Go Back   Alternate History Discussion Board > Discussion > Alternate History Discussion: After 1900

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old May 16th, 2011, 03:42 PM
ChuckAnderson ChuckAnderson is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: University Place, WA
Posts: 18
Alternate Aircraft--Doolittle Raid

Hi Everyone!

Before the North American B-25 Mitchell was finally chosen as the aircraft type used in Jimmy Doolittle's bombing mission over Japan, other aircraft types were also being considered.

One of them is the Fairey Hendon (modified from the original for the mission), a British bomber design.

The profile shows the Fairey Hendon in the same colours and markings as those actually used on the B-25's that actually took part in the mission.


Chuck
Attached Images
 
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old May 16th, 2011, 03:58 PM
Torqumada Torqumada is online now
Breast Man and urban legend
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: In a world not of my choosing
Posts: 1000 or more
Send a message via AIM to Torqumada Send a message via Yahoo to Torqumada
Half the speed, 25% of the bomb load, 4,000 less feet for service ceiling, 8 feet longer with 40 more feet wingspan for 10 more miles of range? Why would they consider it?

Torqumada
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old May 16th, 2011, 05:18 PM
Matt Wiser Matt Wiser is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Auberry, CA
Posts: 1000 or more
Only four aircraft were really in the running for the raid: the B-18 Bolo, the B-23 Dragon, the B-26 Marauder, and the B-25. Only the Mitchell met the range requirement, and more importantly, the wingspan requirement for flying off a carrier.
__________________
Diplomacy is the art of telling someone to go to hell so eloquently that he packs for the trip.

War is the simpler art of bringing hell to him.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old May 16th, 2011, 06:00 PM
Just Leo Just Leo is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 1000 or more
I think you're using JPEG for your art. The color definition degrades badly. Try PNG or one of the IFF's.

The Mitchell was powered by R-2600 Wrights. The aborted B-28 used P&W R-2800's to achieve much higher performance, with turbocharging. Combine the two and add folding wings for the PB2J ship-board bomber, presaging the Savage, A3D, and Vigilante.
Attached Images
 
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old May 16th, 2011, 07:59 PM
Derek Jackson Derek Jackson is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 1000 or more
Were Mosquitos avaiable then and would Britain have offered them?>
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old May 16th, 2011, 08:34 PM
Just Leo Just Leo is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 1000 or more
Quote:
Originally Posted by Derek Jackson View Post
Were Mosquitos avaiable then and would Britain have offered them?>
They were just entering service as a new type. Had they been available earlier in quantity, they would still not have been considered an American response to Japanese aggression for propaganda and morale purposes.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old August 2nd, 2011, 08:32 AM
phx1138 phx1138 is offline
Bocagiste troll
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Charlie Townsend's guest house
Posts: 1000 or more
Quote:
Originally Posted by Just Leo View Post
The Mitchell was powered by R-2600 Wrights. The aborted B-28 used P&W R-2800's to achieve much higher performance, with turbocharging. Combine the two and add folding wings for the PB2J ship-board bomber, presaging the Savage, A3D, and Vigilante.
If you're going to go that far, why not make them R4360s?
__________________
Sometimes a butterfly is just a butterfly.
Economic Left/Right: -7.50
Libertarian/Authoritarian: -8.00
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old August 2nd, 2011, 11:34 AM
Just Leo Just Leo is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 1000 or more
Quote:
Originally Posted by phx1138 View Post
If you're going to go that far, why not make them R4360s?
Because the R-2800's were used in the XB-28, were available and reliable, and proved the performance specification. The R 4360 did not, and could not.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old August 2nd, 2011, 11:36 AM
Derek Jackson Derek Jackson is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 1000 or more
If Mosquitos were available and used by US forces of course they would have had US markings
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old August 3rd, 2011, 12:19 PM
Dathi THorfinnsson Dathi THorfinnsson is online now
Daši Žorfinnsson
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Syracuse, Haudenosaunee, Vinland
Posts: 1000 or more
Quote:
Originally Posted by Just Leo View Post
They were just entering service as a new type. Had they been available earlier in quantity, they would still not have been considered an American response to Japanese aggression for propaganda and morale purposes.
Id hate to put aplywood plane on the deck of an aircraft carrier exposed to nort pacific weather....
__________________
David Houston
un Canadien errant
my TL: Canada-wank (99% ASB-free) or here.
Turtledove 2010
updated: 30 Aug '13
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old August 3rd, 2011, 03:45 PM
KyleB KyleB is offline
Slap slap slap, clap clap clap
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Boldly going where no man has gone before
Posts: 1000 or more
What about the Vickers Wellington? The Mk IC had a range of 2,550 miles; would that be enough?
__________________
CNG: Dawn's Early Light: Las Xamanxas (NM/TX)

Quote:
Originally Posted by KingByng View Post
Freaking ice cream trucks man! Destroying American culture, one cone at a time.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old August 3rd, 2011, 05:53 PM
Matt Wiser Matt Wiser is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Auberry, CA
Posts: 1000 or more
Too big for the carrier deck: the B-25s barely made it as it was. When there were takeoff tests from Hornet off of Norfolk, VA, one of the pilots almost hit the carrier's island on launch. That explains the guide lines painted on the carrier deck that you see in film footage of the B-25s on the deck of Hornet. Only four aircraft, again, were considered: the B-18 (lack of range and payload), B-23 Dragon (range, but lack of decent bombload), B-25 (range, payload, and size requirements all met), and B-26 (too big to fit on carrier).
__________________
Diplomacy is the art of telling someone to go to hell so eloquently that he packs for the trip.

War is the simpler art of bringing hell to him.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 01:55 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.