WesWorld

Here's the Planebuilder for the Fw-187A-1 that will be entering service with the Luftwaffe in med-1935 (the prototypes DB-600s are being replaced with DB-601s, the armament is being upgraded by replacing 2 7.92mm MG-17s with 15mm MG-151s, and the fuselage is being widened enough to fit the engine gauges in the cockpit vs on the sides of the nacelles).

Focke-Wulf FW-187A-1

General Type:
Airplane = 1
Airship = 2
Orbiter = 3
1

Year of First Flight: 1938

Description

Carrier or Rough Field
Monoplane
Conventional Fuselage

The initial service version of the FW-187 'Falke'. Equipped with 4 15mm MG-151s and 2 7.92mm MG-17s in the nose.



Characteristics:

Weight (maximum) 11,100 lbs
Weight (empty) 9,330 lbs

Length 36.5 ft
Wingspan 50 ft
Wing Area 327 sq ft
Sweep 3 degrees

Engines 2
DB-601Aa
Piston

1,184 hp at 15,000 ft


Crew 1


Typical cost $0.058 million in 1939
Total number procured 2000


Performance:

Top Speed 351 kts = 404 mph at 15,000 ft
Mach N/A

Operational Ceiling 38,500 ft

Range 1,000 nm = 1,152 miles with 1 lbs payload
2 lbs released at halfway point

Climb 3,199 fpm

Cruise 240 kts = 276 mph at 28,000 ft

Corner Speed 240 KIAS =
301 kts at 15,000 ft
Mach N/A
Turning Rate 22.4 deg/sec
Radius 2,607 ft



Internal Data:

Intake / Fan Diameter 10 ft

Bypass Ratio 95

Engine Weight 1320 lbs
Overall Efficiency 22.5 percent

Structural Factor 1.00

Number of Wings 1
Number of Fuselages 1

Limiting Airspeed 450 kts
Wing Ultimate g Load 10.00 g
Wing Taper 0.5
Wing Thickness at Root 1.6 ft

Tail / Canard Factor 0.4

Number of Nacelles 2
Length 9 ft
Diameter 3.25 ft
Fullness 0.5

Fuselage Diameter 3.25 ft
Fuselage Fullness 0.35

Pressurized Volume 0 percent
Cargo Decks 0

Cleanness 80 percent
Unstreamlined section 2.5 sq ft

User equipment 1,600 lbs

Quoted

Year of First Flight: 1938

1934 surely?

This'll effect the generated "cleaness" factor going down to about 70% causing some drop in speed.

Otherwise seems ok.

Italy is going for a different sort of twin-engined fighter...

I've been using the effective year rather than the actual, since WW is a bit ahead of the real-world on aerodynamics in general.

And the Mexican Version:


TNCA will be license building it. Changes are, different engines, different guns, limited ground attack capability (single 500lb bomb).

Aircraft Type or Name:

Focke-Wulf FW-187M

General Type:
Airplane = 1
Airship = 2
Orbiter = 3
1

Year of First Flight: 1938

Description

Carrier or Rough Field
Monoplane
Conventional Fuselage

The Mexican version of the FW-187 'Falke'. Equipped with 2 25mm cannon and 4 .30 caliber MGs in the nose.



Characteristics:

Weight (maximum) 11,100 lbs
Weight (empty) 8,740 lbs

Length 36.5 ft
Wingspan 50 ft
Wing Area 327 sq ft
Sweep 3 degrees

Engines 2
Curtiss Conqueror V-1570-23
Piston

700 hp at 12,000 ft


Crew 1


Typical cost $0.054 million in 1939
Total number procured 2000


Performance:

Top Speed 274 kts = 315 mph at 12,000 ft
Mach N/A

Operational Ceiling 30,00 ft

Range 1,000 nm = 1,152 miles with 508 lbs payload
550 lbs released at halfway point

Climb 1,540 fpm

Cruise 200 kts = 230 mph
at 24,000 ft

Corner Speed 240 KIAS =
287 kts at 12,000 ft
Mach N/A
Turning Rate 23.6 deg/sec
Radius 2,352 ft



Internal Data:

Intake / Fan Diameter 8.25 ft

Bypass Ratio 100

Engine Weight 1020 lbs
Overall Efficiency 21.1 percent

Structural Factor 1.00

Number of Wings 1
Number of Fuselages 1

Limiting Airspeed 450 kts
Wing Ultimate g Load 10.00 g
Wing Taper 0.5
Wing Thickness at Root 1.6 ft

Tail / Canard Factor 0.4

Number of Nacelles 2
Length 9 ft
Diameter 3 ft
Fullness 0.5

Fuselage Diameter 3.25 ft
Fuselage Fullness 0.35

Pressurized Volume 0 percent
Cargo Decks 0

Cleanness 80 percent
Unstreamlined section 2.5 sq ft

User equipment 1,650 lbs

The new version of the Fw-187 that Focke-Wulf has rolled out for final testing in 1938.

Focke-Wulf Fw-187 C-1

General Type:
Airplane = 1
Airship = 2
Orbiter = 3
1

Year of First Flight: 1941

Description

Carrier or Rough Field
Monoplane
Conventional Fuselage

A later service version of the Fw-187 'Falke'. Equipped with 4 20mm MG-201s and 2 11mm MG-111s in the nose, 10mm armor protecting the pilot (+130 pounds), self-sealing fuel tanks (+326 pounds), and DB-601EMs with 50 liters of MW-50 each. Fitted with standard ETC-300 racks under the inner wings for 300 liter drop tanks or 250 kg bombs. Note: maximum speed does NOT include MW-50 boosting of the engines.






Characteristics:

Weight (maximum) 14,080 lbs
Weight (empty) 11,150 lbs

Length 36.5 ft
Wingspan 50 ft
Wing Area 327 sq ft
Sweep 3 degrees

Engines 2
DB-601EM
Piston

1,404 hp
at 18,000 ft


Crew 1


Typical cost $0.078 million in 1942
Total number procured 2000


Performance:

Top Speed 397 kts = 457 mph
at 18,000 ft
Mach N/A

Operational Ceiling 42,000 ft

Range 1,200 nm = 1,382 miles
with 513 lbs payload
557 lbs released at halfway point

Climb 3,222 fpm

Cruise 250 kts = 288 mph
at 33,000 ft

Corner Speed 270 KIAS =
357 kts at 18,000 ft
Mach N/A
Turning Rate 20.6 deg/sec
Radius 3,355 ft



Internal Data:

Intake / Fan Diameter 9.75 ft

Bypass Ratio 82

Engine Weight 1320 lbs
Overall Efficiency 22.5 percent

Structural Factor 1.00

Number of Wings 1
Number of Fuselages 1

Limiting Airspeed 500 kts
Wing Ultimate g Load 10.00 g
Wing Taper 0.5
Wing Thickness at Root 1.2 ft

Tail / Canard Factor 0.4

Number of Nacelles 2
Length 9 ft
Diameter 3.25 ft
Fullness 0.5

Fuselage Diameter 3.25 ft
Fuselage Fullness 0.35

Pressurized Volume 0 percent
Cargo Decks 0

Cleanness 90 percent
Unstreamlined section 2.5 sq ft

User equipment 2,450 lbs

1400hp at 18000ft seems a bit optimistic for the DB601 given that the DB605 was only running 1240hp at that altitude.

The DB-601EM isn't completely historical, since the OTL -601 didn't have MW-50 capability.

Quoted

Originally posted by Hrolf Hakonson
The DB-601EM isn't completely historical, since the OTL -601 didn't have MW-50 capability.

Thats 1450ps at 2100m, not 5500m. Adding extra boost and dealing with it via MW-50 is only going to increase power at low altitude (and probably not much over the historical figure).

I did say it was not completely historical, yes? That means that the historical numbers do not apply. The -601EM is being improved over the historical -601E because the DB-605 is not being developed, therefore freeing up engineering and manufacturing talent to work on further developing the -601 and the -603.

Quoted

I did say it was not completely historical, yes?

The historical numbers don't apply? When I get so much flak for doing anything whatsoever.

1400hp at 5500m is rather optimistic from the DB601. Having MW-50 injection helps to increase power at low altitude (although ~1450hp seems to be the maximum you can manage with the DB601). It doesn't do a great deal for high altitude performance. Added to that you've got a single speed supercharger which'll massively eat into low altitude power if rated for 5500m. The quite a bit higher capacity DB605ASM managed to get up to 1600hp at 6000m, in 1945, with 150oct C3 fuel.

I'd also like to point out that 9.75ft diameter propellers won't actually fit on the Fw 187.

Probably because you invent outlandish engines that would never have worked in production? Whereas here all I'm doing is using a slightly larger supercharger on an existing engine.

No, the DB-601 did NOT have a single-speed supercharger, it had a hydraulically driven variable speed supercharger. Wikipedia gets this wrong, but there you go.

The note says specifically that MW-50 is not used in the stats given. it was put there for a reason.

As was noted years ago when the Fw-187 was first brought into WW service, the WW Fw-187 is similar but not identical to the OTL aircraft. If you look at the top of the thread, you'll find that initial design, which used 10 foot props. So, I think there won't be any problem fitting 9.75 foot props on a later version.

Quoted

Probably because you invent outlandish engines that would never have worked in production?

I can't remember any of those engines. The big coupled V12s which were historical and did actually work.

Quoted

Whereas here all I'm doing is using a slightly larger supercharger on an existing engine.

Then why no increase in weight, especially to cope with the extra gross power being produced. The DB605A series were managing to get a power to weight ratio of 0.84hp/lb if you look at the altitude rating (1355hp at 5700m for 730kg). For this super-duper DB601 you're managing 1.06hp/lb even before you add lots of MW-50 and extra boost for even more power (somehow). You've got to ask yourself why DB bothered to design the 605 if such performance was possible with the 601? If you're getting up to this sort of power at altitude you need a redesign of the 601 to cope with the increase in gross power (more power produced at the prop and the supercharger).

Looking at the Merlin 25 (two speed but single stage again) you're getting 1250hp at 18000ft which equates to a power/weight ratio of 0.85hp/lb - and that's with 18lb boost.

Quoted

Originally posted by Red Admiral

Quoted

Probably because you invent outlandish engines that would never have worked in production?

I can't remember any of those engines. The big coupled V12s which were historical and did actually work.

As racing engines, sure. So did the DB-601R. That doesn't mean it's produceable or useful as a service engine.

Quoted

Quoted

Whereas here all I'm doing is using a slightly larger supercharger on an existing engine.

Then why no increase in weight, especially to cope with the extra gross power being produced. The DB605A series were managing to get a power to weight ratio of 0.84hp/lb if you look at the altitude rating (1355hp at 5700m for 730kg). For this super-duper DB601 you're managing 1.06hp/lb even before you add lots of MW-50 and extra boost for even more power (somehow). You've got to ask yourself why DB bothered to design the 605 if such performance was possible with the 601? If you're getting up to this sort of power at altitude you need a redesign of the 601 to cope with the increase in gross power (more power produced at the prop and the supercharger).

Looking at the Merlin 25 (two speed but single stage again) you're getting 1250hp at 18000ft which equates to a power/weight ratio of 0.85hp/lb - and that's with 18lb boost.

The weight IS wrong, you're correct there, weight per engine should be 1562 pounds, just like it is on the He-100s. Sometimes things slip through.

I expect the reason DB designed the -605 was that they were anticipating needing even more power than the -601 will be able to supply even with the upgrades in compression, RPM and ADI that could have been applied to the -601. It's a bigger engine, after all (but only by less than 5%).

Quoted

As racing engines, sure. So did the DB-601R. That doesn't mean it's produceable or useful as a service engine.

On the other hand extremely reliable as well. Even pushing on to late WW2 and you've only got the R-2800-57 and Sabre achieving similar reliability at power. When you can run continuously for hours at 2800hp. Even taking into account the larger capacity, splitting it into two V12 producing 1400hp each, the similar size Merlin/DB605/V-1710 aren't reaching similar reliability until mid WW2. Not really any specialist technology or manufacturing used in it either. It was still using split cylinder construction. Redesigning as a monoblock would reduce stresses and increase cooling ability further.

Biggest problem for me was the sheer power you could produce with low amounts of boost. A fighter with 3000hp+ starts getting too big.

Modified to have the correct engine weights, which pushed up the loaded weight to keep the range required.

Focke-Wulf Fw-187 C-1

General Type:
Airplane = 1
Airship = 2
Orbiter = 3
1

Year of First Flight: 1941

Description

Carrier or Rough Field
Monoplane
Conventional Fuselage

A later service version of the Fw-187 'Falke'. Equipped with 4 20mm MG-201s and 2 11mm MG-111s in the nose, 10mm armor protecting the pilot (+130 pounds), self-sealing fuel tanks (+326 pounds), and DB-601EMs. Fitted with standard ETC-300 racks under the inner wings for 300 liter drop tanks or 250 kg bombs.






Characteristics:

Weight (maximum) 14,300 lbs
Weight (empty) 11,540 lbs

Length 36.5 ft
Wingspan 50 ft
Wing Area 327 sq ft
Sweep 3 degrees

Engines 2
DB-601EM
Piston

1,404 hp
at 18,000 ft


Crew 1


Typical cost $0.079 million in 1942
Total number procured 2000


Performance:

Top Speed 396 kts = 455 mph
at 18,000 ft
Mach N/A

Operational Ceiling 41,500 ft

Range 1,200 nm = 1,382 miles
with 326 lbs payload
355 lbs released at halfway point

Climb 3,154 fpm

Cruise 270 kts = 310 mph
at 28,000 ft

Corner Speed 272 KIAS =
360 kts at 18,000 ft
Mach N/A
Turning Rate 20.4 deg/sec
Radius 3,411 ft



Internal Data:

Intake / Fan Diameter 9.75 ft

Bypass Ratio 82

Engine Weight 1562 lbs
Overall Efficiency 22.5 percent

Structural Factor 1.00

Number of Wings 1
Number of Fuselages 1

Limiting Airspeed 500 kts
Wing Ultimate g Load 10.00 g
Wing Taper 0.5
Wing Thickness at Root 1.2 ft

Tail / Canard Factor 0.4

Number of Nacelles 2
Length 9 ft
Diameter 3.25 ft
Fullness 0.5

Fuselage Diameter 3.25 ft
Fuselage Fullness 0.35

Pressurized Volume 0 percent
Cargo Decks 0

Cleanness 90 percent
Unstreamlined section 2.5 sq ft

User equipment 2,320 lbs