_c
Member
Posts: 816
Joined: 22 Jan 2014, 04:16

Re: five engine FW-200 Condor

#3

Post by thaddeus_c » 18 Sep 2016, 05:07

T. A. Gardner wrote:Well, one possibility is that the aircraft could cruise on 3 engines leaving two shut down to increase its range.
thanks, didn't think about that. the HE-111Z joining of two fuselages (and adding fifth engine) is stated as being able to operate on two outside engines alone (or at least not crash.)

User avatar
Sheldrake
Member
Posts: 3749
Joined: 28 Apr 2013, 18:14
Location: London
Contact:

Re: five engine FW-200 Condor

#4

Post by Sheldrake » 18 Sep 2016, 08:55

thaddeus_c wrote:one German project that got cancelled because "did not represent technological advance" was for five engine FW-200 Condor (with of course the fifth engine added to the nose of aircraft.)

but there was no real detail mentioned? for the aviation buffs, what might service ceiling and max. speed increase to?

(not an elegant solution but it plausibly matches the Piaggio P.108?)

I think the answer is: "not enough to represent technological advance"

The trimotor configuration was a way to get the most from relatively feeble engines. If the Germans wanted to add power to the Fw200 it would have been more use to replace the four engines with more powerful ones and add additional fuel tanks

The Fw200 did not lack range or altitude. The fundamental problem with ther aircraft wasthat it was designed to be a civilian passenger aircraft and not as a bomber or platform for anti shipping weapons. The He177 was designed and stressed to act as a bomber.

thaddeus_c
Member
Posts: 816
Joined: 22 Jan 2014, 04:16

Re: five engine FW-200 Condor

#5

Post by thaddeus_c » 18 Sep 2016, 14:49

Sheldrake wrote:
thaddeus_c wrote:one German project that got cancelled because "did not represent technological advance" was for five engine FW-200 Condor (with of course the fifth engine added to the nose of aircraft.)

(not an elegant solution but it plausibly matches the Piaggio P.108?)
I think the answer is: "not enough to represent technological advance"

The trimotor configuration was a way to get the most from relatively feeble engines. If the Germans wanted to add power to the Fw200 it would have been more use to replace the four engines with more powerful ones and add additional fuel tanks

The Fw200 did not lack range or altitude. The fundamental problem with ther aircraft wasthat it was designed to be a civilian passenger aircraft and not as a bomber or platform for anti shipping weapons. The He177 was designed and stressed to act as a bomber.
they just could not make HE-177 work. my scenario tries to stick fairly close to real timeline. what if? the HE-177 is abandoned after the pre-production and first run of 130 were disaster. (by that time jet programs were underway)

extend viability of FW-200 with fifth engine and have Heinkel build more HE-111Z twin fuselage aircraft (a project for all flaws that came together in short order)

leapfrog to modern FW-300/TA-400 aircraft with per your post, more powerful engines (one variant had mixed propulsion)

User avatar
Sheldrake
Member
Posts: 3749
Joined: 28 Apr 2013, 18:14
Location: London
Contact:

Re: five engine FW-200 Condor

#6

Post by Sheldrake » 18 Sep 2016, 22:34

thaddeus_c wrote:
Sheldrake wrote:
thaddeus_c wrote:one German project that got cancelled because "did not represent technological advance" was for five engine FW-200 Condor (with of course the fifth engine added to the nose of aircraft.)

(not an elegant solution but it plausibly matches the Piaggio P.108?)
I think the answer is: "not enough to represent technological advance"

The trimotor configuration was a way to get the most from relatively feeble engines. If the Germans wanted to add power to the Fw200 it would have been more use to replace the four engines with more powerful ones and add additional fuel tanks

The Fw200 did not lack range or altitude. The fundamental problem with ther aircraft wasthat it was designed to be a civilian passenger aircraft and not as a bomber or platform for anti shipping weapons. The He177 was designed and stressed to act as a bomber.
they just could not make HE-177 work. my scenario tries to stick fairly close to real timeline. what if? the HE-177 is abandoned after the pre-production and first run of 130 were disaster. (by that time jet programs were underway)

extend viability of FW-200 with fifth engine and have Heinkel build more HE-111Z twin fuselage aircraft (a project for all flaws that came together in short order)

leapfrog to modern FW-300/TA-400 aircraft with per your post, more powerful engines (one variant had mixed propulsion)
The Germans eventually did make the He177 work. They would have done so more quickly if they abandoned the coupled engine project and fitted four engines.

The Fw200 was not structurally strong enough to be developed further and IIRC tended to break in heavy landings. Adding the weight of an extra engine wasn't going to help.

User avatar
T. A. Gardner
Member
Posts: 3568
Joined: 02 Feb 2006, 01:23
Location: Arizona

Re: five engine FW-200 Condor

#7

Post by T. A. Gardner » 19 Sep 2016, 00:27

thaddeus_c wrote:they just could not make HE-177 work. my scenario tries to stick fairly close to real timeline. what if? the HE-177 is abandoned after the pre-production and first run of 130 were disaster. (by that time jet programs were underway)

extend viability of FW-200 with fifth engine and have Heinkel build more HE-111Z twin fuselage aircraft (a project for all flaws that came together in short order)

leapfrog to modern FW-300/TA-400 aircraft with per your post, more powerful engines (one variant had mixed propulsion)
The He 277... (aka He 177B) The four engine version of the He 177... could have been pursued early in the program when it was getting clear that the coupled engines of the 177 weren't going to get their problems resolved. The RAF did that with the Avro Manchester and got the Lancaster.
The only thing preventing it was the stubborn refusal of the RLM and top Luftwaffe officers to allow it to happen. Had they gone that way the He 177 might have been in full production and operational use by early 1943, maybe even earlier.

Of course, my pick for a producible 4 engine bomber for the Luftwaffe is the Ju 488. That plane, if proposed earlier, was a real winner. It used existing Ju 88 / 188 / 288 components to build it and would have been easy to get into production.

thaddeus_c
Member
Posts: 816
Joined: 22 Jan 2014, 04:16

Re: five engine FW-200 Condor

#8

Post by thaddeus_c » 19 Sep 2016, 13:01

T. A. Gardner wrote:
thaddeus_c wrote:they just could not make HE-177 work. my scenario tries to stick fairly close to real timeline. what if? the HE-177 is abandoned after the pre-production and first run of 130 were disaster. (by that time jet programs were underway)

extend viability of FW-200 with fifth engine and have Heinkel build more HE-111Z twin fuselage aircraft (a project for all flaws that came together in short order)
The He 277... (aka He 177B) The four engine version of the He 177... could have been pursued early in the program when it was getting clear that the coupled engines of the 177 weren't going to get their problems resolved. The RAF did that with the Avro Manchester and got the Lancaster.
The only thing preventing it was the stubborn refusal of the RLM and top Luftwaffe officers to allow it to happen. Had they gone that way the He 177 might have been in full production and operational use by early 1943, maybe even earlier.

Of course, my pick for a producible 4 engine bomber for the Luftwaffe is the Ju 488. That plane, if proposed earlier, was a real winner. It used existing Ju 88 / 188 / 288 components to build it and would have been easy to get into production.
the HE-277 may have worked well with conventional four engine layout but that is not panacea as Messerschmitt struggled to develop ME-264. baffling why the 177 was not cancelled after they built first run of over 100 and had actual operating experience, made some design changes but not as you suggest switch to conventional layout?

a crash wartime program could be (speculative) five engine Condor, HE-111Z , and "Frankenstein" 488 (and that is complement.)

User avatar
Sheldrake
Member
Posts: 3749
Joined: 28 Apr 2013, 18:14
Location: London
Contact:

Re: five engine FW-200 Condor

#9

Post by Sheldrake » 19 Sep 2016, 13:29

thaddeus_c wrote:
T. A. Gardner wrote:
thaddeus_c wrote:they just could not make HE-177 work. my scenario tries to stick fairly close to real timeline. what if? the HE-177 is abandoned after the pre-production and first run of 130 were disaster. (by that time jet programs were underway)

extend viability of FW-200 with fifth engine and have Heinkel build more HE-111Z twin fuselage aircraft (a project for all flaws that came together in short order)
The He 277... (aka He 177B) The four engine version of the He 177... could have been pursued early in the program when it was getting clear that the coupled engines of the 177 weren't going to get their problems resolved. The RAF did that with the Avro Manchester and got the Lancaster.
The only thing preventing it was the stubborn refusal of the RLM and top Luftwaffe officers to allow it to happen. Had they gone that way the He 177 might have been in full production and operational use by early 1943, maybe even earlier.

Of course, my pick for a producible 4 engine bomber for the Luftwaffe is the Ju 488. That plane, if proposed earlier, was a real winner. It used existing Ju 88 / 188 / 288 components to build it and would have been easy to get into production.
the HE-277 may have worked well with conventional four engine layout but that is not panacea as Messerschmitt struggled to develop ME-264. baffling why the 177 was not cancelled after they built first run of over 100 and had actual operating experience, made some design changes but not as you suggest switch to conventional layout?

a crash wartime program could be (speculative) five engine Condor, HE-111Z , and "Frankenstein" 488 (and that is complement.)

What were the urgent problems to which a five engined condor become part of an emergency crash build programme?

In 1941-42 the Germans did not need a marginal improvement to their maritime reconnaissance aircraft. A five engined fw200 wasnlt going to out run an F4F or Beaufughter. Nor would it deliver substantially more bombs with greater accuracy.

The He177 was a step improvement on the Fw200 and could do both. The Luftwaffe had an urgent need to make their next generation of aircraft work. This only started when Udet removed himself from the technical directorate. a five engined FW200 was a project too pointless for even Udet's inspectorate to approve!

The Luftwaffe looked at the idea of a five engined condor didn't offer any technological improvement and wasn't worth building. On what armchair logic does it go higher up the priority list than, say, a better fighter, making

thaddeus_c
Member
Posts: 816
Joined: 22 Jan 2014, 04:16

Re: five engine FW-200 Condor

#10

Post by thaddeus_c » 19 Sep 2016, 13:44

Sheldrake wrote:
thaddeus_c wrote:the HE-277 may have worked well with conventional four engine layout but that is not panacea as Messerschmitt struggled to develop ME-264. baffling why the 177 was not cancelled after they built first run of over 100 and had actual operating experience, made some design changes but not as you suggest switch to conventional layout?

a crash wartime program could be (speculative) five engine Condor, HE-111Z , and "Frankenstein" 488 (and that is complement.)

What were the urgent problems to which a five engined condor become part of an emergency crash build programme?

In 1941-42 the Germans did not need a marginal improvement to their maritime reconnaissance aircraft. A five engined fw200 wasnlt going to out run an F4F or Beaufughter. Nor would it deliver substantially more bombs with greater accuracy.

The He177 was a step improvement on the Fw200 and could do both. The Luftwaffe had an urgent need to make their next generation of aircraft work. This only started when Udet removed himself from the technical directorate. a five engined FW200 was a project too pointless for even Udet's inspectorate to approve!

The Luftwaffe looked at the idea of a five engined condor didn't offer any technological improvement and wasn't worth building. On what armchair logic does it go higher up the priority list than, say, a better fighter, making
they looked at (any) changes to Condor that could allow it to remain viable (as bomber) long after Udet had departed.

the armchair logic is to modify, reuse, enhance any actual flying aircraft when HE-177 proves disaster. there was precedent with scrapping of ME-210.

the continued production of Condors (and HE-111s) is never a real waste as both can be used as transports (and were) while HE-177 cannot fill that role.

Graniterail
Member
Posts: 73
Joined: 11 Oct 2015, 10:00
Location: NZ

Re: five engine FW-200 Condor

#11

Post by Graniterail » 20 Sep 2016, 05:01

A longer ranged bomber available to Germany in 1942. I don't suppose it'd be of any use in a hypothetical 1942-1943 'Operation Eisenhammer' (plan to attack Soviet Hydroelectric facilities powering their war industries with air-dropped floating mines that would get sucked into the Turbines) variant?

thaddeus_c
Member
Posts: 816
Joined: 22 Jan 2014, 04:16

Re: five engine FW-200 Condor

#12

Post by thaddeus_c » 20 Sep 2016, 06:25

Graniterail wrote:A longer ranged bomber available to Germany in 1942. I don't suppose it'd be of any use in a hypothetical 1942-1943 'Operation Eisenhammer' (plan to attack Soviet Hydroelectric facilities powering their war industries with air-dropped floating mines that would get sucked into the Turbines) variant?
believe the closest they came with that operation was use of Mistels https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mistel

what was weight of mines they planned on using? Condor carried two HS-293 glide bombs, one on each wing, and they weighed 2,300 lbs. ea.

(the LW wanted to hit aircraft engines plants instead)

User avatar
Sheldrake
Member
Posts: 3749
Joined: 28 Apr 2013, 18:14
Location: London
Contact:

Re: five engine FW-200 Condor

#13

Post by Sheldrake » 20 Sep 2016, 09:37

thaddeus_c wrote:
Sheldrake wrote: The Luftwaffe looked at the idea of a five engined condor didn't offer any technological improvement and wasn't worth building. On what armchair logic does it go higher up the priority list than, say, a better fighter?
they looked at (any) changes to Condor that could allow it to remain viable (as bomber) long after Udet had departed.
.......the continued production of Condors (and HE-111s) is never a real waste as both can be used as transports (and were) while HE-177 cannot fill that role.

The question was not whether there was a benefit in continuing to build Fw200 but whether the resources spent developing the type further would have more used elsewhere. The Luftwaffe looked at adding a fifth engine to the condor and decided it didn't improve its performance.

Speculating on theoretical performance improvements of a development of historic interest only to aircraft modelers looks like a WOFTEX, to use an RAF term ;)

thaddeus_c
Member
Posts: 816
Joined: 22 Jan 2014, 04:16

Re: five engine FW-200 Condor

#14

Post by thaddeus_c » 20 Sep 2016, 13:36

Sheldrake wrote:The question was not whether there was a benefit in continuing to build Fw200 but whether the resources spent developing the type further would have more used elsewhere. The Luftwaffe looked at adding a fifth engine to the condor and decided it didn't improve its performance.
half the story, Milch struck planned production only in early 1943 and shortly thereafter they were examining how to keep Condor viable for a while longer as the 177 was still having problems and they didn't want to use it for longer flights over Atlantic.

the "resources" for Condor were considered surplus engines, why they were used in first place, why they were used on JU-352 transport.

the real resource sinkhole was 177, had they scrapped that after, as noted already,the initial run, 4,000 DB engines (actually many more since one aircraft could run through multiple sets of engines) would have been available, and the materials used to construct the airframes.

the other project they struggled to bring into production was JU-290 but it is twice as heavy as other comparable aircraft and six engine variant required tug and/or RATO to get off ground.

was already mentioned the simplest, logical solution was JU-488, using in production parts.

Graniterail
Member
Posts: 73
Joined: 11 Oct 2015, 10:00
Location: NZ

Re: five engine FW-200 Condor

#15

Post by Graniterail » 20 Sep 2016, 17:25

thaddeus_c wrote:
Graniterail wrote:A longer ranged bomber available to Germany in 1942. I don't suppose it'd be of any use in a hypothetical 1942-1943 'Operation Eisenhammer' (plan to attack Soviet Hydroelectric facilities powering their war industries with air-dropped floating mines that would get sucked into the Turbines) variant?
believe the closest they came with that operation was use of Mistels https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mistel

what was weight of mines they planned on using? Condor carried two HS-293 glide bombs, one on each wing, and they weighed 2,300 lbs. ea.

(the LW wanted to hit aircraft engines plants instead)
Closest I'm getting is references to 'Sommerballon', particularly a model BM 1000F, which is perhaps 1000kg & 'Winterballon'(BM 1000H?), needing 300 of each,
http://downloads.sturmpanzer.com/guides/nara_t971.pdf

With 100 Mistrel combos.
https://books.google.com.au/books?id=5n ... on&f=false

Ah, here it is, Parachute Mines, "Bomenmine"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parachute_mine#History
"The Luftwaffe also used the 1,000 kg (2,200 lb) Bombenmine (BM 1000, Monika, or G Mine)."

Post Reply

Return to “What if”