VVS alternatives for 1938-42?

[tomo pauk]

Same intro as for other similar threads - improvement of Soviet aircraft (and their 'fiddly bits), tactics, strategy, tech etc. Thinkering starts from early 1938, with effects taking place between mid-1940 to end of 1942. Tech & aerodynamics of the day, buy licence if needed.

 

[tomo pauk]

Engine situation:
- the M100/103/105 - carry on as historically
- Mikulin engines - AM-34 as-is; AM-35A - either as-is, or trade a bit of rated altitude for more power down low, perhaps 1350 HP at 4000m instead of 1200 HP at 6000m (that will also much improve take off power); next - a 2-speed supercharged verision
- M87 and M88 line - the M88 will probably need to be designed with central bearing from scratch, so it can withstand better the increase of boost and rpm for more power. I'm not sure that M87 adds anything over the M63 engine.
- M82 - as historically

All non-Mikulin engines might use the Polikovskiy's swirl throttle to improve low-alt power. The V12s might also use fuel injection, instead of lots of carbs per each engine.

Guns:
Carry on as historically. Fighters need to be required to carry 2 20mm cannons.

 

[Kevin J]

Engine situation:
- the M100/103/105 - carry on as historically
- Mikulin engines - AM-34 as-is; AM-35A - either as-is, or trade a bit of rated altitude for more power down low, perhaps 1350 HP at 4000m instead of 1200 HP at 6000m (that will also much improve take off power); next - a 2-speed supercharged verision
- M87 and M88 line - the M88 will probably need to be designed with central bearing from scratch, so it can withstand better the increase of boost and rpm for more power. I'm not sure that M87 adds anything over the M63 engine.
- M82 - as historically

All non-Mikulin engines might use the Polikovskiy's swirl throttle to improve low-alt power. The V12s might also use fuel injection, instead of lots of carbs per each engine.

Guns:
Carry on as historically. Fighters need to be required to carry 2 20mm cannons.

You need AM 35A as is so that you stand a chance of intercepting the Ju 86R or any other high altitude photo recon aircraft.
A single cannon in the middle of the centre of an engine is just as good as 2 wing mounted ones.

 

[NevadaK]

In no particular order:

1. Learn from conflict with the Finn's
2. Be willing to move away from central command control in conflict (see above)
3. Reintegrate purged leadership/staff/designers sooner or better yet don't have the purge in the first place.

 

[tomo pauk]

You need AM 35A as is so that you stand a chance of intercepting the Ju 86R or any other high altitude photo recon aircraft.
A single cannon in the middle of the centre of an engine is just as good as 2 wing mounted ones.

Oh, no, I don't advocate wing cannons here (unless they are in wing roots). For fighters powered by M100/103/105 - have one firing through the prop, another in cowling. For other engines (radials, Mikulin engines) - two synchronised cannons.
A single cannon is not worth as two wing-mounted ones.
'My' AM-35A will not sacrifice that much of altitude performance. What might interefere with catching hi-alt German recons is small wing of Soviet fighters, as well as problematic cockpit canopy of historical MiG-1/3?

 

[Dimlee]

Main prerequisites:
A. Tupolev, Petlyakov, Arkhangelsky, Myasishchev, Glushko, Korolev, Kerber, Bartini, Bazenkov, Markov, Neman, Ozerov, Putilov, Tomashevich, Charomsky, Cheryomukhin, Arkadiy Nazarov... (the list is not final) are replaced behind the bars in sharashka in 1938-1939 by Yakovlev and Ilyushin.
It's nice to have Oshchepkov, Berg, and Vekshinsky free as well - if we want VVS to have a radar earlier (and probably better) than "Gneis".
B. NKAP (Aviation Ministry) and AmTorg work relentlessly with the US aviation industry and manage to acquire more licenses and more engines until the Winter War embargo in 1939. Including P&W R-2800.

Now we can continue.
1. VI-100 (aircraft "100") is developed as a twin-engine fighter and is produced in two major modifications: long-range escort (in the Navy in particular) and night fighter. No Pe-2.
2. Ar-2 is accepted as the replacement of SB-2 and became the main tactical bomber until Tu-2 arrives and the main (the only?) dive bomber until 1945.
3. I-180 began to replace I-16 in 1940. It is complemented in 1941 with I-185 (M-81 engine) and from 1942 it is replaced by I-185 (M-71, M-82).
4. Su-2 production is going on unhindered in 1941 before and after the relocation of the factories to the East. With M-82 engine Su-2 becomes main CAS aircraft in 1942. In the meantime, Su-6 is being tested and prepared for mass production from the end of 1942.
5. Production of DB-3F/Il-4 is stopped at the end of 1941 completely. Replaced by lend leased B-25s in VVS and by A-20 in the Navy.
6. First P-47s are acquired for evaluation not in 1943 but at the end of 1942. To be ordered in large numbers (as large as the US side can supply) and used as a fighter bomber later, from 1943.
7. Tu-2 is given high priority in 1941, full-scale production from spring 1942.

8. In the meantime, in sharashka... Alexander Yakovlev works under NKVD control and offers several prospective fighter designs. One or two of them are accepted by VVS in the role of a point defense interceptor. Another inmate, Sergey Ilyushin is ordered to focus on transport aircraft. He does his job well but the first results appear after 1942 (let's say, Il-12 in 1943 and Il-14 in 1945).

 

[tomo pauk]

Main prerequisites:
A. Tupolev, Petlyakov, Arkhangelsky, Myasishchev, Glushko, Korolev, Kerber, Bartini, Bazenkov, Markov, Neman, Ozerov, Putilov, Tomashevich, Charomsky, Cheryomukhin, Arkadiy Nazarov... (the list is not final) are replaced behind the bars in sharashka in 1938-1939 by Yakovlev and Ilyushin.
It's nice to have Oshchepkov, Berg, and Vekshinsky free as well - if we want VVS to have a radar earlier (and probably better) than "Gneis".
B. NKAP (Aviation Ministry) and AmTorg work relentlessly with the US aviation industry and manage to acquire more licenses and more engines until the Winter War embargo in 1939. Including P&W R-2800.

Now we can continue.
1. VI-100 (aircraft "100") is developed as a twin-engine fighter and is produced in two major modifications: long-range escort (in the Navy in particular) and night fighter. No Pe-2.
2. Ar-2 is accepted as the replacement of SB-2 and became the main tactical bomber until Tu-2 arrives and the main (the only?) dive bomber until 1945.
3. I-180 began to replace I-16 in 1940. It is complemented in 1941 with I-185 (M-81 engine) and from 1942 it is replaced by I-185 (M-71, M-82).
4. Su-2 production is going on unhindered in 1941 before and after the relocation of the factories to the East. With M-82 engine Su-2 becomes main CAS aircraft in 1942. In the meantime, Su-6 is being tested and prepared for mass production from the end of 1942.
5. Production of DB-3F/Il-4 is stopped at the end of 1941 completely. Replaced by lend leased B-25s in VVS and by A-20 in the Navy.
6. First P-47s are acquired for evaluation not in 1943 but at the end of 1942. To be ordered in large numbers (as large as the US side can supply) and used as a fighter bomber later, from 1943.
7. Tu-2 is given high priority in 1941, full-scale production from spring 1942.

8. In the meantime, in sharashka... Alexander Yakovlev works under NKVD control and offers several prospective fighter designs. One or two of them are accepted by VVS in the role of a point defense interceptor. Another inmate, Sergey Ilyushin is ordered to focus on transport aircraft. He does his job well but the first results appear after 1942 (let's say, Il-12 in 1943 and Il-14 in 1945).

A - yes, indeed
B - R-2800 for Soviets before Summer of 1941 is probably impossible.
1 - The day-fighter-only VI-100 might fall in the same trap as Bf 110 pushed in day-fighter-only trap. Soviets can field an 1-engined fighter with two cannons and extra fuel by 1941.
2 - The Ar-2 makes sense, but it will need fighter numerous fighter escort to survive. Soviets give 475 km/h max speed for the Ar-2.
3 - The I-180 & 185 are indeed interesting. The M-71 seem to be cancelled, though. But, at any rate, a Soviet fighter with a powerful radial engine (M-82, or a capable, alternative M88) in 1941 would've been a wecome addition.
4 - One wonders how good a fighter-bomber the Soviets might have if a fighter in 1941 sports 1400-1700 HP engine?
5 & 7 - With Tu-2/ANT-58 in early service, plus availability of Western bobers, the need for the Il-4 is indeed much diminished.
6 - Yes - P-47 ASAP for the VVS.

 

[Kevin J]

A - yes, indeed
B - R-2800 for Soviets before Summer of 1941 is probably impossible.
1 - The day-fighter-only VI-100 might fall in the same trap as Bf 110 pushed in day-fighter-only trap. Soviets can field an 1-engined fighter with two cannons and extra fuel by 1941.
2 - The Ar-2 makes sense, but it will need fighter numerous fighter escort to survive. Soviets give 475 km/h max speed for the Ar-2.
3 - The I-180 & 185 are indeed interesting. The M-71 seem to be cancelled, though. But, at any rate, a Soviet fighter with a powerful radial engine (M-82, or a capable, alternative M88) in 1941 would've been a wecome addition.
4 - One wonders how good a fighter-bomber the Soviets might have if a fighter in 1941 sports 1400-1700 HP engine?
5 & 7 - With Tu-2/ANT-58 in early service, plus availability of Western bobers, the need for the Il-4 is indeed much diminished.
6 - Yes - P-47 ASAP for the VVS.

You don't to give the Soviets too many P-47's because then they'll be able to intercept the B-29 when the WW2 ends.

 

[Dimlee]

B - My knowledge in this field is limited. It would be interesting to speculate what were the best (in terms of power and compatibility with the Soviet airframes) options IF NKAP and Soviet designers could pick and choose at US and British markets.

1 - I agree about the trap. My idea is that VI-100 as a day fighter fills just a certain niche. As air protection of convoys in 1941 and 1942, in the North and in the Black Sea. In both theaters long-range fighter cover was critical. In late spring and June, 1942 supply lines of Sevastopol were cut as the convoy system failed under LW attacks.
Probably VI-100 could become a good recon platform as well. At least for 1941-1942.
Surprisingly, a single-engine fighter with extra fuel was not seriously considered until 1941. Probably designers did not consider such a concept to be feasible. Or they did not want to consider it due to lack of demand from VVS which was limited in its vision by the current doctrine.
2 - Agree about the escorts. I assume they would be available for Ar-2 as for Pe-2 in real life. In the worst case with the same losses in the initial period but with Ar-2 achieving better results.
3 - Any US radial engine for I-185 after the embargo is cancelled?
6 - I love this idea. Yet I know little about P-47 availability in that period. Could lend leased export of P-47 become as massive as of P-39?

 

[tomo pauk]

B - My knowledge in this field is limited. It would be interesting to speculate what were the best (in terms of power and compatibility with the Soviet airframes) options IF NKAP and Soviet designers could pick and choose at US and British markets.

I'd suggest Merlin and V-1710 for the Soviets.

1 - I agree about the trap. My idea is that VI-100 as a day fighter fills just a certain niche. As air protection of convoys in 1941 and 1942, in the North and in the Black Sea. In both theaters long-range fighter cover was critical. In late spring and June, 1942 supply lines of Sevastopol were cut as the convoy system failed under LW attacks.
Probably VI-100 could become a good recon platform as well. At least for 1941-1942.
Surprisingly, a single-engine fighter with extra fuel was not seriously considered until 1941. Probably designers did not consider such a concept to be feasible. Or they did not want to consider it due to lack of demand from VVS which was limited in its vision by the current doctrine.
2 - Agree about the escorts. I assume they would be available for Ar-2 as for Pe-2 in real life. In the worst case with the same losses in the initial period but with Ar-2 achieving better results.
3 - Any US radial engine for I-185 after the embargo is cancelled?
6 - I love this idea. Yet I know little about P-47 availability in that period. Could lend leased export of P-47 become as massive as of P-39?

1 - The 1-engines fighter with extra fuel didn't rated high in European designs of he time, especially in the countries SU had habit of looking for inspirations (mostly Germany, and France a bit).
2 - Pe-2 was, once bombs were away, a reasonably survivable aircraft. The Ar-2 will be 50 km/h slower than Pe-2 - making it a fair game even for Romanian or Finish fighters.
3 - The R-2600 and R-2800 were in ballpark with M-71 size- and weight-wise. The R-2800 should be a much beter pick, though.
6 - USA were sparingly shipping the P-47s to anyone that was not USAAF. They were making two times as much of P-39s than P-47s between early 1942 and April of 1943. P-47 production was 533 in whole 1942, half of those were made in last two months of '42. Production of P-39 was more than 1900 in 1942 (curiously enough, not a single delivered in August?? and just 3 in October).*
With all this said - have P-39's outer guns striped, reduce number of radios to 1, install the VJa-23 in lieu of the 37mm and you're good to go? Soviets were stripping the P-39s anyway.

*data from AHT

 

[Dimlee]

2 - Ar-2 512 km/h at 5,000 m. January 1941.
Архангельский АР-2
Pe-2 540 km/h at 5,100 m. December 1940.
https://amzn.to/2xDZoux
If this difference of 28 km/h between the two remains in serial production, would it make Ar-2 more vulnerable compared to Pe-2? I assume that proper fighter escort plays a more important role. Unless the escort is absent as in the chaos of summer-autumn 1941. Then Pe-2 has more chances, of course.

6 - My idea is that P-47 in VVS is used as a fighter-bomber/CAS complementing or replacing Il-2 completely. Probably, some could be deployed in PVO in an attempt to restrict German air reconnaissance.

 

[tomo pauk]

2 - Ar-2 512 km/h at 5,000 m. January 1941.
Архангельский АР-2
Pe-2 540 km/h at 5,100 m. December 1940.
https://amzn.to/2xDZoux
If this difference of 28 km/h between the two remains in serial production, would it make Ar-2 more vulnerable compared to Pe-2? I assume that proper fighter escort plays a more important role. Unless the escort is absent as in the chaos of summer-autumn 1941. Then Pe-2 has more chances, of course.

Yes, seems like the Ar-2 was capable to the higher speeds once the modifications were in place after winter of 1940/41, at least by looking at the article.

6 - My idea is that P-47 in VVS is used as a fighter-bomber/CAS complementing or replacing Il-2 completely. Probably, some could be deployed in PVO in an attempt to restrict German air reconnaissance.

I'd go with P-47 flying high up, say above 6 km. P-47 was not that good at low and mid altitudes before winter of 1943/44 when water injection was introduced, along with better prop. Between SL and 6-7km, fighters of Soviet origin powered by M-82, or a well-designed Tumansky 2-row radial, or a good Mikulin should be competitive already in 1941-42.
Production of M-82 was 411 in 1941, ~3970 in 1942. Mikulin's numbers were ~5850 in 1941, almost 9000 in 1942. Tumansky's M-88 went to almost 3000 in 1941, and a bit more than 4000 in 1942. Engines of Klimov design was almost 12000 in 1941, and 14500 in 1942. (link)

 

[tomo pauk]

The Ar-2 might be a good candidate for a decent radial, like M-82 or something like that.

 

[warbirdbuff]

P-47s...[t]o be ordered in large numbers (as large as the US side can supply)

I am in more/less complete agreement with the rest (aside my virtually total ignorance of Red Air Force types ), but this one IMO is a non-starter. Those P-47s are vitally needed in ETO, especially if we can persuade the Bomber Mafia to allow drop tanks before they get their asses handed to them over Schweinfurt & finally have a Come to Jesus moment & realize they do need escorts over Berlin...

BTW, howdy to Tomo from AH.com

 

[Dimlee]

I am in more/less complete agreement with the rest (aside my virtually total ignorance of Red Air Force types ), but this one IMO is a non-starter. Those P-47s are vitally needed in ETO, especially if we can persuade the Bomber Mafia to allow drop tanks before they get their asses handed to them over Schweinfurt & finally have a Come to Jesus moment & realize they do need escorts over Berlin...

BTW, howdy to Tomo from AH.com

Does it mean there was no possibility to increase P-47 production to supply USSR? I always wondered what could happen if Moscow requested a significant number of Thunderbolts.

 

[tomo pauk]

I am in more/less complete agreement with the rest (aside my virtually total ignorance of Red Air Force types ), but this one IMO is a non-starter. Those P-47s are vitally needed in ETO, especially if we can persuade the Bomber Mafia to allow drop tanks before they get their asses handed to them over Schweinfurt & finally have a Come to Jesus moment & realize they do need escorts over Berlin...

BTW, howdy to Tomo from AH.com

Cheers
Bomber Mafia was probably not specifically against the drop tanks, but rather oblivious to the need to have them specified for P-47. After all, P-40 and P-39 were plumbed to carry drop tanks before Pearl Harbor, followed by such P-38s in early 1942.

 

[warbirdbuff]

Does it mean there was no possibility to increase P-47 production to supply USSR? I always wondered what could happen if Moscow requested a significant number of Thunderbolts.

It might have been possible (IDK), but I don't think it would've been smart, when Eighth & Fifteenth AFs needed them more.

 

[warbirdbuff]

Bomber Mafia was probably not specifically against the drop tanks

From what I've read (admittedly online, but apparently using period docs {reproduced on the site}, so not just some Web troll), actively opposed to drop tanks because it undermined the "self-defense" argument. (Just don't ask me for the url... I've Googled it again, & I can't find it, now... )

 

[special ed]

I've read whenever Lend lease was discussed with Stalin, he always asked for B-29s on his list of aircraft.

 

[tomo pauk]

From what I've read (admittedly online, but apparently using period docs {reproduced on the site}, so not just some Web troll), actively opposed to drop tanks because it undermined the "self-defense" argument. (Just don't ask me for the url... I've Googled it again, & I can't find it, now... )

Theory about USAF opposing the drop tank idea was probably true for era before 1941.
In one of Greg's videos, he spins up a theory that P-47 was precluded by the higher ups from having drop tanks as late as 1943, going as far as accusing the USAF brass for rather sending the B-17 crews in harms way, than to have P-47s using the drop tanks that were supposedly in the UK by thousands. We've discussed that video in the 'Aviation' forum here some time ago, IIRC conclusion is that Greg went well off the mark there.