Why germany never had a four engined bomber?

**ruddersrangers44** · 08-10-2014, 11:50 AM

Ever since I can remember being into WW2 Aircraft,I've always been perplexed as to why the Luftwaffe never had a Four engined Bomber at its disposal?obviously Germany was fully aware of the RAF having the "Halifax" "Short stirling" and later on the "Lancaster",hope someone here can shed some light and finally put an end to this un-answered thought.......

**Espenlaub Militaria** · 08-10-2014 11:50 AM

We also buy and trade your items and full collections!

**Danmark** · 08-10-2014, 12:32 PM

The heinkel 177 'greif' had 4 engines....

But only 2 propellers! !

**ruddersrangers44** · 08-10-2014, 12:37 PM

Never thought of that one Dan having Four Engines and only two props

ok just to clarify why did Germany not have a Four proped engined Bomber

**Danmark** · 08-10-2014, 12:41 PM

The 'Griffin' had paired engines driving one prop.
Massive overheating problems and fires.
Maybe the "flying coffin" experience put paid to other four engine plans??

**another ant** · 08-10-2014, 12:55 PM

something had

Why germany never had a four engined bomber?

275 fw200 built, They lost about 215

I guess it was strategy, the British had to get to Germany and occupied areas (long way)since its "natural aircraft carrier" and the Germans had to get to England from the French coast, better do 5 with two engines,that 1 with four.

germans as think Russians, for the aerial weapon for support, not as a separate or independent weapon
the raf "forced by circumstances"
or usaaf "an army inside another army" They applied it to the Air Force as a separate and independent weapon.

**Woolgar** · 08-10-2014, 12:57 PM

They had the JU 290 also

Nick

**big ned** · 08-10-2014, 01:08 PM

by Danmark

The heinkel 177 'greif' had 4 engines....

But only 2 propellers! !

The engines on the 'Griffin' were 2 DB 605's joined together by a clutch and gearbox system to power a single 14'10" diameter four bladed propeller. The circular cowled radiators at the front make it appear to be a radial engine, but it was in fact a double 'V' inverted 24 cylinder (6 cylinders per bank) inline engine of a massive 70 litres capacity. The problem was that the futuristic design was typically German in being over engineered and the bugs were never ironed out of it, they caught fire more often than not in flight with often disastrous consequences.

I've always thought that the 177 might have been a better aircraft if they had followed the example of the British by reinventing the 2 engined Avro Manchester into the 4 engined Lancaster, and the odd dichotomy of going the 2 engines into 1 propeller way as opposed to the more successful British method of 1 engine into 2 (contra rotating) props as seen on the likes of the Mk XIV Spitfire and others. It was without doubt a futuristic design with great innovations and potential, had certain design problems not been insurmountable at such a critical time.

Here's a pic of a 610 down the road from me at RAF Cosford. I've more than once had to dust this sucker down, and it still leaks a little oil, but what aero engines don't?

Regards, Ned.

**Gunny Hartmann** · 08-10-2014, 01:20 PM

by big ned

The engines on the 'Griffin' were 2 DB 605's joined together by a clutch and gearbox system to power a single 14'10" diameter four bladed propeller. The circular cowled radiators at the front make it appear to be a radial engine, but it was in fact a double 'V' inverted 24 cylinder (6 cylinders per bank) inline engine of a massive 70 litres capacity. The problem was that the futuristic design was typically German in being over engineered and the bugs were never ironed out of it, they caught fire more often than not in flight with often disastrous consequences.

I've always thought that the 177 might have been a better aircraft if they had followed the example of the British by reinventing the 2 engined Avro Manchester into the 4 engined Lancaster, and the odd dichotomy of going the 2 engines into 1 propeller way as opposed to the more successful British method of 1 engine into 2 (contra rotating) props as seen on the likes of the Mk XIV Spitfire and others. It was without doubt a futuristic design with great innovations and potential, had certain design problems not been insurmountable at such a critical time.

Here's a pic of a 610 down the road from me at RAF Cosford. I've more than once had to dust this sucker down, and it still leaks a little oil, but what aero engines don't?

Regards, Ned.

They tried building a true four separate engined version, but it never went into full production!..
Heinkel He 277

**KradSpam** · 08-10-2014, 01:22 PM

I guess Ant has it, The Luftwaffe was used tactically for close support for the most part, whereas the RAF saw itself as a purely strategic arm and hated having to work closely with ground troops. Of course contradictions of this could be found but I think it's generally correct.