He-177B

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

Instead of using a push-pull arrangement, tandem engines driving contr-props could have been achieved.

Like the Ki-64, except that the engines would be closer together.

http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/album/aircraft-cutaways/p18647-kawasaki-ki-64.html

Both engines could operate separately, and one could be shut down for a slow cruise on a long range mission.

That was also true of the DB coupled engines.

It seems that there's nothing inherent in a coupled arrangement that can't be worked out (a lot of the Heinkel's issues were with what some might think fairly straight-forward things like the routing of oil lines, fuel feeds and so on - not forgetting the lack of firewall) but the concept wasn't all bad, I would suggest it was largely the implementation of it that was the problem as much as anything.

The dive bombing requirement obviously hurt the design and caused great delays (and still according to some reports the wing was not as strong as it ought to have been for level loaded flight!) but there are records of Goring specifically saying, in Sept 1942, that the diving idea was stupid not needed if the plane was being delayed because of work to make it dive then the idea should be dropped straight away and the plane operated as a normal level heavy bomber.
 
Somehow Roy Chadwick, Ernest Hives and someone at the Air Ministy managed to get the Machester/Vulture issue resolved by creating the Lancaster/Merlin combo. The catapult launched and slide bombing Manchester was almost as silly as the 45-60 degree dive bombing He 177 yet the British muddled their way out of the mess by pulling the plug on a troublesome design before too much effort was wasted on it. Maybe the difference was that the Vulture was seen as an completely new engine while the DB606 was seen as simply two existing and established DB601's coupled (I mean what could go wrong?)

Slide bombing? What is that?

The Manchester's requirements for carrying a large (was it the 18"?) torpedo and the catapult launch capability were design features that stood the Lancaster in good stead. The torpedo requirement led to a long uninterupted bomb bay, which the RAF found very useful in the following years. The catapult launch requirement led to extra strength being designed into the airframe, which would later allow some relatively extreme manouevres for the Lancaster and allowed it to carry load sin excess of the original design requirement.

Not sure how much Hives had to do with the change from Manchester to Lancaster, apart from getting the government to cancel the Vulture. Even so, Chadwick, IIRC, had been working on the 4 Merlin Manchester before the Vulture was cancelled. Luckily Rolls had developed the quick engine change module (or "power egg") for the Merlin Beaufighter - Avro didn't have sufficient resources to do the airframe changes and design the engine installation.
 
That was also true of the DB coupled engines.

It seems that there's nothing inherent in a coupled arrangement that can't be worked out (a lot of the Heinkel's issues were with what some might think fairly straight-forward things like the routing of oil lines, fuel feeds and so on - not forgetting the lack of firewall) but the concept wasn't all bad, I would suggest it was largely the implementation of it that was the problem as much as anything.

The dive bombing requirement obviously hurt the design and caused great delays (and still according to some reports the wing was not as strong as it ought to have been for level loaded flight!) but there are records of Goring specifically saying, in Sept 1942, that the diving idea was stupid not needed if the plane was being delayed because of work to make it dive then the idea should be dropped straight away and the plane operated as a normal level heavy bomber.

Only difference in what I am proposing is that there needs to be no clutch to decouple one of the engines.
 
That's fine for 1946 but the He-177B was proposed during 1938. :)

The efficacy of the push pull arrangment was well established by the Dornier flying boats by 1938 and the configuration had been explored in some Heinkel flying boats as well. Google the configuration and you will get lots of opinions and some maths about how the rear prop looses efficiency.

Reality however is that one of the fastest prop aircraft of the war (possibly the fastest) the Do 335 used this arrangment, while the Dornier Do 26K was one of the longest ranged aircraft ever built. Theory and opinions aside: the arrangment worked very well in practice!
 
Slide bombing? What is that?
.

Dive bombing at a shallow angle so as not to require dive brakes. The British Mk.XIV bombsight had a unique abillity to do this to an angle of 20 degrees.

The poor performance of the Manchester due to weight growth and the vulture inabillity to keep up with that growth of course was a major reason the Lancaster was developed. The He 177 however was not underpowered.
 
I hate to see every failure get blamed on Hitler. Let's not forget Goerings statement " The Furher doesn't ask me how big my bombers are, he ask how many bombers I have" That's paraphrased, and from Goering, who knows if it's really true, but if it is the lack of the heavy bombers being developed is the way Hitler wanted it.

Hitler gets blammed for far to much. He seldom meddled in detailed technical affairs and when he did his interest generally helped. Its just a tradition to scape goat him.

He had a love of mounmental architecture on a massive scale and he is often called 'megalomaniac for his love of massive siege guns. However those guns had a very practical purpose: they were a counter to the maginot line.
 
The efficacy of the push pull arrangment was well established by the Dornier flying boats by 1938 and the configuration had been explored in some Heinkel flying boats as well. Google the configuration and you will get lots of opinions and some maths about how the rear prop looses efficiency.

Reality however is that one of the fastest prop aircraft of the war (possibly the fastest) the Do 335 used this arrangment, while the Dornier Do 26K was one of the longest ranged aircraft ever built. Theory and opinions aside: the arrangment worked very well in practice!

Was the Dornier Do 26K (?) one of the longest ranged aircraft ever built (that in itself is debatable) because of the tandem engines or in spite of the tandem engines?
 
"... Hitler gets blamed for far to much. He seldom meddled ...."

I agree ... his tea time chats with Eva and the secretaries are the "real" Hitler .... chatty, gossipy, trivial, boring beyond belief. The softer, gentler, sensitive artist {wantabe}. He didn't smoke, drink or eat flesh ...... just the kind of bright spark you want at your Super Bowl soiree. [I hope the mods don't think I'm veering towards political)

MM
 
"... Hitler gets blamed for far to much. He seldom meddled ...."

I agree ... his tea time chats with Eva and the secretaries are the "real" Hitler .... chatty, gossipy, trivial, boring beyond belief. The softer, gentler, sensitive artist {wantabe}. He didn't smoke, drink or eat flesh ...... just the kind of bright spark you want at your Super Bowl soiree. [I hope the mods don't think I'm veering towards political)

MM

We're watching. :)
 
Was the Dornier Do 26K (?) one of the longest ranged aircraft ever built (that in itself is debatable) because of the tandem engines or in spite of the tandem engines?
The four engine Ju-290 had an even greater range / payload. Otherwise Do-26k would have been making the trip between German controlled Crimea and Japanese controlled Manchuria.
 
The Ju290 is listed as having a range of 6,150km (3,843 miles). Of course the Ju290 had a faster top speed, but cruise speeds may not have been much different.

The Do26 would probably have been cheaper to use for such a journey if the payload to be delivered was small, or consisted of a small party of officials.
 
IMO wiki is wrong (typo) with 500kg payload, you can read there: " 500 kg or 12 fully equipped troops"
Regards
Cimmex
 
Number of planes did record setting or long distance flights, it doesn't mean they could operate at those ranges for normal operations. The Lockheed Electra 10 flew the Atlantic several times and was used by Amelia Earhart for her attempt at a round the world flight. In "normal" conditions ( and fuel tanks) it had a range of 700-800 miles. The DO26 also depended on being catapult launched for it's heavier gross weights which tended to limit it's usefulness.
 
but " 500 kg or 12 fully equipped troops" could not be right!
Regards
Cimmex
 
from "Axis A/C of WWII" by David Mondey
Max bomb Weight: Bomb load up to 6,614 lbs (3000kg) or 3 Hs 293, 294 or FX-1400 Fritz-X

Ranges vary by marks. Wuzak posted for the A-5. The B-2 was supposed to be able to go 4,970 miles.
 
In reference to the Dornier 26. It may not be right.

Add a "1" in front if you want (1500kg). The performance figures are sketchy at best. With 3 different engines fitted at times and different gross weights trying to figure out it's actual payload over a given distance is mostly guess work.
Many other flying boats aren't much better. The British "Empire" flying boats used different engines and gross weights from about 40,000lbs to 53,000lbs at different times so figuring out their range and payload abilities is also a lot of guess work.
All we "know" is that one plane carried 580kg of medicine to Peru once. How much help or trouble it got from prevailing winds I have no idea.
 
"... Hitler gets blamed for far to much. He seldom meddled ...."

I agree ... his tea time chats with Eva and the secretaries are the "real" Hitler .... chatty, gossipy, trivial, boring beyond belief. The softer, gentler, sensitive artist {wantabe}. He didn't smoke, drink or eat flesh ...... just the kind of bright spark you want at your Super Bowl soiree. [I hope the mods don't think I'm veering towards political)

MM

It's possible to see Hitler as an inner city emo doing inner city radical politics, even has the hair flick.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back