1
$\begingroup$

The Fw 200 Condor was a large plane of Germany during WW2. It was used in recon and bomber roles against convoys. Wikipedia lists several specs including max takeoff weight of 24.5 tons and 4 engines producing 895 kW each.

But I could not find takeoff run distance, neither there nor in google. I would like to know how long of a runway was needed for it.

Improve this question
$\endgroup$

2 Answers 2

Reset to default
4
$\begingroup$

Unfortunately i could not find this information for the basic variants, but for the Fw200F an Focke Wulf document from 1943 states following

on a paved runway, 4x 323R engines on standard start power

********** (deleted / see graph)

on max power

   ********** (deleted / see graph)

EDIT: enter image description here

Improve this answer
$\endgroup$
9
  • $\begingroup$ Link / photo of document? I can't find an Fw 200 "F" variant, 8,000 feet is insane distance for such plane. $\endgroup$
    – user14897
    Sep 21, 2017 at 13:14
  • $\begingroup$ the document is called "Focke Wulf Fw 200 F Fernaufklärer mit erhöter Reichweite" page 29 germanluftwaffe.com/archiv/Dokumente/ABC/f/FockeWulf/Fw%20200/… $\endgroup$
    – alfetta
    Sep 21, 2017 at 13:18
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ excellent, but please double-check the numbers from the graph, I believe a mistake happened, at 25t I see 1000m for one of the lines, not 1450/1700. $\endgroup$
    – user14897
    Sep 21, 2017 at 13:25
  • $\begingroup$ ymb1: i think you are right, i got the scale wrong, another thing is the SR vs S20 $\endgroup$
    – alfetta
    Sep 21, 2017 at 13:28
  • $\begingroup$ @alfetta Yeah I'm curious: what does SR and S20 mean? $\endgroup$
    – DrZ214
    Sep 21, 2017 at 13:38
2
$\begingroup$

The Fw 200 isn't really too large (even back then). A couple hundred were built during a time were many thousands of other types were built. So it's not very popular to easily find information about it online (trust me, I tried). More popular planes from that era lack that bit of information online as well.

The why is interesting, before the jet age, all you needed was a 6,000-foot runway and you were good to go (performance calculations were still performed, but you know what I mean, aircraft didn't need much runway until the jet age).

Based on Wikipedia, an aircraft of comparable role, configuration, and era is the Douglas DC-4E (almost same size by the way, and 4 big 1,080 kW engines).

From this flightsafety.org report, we find the Douglas C-54 Skymaster (what became of the DC-4E via the DC-4) when loaded at 25.5 tonnes (the serendipity of the coincidence) needed 2,750 feet (839 m) of runway. That should apply more or less to the Fw 200.

Note: On a different day with less or more headwind, or a runway with a different slope, or any of the many variables, that number changes. Not to mention there were many Fw 200 variants.

If you need the figure for reasons other than curiosity, some sellers specialize in historic AFM's (aircraft flight manuals) where you will find all the performance information you need.

This should suffice unless a more specific answer comes along, which would need the variant and the exact runway specifications (elevation, slope, etc.), weather conditions, etc.

Improve this answer
$\endgroup$
2
  • $\begingroup$ I'd hazard a guess that a 6000 foot long runway was "crazy long" pre-jet age. Even some of the largest planes in service, like the L-1049 Super Constellation at a MTOW of more than 68 tons took less than 5000' of runway to take off. $\endgroup$
    – Ron Beyer
    Sep 20, 2017 at 19:33
  • $\begingroup$ @RonBeyer - I agree, I played it safe ;) $\endgroup$
    – user14897
    Sep 20, 2017 at 19:34

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .