What plane do you wish had sawservice (1 Viewer)

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

The Tigercat did see service in the last days of the war. It flew some recon and nightfighting missions but never encountered enemy planes so never saw combat in WWII. Likewise the P-80 and Meteor III saw service but not arial combat, though the Meteor at least scored kills on ground targets...
The F7F also served extensively in Korea.
 
Don't know if I already said it but, the Messerschmitt P.1011 the Ta-183.

The P.1101 was a pretty darn close one!
 
1. Horten Ho IX V-3 ("Horten Ho.229") - Would have been bloody uncomfortable for the pilot sitting in between two Junkers Jumo 004 turbines, and two MK 103 cannons, but what a BEAUTIFUL aircraft!!!!

2. DeHavilland DH.100 vampire - just a little too late to see wartime service, but would have been an interesting match for the Me 262 and Horten, not to mention absolutely magic to watch in flight.

3. Focke-wulf Ta.183 'Flitzer' - a very potential (and good looking) design, which the Russians managed to develop very nicely into first class aircraft.
 
The vampire should have seen service (maiden flight was only a couple months after the meteor), but the Brits seemed more interested in the Meteor and De Havilland was preoccupied with Mosquito production and development of the Hornet.

With 004Ds the Ho 229 wouldn't have been as uncomfortable as at least you didn't have to worry about the engine fires. (at least not nearly as much) And the MK 103s would have been less uncomfortable to operate than MK 108s due to the much reduced muzzel blast.


I like the P.1011 for the practicallity of borrowing the wings from the Me 262 (outboard of the engines) and other expediatory development additions, but I still don't like the HeS-011 that much, as its development was lagging for production quality, though perhaps the 004D could be used as an intrim, or maby the powerful 003D which Delcyro mentioned on a He 162 topic.
 
XP60 WARHAWK a modified P-40 WARHAWK
XF5U CORSAIR A modified F4U CORSAIR
HEINKELL 100 a german fighter too
 
XP-60 was no better than planes already in service in the USAAF.

XF5U was the "Flying Flapjack," you may have meant the F4U-5 which did see post-war service, or the Goodyear F2G "Super-Corsair" but it was slower than the F4U-4 and had control and structural problems, though the rate of climb was amazing.

Agree on the He-100.

The P-47J or P-72 at ~500 mph would have been a bad surprise for the German Jets, though the P-72 probably wouldn't have been ready for service until the war's end while the P-47J could have been. (pending the same engine issues that plagued the P-47M which were solved by the advent of the P-47N) And either way the more streamlined, tight-cowled, fan-cooled nose and engine mount should have been used on the later P-47's even if the J model wasn't produced. (maby even used on late model P-47Ds) The better streamling should 10-20 mph to the P-47s' top speed without introducing new difficulties or reliabillity issues.

But other than the He-100 and Fw-187 there aren't many early-war planes which would have really helped more than the way things were. Maby the Gloster F.5/34 with a Pegasus or Taurus engine to supplement the RAF (ie a fighter not relying on the merlin and tougher, with its radial engine as well as other advantages over the Spitfire and especially the Hurricane, like climb rate and visibility and possibly maneuverabillity and speed-at least compared to the Hurricane), or for use with the FAA, though the need for carrier-based fighters wasn't that great in their case. (no carrier fighters to oppose, only bombers and patroll craft like the Fw-200 to worry about as far as airborne threats are concerned)

Possibly a fully developed P-42 (with cooling issues worked out) would have been of intrest to the USN as it outperformed the Wildcat, concivably retaining this even with the added carrier equipment, and would have been about as tough and well-armmed and with longer range as well. (the P-40 and other liquid-cooled designs not been favorable in the Navy's eyes due to the Flamable coolant, though pre-mixed 70/30 glycol/water was nonflamable, and due to the lower damage resistance which was even mor important when over water.) It also had the potential for growth along with improvements to the P-40 and to the R-1830 engine. (the R-1820 being too wide to practically benifit from the improved streamlining.)
 
Again, I don't mean to critisize, and you're entitled to your oppinion, but I'm curious about why the P-60? (certainly better than the P-46 though...)

I'm still not sure where this confusion of the XF5U is coming from...

It would have been nice if at least one single-engined fighter design using a turbocharged Allison V-1710 had seen service though...

I wonder how the P-46 would have done with a turbo, though the whole light-weight, short-range high-performance class of a/c turned out to be fairly usless as offensive weapons, though decent interceptors, but the P-46 lacked armament for that.
 
Kool kitty, you're right with the vampire, for some reason I'd remembered it as first flying in '45.

Regarding the Horten though, improved engines or not, the pilot would still be deaf in a week, I reckon!
 
A4K said:
Kool kitty, you're right with the vampire, for some reason I'd remembered it as first flying in '45.

Regarding the Horten though, improved engines or not, the pilot would still be deaf in a week, I reckon!
Click to expand...

No mate, the fact that the aircraft proved to be a very well fighter during tests and I do not think that the engine noise would be a problem for the pilot.

Horten 229 flying wing, would be great to see one fly.
 
You know what made the BMW 003D so powerful? The same thing that allowed the HeS-30 (HeS-006) to produce thrust on par with the 004 (and possibly better, certainly if development had continued) which is the use of a reaction type compressor in which compression occurs through roughly equal amounts in the rotors and stators. This configuration is ~10% more efficient than the typical rotor-accelerates air, stator compresses layout, and even more efficient compared to the 004's "impulse type" compressor in which ~80% of compression is done by the rotors and the staitors are mainly to guid and smooth-out airflow.

The drawbacks of this layout are that the compressor and stator blades require careful bachining and the use of thrust bearings is required. In the other extreme the 004B could afford to use compressor blades made of stamped steel which greatly simpified production and didn't require the use of cutting steel which made the 004 a very practical design to produce, especially considdering the condition German industry was in by mid/late 1944. (then again, with the rapad progress seen with the HeS-30 in late '41 and early '42 just prior to its cancelation, its conceivable that production could have started in early 1943, maby late 1943 with a shift to non-strateighic materials)
 
Sorry for bringing this old one back but I read today about an interesting fighter, the Republic P-44 Rocket.

It was basically a P-43 Lancer with the R-2800 engine of the later P-47. I like it because of its expected performance (over 400 mph), high climb rate and because it would have been a modified P-43 which means that it could have been taken into production rather easily.



Seversky Aircraft and Republic Aviation

Kris
 
The twins, Gloster F.9/37, Fw-187, MiG-5 (a.k.a. Dis), Su-8.

Then, Su-6, Miles M.20 (as FAA carrier-borne fighter), P-47J, later developments of Mig-3 (I-200 to -220).

Of the planes that were produced in numbers, but were just too late: Sea Fury, F8F, F7F, P-51H, P-82.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)

Similar threads

G
Could Mustang have had 2nd stage Super/Turbo without Merlin
2
Replies
22
Views
4K
MIflyer
M
What Constituted A Mission
Replies
1
Views
731
Acree
A
N
Do 217N aircraft markings
Replies
1
Views
426
Capt. Vick
P
Cool plane names
Replies
4
Views
2K
Greyman
G
D
What aircraft is that plane and which nation? Not Germnay for sure.
Replies
6
Views
2K
pb43
P
Menu
Log in
Register