Nightfighter for the USAF: you're in charge

[snowmobileman]

I personally like the later versions of the P-61, after they did away with the 3rd crewmember. I think the XP-61E XP-61F were pretty interesting...and although they were changed from night fighter to escort roles, they probably could have installed smaller radar units at that point. Also, the F7F-1N would probably have been a useful night fighter in the war, if it had been in service sooner.

 

[Shortround6]

While you don't need a fuselage as big as the P-61 to mount the radar it carried, the radar carried on for quite sometime.

and in modified form

If you wanted the capabilities of the SCR-720 radar you had to put up with it's bulk even for a number of years after the war. They had smaller radars but they had less range and didn't cover as much of the sky (SCR-720 swept 180 degrees horizontally)

 

[Glider]

The A20 certainly had a decent speed what it lacked was climb. My understanding was that they were seen as training aircraft because they failed in combat

 

[tomo pauk]

The A20 didn't have the performance and never would have in particular the climb. In action the main problem with the A20 was that it took too long to get to the height required and nothing will change that.

Something can change that, namely the installation of an engine with better capabilities. For the comparison: at 15000 ft, the R-2600 installed at most of A-20s and all P-70s was making maybe 1210-1220 HP, the R-2600 installed in B-25s was making 1320 HP, the Hercules was good for 1270 up to 1500 HP from 1941 on. So we can install the more capable version of the R-2600 to extract a bit of performance. Or we can install the Packard Merlin (V-1650-1) for enhanced perf. The turbo V-1710 should also work. The airframe was stressed for the R-2600 + turbo, so we can install a bit heavier R-2800.
As SR6 noted, on comparable HP, the A-20 was actually a bit faster than Beaufighter.

The Beau had the wing it needed but a lot of the drag comes from the body of the aircraft and bombers generally are larger than fighters

Agreed all the way. Guess that nobody wants to turn the B-25 or B-26 into night fighters

 

[Shortround6]

The A20 certainly had a decent speed what it lacked was climb. My understanding was that they were seen as training aircraft because they failed in combat

They went to the training squadrons first and only went overseas when delays in the P-61 (not a big surprise) or shortages of Beaufighters became apparent although I believe the squadron/s sent to North Africa did re-equip before seeing combat. Only combat IN US SERVICE was in the Pacific. and that started in Feb 1943.

 

[tomo pauk]

Anyone could post something about the radars Beaufighter carried?

 

[gjs238]

Would the Martin Baltimore have performed better than the A20?

 

[tomo pauk]

Don't think so - it was up to 50 mph slower than the A-20, on a more powerful version of the R-2600.

 

[Shortround6]

Tomo is right, somewhat, the Baltimore was not quite that slow. the early ones (first 1500 or so) use the 1600hp engines. While not much different in weight it was a larger, lumpier aircraft.

Things were changing fast, what made an acceptable( not great or even good) long range fighter/bomber interceptor in 1940 (Martin Maryland or Bristol Blenheim) was about useless in 1942. The bombers had gotten faster let alone trying to deal with any enemy fighters.

 

[Donivanp]

I see an awful lot of A-20 going on here. That should have been put to be a long time ago. Don't for get that the B-25 was used in this capacity in the SW pac area as well to some success, but no radar. the P-61 was faster and better at it's role then either the A-20 or A-26. The gun nose on an A-26 or B-25 would have to be removed or a bulky radar bulge would need to be added somewhere on the aircraft. One has to deal with either moving the weapons to a different area or moving the radar. The Mossy has the widow in range but speed is about the same. The wood construction of the Mossy may be harder to repair when damaged. Then again if skilled in wood may not be. The Widow is near twice as heavy. I've read where single engine fighter guys bad mouthed the Widow and got their butts cleaned in a fly off as the widow easily out maneuvered them to get their tail. I still say the widow with or with out the turret, (should do with out turret but just the .50) is the best bet going. If I changed anything I would do like the Germans in the Bf 110 where the back seater can change ammo drums in the 20mm's.

 

[mhuxt]

FWIW, the Widow was not far off the single-stage Mosquitos in overall top speed, however it was significantly slower than the NF.30, which went into service at about the same time as the Widow in Europe.

 

[GrauGeist]

Anyone could post something about the radars Beaufighter carried?

Tomo, look up the British AI Mark IV radar system. These were installed in the Beaufighter and the American counterpart: SCR-540 was also installed in P-70/A-20 Nightfighers.

A good quick-reference on the SCR systems can be seen here: AI--Aircraft Interception Sets - US Radar: Operational Characteristics of Radar Classified by Tactical Application [FTP 217]

 

[tomo pauk]

I see an awful lot of A-20 going on here. That should have been put to be a long time ago. Don't for get that the B-25 was used in this capacity in the SW pac area as well to some success, but no radar.

On the contrary, the A-20 was a far better base for a night fighter than the B-25. I'd love to read about the B-25 used as a radar-less NF, though.

the P-61 was faster and better at it's role then either the A-20 or A-26. The gun nose on an A-26 or B-25 would have to be removed or a bulky radar bulge would need to be added somewhere on the aircraft. One has to deal with either moving the weapons to a different area or moving the radar.

Premise of the thread is that USAF quickly move and acquire a reasonably capable NF at 1st, and (maybe) then to move on and procure a worlbeater NF. The P-61 was too late for the 1st premise, and any NF designed from ground-up after BoB will not be available before late 1943/early 1944. So we can, for example, modify the A-20 for such a role, or maybe the P-38.
The P-70 was outfitted with gun pack under the bomb bay in one version, so the radar antennae can be installed in/on the nose. The A-26-based NF can do the same. Such a fighter, but with same engines as the P-61, would've been notably faster at any altitude than the P-61, due to more advanced wing profile, as well as a smaller wing

The Mossy has the widow in range but speed is about the same. The wood construction of the Mossy may be harder to repair when damaged. Then again if skilled in wood may not be. The Widow is near twice as heavy.

The performance the P-61 had in 1942, the Mossie NF was displaying maybe 18 moths earlier. The Nf.30 was a much better performer.

I've read where single engine fighter guys bad mouthed the Widow and got their butts cleaned in a fly off as the widow easily out maneuvered them to get their tail. I still say the widow with or with out the turret, (should do with out turret but just the .50) is the best bet going. If I changed anything I would do like the Germans in the Bf 110 where the back seater can change ammo drums in the 20mm's.

Changing the drums is a necessity, not a virtue? If one lacks belt fed cannons for the USAF NF needs, just install more .50s and you're fine.
Any fighter pilot that engages into a flight pattern that suits the adversary should not be driving the fighter in a 1st place.

 

[Shortround6]

Part of the problem is timing. The only way to get an airframe into service in numbers in 1942 was to start design in 1939. Since AI radar didn't exist in 1939 (except in a few peoples heads) designing a plane around it was more than little difficult. This means that adapting an existing airframe is your only choice. The British were very fortunate that the Beaufighter and the Mosquito happened to fall into the right size category. They were doubly fortunate in that the Merlin was able to be adopted/modified to a passable altitude engine even with the single stage supercharger so no great rework was required of the airframe/engine installation. The Allison needs the turbo to compete with the Melrin XX series even in 1942 and the R-1830 has too much drag, at least in service form in 1942. The R-2800 needs the two stage supercharger to perform at 20,000ft.

 

[tomo pauk]

The Hercules was also an useful engine, most of the marks outfitted with 13 in diameter S/C were either comparable or better vs. the 'better' R-2600 versions in altitude power. In late 1941, the Mk.VI making, per Lumsden, 1545 HP at 15500 ft - that's even a bit better than the BMW-801D after the restrictions were lifted.

Now I'm thinking about the Spitfire with that engine aboard (and taking cover before Readie finds this out)... For another current thread, of course.

 

[wuzak]

Merlin 45 1,190hp @ 23,000ft. Weight 1,385lb
Merlin XX 1,430hp @ 11,000ft. 1,460hp @ 6,500ft. Weight 1,450lb
Hercules VI 1,545hp @ 15,500ft. 1,750hp @ 6,500ft.. Weight 1,845lb.

The Hercules has more power than the equivalent period Merlin, but also more weight and drag. Plus there would need to be significant revisions to the fuselage since the Hercules is nearly twice as wide. Also, the prop centreline will be lower so the prop diameter will be restricted and the extra hp may not result in extra thrust.

 

[Lucky13]

How about buying some Messerschmitt Bf 110's and work from there? It did fly for the first time in '36! A bit of tweaking, change engines...

 

[gjs238]

How about buying some Messerschmitt Bf 110's and work from there? It did fly for the first time in '36! A bit of tweaking, change engines...

Which radar do you have in mind - SCR-720 or SCR-540?
Would the SCR-720 fit in a Bf-110?

 

[gjs238]

.

 

[Lucky13]

Good question....also, could a Allison V-1710 be fitted to a '110 and maybe later, Merlins....what would the performance be?