Contenders in German "Bomber A" Program

[pbehn]

Well, a better question might be: "What moron in his right mind would want to develop a heavy dive-bomber?" but we both know the answer.
That occurs whether you have two engines, or four engines acting like two engines, or four individual engines. I would probably guess that at least if the engines were individualized, you'd have less odds of getting all of them shot off before you're finished with the bombing attack.
.

The bigger and heavier the plane the less manoeuvrable it is and the easier it is to hit.especially if you are attacking targets that are important.

 

[Zipper730]

The bigger and heavier the plane the less manoeuvrable it is and the easier it is to hit.especially if you are attacking targets that are important.

While I'll have to take a look on this, the baseline design was quite large and already presented a good target as is...

 

[pbehn]

While I'll have to take a look on this, the baseline design was quite large and already presented a good target as is...

My point about dive bombing with a heavy bomber was regardless of how many engines it has. Two or four makes little difference to that issue.

 

[Zipper730]

My point about dive bombing with a heavy bomber was regardless of how many engines it has. Two or four makes little difference to that issue.

That I agree with: It was equally idiotic

 

[pbehn]

That I agree with: It was equally idiotic

The British had barrage balloons up to 5,000 ft to protect targets. A US bomber formation was spaced not only to for the gunners fields of fire but to make it more difficult for anti aircraft fire. A He 177 with four engines is 4 bf109s in incredibly close formation separated by fuel tanks and a crew of six sitting in a big glass house in the middle.

 

[Zipper730]

A US bomber formation was spaced not only to for the gunners fields of fire but to make it more difficult for anti aircraft fire.

I knew the first part, but not the second part.

 

[pbehn]

I knew the first part, but not the second part.

There were all sorts of calculations and compromises made in the spacing of a bomber formation. To hit a particular target the planes should be line astern, to hit an area they should be as close together as possible but its possible to be so close that you give ground fire a target they cant miss and planes start hitting each other and dropping bombs on each other. To overwhelm ground forces passing as quickly as possible at as many varied heights as possible is best but to escort a formation they need to be as tight as possible but then if they are too tight they are on each others line of defensive fire. US daylight formations closed up to bomb the target then spread out after. B-17s could hold a tighter formation than B24s. As with many things, its complicated.

 

[Zipper730]

Elmas , W wuzak

I'm curious about the Germans and and radiator design: How much latitude did bomber designers get to design their radiators? Fighter designers appeared to have gotten some latitude, but the bomber guys all seemed to use annular radiators.

 

[Zipper730]

US daylight formations closed up to bomb the target then spread out after.

I thought that was early on, where they'd come out of the combat-box; then bomb individually; then form-up again.

B-17s could hold a tighter formation than B24s.

Because they were more docile in handling and didn't hunt in yaw much?

 

[pbehn]

I thought that was early on, where they'd come out of the combat-box; then bomb individually; then form-up again.
Because they were more docile in handling and didn't hunt in yaw much?

As with all things it is complicated and there isn't a universal truth. I was just saying the most general of generalisations. Combat box - Wikipedia note this mainly refers to "stuff" in 1943 which was before the US really got going in Europe.

 

[wuzak]

Elmas , W wuzak

I'm curious about the Germans and and radiator design: How much latitude did bomber designers get to design their radiators? Fighter designers appeared to have gotten some latitude, but the bomber guys all seemed to use annular radiators.

A lot of German engines were provided as power eggs, with the cooling system included. This facilitated changing between liquid and air-cooled engines.

That said, the He 111 did not have an annular radiator, early Do 17s, Do 215 and some Do 217s. And the Junkers Ju 87 did not.

As planned, with DB 603s, the Me 264 would not have had annular radiators either. They came about as the DB 6043 was not yet available, so Jumo 211s were substituted.

 

[Zipper730]

A lot of German engines were provided as power eggs, with the cooling system included.

So there was minimal decision on the radiator configuration?

That said, the He 111 did not have an annular radiator, early Do 17s, Do 215 and some Do 217s.

Were power eggs a factor in Bomber A?

 

[wuzak]

So there was minimal decision on the radiator configuration?

There would have been discussion between the airframe and engine manufacturers to agree on a solution.

Were power eggs a factor in Bomber A?

I doubt it.

I also don't think any of the Bomber A prototypes had an annular radiator.