Will the Manchester enjoy the wider wingspan permission? 120ft is Lincoln country.
AHC: Peerless Air Ministry
- Thread starter perfectgeneral
- Start date
hipper
Banned
all very nice but OR will point out sometime in 1942 that no aircraft will ever make a re attack, and the best option is to drop all depth charges at once in a long stick.
hipper
Banned
http://www.lancs.ac.uk/~fairbrot/OR/bombweights.html
The attack can be seen as the culmination of the work of the costal command. Around 170 man hours were needed to give one hour of flying time and around 200 hours of flying time to give one attack. That attack would then last only a few minutes. It is clear therefore that a huge amount of time and effort is invested in those few minutes. Since the attack only concerned a relatively small number of aircrew and the equipment they were using it was seen as a good way to increase the total number of U-boats sunk. This was shown to be correct by the massive improvement in the success rate for attacks. In 1941 only 2 or 3% of attacks resulted in a sinking, this rose to 40% in 1944 and as high as 60% in the last few months of the war. This also meant that aircraft changed from being simply a moral deterrent to a credible killing weapon against U-boats.
One of the obvious difficulties in sinking a U-boat was getting the D.C. on target. There were two main types of error in aiming namely range and line errors. Range error is when the centre of the stick is either behind or in front of the centre of the U-boat. Line error is when the line of the stick does not pass through the centre of the U-boat. By looking at the accounts of pilots based on the number of times they claim to have hit their target the aiming error was estimated to be 20 yards in range and 10 in line. However by looking at the damage done to U-boats in these attacks the success rate was much lower than expected given the size of the explosions. This gave an estimate of the aiming error of around 60 yards in range and 25 in line. These two points of view are clearly opposite.
Driftless
Donor
I'd think attacking U-boats from the air with depth charges would have similar aiming issues to all other aerial attacks: the four-dimensional calculus for deflection (both horizontal axes, a vertical component, and significant speed/time differences). Attacks done from the beam or the quarters have especially low allowable margins for error, correct - because of that deflection calculation? Destroyer vs U-Boat and torpedo plane vs ship have partially reduced the vertical calculation (and the speed differential to some extent as well). It's not surprising that the hit rate for air dropped DCs was low.
"On September 21st 1939, two Sundelands from No's 204 & 228 squadrons picked up the entire crew of a torpedoed merchantman, the Kensington court, flying them to safety to complete the first of its kind in history." Wm Green Flying Boats p.98
Errolwi
Monthly Donor
http://www.historyofwar.org/articles/weapons_short_sunderland_service.html
The first attack on a U-boat came on 8 September, without success. This was followed on 18 September by the first air-sea rescue mission of the war, when two aircraft from Nos. 228 and 204 Squadrons rescued 34 crewmen from the tramp-steam SS Kensington Court, after the ship was sunk seventy miles from the Sicily Islands. The Sunderland was not well suited to the air-sea rescue role, which would later be performed with distinction by the Catalina. Despite its robust appearance, the Sunderland had a thin hull that was not designed for landings on exposed waters, and a number of Sunderlands would be lost attempting to land on rough seas.
https://uboat.net/allies/aircraft/sunderland.htm
The Sunderland also flew search-and-rescue missions. It has to be pointed out that normally, the Sunderland could not land to pick up survivors. Like other flying boats, it could land and take-off only from sheltered coastal waters. From 1942 onwards, landings in open sea were expressly forbidden, except in special circumstances and with permission.
I've spoken with a few ex-RNZAF Sunderland crew, who were quick to correct people's understandable misconceptions from a few high-publicity successes in the war. Completely different attitude in Catalina equipped units, these were routinely assigned to 'Dumbo' missions.
It would be good to track down the order prohibiting landings, the number of exceptions granted, and how often the order was ignored.
In ref a/c DC attacks, it seems pretty clear the ability to re-attack is more notional than real, which makes sacrificing fuel a bad idea.
As for why the attacks failed early, beyond the aiming error (not trivial), the inability of early DC to detonate shallow enough surely contributed. Given a/c can't (don't) achieve many kills early on, "scarecrow" missions (out of NF) keeping U-boats from making contact will have an effect equivalent to sinking. It might have broader benefits: what does that do to the morale of the U-boat force at large?
As for why the attacks failed early, beyond the aiming error (not trivial), the inability of early DC to detonate shallow enough surely contributed. Given a/c can't (don't) achieve many kills early on, "scarecrow" missions (out of NF) keeping U-boats from making contact will have an effect equivalent to sinking. It might have broader benefits: what does that do to the morale of the U-boat force at large?
6.09 A Big Bird Spreads Its Wings
Part 6.09 A big bird spreads it’s wings
The problems with the Napier dagger engine only increased the AM’s fears over the Napier Sabre which seemed to be making no progress towards series production unlike the Fairey Monarch engines that were coming off the production line in a slow but steady stream. Not only was the prototype Stirling due to roll out in May but by the end of year both the Avro Manchester and the Hawker Tornado were due to fly as well. As for the Tornado’s Napier engined stablemate the Hawker Typhoon nobody could predict if or when it would receive its engine.
Once he had been on an official tour of Napiers factory with Sir Archibald Sinclair, in their capacity as ministers for Air and Aircraft Production, Sir Phillip had a much better understanding of the causes of Napier’s failure to produce successful production engines. The visit to the Napier Acton factory revealed a congested and chaotic layout of buildings, seemingly strewn haphazardly across the site. Engine components were transported on hand trolleys from forge house to machine shop, to fitting shed at times crossing a cobbled yard. When compared to the streamlined and efficient factories of RR or Alvis the Napier works looked and felt positively Victorian.
If the Sabre engine had not held such promise then Sir Phillip would have considered cancelling it. By pure happenstance the Sabre and the Taurus engines shared the sane bore and hence the same sleeve valve diameters. After much wringing of hand by the Bristol cousin’s they acquiesced to the transfer of their sleeve valve grinding equipment to a new factory in Liverpool constructed to build the Sabre engine.
When the first flight of the Stirling took place on the 14th of May 1939 the interest of the AM and the RAF was intense. This was the first modern four engine monoplane bomber to be rolled out and it was truly huge by comparison to the current operational bombers. The largest of which were the Whitley and the Wellington. The Stirling’s wingspan of 112ft was about a third again bigger than either of the other planes wingspan, which were about 85 feet and at some 87 feet from nose to tail it was some 20% longer than the Whitley which was considerably longer that the Wellington. If the aircraft was impressive on the ground once the engines were started the roar of eight thousand horse power was almost overwhelming.
With the counter rotating propellers whirling to near invisibility the aircraft commenced to roll on it’s first take off. The Stirling seemed to accelerate like a fighter and the tail came up quite quickly, the test pilot held her down for a bit to gain speed and then lifted her off. When the aircraft returned and pulled to halt the flight crew left the aircraft with broad smiles. Though there would be months of test flying and development before an operational production aircraft would roll of the assembly lines in Britain or Canada the crew new they had just flown a remarkable aircraft.
Comparing aircraft engine power and weights proved interesting as at max take-off weight the Wellington was currently, 28,500lb on 2,100 hp for 13.5lb/hp, whereas the Whitley carried 33,500lb on 2,190hp for 15.3lb/hp. The calculated maximum take of weight for the Stirling was 60,000lb for 7.5lb/hp. This massive power to weight ratio was indicative of the aircrafts long range role and the ability to fly with half of each engine shut down to extend range. The Monarchs engines unique design made it practical to shut half of each engine down in flight, the half engine still running kept the oil in the idle half close to operational temperature so start up and return to use of the idle half was a fairly quick procedure. Even with half the engines shut down the Stirling was still flying with 4,000hp or 15lb/hp power to weight ratio.
With its generous fuselage dimensions there was room within the Stirling for the proposed long ranged maritime patrol aircraft to have a small galley, bunks and a rest area for extra crew. As it was with eight sets of engine instruments to monitor there would probably be a requirement for at least two flight engineers, couple that with all the fuel management required during a long duration flight and even two engineers might have their hands full.
One of the factors that had resulted in the Canadians in being interested in building the Stirling was it’s passenger carrying capacity as well as it’s long range. The original AM specification had been written with the ability to self-deploy to the far reaches of the empire. With Canadas vast wildernesses and sparsity of population the ability to fly from one side of the country to the other nonstop was seen as a desirable attribute.
Throughout the previous year Whittle and his team at Powerjets had been making steady progress. Going through innumerable test runs, analysing failures when they occurred and steadily refining the WU engine and then building the flightworthy W1 series engine, this engine was running at 16,000 rpm as witnessed by Dr Pye, Director of Scientific Research and Tizard in January of 1939. At this time there were still combustion problems that were hindering the development of the W1 and Dr Pye and Tizzard took a keen interest in these problems and suggested to Whittle where to seek advice within the scientific and engineering research community.
Further they had recommended the Air Ministry places contracts with Gloster for two prototype E28/39 aircraft jet engine research aircraft immediately. Design work on an improved W2 jet engine to give 1600 pounds of thrust was begun for these aircraft. Providing flight worthy engines were available Glosters were contracted to complete the first of the two aircraft by the end of the year. All work by Glosters on the E28/39 project was being done in a separate building within the factory compound and security was very tight, that in itself, aroused the curiosity of a proportion of the companies staff.
There are several versions of how the shed the E28/39 was being built got its name but the one written in the Official History of the Hucclecote works explained it like this; When stopped by a security guard and told to “Stop Ferreting around where he had no business” a curious Gloster worker had jibed back “Well if you will behave like a load of wicked weasels working in that shed, what do you expect”. From then on the shed was known as the ‘Weasel Works’.
As it was the Gloster employees were as busy as peacetime conditions permitted building Henleys and Hurricanes under contact for Hawkers. By the middle of the year they were schedule to be building the cannon armed Hurricane MkIc in place of the current MkIb.
The problems with the Napier dagger engine only increased the AM’s fears over the Napier Sabre which seemed to be making no progress towards series production unlike the Fairey Monarch engines that were coming off the production line in a slow but steady stream. Not only was the prototype Stirling due to roll out in May but by the end of year both the Avro Manchester and the Hawker Tornado were due to fly as well. As for the Tornado’s Napier engined stablemate the Hawker Typhoon nobody could predict if or when it would receive its engine.
Once he had been on an official tour of Napiers factory with Sir Archibald Sinclair, in their capacity as ministers for Air and Aircraft Production, Sir Phillip had a much better understanding of the causes of Napier’s failure to produce successful production engines. The visit to the Napier Acton factory revealed a congested and chaotic layout of buildings, seemingly strewn haphazardly across the site. Engine components were transported on hand trolleys from forge house to machine shop, to fitting shed at times crossing a cobbled yard. When compared to the streamlined and efficient factories of RR or Alvis the Napier works looked and felt positively Victorian.
If the Sabre engine had not held such promise then Sir Phillip would have considered cancelling it. By pure happenstance the Sabre and the Taurus engines shared the sane bore and hence the same sleeve valve diameters. After much wringing of hand by the Bristol cousin’s they acquiesced to the transfer of their sleeve valve grinding equipment to a new factory in Liverpool constructed to build the Sabre engine.
When the first flight of the Stirling took place on the 14th of May 1939 the interest of the AM and the RAF was intense. This was the first modern four engine monoplane bomber to be rolled out and it was truly huge by comparison to the current operational bombers. The largest of which were the Whitley and the Wellington. The Stirling’s wingspan of 112ft was about a third again bigger than either of the other planes wingspan, which were about 85 feet and at some 87 feet from nose to tail it was some 20% longer than the Whitley which was considerably longer that the Wellington. If the aircraft was impressive on the ground once the engines were started the roar of eight thousand horse power was almost overwhelming.
With the counter rotating propellers whirling to near invisibility the aircraft commenced to roll on it’s first take off. The Stirling seemed to accelerate like a fighter and the tail came up quite quickly, the test pilot held her down for a bit to gain speed and then lifted her off. When the aircraft returned and pulled to halt the flight crew left the aircraft with broad smiles. Though there would be months of test flying and development before an operational production aircraft would roll of the assembly lines in Britain or Canada the crew new they had just flown a remarkable aircraft.
Comparing aircraft engine power and weights proved interesting as at max take-off weight the Wellington was currently, 28,500lb on 2,100 hp for 13.5lb/hp, whereas the Whitley carried 33,500lb on 2,190hp for 15.3lb/hp. The calculated maximum take of weight for the Stirling was 60,000lb for 7.5lb/hp. This massive power to weight ratio was indicative of the aircrafts long range role and the ability to fly with half of each engine shut down to extend range. The Monarchs engines unique design made it practical to shut half of each engine down in flight, the half engine still running kept the oil in the idle half close to operational temperature so start up and return to use of the idle half was a fairly quick procedure. Even with half the engines shut down the Stirling was still flying with 4,000hp or 15lb/hp power to weight ratio.
With its generous fuselage dimensions there was room within the Stirling for the proposed long ranged maritime patrol aircraft to have a small galley, bunks and a rest area for extra crew. As it was with eight sets of engine instruments to monitor there would probably be a requirement for at least two flight engineers, couple that with all the fuel management required during a long duration flight and even two engineers might have their hands full.
One of the factors that had resulted in the Canadians in being interested in building the Stirling was it’s passenger carrying capacity as well as it’s long range. The original AM specification had been written with the ability to self-deploy to the far reaches of the empire. With Canadas vast wildernesses and sparsity of population the ability to fly from one side of the country to the other nonstop was seen as a desirable attribute.
Throughout the previous year Whittle and his team at Powerjets had been making steady progress. Going through innumerable test runs, analysing failures when they occurred and steadily refining the WU engine and then building the flightworthy W1 series engine, this engine was running at 16,000 rpm as witnessed by Dr Pye, Director of Scientific Research and Tizard in January of 1939. At this time there were still combustion problems that were hindering the development of the W1 and Dr Pye and Tizzard took a keen interest in these problems and suggested to Whittle where to seek advice within the scientific and engineering research community.
Further they had recommended the Air Ministry places contracts with Gloster for two prototype E28/39 aircraft jet engine research aircraft immediately. Design work on an improved W2 jet engine to give 1600 pounds of thrust was begun for these aircraft. Providing flight worthy engines were available Glosters were contracted to complete the first of the two aircraft by the end of the year. All work by Glosters on the E28/39 project was being done in a separate building within the factory compound and security was very tight, that in itself, aroused the curiosity of a proportion of the companies staff.
There are several versions of how the shed the E28/39 was being built got its name but the one written in the Official History of the Hucclecote works explained it like this; When stopped by a security guard and told to “Stop Ferreting around where he had no business” a curious Gloster worker had jibed back “Well if you will behave like a load of wicked weasels working in that shed, what do you expect”. From then on the shed was known as the ‘Weasel Works’.
As it was the Gloster employees were as busy as peacetime conditions permitted building Henleys and Hurricanes under contact for Hawkers. By the middle of the year they were schedule to be building the cannon armed Hurricane MkIc in place of the current MkIb.
Having maneuvered Leigh-Mallory from taking command of 12 group I am having problems finding a suitable alternative officer of the right seniority in 1939. Has anyone any suggestions.
You really dont need Stirlings flying out of NF until (unless?) France falls.
Until then, and even after for a considerable time, u-boat attacks were in the eastern Atlantic - the American coast simply wasted too much time in transit.
It was only really when Admiral King gave the U-boats such a wonderful present that they seriously attacked in the western atlantic.
A small squadron to keep an eye on the convoys is really the most you need. And not being in NF will make the aircrew happier
Until then, and even after for a considerable time, u-boat attacks were in the eastern Atlantic - the American coast simply wasted too much time in transit.
It was only really when Admiral King gave the U-boats such a wonderful present that they seriously attacked in the western atlantic.
A small squadron to keep an eye on the convoys is really the most you need. And not being in NF will make the aircrew happier
Driftless
Donor
Richard Saul? But then you need a replacement for him at 13 Group
*edit* or Quintin Brand from 10 Group, but then it's the similar succession question there.
Yes good move in shuffling the deck, he is a good choice. Park off course is soon to go to 11 Group as in OTL. So who forms 13 group then?
Depends on your definition of tactical air support, but the Desert Air Force only got involved at low level after he left.
Actually Rocket armed Typhoons did less damage than believed. More German tanks were killed by a mix of 250lb GP bombs and 20mm cannon shells than 60lb rockets, though being attacked with rockets was apparently a terrifying experience and caused more than one panzer crew to bail out. The armour piercing rockets did do a number on light shipping.
If it's up that long then you would need a galley. The RAF MPA community consider a galley more essential than anything short of fuel or an actual aircraft.