Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
You need to add a condenser which is a bulky and heavy piece of equipment. This obviously reduces the payload. South African Railways did use condensers on some of their locomotives because of severe water supply issues.In any calculation of consumption, it must be taken into account that the means of transport must be returned anyway. And since this is a What if section - I don't see that it is impossible to create an (almost) closed water-steam cycle, after all, some steam cars (passenger cars) did (unlike, for example, the Sentinel wagon) have such systems. That the water in these systems needs to be replenished, but not in quantities like the Sentinel wagon, where (if I'm not mistaken,I) all the steam (water) was consumed end expelled.
How about this crazy idea: no cowl MGs at all once belt-fed cannons are in?Good as the FN 13.2mm aircraft HMG was, it was also too big to fit in the cowling of the Bf 109. AFAIU that was one of the main motivations behind the MG 131; something compact enough to fit there. OTOH, since this is a what-if thread, they could have, in addition to all the other rather major modifications they made for the Bf 109F, also have made the cowling a bit longer in order to fit a bigger HMG.
Returning back to the He112B:
It had comparable performance to the Bf109F, but greater range on internal fuel. Add drop tanks to extend that range and you'll have better bomber protection.
Might not be so easy to find unfrozen water in a Russian winter
How about this crazy idea: no cowl MGs at all once belt-fed cannons are in?
That is one option. Another might've been 2x2 HMGs in the wings + the prop cannon.So how should the 109 be equipped then? Motor cannon + 2 FN HMG's in the wings outside the prop arc?
The in-between 30mm cannon always gets my vote.Alternatively, a longer cowling to fit the FN HMG's could also allow a bigger higher velocity 30mm motor cannon. Not the Mk 103, that is still too big and bulky, but something inbetween the OTL Mk 103 and 108. Say something with a MV of 700-750 m/s?
The ranges were to great to effectively attack U.S. oil fields.I have read about the ARP( aereo radio pilotato) , a italian project as a kamikaze planes without waste human lives..there Is possibility of use radio command aircraft to hit oil fields of US?some italian aircraft had long range... more over, if the Plane could be sacrified,the range limiti Will be 6000 km or something like that to hit vital target as new York from europe or California from japan
And if the crew accept to be a suicide mission,basically not having a return fly,destroying both aircraft and crew?from europe/japan with 6/6500 km couldn't be reached?The ranges were to great to effectively attack U.S. oil fields.
The oilfields in Pennsylvania and Oklahoma were too far inland.
The oilfields in Texas and California would require getting past numerous Navy and Army bases.
The only oil fields that were least protected, would have been near Santa Barbara (Elwood) and a Japanese submarine did try to attack it, with no success.
Ju-89 or Do-19..or at least had something with the range of B17 to destroy British aircraft industry in UK
1950s Minnesota, that is even colderMight not be so easy to find unfrozen water in a Russian winter
There was also the Me264.Ju-89 or Do-19
View attachment 814140
View attachment 814139
But their proponent, Luftwaffe Chief of Staff, General Wever died in an accident, and his push for the Ural bomber program died with him, while Udet supported the tactical side of bombing, especially divebombers, and Albert Kesselring wanted more fighters.
Also didn't help that the performance of either of them was substandard for the time in 1936, partly from the low performance of the Bramo radials
The only Axis bomber close to the US Bombers at the start of the War in performance was the Piaggio P.108, and their radials were unreliable
View attachment 814141
No way the Japanese were going to have a machine that could fly from Japanese held territory to the west coast of North America.And if the crew accept to be a suicide mission,basically not having a return fly,destroying both aircraft and crew?from europe/japan with 6/6500 km couldn't be reached?
That might be an extravagant use of critical resources.And if the crew accept to be a suicide mission,basically not having a return fly,destroying both aircraft and crew?from europe/japan with 6/6500 km couldn't be reached?
The Belgian 13.2mm Browning seems to a unicorn with golden horn.Another war booty thing that Germans might've found useful: a good HMG made in Belgium. They don't have one in service (bar the token examples) until some time in mid-1943, so the 13.2mm HMGs can help them to bridge the gap. Up to the point that the MG 131 is removed from the production plans.
A HMG has it's role as a defensive weapon for the bombers, and might've fit in the places that a 20mm cannon will not. The Belgian gun was also much more potent than the German type, so letting it fly with API ammo will mean easier penetration of the pilot and fuel protection of the enemy aircraft.
French are also making the HMG in that calibre (even though their are not as advanced as the Belgian types), meaning that there is a lot of potential for the good numerical supply both of the guns and ammo.
I don't have my books handy, but the final He112 was to be introduced as the He112B-2 for production.Is there some math around for this?
Once the American prism is removed from the field of view, the Belgian Browning is what it was - a good HMG.The Belgian 13.2mm Browning seems to a unicorn with golden horn.
Have I not stated dozen of times that synchronised MGs need to go?The French 13.2mm round is basically a US .50 cal that that traded velocity for bullet weight. Not to start with but that is the way it wound up.
And let's remember that the Browning gun, at least the large ones, didn't like synchronization that much. American, Italian, Japanese they all had a major change in rate of fire.
For a captured design to be useful for the Germans they needed not only the design, they needed the manufacturing facilities. And they needed a manufacturing facility that could make the desired gun in large numbers. AND not impact other weapon deliverers also desired by the Germans, pistols and/or bolt action rifles.
I will also note that machinery that can make pistols may not be suitable for making large machine guns. Or even machinery that can make bolt action rifles and/or shotguns.
Sticking as single big Browning into a turret or hand mounting where a 20mm MG 151 won't fit instead of am MG 131 isn't really going to buy much.
I don't have my books handy, but the final He112 was to be introduced as the He112B-2 for production.
It was fitted with the Jumo210Ga engine, redesigned wing, fuselage, canopy and vertical stabilizer. It was also armed with two 20mm cannon and two 7.92mm MGs.
Returning back to the He112B: It had comparable performance to the Bf109F
My favorite, though, is one prop cannon + two in the wings.
I guess there were reasons why they didn't do this as the 'standard' Bf 109 armament; presumably they thought the price in terms of performance was too high.
The Belgian 13.2mm Browning seems to a unicorn with golden horn.
The French 13.2mm round is basically a US .50 cal that that traded velocity for bullet weight. Not to start with but that is the way it wound up.
And let's remember that the Browning gun, at least the large ones, didn't like synchronization that much. American, Italian, Japanese they all had a major change in rate of fire.
For a captured design to be useful for the Germans they needed not only the design, they needed the manufacturing facilities. And they needed a manufacturing facility that could make the desired gun in large numbers. AND not impact other weapon deliverers also desired by the Germans, pistols and/or bolt action rifles.
The Belgian version fired faster, so the rate of fire is up but the advantage of the Belgian Browning is not quite what it appears.
My point is that a production line that is cranking out a few dozen guns a month might not be of interest to the Germans, they need hundreds or thousands of guns per month.Belgians, tricky as they were, were still unable to put the production lines in their pockets and run with them in the UK in 1940. Meaning that Germans have had these under their control from June 1940.