Which was the best night fighter?

Koopernic said:

P-38 late into production: This was caused by lack of proper funding of the P-38 so that only one prototype was built. This meant that when the prototype was lost nearly a year was lost making the second prototyp.

Click to expand...

To quote Wiki,
Kelsey then proposed a speed dash to Wright Field on 11 February 1939 to relocate the aircraft for further testing. General Henry "Hap" Arnold, commander of the USAAC, approved of the record attempt and recommended a cross-country flight to New York. The flight set a speed record by flying from California to New York in seven hours and two minutes, not counting two refueling stops.[31] Kelsey flew conservatively for most of the way, working the engines gently, even throttling back during descent to remove the associated speed advantage. Bundled up against the cold, Arnold congratulated Kelsey at Wright Field during his final refueling stop, and said, "don't spare the horses" on the next leg.[39] After climbing out of Wright Field and reaching altitude, Kelsey pushed the XP-38 to 420 miles per hour (680 km/h).[40] Nearing his destination, Kelsey was ordered by Mitchel Field tower into a slow landing pattern behind other aircraft, and the prototype was downed by carburetor icing short of the Mitchel runway in Hempstead, New York, and was wrecked. However, on the basis of the record flight, the Air Corps ordered 13 YP-38s on 27 April 1939 for US$134,284 each.[4][41] (The "Y" in "YP" was the USAAC's designation for a prototype, while the "X" in "XP" was for experimental.) Lockheed's Chief test pilot Tony LeVier angrily characterized the accident as an unnecessary publicity stunt,[42] but according to Kelsey, the loss of the prototype, rather than hampering the program, sped the process by cutting short the initial test series.[43] The success of the aircraft design contributed to Kelsey's promotion to captain in May 1939.

Manufacture of YP-38s fell behind schedule, at least partly because of the need for mass-production suitability making them substantially different in construction from the prototype. Another factor was the sudden required expansion of Lockheed's facility in Burbank, taking it from a specialized civilian firm dealing with small orders to a large government defense contractor making Venturas, Harpoons, Lodestars, Hudsons, and designing the Constellation for TWA. The first YP-38 was not completed until September 1940, with its maiden flight on 17 September.[45] The 13th and final YP-38 was delivered to the Air Corps in June 1941; 12 aircraft were retained for flight testing and one for destructive stress testing. The YPs were substantially redesigned and differed greatly in detail from the hand-built XP-38. They were lighter and included changes in engine fit. The propeller rotation was reversed, with the blades spinning outward (away from the cockpit) at the top of their arc, rather than inward as before. This improved the aircraft's stability as a gunnery platform.[46]

Koopernic said:

It's an interesting chart but it's deceiving because of what it doesn't show. As Greg's Planes and Automobiles pointed out there was a Republic developed and certified 205 gallon drop tank available and most P-47 were plumbed to use it. It was available at the time of the Schweinfurt raids. It's Range would be perhaps a little less than the 2 x 108 gallon tanks.

Republic had developed it using private funding for purposes of ferry flights and overseas customers. The response of the "bomber mafia" to the 25% attrition of the Schweinfurt raids was to use B26 raids as decoys to draw of Luftwaffe and develop the YB-17 as an escort, both failed. They could have just shipped the 205 gallon tanks Immediately. Even the Luftwaffe caught out on lack of drop tanks in the BoB responded faster and they actually had to modify 109 on the production line.

Ranges can be extended by compromising combat power time and WEP power time as well as careful use of relay escorts. Even if some of P47 exceed this and have to break of early (say 90 miles out from target) at least the B17 are only exposed 25 minutes to German fighters before they drop bombs and can accelerate away.

Any drop tank is better than no drop tank and an escort that might have to turns back 30-60 minutes away from target is better than one that turns back 2-3 hours out.

Click to expand...

So far you havnt mentioned the increase in internal fuel capacity of the P-47 Internal fuel capacity for the D1-23( Razerback) was 305 US gal. The D-25 to-40 (bubble canopy) and the hotrod M model carried 370 US gal. The N carried 556 US gal. Internal fuel is the deciding factor, that is what you have to fight with and get home after dropping external tanks.

Milosh said:

The tanks were unpressurized and unreliable, with only half the fuel being able to be used. Dual 75 gal pressurized and more reliable tanks allowed the P-47 to barely penetrate the German border. July1943

Click to expand...

And that with Spitfires or others performing the escort on bomber form up. It is all very well discussing the P-47s external fuel, its engine consumed approximately twice as much per hour as a Merlin did, 150 gallons didnt last long in a P-47, maybe 90 minutes cruising or 30 minutes in combat.

Koopernic said:

P40 and P39 poor altitude performance. The country that had all of those world renowned machine tool factories areound Philadelphia, Cincinnati etc shouldn't have had a smidgen of trouble making a two speed integrated planetary gearbox for the Allison V-1710.

Click to expand...

File this with the great myths.

Yes a two speed supercharger can offer better altitude performance than a single speed supercharger but it is often not dramatic (big difference).
It rather depends on the existing supercharger and the gears used. It also depends on the fuel used (planned).

For the US the radials that changed to two speed superchargers rarely had critical altitudes much above 14,000ft, they used a low gear to improve take-off performance.
The Allison with 8.80 gears was the highest gear set Allison was offering at the time. The supercharger flowed enough air to support 1040hp at about 14,000ft. It would do about 1125-1150hp at 11,500ft or so, the change to the 9.60 gears raised the 1125-1150hp to 15,000ft but those were not the only changes (new guide vanes?)
You can only spin an impeller so fast before the tips go supersonic inside the supercharger and the flow gets destroyed.
You can hit areas just below that were the efficiency of the supercharger is falling off and you are heating the intake charge at a faster rate than you are compressing the air and the intake charge temperature is a major factor in hitting the detonation limits. Combining a set of low gears (like between 6.44 and 7.48) might have allowed the early P-39s and P-40s an extra 100-200hp for take-off and low altitude without using WEP ratings but wouldn't have done a thing for high altitude work.

Merlin X didn't perform that much better at altitude than a Merlin III
Merlin XX didn't perform that much better at altitude than a Merlin 45.

pbehn said:

A ferry tank is not a drop tank as explained in the comments on the link both you and I posted.

Click to expand...

The Republic developed 200 gallon drop tank was a fully capable jettisonable drop tank. It's only limitation was a restriction to 23000ft as it could not be pressurised. Operationally this was not a impediment to long range operations as around half this fuel was burned of in takeoff to 23,000-25,000ft. Effective escorting of bombers requires 3-4 fighters per bomber and the long range P47 escorts would themselves be positioned and escorted to avoid contact with the Luftwaffe till they had jettisoned. Eaker, in charge of the 8th at the time managed to get improvised tanks built in Britain in operation within 2 months. They could have just shipped him some 200 gallon tanks in 5-6 weeks.

pbehn said:

So far you havnt mentioned the increase in internal fuel capacity of the P-47 Internal fuel capacity for the D1-23( Razerback) was 305 US gal. The D-25 to-40 (bubble canopy) and the hotrod M model carried 370 US gal. The N carried 556 US gal. Internal fuel is the deciding factor, that is what you have to fight with and get home after dropping external tanks.

Click to expand...

I did mention it in my first post. With 305 gallons internal fuel and 200 gallons external drop tank fuel a P47C could fly 470 miles radius with carefully restricted use of combat power and WEP. The latter razor back P47C had the increased 370 gallon internal fuel.

The wet wing technology used in the P47N was already debugged in the Republic P-43 Lancer though initially troublesome and lacking armour.

Had US doctrine permitted the investment in escort fighters the larger tank, wing tanks and wett wing tanks might all have already been available by 1942.

Koopernic said:

The Republic developed 200 gallon drop tank was a fully capable jettisonable drop tank. It's only limitation was a restriction to 23000ft as it could not be pressurised. Operationally this was not a impediment to long range operations as around half this fuel was burned of in takeoff to 23,000-25,000ft. Effective escorting of bombers requires 3-4 fighters per bomber and the long range P47 escorts would themselves be positioned and escorted to avoid contact with the Luftwaffe till they had jettisoned. Eaker, in charge of the 8th at the time managed to get improvised tanks built in Britain in operation within 2 months. They could have just shipped him some 200 gallon tanks in 5-6 weeks.

Click to expand...

This is a well worn subject, discussed over many years on many threads. You know all the ins and outs of these discussions as you knew all about dropping of parachute mines on UK. You pretend not to know everything until presented with a sourced document and then immediately forget it for the next discussion. You posted a link, the same link I posted, so you read it and stop pretending that you dont know what you do. It is getting VERY tiresome.

The P-43 used integral tanks. Now perhaps known as a wet wing, but they never got them to seal properly even with a "self sealing" internal coating. having planes leak fuel while sitting on the apron or in their stands is not a good thing.

The P-47N did have fuel tanks in the wing, but just like it says, those were tanks placed into spaces in the larger wing on the P-47N, not sealed up spaces in the wing.

P-47N had the wing roots extended to make space for the tanks. The wing tips were clipped to keep the span nearly the same.

Koopernic said:

I did mention it in my first post. With 305 gallons internal fuel and 200 gallons external drop tank fuel a P47C could fly 470 miles radius with carefully restricted use of combat power and WEP. The latter razor back P47C had the increased 370 gallon internal fuel.

The wet wing technology used in the P47N was already debugged in the Republic P-43 Lancer though initially troublesome and lacking armour.

Had US doctrine permitted the investment in escort fighters the larger tank, wing tanks and wett wing tanks might all have already been available by 1942.

Click to expand...

As you know the P-47N doesn't apply because it didn't serve in 1943, or 44 or even in Europe. As you also know the "bubble top" P-47 wasn't in service in 1943, to extend the range of a fighter you have to increase internal fuel, external fuel can be increased as much as you like and can result in flying to a place and a fight you cant fly back from, but you know that don't you?

Question: just how good was the Ju-88 as a night-fighter? Did it really do so well that development of a dedicated night-fightercraft was a waste of time and resources?

Koopernic said:

As others have posted.

Initial USAAF bomber mafia response to 25% and 26% total loss rate of bombers on the two Schweinfurt raids was to use B-26 as decoys and try and develop a YB-17 armed with more guns to escort the bombers rather than ship drop tanks to Europe.

Click to expand...

The above statement is factually incorrect.

(1) It was the YB-40, not the YB-17. (There was also the XB-41, the bomber escorter version of the B-24).

Admittedly the above is a minor correction. The more important correction:

(2) The bomber escorter project was started well before the first Schweinfurt raid.

The work to convert a B-17 into a more heavily armed escort version was commenced in September 1942, some eleven months before the first Schweinfurt raid (Aug. 17, 1943). The resulting YB-40 flew its first operational mission on May 29, 1943, nearly three months before the first Schweinfurt raid. The type flew its last operational mission on July 29, 1943, nearly three weeks before the first Schweinfurt raid.

In short, the losses on the Schweinfurt missions had nothing to do with the YB-40/XB-41 bomber escorter projects.

dedalos said:

Heinkel was designing versions with 3rd crew member and defentive Mg131. That would slow the heinkel further.
Finally the ju 88G6 with the berlin radar would not need Mw50 to achieve 620-640km/h. Could the he219 use the Fug240? I am not sure

Click to expand...

If the B-series had been fully developed, the Mg 131 would most likely have been dropped and a more aerodynamic canopy would have been employed (just look at the B-2 variant for example). Why would the He 219 be unable to use the FuG 240?

Koopernic said:

With the DB603L engine the Do 335 was estimated to achieve 790km/h/490mph but our He 219 with this engine might be able to match a Mosquito at 710/440mph.

Click to expand...

I believe Heinkel projections had the He 219B-1 fitted with 2,500 Jumo 222 engines at 435-440 mph. This is of course without FuG 240 but with defensive armament, a worse canopy, and a third crewman.

However, Nowarra holds that the B-1 with Jumo 222 reached 422 mph, while the B-2, a much more streamlined version (retaining the shorter fuselage of the A variant and less cannons than the B-1) using DB 603/TK 13 only reached 376 mph. The B-2 number seems flat out wrong, but in any case, it seems that if you give the He 219 2,500HP+ engines and forgo the added weight of the B-1/C-1, the He 219 could probably have gotten close to the 440 mph range.

SpicyJuan11 said:

If the B-series had been fully developed, the Mg 131 would most likely have been dropped and a more aerodynamic canopy would have been employed (just look at the B-2 variant for example). Why would the He 219 be unable to use the FuG 240?


I believe Heinkel projections had the He 219B-1 fitted with 2,500 Jumo 222 engines at 435-440 mph. This is of course without FuG 240 but with defensive armament, a worse canopy, and a third crewman.

However, Nowarra holds that the B-1 with Jumo 222 reached 422 mph, while the B-2, a much more streamlined version (retaining the shorter fuselage of the A variant and less cannons than the B-1) using DB 603/TK 13 only reached 376 mph. The B-2 number seems flat out wrong, but in any case, it seems that if you give the He 219 2,500HP+ engines and forgo the added weight of the B-1/C-1, the He 219 could probably have gotten close to the 440 mph range.

Click to expand...

The idea that the He 219 with Jumo 222's could reach 440+mph is not just my speculation, it is also supported by the estimates of another Jumo 222 powered He 219 project at the time, the Hütter 211, which was projected at 441 mph.

Also, did Mosquitoes regularly reach 440+ mph themselves over Germany in 1944-45? Would the He 219 really needed to get to that speed or faster themselves, or would 420-430 have sufficed?

Koopernic said:

The observer was made to face rearward, the cockpit canopy was raised and rearward facing armament was added. I think dive brakes were added as well. These modification resulted in an aircraft that lost performance and gained a high wing loading.

Click to expand...

Dumb question time, again: why would anyone put dive-brakes on a night-fighter?

I get not wanting to overshoot a target, but dive-brakes? Seems like overkill.

Also, not sure of the utility of an extra gun and gunner (with all that implies about weight and performance) facing rearward in a plane operating offensively in the dark.

Thumpalumpacus said:

Also, not sure of the utility of an extra gun and gunner (with all that implies about weight and performance) facing rearward in a plane operating offensively in the dark.

Click to expand...

The Germans were so concerned with defensive armament that on the C-series they lengthened the fuselage by 1 meter, discarded the single Mg 131, and replaced it with a 4xMg 131 turret in the tail.

Based on its body of work and what was achieved, I think the Ju.88 has to be seriously considered as the finest night-fighter of the war, and overall, one of the best twin-engined aircraft of the war. Performance-wise the He.219 may have been better, but I do not believe there were as many claims made using this aircraft. Again, based on its body of work and what was actually achieved, the Mosquito should be seriously considered as one of the better "night fighter killers" of the war. Remember there are fewer night fighters in the skies over Germany as there were bombers, so one should expect that there would be more bombers shot down than night fighters.

I think too many people get wrapped up over theoretical performance characteristics of an aircraft rather than what was actually achieved.

Jim

Koopernic said:

I did mention it in my first post. With 305 gallons internal fuel and 200 gallons external drop tank fuel a P47C could fly 470 miles radius with carefully restricted use of combat power and WEP. The latter razor back P47C had the increased 370 gallon internal fuel.

The wet wing technology used in the P47N was already debugged in the Republic P-43 Lancer though initially troublesome and lacking armour.

Had US doctrine permitted the investment in escort fighters the larger tank, wing tanks and wett wing tanks might all have already been available by 1942.

Click to expand...

Nope. The combat radius of the P-47C w/200 gal Ferry tank was far short of 470mi. First the 200 gal tank was unpressurized and only 100 useful gallons could be used before altitude necessary for B-17 escort above ~ 18K ft reduced useful fuel by half. Second, the drag of that tank was horrendous. The longest recorded fight radius was by the 4th FG on July 28,1943 in a fight with LW at Emmerich GY - approximately 225mi from Debden. The streamlined 75 gal combat tank had better combat range performance than the 200gal Ferry Tank.

Wing tanks were available at Lockheed for P-38 as kits for P-38E and F4 in December 1941. The A-36 proposal contained both bomb racks and planned internal wing plumbing for combat fuel tank in November 1941. Tested on Mark I Mustang in May-June 1942.

I'd have to call it for the Mosquito NF.30. While the Germans had the home field advantage over Germany (tracking radar, ground controllers, strategically stationed night fighter units), the RAF was still able to regularly send Mossies out to tear those Junkers a few new ones. I've never heard of Ju 88 night fighters having an established ability to hunt the Beaus and Mossies defending the UK.

I've noticed a similar pattern in daylight. When KG 40's Ju 88s went over the Bay of Biscay to savage Allied ASW aircraft, the Brits send Mosquitos to hound the Germans.

In both cases, if the Ju 88 was superior, the Mosquitos should have failed. But the Mosquitos succeeded.

(I still intend to model a 1/48th Ju 88 G6 one day - love the colors - but I'll probably build a half dozen Mosquitos...)

One man's opinion!

Cheers,



Dana

Operations Steinbock and Gisela were clear wins for the Mosquito, though it is only part of a defence system.

Dana Bell said:

I'd have to call it for the Mosquito NF.30. While the Germans had the home field advantage over Germany (tracking radar, ground controllers, strategically stationed night fighter units), the RAF was still able to regularly send Mossies out to tear those Junkers a few new ones. I've never heard of Ju 88 night fighters having an established ability to hunt the Beaus and Mossies defending the UK.

I've noticed a similar pattern in daylight. When KG 40's Ju 88s went over the Bay of Biscay to savage Allied ASW aircraft, the Brits send Mosquitos to hound the Germans.

In both cases, if the Ju 88 was superior, the Mosquitos should have failed. But the Mosquitos succeeded.

(I still intend to model a 1/48th Ju 88 G6 one day - love the colors - but I'll probably build a half dozen Mosquitos...)

One man's opinion!

Cheers,



Dana

Click to expand...

I can only support this post and if I can add some detail
Mosquito as a night fighter hunter
Probably the best of these was Wing Commander Branse Burbridge who shot down 21 aircraft at night including four night fighters in one night. The difficulty in finding and shooting down enemy nightfighters on your own, over enemy territory, without any external help cannot be overemphasised. The German nightfighters had all the advantages.

JU88's Over the Bay of Biscay
Initially the RAF used Beaufighters to combat the Ju88 and the standing orders for the Ju88 were not to fight the Beaufighters unless they held a clear numerical or tactical advantage. Against the Mosquito the standing order was simple, not to engage the Mosquito.