Opinions on the FW-190 D-9?

Discussions on all (non-biographical) aspects of the Luftwaffe air units and general discussions on the Luftwaffe.
User avatar
David C. Clarke
Member
Posts: 11368
Joined: 10 Mar 2002 17:17
Location: U.S. of A.

Opinions on the FW-190 D-9?

Post by David C. Clarke » 14 Sep 2003 19:51

Hi Guys, I haven't seen a Thread on this fighter in a while. I know you Luftwaffe types get a little tired of discussing the same subjects, but the D-9 seems to arouse different emotions in different people.
Now, realizing that the TA-152 was meant to be the ultimate representative of the Focke-Wulf line, where does that leave the Dora? My own feeling is that she was enough of an advance over the earlier FW-190s to merit being built, what do you think?

Best Regards,
David

User avatar
Leibstandarte_reenactor
Member
Posts: 1560
Joined: 08 Jun 2003 21:20
Location: South Carolina

Post by Leibstandarte_reenactor » 14 Sep 2003 19:58

the long nose "Dora" was Kurt Tanks ingenous war planes. i think they were reserved for a high speed hi alt interceptor. beauty of an war bird IMHO

User avatar
Kugelblitz
Member
Posts: 168
Joined: 16 May 2003 05:08
Location: CE

Post by Kugelblitz » 15 Sep 2003 03:40

It was the first german propeler fighter to deal in equal to equal with Mustangs, then came the newest BF-109 and the Ta-152.
Great plane.

User avatar
Scott Smith
Member
Posts: 5602
Joined: 10 Mar 2002 21:17
Location: Arizona

Post by Scott Smith » 15 Sep 2003 04:31

The FW 190-D9 was a transitionary aircraft to the Ta 152 but it was a match for the Mustangs as an air-superiority fighter. It did not have as much range as the P-51 and some would say that it was underarmed with two 20mm cannon and two 13mm machine guns compared to the Mustang's six .50 caliber machine guns. Walter Krupinski flew the D9 "Langnase" but didn't like it as well as the Bf 109. He said that FW 190 pilots thought the D9 was great but he had too many hours in a 109 to like anything else.
:)

This Dora Nine is on display at Falcon Field in Arizona.

Image

User avatar
Juancho
Member
Posts: 145
Joined: 18 Nov 2002 02:48
Location: Sydney, Australia

D-9 vs Ta152?

Post by Juancho » 15 Sep 2003 09:22

Almost the same thing, but not very well used, since the lack of good pilots. I believe they were very good fighters, and despite I like the Bf-109K14 I think the Focke Wulf aircraft was worth to continue in production, and discard the Messerschmit one, anyways, the jet fighters were impressive enough not to expect a long life for propeller fighters, evne in that era.


regards,

Juan

varjag
Financial supporter
Posts: 4431
Joined: 01 May 2002 01:44
Location: Australia

Post by varjag » 15 Sep 2003 12:11

Wasn't the D-series Focke-Wulf's reply to the poor high-altitude performance of the BMW-radial powered? It astounds me sometimes that the diminishing performance of the BMW over 20000 feet seems to have eluded the Fw 190 enthusiasts. Above 25000 feet a Me 109 could fly rings around the Focke-Wulf. The Jumo 213 remedied a lot of that weakness and the D-9 transitional and later Ta 152 finally offered the performance needed to take on the Mustangs - but of course, too late.

User avatar
Scott Smith
Member
Posts: 5602
Joined: 10 Mar 2002 21:17
Location: Arizona

Post by Scott Smith » 17 Sep 2003 08:56

varjag wrote:Wasn't the D-series Focke-Wulf's reply to the poor high-altitude performance of the BMW-radial powered? It astounds me sometimes that the diminishing performance of the BMW over 20000 feet seems to have eluded the Fw 190 enthusiasts. Above 25000 feet a Me 109 could fly rings around the Focke-Wulf. The Jumo 213 remedied a lot of that weakness and the D-9 transitional and later Ta 152 finally offered the performance needed to take on the Mustangs - but of course, too late.

Yes, the D-9 had better performance at altitude than the A model with the BMW 801 radial engine, but the Bf 109K-4 was better still as far as performance but not maneuverability. The D-9 was on par with the Mustangs in performance and maneuverability but not range--and some would say, firepower.

There was also an FW 190 H model (IIRC) also with a Jumo 213 liquid-cooled engine that had a wider wingspan for extreme altitude, but it was not an air-superiority fighter intended to engage the Mustangs supporting the bombers.

On the other hand, the Bf 109 was not so great at medium altitudes because its turbocharger had not really kicked-in yet. The Merlin engine avoided this problem because it had a dual speed turbocharger or something like that. Perhaps somebody knowledgeable in this area can explain it in more detail.
:)

varjag
Financial supporter
Posts: 4431
Joined: 01 May 2002 01:44
Location: Australia

Post by varjag » 17 Sep 2003 12:39

Scott - I think we're in agreement. There were only two high-altitude - high-performance engines in all the aircraft in all of WW2. The Merlin and the Benz.As fighting altitudes increased - all the others were just trying to catch up.

User avatar
Kim
Financial supporter
Posts: 1851
Joined: 12 Mar 2002 23:22
Location: Minnesota, U.S.A.

Post by Kim » 17 Sep 2003 15:16

There is an FW-190D at the U.S. Air Force Museum in Dayton,Ohio. Also an Me-262, Me-163 and of course a bf-109. Well worth a visit.
Kim
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

User avatar
Scott Smith
Member
Posts: 5602
Joined: 10 Mar 2002 21:17
Location: Arizona

Post by Scott Smith » 17 Sep 2003 21:38

varjag wrote:Scott - I think we're in agreement. There were only two high-altitude - high-performance engines in all the aircraft in all of WW2. The Merlin and the Benz.As fighting altitudes increased - all the others were just trying to catch up.

The FW 190 H (the Langnase for high-altitude recon with a very wide wingspan) might have had a Daimer-Benz engine in it like a DB 605 instead of a Jumo. Unfortunately, somebody stole the public library's copy of William Green's Warplanes of the Third Reich which is my standard reference for this kind of stuff.
:?

User avatar
Erich
Member
Posts: 2728
Joined: 12 Mar 2002 23:28
Location: OR

Post by Erich » 19 Sep 2003 05:20

do I dare respond ?

actually the Bf 109G-10 was the best in combating the P-51. But so much for Luftwaffe pilots in 1945....... the Dora of the Fw 190 series was just a stop gap and still was having problems on par with the P-51 as it could not match the equal altitude and manueverabilty of the Allied escort.

a real problem with being overwhelmed as there has never been a fair assessment of one to one in combat of the Dora and the P-51 except in mock combat post war and given in detail by pilots that never flew on ops.

~E

User avatar
Scott Smith
Member
Posts: 5602
Joined: 10 Mar 2002 21:17
Location: Arizona

Post by Scott Smith » 19 Sep 2003 08:30

Erich wrote:do I dare respond ?

actually the Bf 109G-10 was the best in combating the P-51.

Why do you say that?

:)

User avatar
Erich
Member
Posts: 2728
Joined: 12 Mar 2002 23:28
Location: OR

Post by Erich » 19 Sep 2003 15:50

Personally I have found the Bf 109G-10 fastest of the 109 variants as well as having real good high altitude performance. The Dora seemed to actaully do better in combat operative conditions at medium to 25,000 foot altitudes according to some IV./JG 3 vets.

~E

User avatar
Erich
Member
Posts: 2728
Joined: 12 Mar 2002 23:28
Location: OR

Post by Erich » 19 Sep 2003 15:53

incidently many Fw 190A-9 pilots preferred removing the outer 2cm weapons in the wings to lighten the load so they could combat P-51's. This was especially apparent in I. and II./JG 301 in late 44 till war's end although II./JG 301 had their 5-7th staffels completely refitted with the Dora in January/February 1945 and only the 8th staffel had the A-9.

~E

User avatar
Erich
Member
Posts: 2728
Joined: 12 Mar 2002 23:28
Location: OR

Post by Erich » 19 Sep 2003 15:54

maybe someone on the boards can list the units outfitted with the Fw 190Dora for us ?

cheers all !

~E

Return to “Luftwaffe air units and Luftwaffe in general”