Quantity Not Quality Fighters

[Kullman]

I believe that the Germans made a mistake in trying to design and produce the many types of fighter aircraft they tried. The jet, rocket, and piston planes took valuable resources and production time to manufacture.

By 1943 the Americans bombed Fortress Europa by day, and the British by night. The forces in the East needed ground and fighter support as the Soviets rebuilt their airforce. If the Germans had focused production on a 109 or 190 design, they would have had a better chance of controlling the skies over Europa in 1944 and 1945, while still providing air cover in the East.

The early jet planes may have been the best in combat, but they were dangerous to fly because of design defects. The rocket planes were a bit safer, but they had a short range. Also, the fuels needed for jets are more difficult to refine and the jet planes had poor fuel efficiency.

I am not saying that Germany shouldn't have experimented with jet and rocket planes, but they shouldn't have rushed them into production. The biggest problems I see with my ideas are the same as though I proposed for mass producing Panzer IVs; increased use of fuel as more planes go into combat, and lack of trained flyers.

I think the fuel problem could have been overcome by producing an engine that was fueled with a mix of gasoline and alcohol. As for manpower, the German Airforce had troops just sitting around that could have been taught how to fly.

I realize that Hitler wanted a bomber and that the jet design was messed up because of his intervention. But if piston planes were mass produced and the jets and rocket planes remained proto-types, Hitler wouldn't have obsessed over a bomber design. He knew that German prop-bombers wouldn't change the war in his favor, so he would have kept himself out of
the design and production of proven fighter planes. It was the newness and secret design of the jet that captured his imagination.

[peter_suciu]

Germany needed a better equipped airforce at the start of the war. The Stuka was great in Poland and France. It didn't do the job in England and the lack of a heavy bomber hurt the war effort.

Germany also wasted the pre-war eras trying to do too much. Why build a fleet of surface raiders when U-Boats do the trick? The money that went into building the high seas fleet would have been better spent developing a heavy bomber and increasing the amount of planes.

I also think that Germany should have begun the bombing of English cities before the Battle of France ended. Hitler waited for a couple of weeks. England may have surrendered if France was about to fall and London was being bombed nightly.

[davethelight]

"The early jet planes may have been the best in combat, but they were dangerous to fly because of design defects. The rocket planes were a bit safer, but they had a short range."

What?

The He163 Komet was a death trap, they often expolded during refueling because the T stoff and C stoff fuels would accidently come into contact, react, and kaboom!!! This happened sporadicaly in takeoff, flight and landing too, when the fuel system would leak a little and a reaction would happen inside the aircraft fuesalage outside of the combustion chamber.

[Xanthro]

Aircraft shortage wasn't a problem for the Germans, pilots and fuel was.

Some ungodly number of planes were delivered in Sept 1944, in the tens of thousands. There's no possible way to have that many pilots or the fuel to fly them.

Xanthro

[R-Bob The Great!]

Germany also wasted the pre-war eras trying to do too much. Why build a fleet of surface raiders when U-Boats do the trick? The money that went into building the high seas fleet would have been better spent developing a heavy bomber and increasing the amount of planes.

How could Germany have invaded Norway without a surface fleet.

[paddywhack]

actuly the fuel for the me262 wasnt as fefined as the fuel for the normal prop fighters which was handy at the end of the war but this still didnt stop them running out of fuel! also the me163 killed more pilots through accidents then the allies!!!! as for the he162 that was a good plane BUT it needed more time to be devoleped and pilots need lots of hours on them before combat not the hitler youth pilots that had been intended! as for the ardo 234 it was a pretty good recon plane and was still flying recon over britain till the end of the war,it flew way way above anything the allies had at the time! they also had a plane called the ta183 i think.the soviets captured the plans of at the end of the war which is the spitting image of the mig15!and in fact just in the same way the ak47 was copyed/based on the stg44 so was the ta183!
just my 2 euros worth!

[Redbaron1908]

Aircraft shortage wasn't a problem for the Germans, pilots and fuel was.

Some ungodly number of planes were delivered in Sept 1944, in the tens of thousands. There's no possible way to have that many pilots or the fuel to fly them

very true at the end of the war the main problem was finding fuel and trained pilots the jets were good exept that the pilots were not very well trained exept for the veteran pilots

[Cantankerous]

What would the chances have been of the Luftwaffe taking on the Eighth Air Force if Focke-Wulf had modified hundreds of Fw 190s in late 1941 to use either a Jumo 004 or Heinkel HeS 8 turbojet?

[T. A. Gardner]

"The early jet planes may have been the best in combat, but they were dangerous to fly because of design defects. The rocket planes were a bit safer, but they had a short range."

What?

The He163 Komet was a death trap, they often expolded during refueling because the T stoff and C stoff fuels would accidently come into contact, react, and kaboom!!! This happened sporadicaly in takeoff, flight and landing too, when the fuel system would leak a little and a reaction would happen inside the aircraft fuesalage outside of the combustion chamber.

I absolutely agree here. Rocket planes in general, and not just the German ones were death traps. Everybody had issues with that trying them.

[T. A. Gardner]

What would the chances have been of the Luftwaffe taking on the Eighth Air Force if Focke-Wulf had modified hundreds of Fw 190s in late 1941 to use either a Jumo 004 or Heinkel HeS 8 turbojet?

The HeS 8 wasn't available until late 1942 and then it had issues with fuel leaking big time. The earlier models in that series didn't develop enough thrust to really be useful in a military aircraft. Both Junkers and BMW had issues with their designs in getting the compressors to work properly as well as not stall when air flow shifted. So, no, they weren't going to get a jet engine in 1941 or 42.

[Carl Schwamberger]

Aircraft shortage wasn't a problem for the Germans, pilots and fuel was.

Some ungodly number of planes were delivered in Sept 1944, in the tens of thousands. There's no possible way to have that many pilots or the fuel to fly them.

Xanthro

John Ellis claims 85,000 aircraft accepted by the Luftwaffe in 1944. Near all single engine types. Of course the US air forces accepted 104,000 that same year, & the combined Brit/Soviet production was in the 90,000+ range. Whats worse in this is the Anglo americans were dialing back production in 1944 from the earlier goals, while the Germans were desperately trying to fly any fighter plane they could make run. In the latter half of 1944 German non combat losses were rising past the 45% mark, while US & British non combat losses had dropped to 30% or less.

[Richard Anderson]

What would the chances have been of the Luftwaffe taking on the Eighth Air Force if Focke-Wulf had modified hundreds of Fw 190s in late 1941 to use either a Jumo 004 or Heinkel HeS 8 turbojet?

How do you "modify" an airframe designed for a radial prop to use turbojet engines? Why would you want to substitute marginally developed, experimental engines, that were not in serial production, for a developed engine in full production?

[T. A. Gardner]

What would the chances have been of the Luftwaffe taking on the Eighth Air Force if Focke-Wulf had modified hundreds of Fw 190s in late 1941 to use either a Jumo 004 or Heinkel HeS 8 turbojet?

How do you "modify" an airframe designed for a radial prop to use turbojet engines? Why would you want to substitute marginally developed, experimental engines, that were not in serial production, for a developed engine in full production?

The Russians managed it...



Lavochkin La 156 based on the La 11 radial engine fighter...

But, the resulting plane has a very short range and poor performance compared to properly designed jets. You still need an engine that's working though...

[Richard Anderson]

Lavochkin La 156 based on the La 11 radial engine fighter...

But, the resulting plane has a very short range and poor performance compared to properly designed jets. You still need an engine that's working though...

Sure...as a one-off development project, not as a means of getting "quantity" over "quality". Anyway, how do you get "quantity" by replacing a robust radial engine production program with two engine programs so problematic that one was cancelled in 1942 and the other did not produce any meaningful number of engines until 1945?

This must involve different meanings of the words "quantity" and "quality" I am unfamiliar with.

[Carl Schwamberger]

Why is there never a WI for the Germans doing things like focusing on further developing the successful FW 190? Or similar practical things? The Ju88 was a good basic light bomber, cant the nazis be allowed to focus their engineering talent there?