In mid 1942 NOBODY was going to be catching a V1....yet.
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
In mid 1942 NOBODY was going to be catching a V1....yet.In mid 1942 the RAF was receiving the Mustang Mk1 the Spitfire IX and the Typhoon, no souped up Hurricane was going to be catching a V1.
In mid 1942 NOBODY was going to be catching a V1....yet.
Or it could have been that the available resources were already stretched a bit too thin.It is quite posible that it would not have yielded dramatic enough results to justify the effort or it could have been the tendency to automatically think an all new type is going to be better
It was bigger and weighed about a ton more than a Spitfire.The Mustang's wing was 'cleaner' but also lower lift I think right? or is it just that the Mustang was so much heavier? For a big wing it didn't seem to turn that well.
But at the time, you'd have been hard pressed to convince the powers that be the these were no good, inertia being what it is.My point is that there were a lot of planes being produced already by say late 1941 or early 1942 that weren't doing the Allied war effort much good.
Yes that's what I meant. That it might not have yielded dramatic enough results to justify diverting limited resources from other efforts. If they had unlimited resources then everything is worth trying.Or it could have been that the available resources were already stretched a bit too thin.
Cheers,
Wes
As you may know, the Napier Sabre (the Typhoon engine) was a sleeve valve. There are none of the usual poppet valves used here. Napier was behind on the required metallury for the sleeves, and they often would seize. This improved with time. Also, prep at the factory was poor, with metal filings and shavings left in the engine, which again eventually was addressed.
Of course, one cannot blame the inherent sleeve valve design for this problem.
I know, from classic car hobby experience, that when the sleeves wear out, they go quickly, just like an engine with worn out rings. Lots of smoke, suddenly! But I can't say that any of these Sabre engines were run so much (and not properly maintained) to reach this point. Currell
Key problem, they were so heavy they needed fields long enough for them to take off !Whereas the P-40F just needed replacing with a P-47 to be successful.
Quite a lot of engines had them, the sleeve in the cylinder covers and uncovers ports to allow inlet and outlet of the gas. They have advantages and disadvantages. There is a cut away rotating one in The Yorkshire Museum. it makes your head hurt watching it, pieces of metal seem to be moving in every possible direction.Wow sounds like a 737-Max 8 assembly plantThanks for explaining that it fills in a few gaps.
Could you, or somebody explain the basic concept of the sleeve valve in layman's terms? I gather the Beaufighter had them too, would that be Bristol Hercules? And yet they seemed to work out pretty well.
Wow! Rube Goldberg would be proud. That sucker most have had a ginormous oil pump with all that slipsliding going on. Wonder how much hosepower that valve mechanism consumed. I notice it has a less than 1:1 power/weight ratio.Quite a lot of engines had them, the sleeve in the cylinder covers and uncovers ports to allow inlet and outlet of the gas. They have advantages and disadvantages. There is a cut away rotating one in The Yorkshire Museum. it makes your head hurt watching it, pieces of metal seem to be moving in every possible direction.
They were both heavy fighters and bombers - like a lot of fighters were effectively by that time of the war (albeit granted not that many with internal bomb bays - but you did have the mosquito). With the extra speed though they were supposed to take back the Zerstorer role from the Bf 110, but that never really happened. Being able to use them to attack B-17s and B-24s, with an escort, gave these designs a new life that made them useful again.
Not saying the mount didn't work, however it weighed several hundred pounds. Not what you want if engaging single seat fighters.Apparently the remote control worked though and even one 13mm gun, so long as it doesn't jam, is pretty daunting for a pursuing fighter.
Bf 110, Ju 88, Do 217 were definitely obsolete for daytime combat by 1944, and they were vulnerable to Mosquitoes at night. To me that is obsolete or pretty close to it. My whole point was that obsolete is a matter of degrees not really an absolute. At least until you get to the "target tug" role.
I readily admit I don't know about all planes in the war, like most people around this fourm I basically know more about the planes that interest me. That said, lets not make a mountain out of a mole hill. I knew there were fighter armed Ju 88 variants, I just thought those were used as night fighters and in the bomber destroyer role. I was never frankly interested enough in the Ju 88 to put together the aggressive maritime raids with the heavy fighter variants.
We all have our little areas of expertise, you know the engines very well as I have conceded before. I know a few types inside and out, I daresay I introduced a few things about the P-40 both operationally and developmentally that were not widely known around here. I may do so with a few other types like some of the Russian fighters, if I have the time. I do tend to focus more on the operational history and work my way back to developmental details from there, because that way you can avoid all the dead-ends and clutter that didn't actually go anywhere.
But ultimately you need to cover both sides of the equation, otherwise you'll have a distorted understanding of the subject.
So I do think you have to look at planes from a few different angles.
Hind sight is 20/20 and in light of the problems with the sabre engine and the consequent delays with the Typhoon program, it may have been wise for the Air ministry to allow Hawker to further develop the Hurricane. The Griffon equipped Hurricane is one project that could of moved forward. There was also an old IIb Z3687 that was fitted with laminar flow wings as well as a Hurricane with a merlin 45. It really was a question of available resources.
They were trying for a multi role aircraft but the idea that plane burdened with an internal bomb bay (larger fuselage and more weight) and a power operated rear gun mount and gunner could mix it up with single seat fighters was a non starter.
They didn't need an escort as long as the bombers didn't have an escort. Which they didn't during most of the Me 210s development period. It first flight was 2nd September 1939 but (snip). One could say that changing conditions made them obsolete even as they were being built and deployed but until American escort fighters show up the Big twins didn't need escorts.
Not saying the mount didn't work, however it weighed several hundred pounds. Not what you want if engaging single seat fighters.
And if the single 13mm is daunting for a pursuing fighter then two .50 cal guns in a power turret must have been downright terrifying
Both the B-17 and B-24 saw very little improvement in power plants for a number of years and also limited improvement in armament (once large scale production started) for several years. Were they obsolete in 1944 or did the provision of good escort fighters allow them to stay competitive?
For most air forces it was the single engine/single seat fighter that lead the way, Both in technology and in combat. Without a first rate single engine/single seat fighter many other aircraft simply could not survive to do their jobs. So single engine/single seat fighters tended to go obsolete quicker than other planes. Because they were simpler to design, much fewer pieces, it was also easier to design and introduce new single engine/single seat fighters at a faster rate than multi engine aircraft.
There are few other things you don't seem to know but I don't want to get into personal bashing. I will cover one of them in a separate post.
If you ignore the dead-ends and clutter you don't really have good picture of what the higher ups intended or were thinking.
Actually, I was thinking of moving the aileronsI know that would require a bit of a wing design but again, they did it on the Zero.
And before anybody starts to say the A6M5 came late, the speed increase and the shorter wing both actually date back to the A6M3, which entered production in April 1942 Presumably the wing change didn't take that long.
So I figure the British had to be at least nearly as smart as the Japanese right? They should therefore have been able to do it.
The new engine in the A6M3 ( two speed supercharger and higher power) and the increase in cannon ammunition had nothing to do with their capability? It was all the wing clip? which was restored on the model 22 (which, confusingly, came after the model 32). The model 22a got a higher velocity 20mm cannon (barrels protrude from the wing)I again draw the comparison to the A6M2 vs. A6M3 or A6M5. These were still extremely manueverable airplanes. Cutting the wings down 3' just made them more capable overall.
You left out a drawing.
The original clip wing Zeke. They basically left off the folding tips.
Although they did have to shorten the ailerons a bit?
The A6M5 kept the shorter span but rounded the ends instead of using the square tips.
The A6M also went through 3 stages of modified wing construction to increase the dive speed.
The new engine in the A6M3 ( two speed supercharger and higher power) and the increase in cannon ammunition had nothing to do with their capability? It was all the wing clip? which was restored on the model 22 (which, confusingly, came after the model 32). The model 22a got a higher velocity 20mm cannon (barrels protrude from the wing)