- Thread starter
-
- #41
How effective in the bomber killing business were the Gladiators, Defiants and fighter Blenheims in 1940?
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
If bomber interception is the mission you are doubling the fuel consumption per mission, which with the fuel situation in 1940 is not a good idea.
To justify a twin merlin for the interception role it must be twice as effective per mission (ie double the kills) for the same expenditure of resources.
The P-322 (turboless P-38) was rejected by the British and the USAAF only used it at home as a training plane - because it was simply not good enough.
The time line doesn't work. The first P322 didn't leave the production line until Aug 1941, What the British did or did not know about it is subject to question, The first P-322 to get to Britain doesn't get there until Dec 1941, how soon it is tested I don't know. The 2nd P-322 Arrived in England in Jan 1942. Yes they wanted no more of them but.............BIG BUT...The RAF took on those in the pipeline already but found them unsatisfactory as delivered and wanted no more and spent their money on Hawk81 Tomahawks to replace the Lysanders in Army C-operation Command initially.
There may have been 3 engines used the Lightning Is?P-322 used by USAAF for training was not the same as the Lightining I - the former was with the low-altitude V-1710s, the later was with 'normal' altitude V-1710s. It can be only expected that the former will be lower performing.
Maybe they didn't have an extra 240 turbos?Actually, it's strange that, when they were already putting the newer Alisons in P-322, they didn't put a turbo and produce them like regular P-38s.
? MeaningOr the wing leading edges were not set up to be inter coolers?
I can't find any online pictures.? Meaning
Only the Defiant used the Merlin. I don't see the relevance of gladiators and Blenheims or are you proposing to use the freed up Mercurys in a single seat twin?How effective in the bomber killing business were the Gladiators, Defiants and fighter Blenheims in 1940?
Only the Defiant used the Merlin. I don't see the relevance of gladiators and Blenheims or are you proposing to use the freed up Mercurys in a single seat twin?
All airforces had deadwood. It's a fact that you can't replace your entire inventory at once. The USAAF still had P-26s based at Pearl Harbor on Dec 7 1941.My point is that, in the RAF's inventory, there was a whole forest of dead wood deserving the axe. A high-performance defensive fighter armed with perhaps 12 .303s is far less deserving of a critique than the Defiant, Gladiator and fighter Blenheim - let's forget the bombers for now - that required resources to make, pilots and fuel to to fly without making a dent on LW during the BoB.
RAF was in much worse position with trained pilots than it was in fuel stocks in 1940.
What strike was that. The only one I am aware of is at Hillington in 1943P-322's intake is on top of the boom ahead of the wing leading edge. Air comes in and make a 90* down into the carb. All the intake plumbing for the turbo is simply left out; the outer leading edge can probably be simplified aka made lighter is it isn't being used as an intercooler (or turned into fuel tank to extend range).
View attachment 797377
P-322 to Lightning I is the same change as P-40B to D: i.e. change from Allison C to F engines. The problem with the "C" nose is it uses: a: an internally toothed gear for reduction box (needs custom machining equipment) and a huge plain bearing. With number of engines being ordered and power increases to the engine, it was more challenging to increase capacity than to change to the 2 externally toothed gears. So, Allison changed production to the F nose*. But the actual thrust line doesn't change that much (Curtis/Lockheed still probably need to manufacture new cowls).
Could the low supercharger ratios be part of the contract for the French i.e. They wanted engines to be able to run on 87 (or worse) fuel. Then Allison was just fulfilling the contract they had in hand. I know there is a lot of bad blood between Lockheed and British over what was ordered versus what was needed.
*It makes commonality with the Allison E series easier too. C nose engines drove the supercharger via a shaft from the reduction gear. But the P-39 doesn't have a reduction gear on the engine, adding the reduction gears - crankshaft and internally tooth gear to drive the supercharger are expensive solution. Taking the drive off the back end of the crankshaft for the supercharger is a common solution.
The ~200 Merlins lost in Summer '40 when RR workers went on strike in middle of BoB would have powered 100+ Lightning Is... (You can see the dip in numbers G Geoffrey Sinclair provides). But there was no better time to get concessions from gov't for better housing, etc.
The Magic of a Name – The Rolls-Royce Story – The First 40 Years. by Peter Pugh; in it he says: The men walked off the job for 10 days.What strike was that. The only one I am aware of is at Hillington in 1943
Worse, you can't layoff your entire staff while say you change from fabric to metal covering. So, you continue to build less than desired product, so the people are there when you need themAll airforces had deadwood. It's a fact that you can't replace your entire inventory at once. The USAAF still had P-26s based at Pearl Harbor on Dec 7 1941.
All airforces had deadwood. It's a fact that you can't replace your entire inventory at once. The USAAF still had P-26s based at Pearl Harbor on Dec 7 1941.