1930s/40s: no 2-engined fighters as-designed

[wuzak]

The Beaufighter was a night fighter derivative of a bomber so should be okay.

The Beaufighter was originally ordered as a cannon fighter. It was, in effect, a back up to the Whirlwind, which was taking rather longer than the Air Ministry would have liked.

To speed up development, the Beafighter used the wings from the Beaufort mated to a new fuselage.

Night fighting was not part of its original specification.

 

[Shortround6]

Night fighting was not part of its original specification.

It might depend on the definition of "night fighting" at the time of the specification.

I could very well be wrong but in 1938 and 39 all a plane needed to be considered a "night fighter" were landing lights, a few parachute flares and an exhaust setup that didn't blind the pilot with his own exhaust glare. Much like the flat plates on Hurricanes or Spitfires that somewhat blocked the pilots view of the exhaust flames. Having a low landing speed didn't hurt either.

Many day fighters were expected to fight at night. Specialized night fighters (ones with radar) didn't really come into being until the summer of 1940 and later.

I keep getting into arguments about the Defiant. It wasn't really ordered as a nightfighter, but it was used as one by a number of squadrons and had it's greatest successes (sarcasm) before it was fitted with radar.

I do believe you are pretty much correct. The Beaufighter was not ordered primarily as a night fighter, but rather as a general purpose aircraft who's duties might include night fighting.

 

[nuuumannn]

I keep getting into arguments about the Defiant. It wasn't really ordered as a nightfighter, but it was used as one by a number of squadrons and had it's greatest successes (sarcasm) before it was fitted with radar.

And I'm pretty much the person who argues for the Defiant when you argue against it, but I agree with what you're saying here. Night fighting was not a specialised form until beginning in 1940 and it was the Blenheim, Defiant (oddly enough) and the Beaufighter that rewrote the manual on modern night fighting techniques. The British Air Ministry wrote 'Day and night fighter' onto many fighter specifications at the time, but misunderstood what was really required, mind you, before WW2 no one really understood it. Britain's rag tag efforts were truly groundbreaking and it took putting up with mediocre performing aircraft, technological limitations and a dash of good fortune to get to the likes of the Mosquito NF.XXX and P-61 Black Widow.

 

[GrauGeist]

It was my understanding that the Daffy was originally intended as a bomber interceptor, much like the YFM-1

 

[Admiral Beez]

who might come off better without a 2-engined fighter in production & service?

Germans. No Bf 110 means more Bf 109s for the BoB and perhaps a single-engined concept to meet the long-range, heavy fighter requirement - sort of a German Typhoon or Jug.

If Petter isn't making his Whirlwind, does he still gain the access, position and experience to finish Mitchell's Spitfire? Do we still get his Canberra, Gnat and Lightning?

 

[tomo pauk]

Germans. No Bf 110 means more Bf 109s for the BoB and perhaps a single-engined concept to meet the long-range, heavy fighter requirement - sort of a German Typhoon or Jug.

Germans certainly gain the most.
OTOH - Typhoon never featured long range, and Jug was not designed with such a requirement, even if it emerged as a long-range fighter after a few years. The Fw 190 was providing a heavy firepower job, however Germans never turned it into a long-range fighter.
(talk about missing opportunities for either side)

If Petter isn't making his Whirlwind, does he still gain the access, position and experience to finish Mitchell's Spitfire? Do we still get his Canberra, Gnat and Lightning?

Whirlwind was a reply to the cannon-armed fighter specification. He can try it this time with half the engine number per fighter.

 

[Shortround6]

Germans need an engine for the "long-range, heavy fighter requirement" Americans used the R-2800 and the British used the Sabre.
A DB 601/605 won't work. Neither will the BMW 801, the Fw 190 was hardly a P-47 or Typhoon.

Using a monster motor instead of two small or medium engines seems to be skating around the premise.

The Typhoon/Sabre combination being a great example of a horrible expensive solution to the question.

 

[Admiral Beez]

Germans need an engine for the "long-range, heavy fighter requirement" Americans used the R-2800 and the British used the Sabre.
A DB 601/605 won't work. Neither will the BMW 801, the Fw 190 was hardly a P-47 or Typhoon.

Using a monster motor instead of two small or medium engines seems to be skating around the premise.

The Typhoon/Sabre combination being a great example of a horrible expensive solution to the question.

Good points. Let's skip the heavy, but the long range role filled by the Bf 110 can be filled by a single engine DB 601/605 aircraft. A German Mustang.... perhaps based on the He 100.

 

[tomo pauk]

Germans need an engine for the "long-range, heavy fighter requirement" Americans used the R-2800 and the British used the Sabre.
A DB 601/605 won't work. Neither will the BMW 801, the Fw 190 was hardly a P-47 or Typhoon.
Using a monster motor instead of two small or medium engines seems to be skating around the premise.
The Typhoon/Sabre combination being a great example of a horrible expensive solution to the question.

Typhoon/Sabre combination was not answer to the 'long-range' part of the question, I'm certain that nobody asked that question back in 1940s in the 1st place.
Fw 190 was certainly not Typhoon, it was a better aircraft. BMW 801 and DB601E/605A can certainly produce a fighter with very good range and 3-4 cannons, that can still be usable between mid-1941 to mid-1943.

Good points. Let's skip the heavy, but the long range role filled by the Bf 110 can be filled by a single engine DB 601/605 aircraft. A German Mustang.... perhaps based on the He 100.

I'd propose that engine on He 100 gets the annular cooling system - that should leave a lot of space for fuel tanks. Add two drop tanks and it should be very rangy. The Fw 190 airframe + DB 601 is also a good starting point.
Particularly for the needs of the BoB, the Bf 109 with a drop tank can cover a lot of long-range escort job.

 

[Admiral Beez]

I'd propose that engine on He 100 gets the annular cooling system - that should leave a lot of space for fuel tanks. Add two drop tanks and it should be very rangy.

And the He 100 had wide track undercarriage. Add the range and put that on Graf Zeppelin..... which still is a deadend project that won't see service, but they don't know that at the time.

 

[Admiral Beez]

For reasons of, perhaps, price, air forces/services of aircraft-producing countries decide they will not do any proposal that will require two engines on an aircraft designed as a fighter, nor that they will accept proposed 2-engined fighter coming as a private venture.

What replaces the Meteor and Me 262? For the RAF, perhaps the Vampire or something akin to a P-80 Shooting Star.

But what of the Germans? The Heinkel He 162 was an emergency fighter, so I expect something different would have been designed if Messerschmidt and/or Heinkel had the several years development time that went into the Me 262 and He 280 programs. Mind you, engine reliability becomes critical when you only have one.

Is it unreasonable for the Germans to go straight to the Me P.1101?

Messerschmitt Me P.1101 Luft '46 Entry

 

[tomo pauk]

What replaces the Meteor and Me 262? For the RAF, perhaps the Vampire or something akin to a P-80 Shooting Star.

But what of the Germans? The Heinkel He 162 was an emergency fighter, so I expect something different would have been designed if Messerschmidt and/or Heinkel had the several years development time that went into the Me 262 and He 280 programs. Mind you, engine reliability becomes critical when you only have one.

Is it unreasonable for the Germans to go straight to the Me P.1101?

Vampire indeed for the British.
For Germans - design the Me 163 around a jet engine instead around a rocket engine.

 

[Admiral Beez]

With no P-38, what aircraft is used for Operation Vengeance? IDK if the P-51 was opera in the SW Pacific at the time.

 

[tomo pauk]

With no P-38, what aircraft is used for Operation Vengeance? IDK if the P-51 was opera in the SW Pacific at the time.

P-38 was conceived as a reply to the specification requiring a hefty load of gun firepower and excellent hi-alt performance. My understanding was that Johnson/Lockheed were reckoning that single 1500 HP engine is needed to power their design, or, in case such engine is not around, go for two 1000 HP engines.

Here, two engines are not an option, so Johnson can choose either R-2180A or R-2600.
The R-2180A, as bought by Japan on DC-4E, was rated to 1400 HP on 95-100 oct fuel. 1500 HP on extra 100 rpm was never manufactured. 1st R-2600s were rated for 1500 HP aboard the Boeing 314. 1600 HP and 1700 HP engines were produced before US entered the war.
Our '1-engined P-38' should be very rangy with drop tanks, same as it was P-38.

 

[Kevin J]

With no P-38, what aircraft is used for Operation Vengeance? IDK if the P-51 was opera in the SW Pacific at the time.

The Beaufighter. Long range, powerful armament. Can outrun anything Japanese at low level. The aussies will have to kill yamamoto.

 

[Kevin J]

The Beaufighter. Long range, powerful armament. Can outrun anything Japanese at low level. The aussies will have to kill yamamoto.

The Beaufighter is much better than the Lightning earlier in the war. Has navigator with m/c gun, 4 cannon, 6 m/c in wings, can't get lost in fog like all those Lightnings up in the Aleutians. Yamamoto is a dead man and the aussies did it.

 

[swampyankee]

P-38 was conceived as a reply to the specification requiring a hefty load of gun firepower and excellent hi-alt performance. My understanding was that Johnson/Lockheed were reckoning that single 1500 HP engine is needed to power their design, or, in case such engine is not around, go for two 1000 HP engines.

Here, two engines are not an option, so Johnson can choose either R-2180A or R-2600.
The R-2180A, as bought by Japan on DC-4E, was rated to 1400 HP on 95-100 oct fuel. 1500 HP on extra 100 rpm was never manufactured. 1st R-2600s were rated for 1500 HP aboard the Boeing 314. 1600 HP and 1700 HP engines were produced before US entered the war.
Our '1-engined P-38' should be very rangy with drop tanks, same as it was P-38.

The pre-war R-2180 was a completely different engine from the post-war R-2180; its ancestry included the Hornet (R-1690), while the post-war engine was related to the Wasp (R-2800). It also received very little development effort, with only about thirty built.

The R-2800 was first flown in 1940, vs 1938 for the R-2600. Of course upgrading to a Double Wasp would be easy....

 

[tomo pauk]

The pre-war R-2180 was a completely different engine from the post-war R-2180; its ancestry included the Hornet (R-1690), while the post-war engine was related to the Wasp (R-2800). It also received very little development effort, with only about thirty built.

The post-war engine was named R-2180E, went to 1800+ HP with water injection and 2800 rpm and 130 grade fuel; 1-stage S/C only.

The R-2800 was first flown in 1940, vs 1938 for the R-2600. Of course upgrading to a Double Wasp would be easy....

Agreed.

 

[Admiral Beez]

It will be interesting to see what the Japanese come up with in place of their heavy fighters Kawasaki Ki-45, Ki-102 and Nakajima J1N. The IJAF thought they had the need of a heavy companion to their lightweight Ki-43, etc., so they'll design something for the heavy fighter, but what engine?

 

[Shortround6]

Tomo is correct on the R-2180 however it may have made for a lousy fighter engine without a lot more development. All but one model used a single speed supercharger and while military power is not listed (for the most part) max continuous power seems to have been around 1000-1150hp at 9,000-7,000ft, please note that a 2 speed R-1830 running on 100 octane had a max continuous rating of 1100hp at 6100ft in low gear and and 1000hp at 12,500ft in high gear. The R-2180 twin Hornet was about 150lbs heavier and about 3 1/2 in larger in diameter. The post war version (1/2 of an R-4360) certainly made more power, it also weighed around 200lbs depending on which models you compare. It may have needed manufacturing techniques pioneered with the R-2800 C.