Airforces just pre-WW2: you run the show

tomo pauk said:

Just some cuts/changes:
-no Chrysler aircraft engine, build either Merlins or V-1710s
-no Continental AC engine(s), build V-1710s
-no Bristol Taurus, most of the funding effort goes to Hercules, some for Perseus
-no 37mm cannon for USAAC, not until it can fire the shell from AAA cannon (event then it's not necessary to have one)
-no Botha, Roc, Defiant, Battle, Beaufort (make upgraded Skuas, and twin-Merlin fighter-bombers), no P-63 (make more P-51s),
-Curtiss does not build P-47

Click to expand...

While cutting the Chrysler engine saves engineering work it doesn't do much for production since Chrysler never tooled up to make the thing. The Dodge Division of Chrysler did make over 6000 R-3350s in 1944 though, a bit late for 1938-42.

Continental offers more scope but again do not confuse experimental work ( a couple of prototype engines) with production. Continental was a large engine maker in the US, making engines for car makers, trucks (large and small) boats and industrial engines in addition to the air-cooled aircraft engines. The production facilities were not idle while they were playing with the IV-1430, While a new factory had been built it made radials and finally Merlins but not until near the end of the war.

Canning the Taurus is a good idea, what ever it saved in drag over a Perseus it lost in weight and cost.

Fixing the M4 37mm doesn't take much, just a modification to the ejection chute to get the fired cartridge case out of the way.

Some Battles built in 1937-1939 are a good idea, the new squadrons have to train on something. continuing production as long as they did wasn't the best idea.

Beaforts should have had Hercules engines. Make a proper medium bomber out of it.

Yes, I do know that both Chrysler's Conti's engines were in experimental stages, but they were draining funding engineer's time, both better spent on something else. Another shortcoming was that there were some planes built around them - ditch the engines, ditch the planes. So Republic can iron out the regular P-47s, Lockheed same thing with P-38 etc.
The M4 cannon did have other issues preventing it being top performer, like low RoF MV, so better spend the effort to bring the 20mm program to frutition earlier. Or/and neck up the .50 cal HMG.

A better usage of Hercules might be installing them into Hempden?

What about heavy bomber programs? How about an unarmed bomber, either a classic 4 engined plane with turbo V-1710s or R-2800s, or non-conventional type akin to Douglas Mixmaster? Maybe a metal sibling to the Mossie?

Both engines came late in the game. at least in flyable form. The P-49 doesn't fly until 11 November 1942. The US aviation industry was of a size were it could afford to fool around with some extra things without delaying other projects too much. Granted it took a while to get some production plants up and running but production plants could be hundreds of thousand of sq ft and employ tens of thousands of workers each. Ditching a few prototype planes doesn't save much, The P-49 wasn't that far off from the P-38 and P-67 didn't delay much of anything, too late in the war and MacDonald didn't really have any production facilities anyway, it did give them something to learn on while coming up with the Navy jets though.

The Chrysler powered P-47 didn't even fly till 1945 so I doubt it delayed sorting out the the other P-47 models by much.

Continental would up making over 53,000 Wright R-975 Whirlwind engines during and after the war. While not fighter engines they did power trainers and transports and tanks. Post war they went into helicopters.
this in addition to their own flat 4 6 cylinder engines and the R-670 radial used to power trainers

"What about heavy bomber programs? How about an unarmed bomber, either a classic 4 engined plane with turbo V-1710s or R-2800s, or non-conventional type akin to Douglas Mixmaster? Maybe a metal sibling to the Mossie?"

Now you are getting into never were programs and not just rearranging production

Convincing points re. experimental stuff

Re. different bombers: just could not resist

A startling fact is that the US Pacific Fleet on December 7, 1941, had a total of 85 aircraft in inventory. Two years before, forget the Brewster Buffalo, ramp up development and production of the Wildcat. Buy more SBDs and frantically find a replacement for the TBD. Get Vought to go into emergency mode to develop the F4U and get it into production!

If Heinkel gets his 1938 wish to develop the He-177B I doubt there would be a July 1939 Bomber B program. Instead the He-177B would enter mass production about 1941.

Not that I have anything against the Bomber B per se. It was a very high performance aircraft by WWII standards. But when WWII begins I think Germany would push the He-177B to completion as it would be available sooner. It's also more of a sure thing. Jumo 211 engines worked just fine by 1939 and were available in large numbers. So Heinkel only needs to perfect the He-177B airframe.

TBD was replaced by TBF, Navy ordering the Grummans in April 1940. Guess that development was pretty fast?
Vought can forget the TBU (later TBY, Sea Wolf), in order to better concentrate on F4U.

renrich said:

A startling fact is that the US Pacific Fleet on December 7, 1941, had a total of 85 aircraft in inventory. Two years before, forget the Brewster Buffalo, ramp up development and production of the Wildcat. Buy more SBDs and frantically find a replacement for the TBD. Get Vought to go into emergency mode to develop the F4U and get it into production!

Click to expand...

That's definitely the way to go if the USA is in a war starting in December 1941... I'd even say starting earlier. Perhaps as early as January 1 1940. The XF4F-3 has flown and other notable aircraft, whereas many in my original list are already obsolescent.

I was just responding to the alternate universe (or virtual reality) where our war starts simultaneous to the European one. Perhaps that should be a separate thread. Or perhaps in some ways more interesting start the world war for everyone when Japan invades Manchuria. (September 19, 1931) or when it invades China: July 7, 1937 or when Germany's anschluss with annexation of Austria March 12, 1938.

lots of things tie together. you can't build an TBF until you can get the R-2600 (or equivalent) in quantity. In fact P&W could not supply enough of the two stage supercharged R-1830 engines to supply all the F4F-3 and that is why F4F-3As were built along side with a two speed single stage engine. The difference is the -3A had 1000hp at 14,500ft while the -3 and -4 had 1000hp at 19,000ft. the -3A would down to about 915-920hp at 19,000ft. Even if you can get airframes you need the right engines. Not all 1200hp R-1830s were created equal

it takes 2-4 years to go from pencil on paper to squadron service. Best the US could have done in 1939 is stick a newer R-1830 into the Devastator, start protecting the fuel tanks and see about doubling up the gun in the rear cockpit.

TBF was a rather timely design, that is simply in need of fighter cover to get it's job done. We can just forget all that torpedo stuff, too, and fly it at 15000 ft, then descend at wave top height and make skip/mast height bombing? Or 60-70 deg dive bombing from those 15kft?

That's true of any bomber if enemy fighter aircraft are in the vicinity. Including a P-47 or F4U loaded down with bombs for ground attack.