1930s-40s AHC: cancel 3 combat A/Cs, replace with good stuff

...per country.
Or, in more words: in leading up to the ww2 and during the war, cancel the 3 combat aircraft that were produced, before the 1st prototype is flown, and have 3 other A/C typestake the place in the production lines. Eg. cancel the P-63, have Bell make P-51s instead. The switch will ideally involve the aircraft of similar size, shape, weight, role and engine it uses/used, but not mandatory. Preferably the alternative is the historic A/C, but that is not mandatory, eg. in the above-mentioned example, a long-range P-63 might be produced. Or some A/C that existed, but was not produced in series; even some aircraft that is a product of you imagination, or existed on paper only.
Cancellation is just for the A/C that went into series production, not prototypes or small-run series. Lets say at least 100 examles were made in order to get cancelled. 'Combat aircraft' only, no transports or trainers.
 
OTL Canadian Car and Foundry never bids on the Curtiss Helldiver contract.
ATL Instead CCF builds Grumman Avengers.

ATL Or CCF could build thousands of (fictional) Gregor Monoplane light fighters.

OTL National Steel Car Company never builds Westland Lysanders.
ATL Instead NSCC builds Westland Whirlwinds. The first few are powered by RR Peregrine engines. They test-fly a variant with RR Kestrel engines, then search American manufacturers for replacement engines, because the airframe is too small to carry RR Merlins.

Victory Aircraft of Canada never builds Hampdens, instead they build Martin Marauders.
 
Last edited:
Fairchild of Canada drops Helldiver in favour of Curtiss-Wright Seahawk SC floatplanes.
Boeing of Canada drops PBY Catalina in favour of Consolidated Corregidor flying boats.
Canadian Vickers drops Canso flying boat in favour of Grumman Hellcat production.
 
Last edited:
USA looses:
- Bell P-63
- Brewster Buffalo
- Martin B-26

... and ideally gets:
- Bell-made P-51s under license
- A naval fighter developed around a big radial engine
- A proper fast bomber powered by R-2800s, sorta better Do-217 or Tu-2
 

Ramontxo

Donor
OTL Canadian Car and Foundry never bids on the Curtiss Helldiver contract.
ATL Instead CCF builds Grumman Avengers.

ATL Or CCF could build thousands of (fictional) Gregor Monoplane light fighters.

OTL National Steel Car Company never builds Westland Lysanders.
ATL Instead NSCC builds Westland Whirlwinds. The first few are powered by RR Peregrine engines. They test-fly a variant with RR Kestrel engines, then search American manufacturers for replacement engines, because the airframe is too small to carry RR Merlins.

Victory Aircraft of Canada never builds Hampdens, instead they build Martin Marauders.

Or the Whirlwinds get an eight cylinder derivative of the merlin (the idea is not mine was posted by another member whose name i dont remember) or an Hispano suiza 12Y
 
Actually for the USA - instead of the OTL P-43, make a similar fighter, but with V-1710 in the nose.

UK looses:
-Botha
-Defiant
-Whirlwind

..while getting:
- more Hampdens, or Wellingtons, or Whitleys
- more Spitfires
- a heavy fighter with 2 Merlins, designed by De Havilland
 
Britain:
Lose Blackburn Skua/Roc and replace with earlier mass production of Sea Hurricanes.

Lose Fairey Battle, replace with earlier mass production of Hurribombers.

Lose all bomber production except Lancasters as soon as Mosquito production ramps up*.

*pre-war mass-plant balsa plantatioms - they only need 6-10 years of growth. Note that the first two may allow victory in the Norway Campaign and access to large reserves of timber.
 

Driftless

Donor
For Poland:
Cancel the PZL.37 Łoś - a fine modern bomber for its era, but in hindsight, those resources would have been better used in modern fighters.

Add: PZL.50 Jastrząb - to replace the obsolescent fighters in the Polish air fleet. AND to increase the total number of fighters
Add: Curtis Hawk 75 - especially if the Pzl.50 continues with its historic development delays.
 

Driftless

Donor
For France: Add the VG-33 in quantity, though having a coherent doctrine for fighting an air war is the biggest item on the wish list.
 
USA looses:
- Bell P-63
- Brewster Buffalo
- Martin B-26

... and ideally gets:
- Bell-made P-51s under license
- A naval fighter developed around a big radial engine
- A proper fast bomber powered by R-2800s, sorta better Do-217 or Tu-2

A big radial engined naval fighter? F6F? F4U
A proper fast bomber powered by R-2800's. B-26? The R-2800 powered all three. Dinfitely one of the 5 best piston aircraft engines ever produced.
The P-47 powered by the R-4360

A naval fighter, a carrier capable P-47 perhaps
Bell produced P-51's. Is Packard building enough Merlin's?
The Whirlwind powered by two Lycoming IV-1250's ? Or two D-12 or Conquer derived engines

The USAAF and USN drop the Buffalo, later marks of the P-40, P-39, the Helldiver, the Seamew, the Lockeed patrol aircraft, all of the flying boats post PBY. Notice the domination of the list by Curtiss
 

Driftless

Donor
US: Cancel the P-39, or leave it for export only.
Add: Grumman F5F/P-50 in one of the longer nosed versions. Give it to the Marines to start with and worry about carrier qualifications later.
* serve in the long-range heavy fighter role
* fighter bomber. Grumman aircraft have had a history of being robust, durable aircraft.​
 
Last edited:
A big radial engined naval fighter? F6F? F4U
A proper fast bomber powered by R-2800's. B-26? The R-2800 powered all three. Dinfitely one of the 5 best piston aircraft engines ever produced.
The P-47 powered by the R-4360

A naval fighter, a carrier capable P-47 perhaps
Bell produced P-51's. Is Packard building enough Merlin's?
The Whirlwind powered by two Lycoming IV-1250's ? Or two D-12 or Conquer derived engines

The USAAF and USN drop the Buffalo, later marks of the P-40, P-39, the Helldiver, the Seamew, the Lockeed patrol aircraft, all of the flying boats post PBY. Notice the domination of the list by Curtiss

You will note that I've underscored the word 'proper'. The B-26 was not a proper fast bomber, a quick comparison with Do 217 and Tu-2 shows that both of those were faster by a good margin while being powered by engines not as powerful as the R-2800. Talk 350-370 mph, not 300-320.
P-51 worked fine with V-1710s. It will work even better with 2-stage supercharged V-1710s.

For the Whirly - as a British A/C, perhaps it is best developed from ground-up with Merlins? Peregrine was not any worse than IV-1250 or the legacy US V12s.
 
For the UK

Cancel the Defiant
Cancel the Battle
Cancel the Gladiator/Sea Gladiator

Replace with

Building more Spitfires and Hurricanes
Giving Spitfires and Hurricanes the ability to carry bombs from the start
Making Seafires and Sea Hurricanes earlier
 
You will note that I've underscored the word 'proper'. The B-26 was not a proper fast bomber, a quick comparison with Do 217 and Tu-2 shows that both of those were faster by a good margin while being powered by engines not as powerful as the R-2800. Talk 350-370 mph, not 300-320.
P-51 worked fine with V-1710s. It will work even better with 2-stage supercharged V-1710s.

For the Whirly - as a British A/C, perhaps it is best developed from ground-up with Merlins? Peregrine was not any worse than IV-1250 or the legacy US V12s.

As to the Whirlwind. It all depends on the weight of the V-1250 or the Conqueor. The D-12 is long in the tooth. Have the Whirlwind licence built in the US or Canada

The B-26. It carried a lot if defensive firepower for it's size. Loose a portion of that and it should help with speed somewhat.

The Curtiss engines would also of made decent tank engines if derated. But then it is a Curtiss product
 
As to the Whirlwind. It all depends on the weight of the V-1250 or the Conqueor. The D-12 is long in the tooth. Have the Whirlwind licence built in the US or Canada

The B-26. It carried a lot if defensive firepower for it's size. Loose a portion of that and it should help with speed somewhat.

The Curtiss engines would also of made decent tank engines if derated. But then it is a Curtiss product

I rate the OTL Whirwind high. The Peregrine engines were about as powerful as one can expect from the listed weight, cubic capacity, RPM, supercharger used and fuel used. Going for a lesser engine will also mean a lesse fighter. Thus I've suggested the prospective heavy fighter for the RAF to use Merlins.
B-26 sported a big fuselage in order not just to carry the required bomb-load, but also to provide accomodation for 8-9 crew members - that is some 90% of length of a bomber devoted to the crew. (schematics) Most of the crew members were either not to man a gun, or were to man just one gun, or were to abandon their usual task and then man a gun. Even the 1st B-26s, lighter, with less wing drag and less guns, were unable to attain 330 mph, while being handful to fly on low speeds due to the high wing loading.
Big = heavy.
We can compare that with Do 217, Tu-2, Ju-288 (not Ju-88/188) and A-26, where fuselage was devoted to the bomb-bay and fuel tanks. So I'd probably go with a say, 'big A-20' for the R-2800 powered fast bomber, with Fowler flaps in order to keep low speed handling acceptable. Turret with twin guns in the tail, plus the low-aft MG position and some MGs facing forward.

I do like idea of Curtiss engine used for tanks, actually. Curtiss engines and aircraft were very good until they managed to shoot themselves in the foot several times during the ww2.
 
UK
Lose the Hampden and Wellington. Merlin Whitley all round
Replace Battle with Hurribombers
Replace Botha with Harrow or Bombay
 
Soviets will loose:
- Su-2
- Mig-1/3 as we know it
- I'm tempted with Il-2...

... replaced with:
- more Pe-2s
- fighter with AM-38 engine, 2 cannons and a proper canopy mechanism
- ANT-58 (pre-Tu-2) into production
 
Yulzari,
You realize that OTL Bombay’s and Harrows were primarily used as transports. By 1930s standards, they were nominally heavy bombers but Bombay only carried 2,000 lbs of bombs, while Harrow II could drop 3,000 lbs.* They were great for supporting colonial police by bombing mountain tribes back into submission but were vulnerable to 1940-vintage fighters.
Whatever .....
Britain was short of transport airplanes and you just named two of their better transport designs.

* In comparison, later versions of Mosquitoe carried 4,000 lbs of bombs much faster.
 
Last edited:
Top