German logistics, purchase programs and war booty, reality and alternatives 1935-43 (1 Viewer)

[Reluctant Poster]

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.

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.

South African Class 25 4-8-4 - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The tender is much bigger than normal to accommodate the heat exchangers.
In any event Sentinel got around it by stopping for water every 30 miles.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=skG-YYGwoFI#ddg-play
Might not be so easy to find unfrozen water in a Russian winter

 

[tomo pauk]

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.

How about this crazy idea: no cowl MGs at all once belt-fed cannons are in?

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.

Is there some math around for this?

Might not be so easy to find unfrozen water in a Russian winter

For teh Germans, it was probably far easier to melt the ice in Russia than to find lakes of petrol or diesel fuel.

 

[z42]

How about this crazy idea: no cowl MGs at all once belt-fed cannons are in?

So how should the 109 be equipped then? Motor cannon + 2 FN HMG's in the wings outside the prop arc?

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?

 

[tomo pauk]

So how should the 109 be equipped then? Motor cannon + 2 FN HMG's in the wings outside the prop arc?

That is one option. Another might've been 2x2 HMGs in the wings + the prop cannon.
My favorite, though, is one prop cannon + two in the wings. Leaving the HMGs for the bombers' defence.

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 in-between 30mm cannon always gets my vote.

 

[Alexander severus]

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

 

[GrauGeist]

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

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.

 

[Alexander severus]

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.

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?

 

[marathag]

..or at least had something with the range of B17 to destroy British aircraft industry in UK

Ju-89 or Do-19

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

 

[marathag]

Might not be so easy to find unfrozen water in a Russian winter

1950s Minnesota, that is even colder

Tanks were insulated, and had circulator pumps and steam heater for tanks that didn't have much use. The local well used to fill would be above freezing, that also helped.
Each tender needed over a thousand gallons

 

[GrauGeist]

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

There was also the Me264.

 

[GrauGeist]

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?

No way the Japanese were going to have a machine that could fly from Japanese held territory to the west coast of North America.

Even the B-17 in Ferry mode was nearly out of gas on approach to Hawaii from California.

The Japanese did attack Oregon with an aircraft (E14Y) launched from a submarine (I-25) and planned on further attacks using the M6A1 Seiran launched from I-400 class submarines, but the war ended before they could carry out planned attacks.

 

[SaparotRob]

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.

 

[Shortround6]

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.

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.
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.

The German MG 131 is actually a rather good gun for it's intended purpose. Which was to fit (mostly) into places where the MG 17 fit. It offered just over twice the power for only 50% more weight.
The Big Browning (either US or Belgian) was longer, wider, taller and a lot heavier. It was more powerful unless that synchronization problem crops up. The MG 131 used electric priming and while the rate of fire slowed down it was more on the order of 10% rather than the 30% (or more) that the Browning guns suffered. Turns out that a MG 131 firing at just over 800rpm is within a few percent of the weight of fire of a .50 cal Browning firing at around 560rpm (some synched Browning's didn't hit 500rpm) Except the MG 131 was a lot lighter.
It was still a lot lighter than the Belgian version. 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.
Now the Germans screwed up many areas of aircraft armament. Like never really getting a twin mount/turret for the MG 131 into wide spread survive. And if they can't get a twin MG 131 into service the chances of a twin 13.2 Belgian Browning is about zero.
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.

 

[GrauGeist]

Is there some math around for this?

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.

 

[tomo pauk]

The Belgian 13.2mm Browning seems to a unicorn with golden horn.

Once the American prism is removed from the field of view, the Belgian Browning is what it was - a good HMG.

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.

Have I not stated dozen of times that synchronised MGs need to go?

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.

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.

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.

A Belgian Browning in the German bomber in 1941 is a d@mn sight better than the MG 131 in the same place but in 1943.

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.

The He 112B-2 was good for about 510 km/s. The Bf 109F was about 100 km/h faster.

Returning back to the He112B: It had comparable performance to the Bf109F

 

[z42]

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.

 

[tomo pauk]

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.

Nobody have had the monopoly on making the mistakes
Galland was scathing wrt. the 109F having only one cannon, and requested (and gotten) the 109F armed with 3 cannons and two HMGs. After all, the gondola cannons' set up was even more draggy and heavy. The HMG set up was also draggy. With cannons in the wings, you at least get a lot of firepower as a return of investment.

 

[z42]

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.

For a couple of data points, the Swedes got the manufacturing drawings for the FN HMG from FN in the summer of 1940 just as Belgium fell to the Germans. Local production was setup and apparently it entered service in 1941. The Finns got the drawings from Sweden sometime after that, and in 1941 the state manufacturer VKT was ordered to produce it for the Finnish Air Force. Though in 12.7x99 caliber, as that caliber ammunition was already in production. Resulting in the Lkk/42 which evidently entered service in autumn 1943.

Now, compared to Finland at the time, surely an industrial powerhouse like Germany could have got the FN HMG into production faster than that. Looking at the Swedish example, maybe Germany could have managed to get it into service in 1941 too, had they so wanted.

As for synchronization, seems in synchronized installations the Finns got about 750-800 rpm from it, versus 1100 rpm for an unsynchronized installation.

 

[Shortround6]

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.

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.
They had also been working on their own MG 131 since at least 1938 and they were specifying it in number of aircraft in 1939-40 (shows up in some of the FW 187 specs).
Now it doesn't seem to have gone quite as planned and the MG 131 seems to have started trickling into Luftwaffe service in the spring of 1941 in bombers. For a gun that was supposed to have been fitted into cowl mounts that took quite a while to happen.
Now the American .50 cal was certainly not in great shape in 1940 or 41 but for some reason everybody assumes that the Belgian version was ready go, reliable and durable and available in large numbers in the summer of 1940.
It took ten factories in the US to satisfy the demand for .50 cal guns at it's peak during the war.
FN was offering guns for sale. How big a production line they had is subject to question. Since aside from the handful of sales to the Belgians and the Swedes (emergency sale) I don't think they actually made very many guns.
FN built well over 1 million pistols for the Germans during WW II, nobody seems to know how many rifles they built, FN was trying sell Mauser bolt action rifles post war (hard sell, there was a lot of cheap surplus. The Germans don't seem to have had FN build very many (or any?) BARs and FN had the tooling to make BARs and even offered a quick change barrel version for sale in 1930s.
I don't have reasons. But there was a lot of tooling in the FN factory for all sorts of weapons. The question is how much tooling they actually had for the 13.2mm machine gun and if the 13.2mm machine gun was actually a finished ready to go project. Or was it pretty much in the same state the US .50 was? unreliable in high altitude cold weather, feed problems while pulling Gs and so on. The Swedes and Finns had a while to sort out the problems.

 

[SaparotRob]

Let's see if I can cause a heated debate.
When did the U.S. Browning fifties actually become reliable?