Worst US made twin engined aircraft used by Britain in WW2

[wuzak]

Resp:
The holding back of the turbo supercharges very likely also soured the deal.

The holding back of the turbos? The Lightning II would have had the turbos.

 

[Kevin J]

The Botha was hamstrung by having a pair of Perseus engines. It MIGHT have worked with a pair of Hercules. It was as heavy as the Beaufort with a higher wing loading and 500 hp less.

The Lerwick well someone screwed up in the design office I think. if it had been prewar a solution might have been found but it was needed yesterday so the ones built were put into service. Catalinas meant it was not worth bothering redesigning.

The Albermarle was built of non essential materials like steel and timber and was a back up if a lot of aircraft factories got bombed and aluminium ran short. It was designed to be assembled from lots of prefabricated parts built in small workshops. By the time it got delivered it had no role.

The Wellington was better. Simple as that.

 

[Reluctant Poster]

Fortunately for the British, they were never subjected to the Curtiss C-46

 

[Snautzer01]

Fortunately for the British, they were never subjected to the Curtiss C-46

Go brush your teeth and sit in the naughty corner.

 

[Schweik]

Used correctly, I'd say the quantity of types of combat aircraft the French has could have held on against France. What the French needed was well led and equipped ground forces. Proper tanks, like the Pzkw III with its three man turret and radio. And France desperately needed a tactical genius like Napoleon. France has the aircraft it needs, but not the leadership.

France had some nice planes coming online, D.520, VG 33, Leo 451, Breguet 693, & MB 174 were all good, and various US types coming in like P-40's, Marylands & Boston's, and maybe those turbo-less Lightnings, & they had some good tanks too (SOMUA S.35 could hold its own with a Pz III) but nothing was quite ready. Pilots & crews didn't have time to train on the new kit, supply chains weren't ironed out, minor problems were still holding things up in production, etc. They should have waited 6 more months before declaring war. Maybe not sell out the Czechs & let them defend their border, they would have gone Ben the Germans some problems.

 

[wuzak]

They should have waited 6 more months before declaring war.

DO NOT invade Poland. OR ELSE.

Germany invades Poland.

France: I'll get back to you in 6 months.

 

[fastmongrel]

The Wellington was better. Simple as that.

Totally agree. The Wellington could do everything the Botha, Lerwick and Albermarle could do better and probably cheaper. The problem was prising them out of Bomber Commands hands. Even though at one point Wellington's were coming off the production lines faster than Bomber Command could use them.

The only thing Wellington's couldn't do is tow gliders because the geodetic structure means there's no rigid structure to fix a towing anchor point to.

To be fair to the designers I don't think anyone had even thought about troop carrying gliders in 1934.

 

[SaparotRob]

I forgot about th

France had some nice planes coming online, D.520, VG 33, Leo 451, Breguet 693, & MB 174 were all good, and various US types coming in like P-40's, Marylands & Boston's, and maybe those turbo-less Lightnings, & they had some good tanks too (SOMUA S.35 could hold its own with a Pz III) but nothing was quite ready. Pilots & crews didn't have time to train on the new kit, supply chains weren't ironed out, minor problems were still holding things up in production, etc. They should have waited 6 more months before declaring war. Maybe not sell out the Czechs & let them defend their border, they would have gone Ben the Germans some problems.

That proves the old saying "if you desire peace, prepare for war.

 

[Algonquin]

I like the Curtis Wright 2600, so that make the A-20 my favorite all time plane. Really wish there were some around to fly, I'd pay large money for that privilege. The TBM-3 has one and a little tricky to start and really easy to flood, but when it comes to life it's an explosion under your feet. Flown the P51D and it's easy to see why they owned the sky, do a hard pull and roll over at 250 point down and your at 320+ right now But still love the A-20's.

 

[Mad Dog]

The first, Westland Whilrlwind prototype was built with handed Kestrels, and was trialled with handed and non-handed engines. It was found that there was little difference in handling. And since the left-hand Kestrel was specially built for reverse rotation including an opposite hand supercharger, it was decided that it wasn't worth the time and effort.

Er, no. The Air Ministry, ever cheap and ill-informed, was dead set against handed engines because they didn't have a clue about the engineering involved, and simply assumed a left-handed engine would require 100% different parts to a right-handed engine, doubling the costs of spares. The designer of the Whirlwind, Teddy Petter, was a very good aeronautical engineer but not good at handling morons, and was far too blunt when he told the Air Ministry how silly they were being. He had a ton of American research data that showed the benefits of handed engines. The Air Ministry then doubled down on their denial and staged tests that were rigged to deny any benefit from handed engines. The result was a generation of British bombers and heavy fighters with alarming swing on take off, the Short Stirling being a particular example were special procedures and training were required to be allowed to pilot the aircraft. Meanwhile, Petter designed the rudder of the Whirlwind to be slightly concave to reduce the impact of not having handed engines. When Rolls Royce eventually designed handed version of the Merlin, they had to promise the Air Ministry that they would make the engines 95% common in parts. As it was, all they needed to do was add an extra idler gear cog to crankshaft when making the handed Merlin 133/134 for the de Havilland Hornet.

 

[Mad Dog]

What's interesting, is how many US types the British ended up with, that were destined for France.

France had a substantial aircraft manufacturing base and if they had focused more on their native designs and not imported US types pre-war, Britain may not have had many of these on hand.

In their defense, the French were suffering under the mismanagement of a socialist government. Their air industry had been forcibly nationalized into one great big mess, where parts orders were handed out liberally and often without even making sure the supplier knew what he had to supply or even the ability to supply. Many French-built fighters were sitting half assembled in 1940 because they were missing vital parts like propellers and/or gunsights, all due to the socialists' procurement non-system. And then the French Communists were actively sabotaging production because - at that point in the War - Stalin was allied with Hitler and was ordering his useful idiots to interfere as much as they could.

 

[Mad Dog]

One would not expect a light amphibian to have a significant military role beyond training, communications, VIP transport, and SAR.

<COUGH> Supermarine Walrus<COUGH>

 

[swampyankee]

Er, no. The Air Ministry, ever cheap and ill-informed, was dead set against handed engines because they didn't have a clue about the engineering involved, and simply assumed a left-handed engine would require 100% different parts to a right-handed engine, doubling the costs of spares. The designer of the Whirlwind, Teddy Petter, was a very good aeronautical engineer but not good at handling morons, and was far too blunt when he told the Air Ministry how silly they were being. He had a ton of American research data that showed the benefits of handed engines. The Air Ministry then doubled down on their denial and staged tests that were rigged to deny any benefit from handed engines. The result was a generation of British bombers and heavy fighters with alarming swing on take off, the Short Stirling being a particular example were special procedures and training were required to be allowed to pilot the aircraft. Meanwhile, Petter designed the rudder of the Whirlwind to be slightly concave to reduce the impact of not having handed engines. When Rolls Royce eventually designed handed version of the Merlin, they had to promise the Air Ministry that they would make the engines 95% common in parts. As it was, all they needed to do was add an extra idler gear cog to crankshaft when making the handed Merlin 133/134 for the de Havilland Hornet.

Surprising!

Handed engines are rarely -- as in almost never -- used on multi-engined commercial aircraft (they are almost completely unknown on modern commercial aircraft; a CN-235 has about 3,500 hp and a TOW of about 35,000 lb, compared to a Stirling at 6,000 hp and 70,000 lb). Heavy bombers of the era didn't have power/weight ratios that different from commercial aircraft, so why would a Stirling need noticeably different procedures than those required for transport aircraft?

 

[Mad Dog]

DO NOT invade Poland. OR ELSE.

Germany invades Poland.

France: I'll get back to you in 6 months.

Yeah, kinda. The Fwench had massively invested in the Maginot Line, an extensive and very expensive series of border forts and bunkers along the German border. The idea was that any German army would be shelled to mincemeat by the emplaced guns. There whole war plan was to sit behind the forts defensively and let the Germans attack. When the Germans invaded Poland, the Fwench were loath to leave their comfy forts and bunkers, and the British had stupidly given command of the front to the Fwench, so there was little they could do independently. An armoured thrust in September 1939 would have rolled up the small number for German forces in Western Germany and forced Hitler to leave Poland to fight for the Ruhr. Hitler correctly gambled that the Fwench would hesitate. And then the Wehrmacht had noticed that the Fwench were far too polite to extend the Maginot Line to cover Belgium (didn't want to upset their neighbours), so when they went on the offensive on Spring 1940 the Maginot Line was exposed as a monumental waste of money.

 

[SaparotRob]

Was the Maginot Line constructed or designed with the help of German engineering firms or is that a myth too?
I know that sounds strange but I got that gem from a history teacher when I was in the 7th grade.

 

[Mad Dog]

Surprising!

Handed engines are rarely -- as in almost never -- used on multi-engined commercial aircraft (they are almost completely unknown on modern commercial aircraft; a CN-235 has a ). Heavy bombers of the era didn't have power/weight ratios that different from commercial aircraft, so why would a Stirling need noticeably different procedures than those required for transport aircraft?

The Short Stirling was massive. It was actually bigger than the Halifax and Lancaster bombers that replaced it in the front-line bombing role. But it had some nasty design flaws as a result of the requirements. One was that it had to be able to take off from small fields. This meant the wing needed to be at a high angle of attack when rolling down the runway. Because the fuselage was very long (and because it was a tail-dragger), this meant very long and spindly main undercarriage. If the four engines were all opened as one, the Stirling would drift right and could groundloop, and the spindly undercarriage would shear off, usually leading to a complete write-off of the aircraft and often to the death of crewmembers. If the aircraft was loaded with fuel and bombs it was usually catastrophic and could damage other aircraft waiting to take off. Landing was also tricky due to high wingloading, with any heaviness resulting in the undercarriage mashing through the top of the undercarriage bays or, again, sheering off. Not good for a bomber that was often being landed at night by weary crews and sometimes with battle damage to also contend with.
For take off, a Stirling pilot was taught to only gradually open the throttles for the righthand engines until the aircraft was rolling at 30 knots, then the lefthand engines were added. All this could have been avoided if Bristol had been allowed to build handed Hercules engines. The Bristol Beaufighter was another victim of take off swing from unhanded engines, and even the de Havilland Mosquito was criticized by American pilots who otherwise admired its handling. But the Stirling was the only aircraft in the RAF inventory that had a separate training requirement and certification just for take off.

 

[SaparotRob]

The Maginot Line might have been quite effective if paired up with mobile forces competently lead...and not too worried about annoying Belgium.

 

[Mad Dog]

Was the Maginot Line constructed or designed with the help of German engineering firms or is that a myth too?
I know that sounds strange but I got that gem from a history teacher when I was in the 7th grade.

One of the requirements of the Versailles Treaty was that Germany had to supply reparations in kind through labour and materials. I do not have a source but I was told that Krupp did supply gun shields and mountings for some of the French turrets. Also, German artillery pieces seized at the end of the Great War were put in place to shell the expected German attackers, and I was again told that Swiss-based but German-owned manufacturers actually supplied ammunition for those guns which were intended to kill Germans!

 

[SaparotRob]

I thought for sure that had to be a myth. Live and learn.

 

[Mad Dog]

I thought for sure that had to be a myth. Live and learn.

Even funnier, at one point during the rush to re-arm, the British came to realise that they didn't have enough foundaries making the armour plate required for their cruiser tank program. The civil service decided to put it out to tender, hoping the Swedes would pick up the slack. They weren't too careful with the tender, and it was eventually fulfilled by - drumroll - a German firm, who got an invaluable insight into how thick the armour was on British cruiser tanks of the day.
This shocking lack of secrecy actually backfired on the Wehrmacht, as they then assumed the little 37mm Pak 36 anti-tank gun, the 2cm KwK 30 main gun of the Panzer II, and the 37mm KwK 36 main gun of the Panzer III, were going to be all that was needed for fighting British tanks. They thick armour of the Matilda II infantry tank came as a nasty shock.
Bit off-track. How about those Venturas, eh?