What plane do you wish had sawservice

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

The Mitsubishi A7M Reppu (Hurricane) single-seat carrier-based fighter was intended by the famous aircraft designer Jiro Horikoshi to be the successor to the A6M Zero-sen fighter.

Even as early as 1940, Jiro Horikoshi was fully aware that he had better start working on the successor to his fabulous Zero fighter. He envisaged an aircraft similar in overall configuration to the Zero but utilizing the much more powerful Mitsubishi NK9A eighteen-cylinder air-cooled radial engine, which was then under development. A 17-Shi specification for the aircraft was issued by the Japanese Navy on July 6, 1942. A maximum speed of 379 mph at 19,685 feet was called for, and the maneuverability was to be at least equal to that of the A6M3 Model 32.

However, In September of 1942 the Japanese Navy insisted that the aircraft be designed around the less-powerful Nakajima NK9K Homare 22 radial. Since the Navy signed the checks, Horikoshi reluctantly agreed.

The A7M1 prototype flew for the first time on May 6, 1944, test pilot Eisaku Shibamaya being at the controls. Test pilots reported that the A7M1 handled extremely well, and that the use of the combat flaps made the A7M1 JUST AS MANEUVERABLE AS THE ZERO. However, they also reported that the aircraft was significantly underpowered for its weight.

Soon after this, the Japanese Navy authorized Horikoshi to begin work on the A7M2 version. This was to be powered by the Mitsubishi MK9A radial, which was the engine that HORIKOSHI HAD WANTED ALL ALONG. The MK9A had a larger diameter than the Homare 22, which required a complete redesign of the forward fuselage. The first A7M2 prototype flew on October 13, 1944, and initial tests indicated that high altitude performance was much better, with maximum speed being 390 mph at 21,655 feet. Service ceiling was 35,760 feet and an altitude of 19,685 feet could be reached in 6 minutes 7 seconds. The armament consisted of four wing-mounted 20-mm cannon.

However, the Japanese aircraft industry was in desperate straits at this stage in the war. The production of the Mitsubishi NK9A engine was delayed by a disastrous earthquake which struck the Nagoya area in December of 1944. Massive B-29 raids followed shortly thereafter, which caused additional production delays. The second A7M2 prototype was destroyed in a landing accident, and three other prototypes were destroyed on the ground during American raids. Only three of the seven prototypes that were built remained in flying condition by the end of the Pacific War, and only one production aircraft had been completed.

The A7M2 was assigned the Allied code name Sam. So far as I am aware, the Reppu never saw any combat.
http://www.csd.uwo.ca/~pettypi/elevon/baugher_other/a7mbau.html

http://www.hlj.com/product/FNMFB-11
http://home.interlink.or.jp/~katoh00/kaigun/reppu/reppu.htm
 
I think it would have been neat to see the Henschel Hs-132 come into service. It was to be the worlds first jet dive bomber. Now here is the real question. What do you need a jet dive bomber for? That is why I think it would have been interesting to see what it could do. I dont think it would have been effective but just interesting.

Origin: Henschel Flugzeugwerke AG
Type: Dive bomber
Models: V1, V2 and A, B, and C
Engine: BMW 003A-1 turbojet
Thrust: 1,760lb (800kg)

Dimensions:
Span: 7.20m (23 ft. 7.5 in.)
Length: 8.90m (29 ft. 2.5 in.)
Height: 3.00m (9 ft. 10 in.)

Weights:
Empty: not known
Loaded: 7,496lb (3400kg)

Performance:
Maximum speed with bomb: 435mph (700km/h)
Clean: 485mph (780km/h)
Range at 32,800 ft (10,000m): 696 miles (1120km)

Armament:
A Model: None
B Model: Two 20mm MG 151 Cannon

The Hs 132 was begun in early 1944 with the concept of taking advantage of the fact that a prone pilot could better resist g forces. The advantages of a reduced frontal area was also not lost; it was thought allied anti-aircraft gunners would not be able to hit such a small fast target. The 132A series carried no guns. The 132B series, with the more powerful Jumo 004 engine was to be armed with two 20mm MG 151 cannon as well as the bomb. There were to be more variants but the factory was overrun before flight testing could begin.
 

Attachments

  • hs132_348.jpg
    hs132_348.jpg
    9.7 KB · Views: 575
8)
Cool plane. I even think that the plane with BMW-003 E would perform better than expected. Reasons?
Speed: Hs-132 has a lighter weight without payload compared to the He-162. Both planes field the same engine and a very close airframe.
critical Mach speed: without the canopy, the fuselage has less drag than the He-162, while most other aspects remains the same (wing, tail...), indicating a critical Mach speed better than He-162
Acceleration (without bombload): It remains often unnoted that the BMW-003 E has 800 kp static thrust and the possibility to overrew it for 30 sek. max. to 940 Kp. This is making the BMW-003 E more powerful than the Jumo-004 B (it also weights less). Plus, it has the advantage of beeing a more reliable powerplant.
Avaiability: Many tooling parts of the He-162 line could be used for this plane, too.
But what they really need for this plane is a good computing bombsight (Askania finished development of it in february 1945) for high speed bomb drops or R4M based air to ground rockets.
 
It would be very easy to get going too fast and end up flying into the dirt while trying to dive bomb using a jet. The thing would have to have huge dive brakes since it has no prop to slow it in a dive, but that would kind of defeat the purpose since it would then be vulnerable to enemy fire when in its run.

Its pilots would be known for taking dirt naps :lol:

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think there has ever been a jet dive bomber?
 
:lol:
Dive bombing would be silly, no doubt. What I had in my mind was kind of an shallow dive with high speed (max. Mach 0.86 at low altitude) to avoid aircover and to make aiming for anti aircraft fire more difficult. Fly in, deliver your payload (hopefully rockets) and disappear...
 
Yup, the B-32 is great!
What are you thinking of? Defensive rockets or offensive ones?

SAM Projects up to prototype stage:

1.) Rheinmetall F-25 -1942-1944-
(subsonic remotery controlled interception missle)
2.) Rheinmetall F-55 -1944-
(supersonic remotery controlled interception missle)
3.) C-2 Wasserfall -1943-1945-
(A-4 based supersonic passively giuded interception missle with ~68 miles range)
4.) Hs-117 (177?) Schmetterling -1942-1945-
(subsonic passively guided interception missle)
5a.) Rheintochter R-1 -1942-1945
(subsonic remotery controlled interception missle)
5b.) Rheintochter R-3 -1944-1945-
(transsonic passively guided interception missle)

All prototypes have been tested, Hs-Schmetterling and C-2W choosen for further development (later including R-3, also). Development abandoned by at least february 1945 (because of the stage of war), rumors that C-2W and Hs-Schmetterling have been succesfully tested used against bombers cannot be confirmed. Developmet included acustic/infrared guidiance systems and approximation fuzes. Maybe Adler can help with more details?
In my view the C-2W was the most envisioned design, bearing some very advanced construction details and providing wide area protection. On the other hand the Hs-Schmetterling could have been ready much sooner. Speer wrote later that his biggest strategical mistake was to favour the A4 instead of the C-2W, from which 3 times as many in the same time with the same manpower and ressources could have been made.
Or are you going to ask for A-9/A-10?
 
RG_Lunatic said:
It would be very easy to get going too fast and end up flying into the dirt while trying to dive bomb using a jet. The thing would have to have huge dive brakes since it has no prop to slow it in a dive, but that would kind of defeat the purpose since it would then be vulnerable to enemy fire when in its run.

Its pilots would be known for taking dirt naps :lol:

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think there has ever been a jet dive bomber?

There hasnt. The Hs-132 was not actually completed.
 
The Hs-132 was completed it just never flew. The picture was taken by the Russians when they captured it. I agree though that dive bombing with a jet was worthless and stupid as I posted above.

RG_Lunatic said:
Its pilots would be known for taking dirt naps

We like to refer to as being a Lawn Dart! :lol:
 
Lawn Darts! some of the prop pilots became such. ;)

As for Rockes, I have not read much on the deffensive side, but man the A-10 would have frightful. But to think if Speer did gofor the C-2W what would the 1,000 plane raids be like? Would they have been done? Or even the rocket attacks on London?
 
In many ways the V-1 flying bomb was far more effective than the A-4 /V-2 was. Just think of the fighter squads whhad to be relocated to Britian in order to deal with the thread or the huge numbers of anti aircraft guns along the coastline and London. They could have contributed much to the curse of war if deployed to the continent. Against the V-2 there was simply no protection, so there wasn´t that much a need to enforce the defense.
The US copied the V-1 quite good and in numbers for a possible assault on Japan.
The A-9/A-10 was in stage of construction studies, not further. There have been some shots of A-4b (...predecessor of A-9 stage) in early 1945 but that´s it. Prototypes are not to be estimated prior to 1946. There are also some architectural relicts, which have to be connected with the A-9/A-10 project. But it´s the same, without nuke and effective guidiance system, as pointed out by Adler, the big missile doesn´t make much sense. Impressive? Yes. But a huge waste of time, ressources and manpower.
The C-2W carried 220 lbs HE, so I estimate that even near hits would have been quite fatal to the structure of bombers, in case the approximation fuze works properly. I haven´t seen any proof for this and cannot confirm the number either but I think we have 15.000 A-4 build, that are around 35.000 - 55.000 C-2W if Speer would have favoured this defensive weapon. What if? Think of 500 deployed in a certain space around a vital structure (take Berlin for example) and ready to intercept bombers. Estimate that no more than 300 could be fired in time (absolutely not sure in this). In tests without approximation fuzes around 50% of the shots failed to hit the target (mostly remotery controlled and under research conditions), in case of effective use I estimate about 70-80% fail to hit, but that are still 60 - 90 bombers taken down by SAM. In case of a 1000 bomber attack we would face 6-9% losses by SAM and additional 2-5% by Flak and interceptors, raising the total loss rate (inclusive accidents) to up to 9-14%. Any sustainable loss rate of bomberforces above 10 % is hard to replace, questioning the continuing strategic day light bomber campaign....
 
Against the V-2 there was simply no protection, so there wasn´t that much a need to enforce the defense

this is not strictly true, many spitfires took part in "operation Big Ben", the details of which of only recently become available, in which they set out to destry V2 rockets before they were launched and i can think of no better time to stop them............
 
I think what he is saying is defence for a V-2 in flight. There was nothing you could do. But hitting them before they launched is the only way as you said Lanc.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back