Hope that little bit of information on the P-12a helps peple's thoughts.
Last edited:
AHC: post-1942 Luftwaffe 'sanity options'
- Thread starter Paolo Giusti
- Start date
Hope that little bit of information on the P-12a helps peple's thoughts.
Classic Germany: they could build tar engine for truck and trains in 1942, instead they built tar-fueled airplane in 1945.
But it seems @thaddeus suggestion was good: Germany had the chemistry knowledge for alternative coal fuels.
Well... there's also the research that went into trying to fit jet turbines into tanks to make them go faster. 
Well... there's also the research that went into trying to fit jet turbines into tanks to make them go faster.
But that would be so cool...
"Stalin haz flying panzer??"
"Mein Fuhrer, dey never vorket und vere too light to faze our panzer"
"General, I vant jet flying panzer!"
"Mein Fuhrer..."
"Serjeant! Shoot this treacherous unfaithfull General!"
marathag
Banned
Many Times I bring up that the Germans could have used much of the Iron used in horseshoes, to make small steam or wood/producer gas powered 10HP steel wheel Tractors to use as Prime Movers over the millions of Horses.
It's a huge logistics gain, and the horses not drafted into service, stay on the Farms, where they belong.
Reducing the number of U-Boats to free up a few diesels and electric motor to make copies of the US pre-War General Motors EMD FT
absolutely destroys Steam for efficiency. Cheaper to build, less maintenance. Sante Fe RR got most of the production during the War, as most of their Right of Ways was over desert. Eliminating water stops is huge.
But logistics wasn't 'sexxy' enough for the Nazis to even standardize on a truck design. List of all German truck manufacturers available on request.
thaddeus
Donor
there was a suggestion by Messerschmitt to add rocket engine(s) to existing piston engine types, both to enhance their performance and in case the jet programs did not pan out.
also a program to thicken the wings to house fuel, which they decided was more aerodynamic than drop tanks and saved precious aluminum.
my speculation is producing the Zwilling versions of both 109 and 111, would use 80 - 90% same parts?
for flak guns my choice would be some type of subcaliber or other change? fictional Foresight War has a tracer/fuse that seems to add a bonus distraction effect? have wondered if nipolit or similar could have been developed earlier and provided a weight savings for longer range than some of the shells used? (but it may not provide a significant improvement?)
I was trying to suggest modifications that worked, and worked well, in large scale and in time of interest. Rocket engines of the time were accidents waiting to happen, whether it was La-7 with rocket engine, or the Me 163 as it was, or the A4 missile during it's development.
Provided it can work, place need to be found for the engine and fuel; the La 7 with rocket engine used 270 L of fuel+oxydizer. The location of fuel+oxydizer need to be CoG-neutral - how to achieve this on Bf 109?
At the end of the day, if the rocket engine is as safe as piston engine, make fighters exclusively powered by rocket engined.
Thickening the wing is aerodynamic self-inflicted wound. Especially with Bf 109's outdated wing profile. Nobody was fighting with drop tank attached anyway. Want a more aerodynamic Bf 109G? Add main wheel well covers, persist with retractable tail wheel, don't make the HMG installation cost 10-13 km/h.
The Fw 190 was capable to hold 500+ liters of fuel in wings as-is.
Aluminium was falling from the skies anyway. Drop tanks can be made and were made of wood and/or paper.
Yes, it was probably so.
Subcaliber shells are indeed interesting, so is the 'headlight tracer' concept.
Few point @tomo pauk @thaddeus :
B&V chief engineer dr. Vogt mastered hardened and aerodinamic wing tank, but teamwork was not a nazi thing.
Germany never maneged to build paper drop tank AFAIK.
Nor they manager to build/copy sabot, they relied on over-tecknik squeez-bore, that obviously cost a lot of rare wolfaranium.
I am scare these are 3 more different POD.
(In fact, I toyed with a reverse engineering division for Germany, some thing like MI10 taping and reverse engineering of Freya and Wurzburg).
B&V chief engineer dr. Vogt mastered hardened and aerodinamic wing tank, but teamwork was not a nazi thing.
Germany never maneged to build paper drop tank AFAIK.
Nor they manager to build/copy sabot, they relied on over-tecknik squeez-bore, that obviously cost a lot of rare wolfaranium.
I am scare these are 3 more different POD.
(In fact, I toyed with a reverse engineering division for Germany, some thing like MI10 taping and reverse engineering of Freya and Wurzburg).
AFAIK Germans did that (there is a beautiful coal-gas-powered Lancia Ro3 near my house) but very very late, like 1945.Many Times I bring up that the Germans could have used much of the Iron used in horseshoes, to make small steam or wood/producer gas powered 10HP steel wheel Tractors to use as Prime Movers over the millions of Horses.
It's a huge logistics gain, and the horses not drafted into service, stay on the Farms, where they belong.
Reducing the number of U-Boats to free up a few diesels and electric motor to make copies of the US pre-War General Motors EMD FT
absolutely destroys Steam for efficiency. Cheaper to build, less maintenance. Sante Fe RR got most of the production during the War, as most of their Right of Ways was over desert. Eliminating water stops is huge.
But logistics wasn't 'sexxy' enough for the Nazis to even standardize on a truck design. List of all German truck manufacturers available on request.
As I said:
EDIT: BTW, why a diesel-electric engine? Germany abunds only of coal: why choose a scarcw hydrocarbur?
Last edited:
Care to share more info about that tank?
They can copy the Japanese wooden drop tank.
Wolfram? (Englanders will call it 'tungsten')
Once past 800-900 m/s, steel penetrators shatter upon impact. Both squeeze-bore and APDS projectiles are thus made of tungsten, or was it from tungsten-carbide. So were the APCRs, used by Germans, Americans, Soviets etc, and APHV projectiles used on British guns equipped with Littlejohn adapter.
German reliance on sqeeze-bore guns was very, very short.
I have to scan a book about BV138, but I have to do it on monday in office (shhh)
There were a lot of thing they could copy but, you know, arrogance.
Exactly what I mean. Sabot has a lot of advantages and Germans never think to invent/copy them.
marathag
Banned
It you're stealing diesels from the KM, might as well take the fuel allocations as well.
But in the USSR, the Germans found that Steam Engines optimized for short distances between waters stops was a real hindrance.
Soviet and US long distance engine had huge tenders for both coal bunker and water tank
The typical DRB 50 2-10-0 steamer had 52,000 pounds of tractive effort for its near 330,000 pound engine and tender weight, including 8 tons of Coal and 6800 gallons of water 50mph
A Sante Fe 2-10-4 'Texan' had 95,500 pounds of Tractive effort for its 877,000 pounds of engine and tender, with 20,000 gallons of water and 7100 gallons of Oil(Wester RRs were more likely to be Oilfired than Eastern Roads) 70 mph top speed
An 'A-B' combo of FTs replaced a Texan. Each Cab and Booster had 1350hp, and 55,000 pound tractive effort and 230,000 pound weight, with 1200 gallons of Diesel . 65mph top speed.
Germany had a choice regarding its limited stock of Tungsten - Sabot rounds or machine tooling
It was I believe mid-1942 that Hitler ordered all tungsten to be used for machine tooling...
The luftwaffe is screwed.
Best I could do would be to get an inline engined FW-190 in service ASAP then get rid of the Me-109, it's at the end of its development potential. Focus on the Ju-88 in the bomber role, remove all the extra features on the Me-210 and make it a dedicated bomber killer. Give the He-177 a standard 4 engine layout. Give top priority to the Me-262. Build trainer versions of all single engined fighters.
As for engine development, put some focus on fuel efficiency. Start a pilot rotation program immediately!
All of these programs will be to little to late.
In 1945 make plans to destroy all aircraft and engine manufacturing facilities in Eastern Germany and get all key personnel and Engineers to Western Germany before the Soviets can capture them
Best I could do would be to get an inline engined FW-190 in service ASAP then get rid of the Me-109, it's at the end of its development potential. Focus on the Ju-88 in the bomber role, remove all the extra features on the Me-210 and make it a dedicated bomber killer. Give the He-177 a standard 4 engine layout. Give top priority to the Me-262. Build trainer versions of all single engined fighters.
As for engine development, put some focus on fuel efficiency. Start a pilot rotation program immediately!
All of these programs will be to little to late.
In 1945 make plans to destroy all aircraft and engine manufacturing facilities in Eastern Germany and get all key personnel and Engineers to Western Germany before the Soviets can capture them
Last edited:
That is why the Germans used Uranium as a substitute in some of their AT rounds. They had more Uranium than Tungsten
