Pełne nadziei prototypy lotnicze, niewprowadzone do sił powietrznych.

[učitel]

I´d like to know, what are rewiews of Polish PZL P. 50 Jastrząb. What would have been possibilities of an eventual dogfight against German Bf 1O9 E-1?

[Qrosava]

You will find some information here (in polish):http://www.dws-xip.pl/wojna/bron/polska/p351.html

[FSO]

Witam;

nie wiem, choć raczej wątpię. Po pierwsze P.50 był na deskach kreślarskich lub dopiero w fazie prób konstrukcyjnych, zaś Me 190 E-x już latał, co tak naprawdę oznaczało realny samolot, w którym stale przeprowadzano zmiany konstrukcyjne, n.p. zmiana silnika na mocniejszy, eliminację drgań w czasie strzelania i tak dalej. Nie da się zaprzeczyć, że P.50 miał o wiele większe szanse w walce niż P-11c czy P-7, ale czy byłby naprawdę równorzędnym przeciwnikiem dla Me 109 kolejnych wersji? Wątpię...

pozdr

[učitel]

Hi,

Orosava, this is the discussion forum, so I´d like to know some personnal opinions. I expected that I would learn something more! But thanks for the www-reference.

By the way (after I had read this article), in Czech historical air literature there is written, that P. 50 prototype did a crash landing (on 3rd September?), but the prototype was shot down by Polish anti-aircraft artillery! Is it truth?

[GP_mars]

In my opinion PZL.50 Jastrząb couldn't be a good opponent for Bf-109E. In my opinion it didn't have a chance to be good fighter at all.

It had quite heavy airframe for a plane that size. Only tail had lighter monocoque construction (or unitary construction - in polish konstrukcja półskorupowa) the rest of fuselage had classic and heavier construction (steel frame). Also wing construction was heavy - PZL design (Misztal torsion box). In comparison Bf109 and Spitfire had monocoque fuselage and lighter wings. PZL.50 looks modern with it's all metal design but it was closer to Hurricane and Ms-409 than to Bf-109.

Despite it's heavy weight PZL was designed with very small wing area. So I think that PZL.50 couldn't have good maneuverability, and good landing and take off characteristic.

What more important it was extremely underpowered. Polish aviation authorities opted for Bristol engines. In the late thirties Bristol was still in the process of designing new avant-garde line of engines (sleeve valve designs). The only possible engine fitting for Jastrząb was outdated Bristol Mercury single row radial engine. Mercury's 800 hp was enough for last biplane constructions like Gladiator, but surely wasn't enough for modern planes (and ones as heavy as Jastrząb).

Generaly I thing that PZL.50 was poorly designed. It had terrible and difficult to alter flaws.

Further development of PZL.50 (A and B versions) proves this. Drawings of next variants of PZL.50 shows completely redesigned wings and many changes in fuselage.

This improvements could create a good fighter but there were still engine problem. Planned Bristol Taurus engine was late and generally was a failure. It turned out to be unreliable (ill fated Albacore and Beaufort proves this).

So even after redesigning PZL.50 wouldn't be ready for production in 1940. In second half of 1940 Germans started to introduce Bf-109f. PZL.50 couldn't compete with Friedrich.

Edytowane 24 Sierpień 2010 przez GP_mars

[učitel]

Hi, everybody.

GP-mars, I very appreciate your precise opinion. I agree with you. Always, when I see a picture or a drawing of PZL P.50, I imagine Bloch M.B. 151 (as if Polish designers based on it).

Further, Pulawski´s ultimate export version of his „top-wing planes“ - PZL P.24: Some time I have read at Pokryshkin´s memoir „The War in the Clouds“, that the most maneuverable plane, that he met in a fight at all, was Rumanian PZL P.24!! Interesting!

I don´t know if it is known in Poland, that there was also a plane with Pulawski´s wing in Czechoslovakia. In 1930´s, the Aero-factory was developing such a fighter marked Aero A-102. It was very fast, more than B-534, but it hadn´t any wing-flaps, which made too high landing speed. In the end, Czechoslovak Air Ministry prefered advanced Avia B.35 fighter.

Further, in summer of 1944, when American B-24s were crossing Bulgaria for bombing of oil rafinery in Rumanian Ploesti, several Bulgarian Avia Av-135 intercepted them. Jordan Ferdinandov shot down one B-24 (with a fighter without any armored pilot seat and armored fuel tanks!). After Americans had landed, the pilots reported that they were attacked by Messerschmitt Bf. 309s !!! Shocking!

It is a well-known thing, that Finnish pilots reached good successes on Morane Saulnier MS.406s (surely they were more successful than French on this type). When Finnish Air Force obtained the lightfighters Caudron CR.714s, they stored them as useless in combat. But, when Polish airmen in France made some combat flights in these planes against Germans in 1940, they appreciated the Caudron performances as quite low, but the maneuverability seemed to be better than with MS.406 C!!

So, I´d like to know what´s opinion on another promised aircraft: for example Polikarpov I-185, Heinkel He.100 D, He.112 B, British Martin Baker-prototypes, Hawker Tornado, French Arsenal-fighters, heavy fighters Focke-Wulf FW 187, He. 219 Uhu (postponed in the middle of the war).

[mut]

PZL 62 miałby szanse z Bf 109, był to nowoczesny myśliwiec z odpowiednimi osiągami. Tylko zabrakło czasu...

[FSO]

Witam;

mut: jedna małą sprawa P-62 był dopiero na deskach kreślarskich, zaś Bf 109 już latał, co oznaczało, że wyeliminowano większość błędów niemowlęcych i dalej rozwijano konstrukcję. Poza tym co innego założenia a co innego realne loty... Poza tym pytanie który Bf 109? D, G, czy K?

pozdr

[mut]

Wiem, że był na deskach kreślarskich ale w założeniu miał dorównywać ówczesnej 109, z pewnością do momentu w którym wszedłby do produkcji 109 byłaby już po wielu modyfikacjach. Miło jednak pomarzyć o takim myśliwcu w pełni polskim. Poza tym, w hipotetycznym pojedynku pzl 62 vs. bf 109 G polski pilot miałby większe szanse niż gdy miał pzl 24.

[FSO]

Witam;

mut: Czas wejścia do służby kolejnych wersji Bf 109: B: '37 r, E - '37/38 r, [z tym że wersji E było kilka, stale je modernizowano], F - październik '40, G - '42 r, [wersji G było do numeru 14], potem jeszcze byłą wersja K. Prototyp na deskach kreślarskich bez silnika [to nie czasy komputerów] oznacza, że może on wejść na służbę ok. r. '43 - '44, czyli w momencie kiedy Bf 109, właściwie już jest pod względem rozwoju modelem bez przyszłości, w chwili kiedy istnieją już szybsze samoloty dysponujące silnikami po ok 2000 KM, i samoloty odrzutowe [Me 262 i in.] Oznacza to, że ni mniej ni więcej nadal jesteśmy o epokę do tyłu....

pozdr

[GP_mars]

GP-mars, I very appreciate your precise opinion. I agree with you. Always, when I see a picture or a drawing of PZL P.50, I imagine Bloch M.B. 151 (as if Polish designers based on it).

Fortunatly, PZL P.50 was able to take off on his first flight. First prototype of M.B.150 was unable to leave the ground at all.

Although I agree that both planes looked somehow similar – and both needed serious redesigning.

Further, Pulawski´s ultimate export version of his „top-wing planes“ - PZL P.24: Some time I have read at Pokryshkin´s memoir „The War in the Clouds“, that the most maneuverable plane, that he met in a fight at all, was Rumanian PZL P.24!! Interesting!

In my opinion Pulawski did a great job designing his series of fighters. He wasn't a genius – but he was consistent, even stubborn designer with a good idea what he really wanted (and not always technical ability or knowledge to do it in a right way). He wanted light plane that was something in between mono and biplanes. Something not limiting speed and visibility but giving good maneuverability. Unfortunately, as I know, his first prototype - P.1 didn't meet expectations. In fact It was a failure, despite some international recognition. Polish air authorities didn't want his inline engine (favored by Pulawski) and favored radial engines. Pulawski adjusted his project to radial engine (P.2 design) but it wasn't enough. P.1 prototype was also too heavy. Fuselage of P.1 (and project of P.2) was made of welded steel tubes covered by duralumin. It was quite massive design limiting performance (speed, climbing) and increasing wing loading (limiting maneuverability).

The answer to weight limitation was at hand. In the early thirties PZL introduced technology of making large sections of semi-monocoque fuselage. Pulawski used this technology in his next design – P.6, combined with Bristol Jupiter VI radial engine. Finally this plane was a success. Light fuselage and low wing loading – made P.6 somehow similar in concept to famous A6M Zero. It still needed more powerful engine (Bristol Jupiter VIIF, with supercharger, introduced in P.7 and Bristol Mercury IV introduced in P.11) but for the first half of the 1930s it was an excellent design.

Unfortunately Zygmunt Pulawski died in 1931. His successor Wsiewołod Jakimiuk finished PZL P.11 design and did some minor improvements in PZL P.24 – but in my opinion Jakimiuk didn't have even an idea how to make a good plane by himself. His own projects – like passenger plane PZL.44 Wicher and PZL.50 Jastrząb fighter were nothing more than costly failures.

I don´t know if it is known in Poland, that there was also a plane with Pulawski´s wing in Czechoslovakia. In 1930´s, the Aero-factory was developing such a fighter marked Aero A-102. It was very fast, more than B-534, but it hadn´t any wing-flaps, which made too high landing speed. In the end, Czechoslovak Air Ministry prefered advanced Avia B.35 fighter.

I didn't know. Sorry – I'm quite surprised You know so much about Polish aircraft designs. I only wish I know half as much about pre-war Czechoslovak designs.

I checked this – and yes Aero A-102 has typical gull wing design. I know also that Yugoslavian Ikarus Ik-2 had this type of wing. Also some German and French prototypes based on Pulawski design. Soviet I-15, although biplane – had upper wing in gull style.

British Martin Baker-prototypes

I know about this planes enough to try to write something.

I like both MB3 and MB5 fighters. Martin Baker introduced some new concept to aircraft designing – that was earlier never used to such extent. With each project James Martin focused on easy accessibility to plane parts and armament.

Unfortunately both planes had engine problems. Engine failure caused crash of MB.3 prototype and death of Valentine Baker. MB3 had strong in-line, sleeve valve engine Napier Sabre. This engines (used on Hawker planes: Typhoon and Tempest) were light had high power on low altitude. Unfortunately making supercharger fitting sleeve valve H type engine – was too difficult for Napier company – so this engine had poor characteristics on high altitude. This limited MB3 potential to low altitude fighter – like Typhoon. Also Napier Sabre engines had at the beginning reliability issues.

MB5 was in my opinion a very modern design. Probably much better plane than Spitfires with the same RR Griffon engines. Unfortunately Martin Baker was only small design bureau. Without production facilities MB couldn't compete with Hawker or Supermarine.

I thing that British air force authorities did the right thing. A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush. It is better to have a plane that is in mass-production that change it to a possible better plane – but for the cost of crippling aircraft supply.

Wiem, że był na deskach kreślarskich ale w założeniu miał dorównywać ówczesnej 109, z pewnością do momentu w którym wszedłby do produkcji 109 byłaby już po wielu modyfikacjach. Miło jednak pomarzyć o takim myśliwcu w pełni polskim. Poza tym, w hipotetycznym pojedynku pzl 62 vs. bf 109 G polski pilot miałby większe szanse niż gdy miał pzl 24.

Nie jestem pewien czy PZL.62 mógł w ogóle powstać bez znaczącego transferu technologii do Polski. Wystarczy przyjrzeć się problemom związanym z tworzeniem Jastrzębia - żeby zrozumieć jaki był faktyczny stan rozwoju polskiego przemysłu lotniczego. Nawet podwozie do myśliwca trzeba było kupić - własnej konstrukcji nie było. Śmigła, silnik Wiele istotnych elementów nie było w PZL znanych - np. konstrukcja powszechnie stosowanego skrzydła dwudźwigarowego. W PZL nigdy nie opracowano prototypu, w którym silnik umieszczony byłby wprost w półskorupowym kadłubie (zawsze przednia część kadłuba łącząca się z silnikiem była ciężką kratownicą). Nie wiem jak by władze wojskowe przyjęły silnik do PZL.62 - Hispano-Suiza 12Z okazał się być konstrukcją dość awaryjną, a takie były (w dużej mierze słusznie) wykluczane przez władze wojskowe. Polska nie miała także tradycji w produkowaniu siników rzędowych. W Polsce nie produkowano działek lotniczych strzelających przez wał śmigła. Boże drogi, przecież problemem było zdobycie i zakupienie nawet wysokooktanowego paliwa do nowoczesnych mocnych silników (z tego co pamiętam nie produkowano go w kraju).

Prawda jest taka, że jak chcesz rozwinąć nowoczesny przemysł lotniczy - to musisz kopiować podpatrzone rozwiązania u innych - czy dzięki zakupom czy produkcji licencyjnej. Zamykanie się na świat i wiara w cudowne zdolności własnych projektantów IMHO - skończyć się może jak w 1939 r.

[Speedy]

Hej

W Polsce nie produkowano działek lotniczych strzelających przez wał śmigła.

W Polsce przed 1939 nie produkowano w ogóle żadnych działek lotniczych.

[učitel]

,,W Polsce przed 1939 nie produkowano w ogóle żadnych działek lotniczych. "

Yes, there were those problems in countries that had not developed all components of their own arms industry and stayed for a long time in a traditional way in 1930´s. GP_mars described this situation in Polish arms industry very accurately. Similar difficulties were on the agenda at pre-Munich time in Czechoslovakia, too.

When I watched your discussion about PZL P-62 prototype, it seems - it was not be obliged to decide yet about final structural form of this fighter (using cannon needn´t fire though propeller circle).

If I take into account the political situation for Poland (prime minister Beck had changed its political direction - for Britain - in June 1939 /too late/), there was possible to import important arms components from such countries as France, The United Kingdom, Switzerland or Czechoslovakia.

In France there was reliable water cooled supercharger engine Hispano-Suiza HS 12Y crs, predetermined for 20 mm cannon Hispano 402. For example, this engine - HS 12Y drs, a common, non-cannon version, was fitted in Avia B-534. It would be available for later P-62 also later version of this engine – HS 16Ycrs – which Morane MS. 406 and Dewoitine D.520 had.

Another possibility was to import Swiss 20 mm-cannon Oerlikon FFS-20 (like Bf 109 E had).

I think it might have been lots of troubles during those news introducing into production.

Deterrent example from Czechoslovakia from 2nd half of 1930´s:

Avia B-534 had the HS 12Y drs, produced under French licence from 1935 by Škoda-, ČKD-, and Avia-factories. The Avia-factory started developing the cannon version of B-534, marked as Avia Bk-534, from 1936 (Bk; k = kanonová = with a cannon). Avia logically supposed using French cannons Hispano 402, for which that factory planned to buy corresponding version of Hispano-Suiza engine. Actually Avia began act for introduction the licence of Hispano-cannons at Czech factories. Unfortunately, the Ministry of Defence decided completely different way: in 1935 soldiers decided that the only 20 mm cannon to be imported would be Swiss Oerlikon FFS! Headquarters needed them for increasing of anti-aircraft defence of the Army - Ministry of Defence probably had to count with a limited budget. It was necessary for Avia factory to make big efforts for redesign of Avia´s inner equipment and adapt French engin for Swiss cannon!!!

In the end – the result was, that Bk-534 fighters were coming to units, but without any cannons! Such a Bk-534 had 3 machine guns (7,92 mm vz.30 – like German MG 17). Instead of engined-cannon there was one central firing 7,92 mm machine gun, and alongside of a fuselage there were two synchronized machine guns of the same type. (A common B-534 was 4 machine guns vz. 30.) Because of those reasons, it managed to complete and send to units only 55 Bk-534 till 15th March, 1939 – the German occupation of Czechoslovakia. Pretty sad….

[učitel]

Still to PZL P.50 Jastrząb. This information comes from Czech avion historian Václav Němeček (I don't know the origin of his sources - if it comes from Morgala, or anybody else). The development of this aircraft was very secret in Poland. In spite of this, it was surprising enough when the P.50-prototype was shown for Italian foreign minister count Ciano in March, 1939. Němeček also wrote that P.50 was tested in summer 1939 in comparative tests against American fighter Seversky P-35. The results finished very well for the Polish airplane, but this comparison was not so relevant because American fighter was still out-of-date in 1939.

I'd like to know the fate of the only finished prototype of P.50: Václav Němeček wrote that this plane had been shot down by own Polish anti-aircraft artillery on 5th September, 1939. Only when the pilot parachute landed, it was found that he was no enemy pilot but Polish pilot Widawski and he said that they had succeeded to shoot down the only prototype of the most advanced Polish fighter. Widawski was this prototype flying over from endangered Warsaw farther to the Polish Army rear.