Bombers as Interceptors?

[Just Leo]

Teddy Petter, in designing the Whirlwind, was screwed by the designated engine, but also screwed up the wing. It was quite thin, good, but in was narrow chord, and too small. Even with good flaps, it needed the best runways. Re-engining with Merlin would require extensive mods, and wouldn't be great without a wing re-design which wouldn't have happened. The wing needed was found later on the DH Hornet, or in Germany, on the FW Falke.

The Welkin still had a narrow chord and greater span, with extra thickness. Petter had never paid any attention to the babbling going on at the Volta conference, where he would find out that a broad chord makes a thick wing seem thinner. He noticed by the time of the Canberra design, which had a thick and broad wing.

The concept of a high-altitude bomber beyond the reach of single-engine fighters only works if you make it so, as back in the days where biplane fighters couldn't catch monoplane bombers. The Spitfire HF could reach the Ju-86, which, in any case, was performing recce, without a bomb load.

 

[oldironside]

Well, that makes the 86P no worse than early bomber command, so maybe there's development potential in there yet.

the Welkin, supposedly, found itself in coffin corner very easily- at fighting altitude it was in the tip of it's flight envelope, maximum speed and stalling speed very close together and limited room for fighter like manoeuvre; the wing was too thick and draggy, a larger more conventional shape (see; four engined fighter) should have been better.

the 432 is weird- it looks right, it should have flown right; was what was wrong with it more than merely teething troubles? The Whirlwind probably couldn't have been re- engined without major reconstruction of the wing, but moving from one mark of Merlin to another should have been feasible.

Surprising that it was the Spit that ultimately proved the best prop VHA fighter, though.

Ah, that's a competition like two bald men fighting over a comb. Being as bad as Bomber Command 1939-1941 is nothing to boast about. Also, the Ju86P was going by daylight, rather than groping around in the dark with a compass and sexton.

The Welkin certainly wasn't the answer. It could at least reach the sort of altitudes it was supposed to operate at, but handled like a junk food addict on a high wire. Somewhere on my bookshelf I've got a magazine with a great little article about the 432. IIRC it wasn't just the issue of ground handling, but had constant engine problems - sometimes losing both Merlins at high speed and high altitude.
I think that although it looked good, it just didn't look quite right.

 

[oldironside]

The Spitfire HF could reach the Ju-86, which, in any case, was performing recce, without a bomb load.

The Ju86P-1 was the high altitude bomber version and this magazine article makes reference (on page 16) to it dropping live bombs. Apparently the first Ju86P to be shot down over England was carrying a bomb.

http://content.yudu.com/Library/A2ltnh/SolentSkyWebzineIssu/resources/14.htm

 

[Just Leo]

The Ju-86P could carry a bomb, but, like all high-altitude bombers, couldn't carry them as high, making their ability to avoid interception through altitude a lie.

 

[KillerT]

Air defence variants of Canberra, TSR2, Buccaneer, VC10 and Vulcan were all considered at some point. The fighter Canberra would have had an AI radar and 4 Firestreak missiles plus cannon. The Buccaneer would have probably had a newer AI radar and most likely toted the air launched variant of Sea Dart (Cf299) being capable of carrying 4 under its wings. The TSR2 would most likely have been similar. The Vulcan interceptor was proposed in the very late 70s either instead of or additional to Tornado ADV it would have mounted Foxhunter radar in a rather ugly blister and mounted a good half dozen plus Skyflash although yes there was also an earlier fighter version that could have toted 12 Cf299. The VC10 though is the best what if ever. It would have been able to loiter over the Atlantic for hours, carrying a replacement crew, plus whatever radar you wanted, maybe a full fighter control team on board plus 18 yes that's 18 AAM, again the Cf299 although Phoenix was also considered. (As indeed it was for all the other CF299 concerns). Imagine two squadrons of those things patrolling GUIK gap denying air space to any Red AF TU22s, Bears, Bisons etc, instant ace business that combination! (The idea was that it would work in tandem with other air assets)

 

[B-29_Bomber]

Until the mid-1930s, bombers were considered to be unstoppable. Not only was radar not developed yet, minimizing warning time (people would have to see/hear them), but the single engine aircraft expected to intercept them lacked speed and heavy armament. Eventually improvements in air defense detection systems and networks and aircraft allowed for a credible defense. However, bombers can still carry larger payloads than interceptors, and due to their size can have greater endurance. How would bombers have served as interceptors, with pre-1950s designs carrying large caliber guns to allow for devastating attacks outside of defensive gun range with cannons capable of destroying aircraft in a single shot, and later designs carrying large radars and massive missiles to shoot down incoming bombers?

via Imgflip Meme Maker

 

[WILDGEESE]

How about the Tupolev TU-128 "Fiddler" from the USSR, it was based on the TU-95 Supersonic bomber.

Does that count?

Regards

 

[Saphroneth]

via Imgflip Meme Maker

Replace it with a B-36, replace the bomb flight with a nuke, and replace the target with a nuclear armed Russian bomber in the days before afterburner jet interceptors.
Nothing else can climb that high, so it's actually dropping bombs on the bomber which the US military considered the best idea. There's a reason the English Electric Lightning and other such with re-heat or afterburner were so important!

 

[Gunnarnz]

...rather than groping around in the dark with a compass and sexton.

I think you mean sextant. I mean you could grope around in the dark with a sexton, but that only relates to navigation in the most euphemistic sense...

 

[CarribeanViking]

Don't knock it; there are numerous references to dead reckoning as being "by guess and by God".

While we're being precise, the Tu-128 was an evolution of a failed fast bomber design, Tu-98, intended to replace the Badger, Tu-16; the wonders of socialism- it is no longer necessary to have other firms involved in industrial rivalry, apparently Tupolev is here competing with itself, putting two rival designs, Tu-98 and Tu-22, forward to replace one of it's own aircraft, Tu-16.

The -22, western Blinder, nicknamed Shilo, awl, in russian, was a medium bomber, and not as far as I know considered for the fighter role; the 128, ex 28, ex 98, looks a bit like someone forgot to stop drawing it- long skinny fuselage and long sharply swept wings.

The Tu-95 is the Bear, turboprop, incredibly noisy, exactly the sort of thing that for the purposes of the thread you'd be expecting to be underneath the B-36.

Oh, random footnote; may 1917- a Gotha G.IV returning from bombing London was intercepted and shot down over Flanders by an O/100 returning form bombing the Ruhr. Bomber vs. bomber goes back a fair way.

 

[PhilKearny]

A Boeing YB-40 shot down a Lockheed P-38, and it wasn't friendly fire. That's odd too.

I'm betting it was the Germans flying the B-17. That they captured.

More likely, assuming Just Leo's statement is correct (which is always the correct assumption), would be the Regia Aeronautica had a captured P-38 (they had several, iirc) and the YB-40 shot that down.

ETA: Yup, that's the ticket.

 

[Delta Force]

Are there any official documents on the B-36 bomber bomber concept? How would the bomb be delivered in such a way as to ensure destruction of enemy bombers while allowing the B-36 itself to escape?

 

[SactoMan101]

Actually, an air defense variant of the TSR.2--had that plane went into service with the RAF--may not have been such a far-fetched idea. It would have required a new nose for a more powerful search radar, but the plane could easily carry something like 4-6 AIM-54 Phoenix missiles or maybe 6-8 BAe Skyflash missiles specifically to counter the Tu-16, Tu-22, Tu-22M and Su-24 ground attack planes.

 

[Saphroneth]

Are there any official documents on the B-36 bomber bomber concept? How would the bomb be delivered in such a way as to ensure destruction of enemy bombers while allowing the B-36 itself to escape?

I've not got any references, but the bolded bit is the key.
They never intended on the B-36 surviving. Better to lose a B-36 than to lose New York.

 

[Somedevil]

More likely, assuming Just Leo's statement is correct (which is always the correct assumption), would be the Regia Aeronautica had a captured P-38 (they had several, iirc) and the YB-40 shot that down.

ETA: Yup, that's the ticket.

Ah nice.


What about Schräge Musik they seemed to had worked in limited use during WWII for the Germans.

The US looked into using something like it looks like on a few early jet fighters so why not load it into a B-29 or something?

 

[Mumbles]

Actually, an air defense variant of the TSR.2--had that plane went into service with the RAF--may not have been such a far-fetched idea. It would have required a new nose for a more powerful search radar, but the plane could easily carry something like 4-6 AIM-54 Phoenix missiles or maybe 6-8 BAe Skyflash missiles specifically to counter the Tu-16, Tu-22, Tu-22M and Su-24 ground attack planes.

It would have required a new and larger wing as well to have any kind of worthwhile performance at altitude. A study was done while the programme was active and above a certain altitude (I don't have the reference handy sorry) as built the TSR.2 would have had to be near supersonic or actually supersonic just to stay airborne, let alone manouvre.

 

[AdA]

I have seen the bomber interceptor, and it works

 

[joeferrito]

I... I... *sniffs* She's beautiful...

 

[Burton K Wheeler]

via Imgflip Meme Maker

Don't post silly memes in serious threads.

 

[AMF]

This excerpt from the Wikipedia article on German fighter pilot Heinz Knoke shows that it is at least possible to down a bomber with a bomb dropped by a fighter-bomber:

The problem of attacking heavily armed bombers effectively occupied the minds of the Luftwaffe in early 1943. Oberleutnant Heinz Knoke and his friend, Leutnant Dieter Gerhardt (killed in action against B-24s on 18 March 1943), developed the idea of aerial bombing as a means to break up the tight combat boxes, thereby compromising the defensively strong USAAF bomber formations. Knoke claimed his fifth victory, a B-24 of the 93rd Bomb Group on 18 March over Helgoland. On 22 March, Knoke successfully downed B-17 Flying Fortress Liberty Bell, of the 91st Bombardment Group, with a 250 kg bomb, intercepting its return flight after attacking Wilhelmshaven. The B-17 fell into the North Sea 30 kilometres (19 mi) west of Helgoland. He thus became the first of very few fighter pilots in aviation history to destroy an enemy aircraft with a bomb. All the crew were killed. However, the practice was soon curtailed, as the carriage of bombs severely affected the high altitude performance of the Messerschmitt Bf-109-G and also made these aircraft vulnerable to any escorting fighters.

There seems to have been an attempt to convert the Mitsubishi G4M 'Betty' bomber into an escort fighter that turned out to be as unsuccessful as the Boeing YB-40. An excerpt from this site:

'Wingtip Escort'

All seemed ready for the IJN's new land based attack aircraft to enter production in the spring of 1940, but events in China disrupted the new aeroplane's development schedule once again. On 17 May 1940, the navy launched Operation 101, a four month assault on the Chinese wartime captial of Chungking and other targets in Szechuan Province, notably Chengtu, by a concentration of some 130 Rikko [Mitsubishi G4M, AMF]. These targets lay far beyond the operating radius of the navy's Type 96 Carrier fighter (A5M), and casualties mounted as the Rikko once again endured unescorted missions.

Experience showed that aicraft positioned at the extreme ends of the defensive 'V of V' formation flown by the rikko were most exposed, and duly suffered the highest casualty rates. Taking note of the new 12-Shi Rikko's outstanding performance the navy wished to modify the basic design into an escort gunship to fly the positions.

Mitsubishi objected strenuously to the escort aeroplane idea, but the navy insisted, and the decision was made to produce 30 of these aeroplanes ahead of the land attack version. Widely refered to as a 'wingtip escort aeroplane', the gunship was officially known as the 12-shi Rikujo Kogeki-Ki Kai (12-Shi Land based Attack Aircraft Modified) and given the technical short code designation G6M1. Modifications from the basic Rikko design included the addition of extra 20mm cannon and partial protection for the fuel tanks.

The first two G6M1s were completed in August 1940, and as Mitsubishi had warned, the aeroplane failed to meet expectations. General flight characteristics suffered from the additional cannon positions and the resulting rearward travel in its center of gravity. As the Americans would later learn with their own YB-40 and XB-41 gunship experiments., the Japanese discovered that the overall performance envelope of the G6M1 was simply too far removed from that of the basic Rikko design to make joint formation flying of the two models a viable concept.

Ironically, August 1940 saw the operational debut of Mitsubishi's Type 0 Carrier fighter, or Rei-sen (A6M). The Zero, as this superb successor to the type 967 Carier fighter was to become universally known, had the range to fly to practically any remaining target in China. Following its spectacular first combat on 13 September 1940 over Chung king (see Osprey Aircraft of the Aces 22), the Rikko's worries were over.

The 'wingtip escort' project delayed service introduction of the G4M1 by alomst a year, and underscored the fundamentally flawed approach towards aircraft protection exhibited by the Imperial Navy. With the armament removed it was used as a transition trainer for Rikko crews, being officially adopted as such in April 1941 as the Type 1 Large Land based Trainer Model 11 (G6M1-K).

Later still, most of these machines were converted into transports, with seating inside for twenty passengers and a crew of five. Adopted for service in October 1941 as the Type 1 land based Transport Model 11 (G6M1-L), they were originally to be used as paratroop carriers, but were flown extensively as squadron hacks and fleet headquarters transports.

The Douglas B-26 Invader was used by the French as a kind of colonial night fighter during the late Fifties and early Sixties. See this article on the aircraft used by the French in their colonial wars:

By 1957, newly independent Tunisia had become a major source of supply for the FLN. The French responded with the Morice Line, an elaborate system of sensors, electrified border fences, mine fields, and forts stretching the length of Algeria's eastern border. When an incursion was discovered, either by sensors or reconnaissance aircraft, B-26s and Aéronavale Privateers, Lancasters, and, later, Lockheed P2V Neptunes would attack the intruders continuously until helicopter-borne paras could arrive on the scene. The border fortifications worked reasonably well, but French authorities were aware that they could be easily breached by light aircraft. When air-defense radars at the Bône naval base seemed to show multiple tracks at low altitudes and low air speeds over the line, two radar-equipped MD-315 light transports were hastily despatched for night fighting duty. Predictably, they proved too slow and too short on endurance. The French then decided that they needed a special colonial night fighter. A small number of Invaders were thus converted and given the designation B-26N. The aircraft had British AI Mk.X radar (from French Meteor NF.11s), and an armament of two underwing gun pods, each housing two .50-cal machine guns, and two MATRA 122 pods for SNEB air-to-air rockets. By 1961, the B-26N fighters had intercepted 38 light aircraft and helicopters, downing nine.