AHC/WI: Earlier Fighter Escorts

kernals12

Banned
I've read that allied bomber command was stubborn for a long time in its belief that "the bomber will always get through" because squadrons of bombers with defensive turrets would ward off any interceptors and that long range fighters were impossible anyway. Both of these assertions were proven false quickly but still, it took until 1944 before daylight bombing raids got escorts from the new P-51 Mustang. So how could we get earlier fighter escorts and what impact would it have on the war?
 
Have the bomber advocates realize they need support earlier, then the requirement for long-range escort fighters will emerge. That probably needs to happen in late 1940 or early 1941 even before the US entered the war to allow for development time.

The earliest USAF fighters used for escort duty were the Lockheed Lightning and Republic Thunderbolt, both were developed as interceptors where long-range isn't an important requirement. Luckily, they both had the size to allow for large fuel tanks to extend their range when moved into escort duties but that wasn't their initial roles.

Most of the escort fighters coming off the drawing boards were twin-engine aircraft and most were dogs. It was fortuitous that someone suggesting putting the R-R Merlin into the Mustang airframe otherwise who knows what the USAF would have ended up using or if they would have given up strategic bombing.
 
Problem is, until the advent of radar the bomber really did always get through - and the fact that this was changing was only dimly realised if at all until the BoB made it abundantly clear in summer of 1940. At that stage, the RAF had already given up on day bombing and was trying to make night bombing work, while the USAAF still thought more defensive guns was the answer: I'd argue that they didn't really understand the criticality of defending fighters until October 1943 by which time the Mustang was on the way.
 
I agree that radar was a game changer for bomber interception. USAF bombing advocates should have analyzed the data from both the BoB and the early Bomber Command efforts that daylight bombing without fighter escorts would generate unacceptable losses. There were voices in and out of the USAF that questioned whether increasing the number of guns in the bomber box was going to be sufficient; good staff planning advocates an alternative course of action which didn't happen here.
 
Either USAF went night bombing like Bomber Command or they developed sufficient long range escort acft. I don't think night bombing was ever an option for the 8AF, so, we need escorts. Given that the only real alt from OTL is the P-38 and they were so desperately needed in theaters with overwater bias, what's available is some combo of advanced drop tank tech and the F4U adapted to Army needs. Please tell me there's some way to mod the Corsair so it has the necessary high altitude performance and range with drop tanks to make this viable...don't feel like advocating for the B-41.
 
I once proposed a 'Malta' Spitfire

That is a MK V Spitfire designed to be able to self deploy from Gib to Malta - taking the pressure of the RN / USN carriers for 'club runs' and allowing for more routine reinforcements and faster build up on the island

The change was to remove the guns and some of the armour plate - put this on a supply sub or HMS Enterprise with the rest of the spares for express delivery to the island

The Aircraft are built with the extra fuel tanks behind the pilot (often used on the PR Spits) and fitted with a 90 gallon aux belly tank between the wings under the AC, and a larger Oil reserve - this gives the AC enough range to reach Malta from Gibraltar

There the guns are refitted as is the removed armour plate - the rear tank is aired for 24 hours (it cannot be removed but is not used for standard interception work) and the belly tank removed and 'mostly' returned to Gib

Someone at BC goes hey ho and experiments with using the type for LR Escort work (with armour and guns fitted of course) from the UK where it can escort bombers as far as the Ruhr and slightly beyond.

This is known as the MK V LRE Spitfire
 
The Lockheed P38 project not being set back for over 12 months. Uncle Sam cleaning up the turbo charger shortage. Quicker development of the twin V12 experimental 3410 Allison water cooled aircraft engine. It would have not been the first time a high speed interceptor changed roles into a long range fighter escort. The first Allied fighters above Berlin were P38 fighters. Or ... if you want to be more enduring, the various British Mosquito excellent to superb at everything light attack aircraft ... but with up powered USA Packard engines.

I sometimes wonder how good the Boeing B29 might have been with the Allison 3600 hp 3410 twin V12 engines in a low drag high performance nacelle. Right side props. Left side props.
 
Actually, on 1918 grounds, I would dispute that the bomber would always get through; early RFC and RAF Independent Force efforts were hellaciously expensive, on their bad days as costly and ineffective as anything 2 Group managed in 1940. In the end the night bombers, relatively safe but inaccurate, were spending as much as sixty percent of their time (heavies less, mediums more) on trying to bomb airfields and flak batteries to give the day bombers some chance of getting through the defences. Going the other way, the Gothas and Reisen were more effective, landing a few painful hits, but were facing increasing defences, transitioned almost entirely to night bombing by september 1917, and even then were whittled down to ineffectiveness by may- june 1918, by which point they were pulled back to tactical targets anyway.

Early strategic bombing ended in defensive victory, shock value notwithstanding, and every air force in the world tried to persuade themselves that it would be different next time. Claiming that the bomber would always get through was a combination of (im)pious hope and justification of budget and role, not the product of reasoned evidence- based analysis.

Based on 1917-18, the unescorted bomber is running a Red Queen's Race between anything it can achieve and the costs it imposes on it's own side, waste and loss through accident and misadventure, and even semi- organised defences can easily tip the balance against them; 1940 was actually lessons learnt on both sides- escorted bombers against well organised defence. The defence still won, as long as they could see to fight.

Sticking to rifle calibre machine guns delays the dominance of the defence a fair bit, actually; but the Zeppelin-Staaken Reisen series were probably the last bombers that could really expect to win a gun duel with a defending fighter. Again, actual analysis from actual results rather than basing strategy and force structure on a service politics based wish list should have shown this. The other lesson of 1917-18 is that attacking the defences directly is sometimes necessary, and can and does pay off in reducing your own losses.

Which way the game of attrition breaks- whether the damage lost by the diversion of effort to defence suppression is more or less than the damage prevented by the enemy defences- depends a lot on the weapons and conditions of the campaign. Defence suppression including escorting fighters, of course, and also arguably including bomber armour and turrets. Historically, there is an argument that a higher flying, faster bomber almost entirely stripped of direct defence (might be worth leaving a nominal capability just to ward off cheap kills), relying on an accompanying suppression platform like a fighter, is better off than an armed and armoured bomber. If you can get a fighter with the range, which 1918 often couldn't.

Also, most of the fighters of the late Great War had an overload capability- they could carry bombs. The Camel and SE.5a had two hundred pound loads, eight 20 or 25lbr. Your route to an escort fighter may be through not forgetting this fact- remember that it could be done, and came in damn' handy on occasion, a fighter being able to attack and survive in the face of ground fire that would have plucked a bomber out of the sky. Keep building fighters with that in mind. Do not allow a fighter specification to go out without it- don't build light bombers at all. Enemy fighters cut them to ribbons over the trenches, regularly. Fighters that can jettison and fight back if necessary are a much better bet.

And when the need for a long range fighter comes up, add plumbing to the bomb, now also drop tank, racks. Problem solved. The Spitfire and Hurricane mark I should have been capable of it.
 

SwampTiger

Banned
Have the RAF get the Oerlikon for Hurricanes working by July 1940, get the P-38 operational in 1941 and have an USAAC general officer observe the Battle of Britain. Yes, the bomber will get through, but will you win before you run out of bombers?
 
It suffers at bit at higher altitudes but as a stop gap until better fighters come along, a P-40 with drop tanks has decent legs.
 

SwampTiger

Banned
It suffers at bit at higher altitudes but as a stop gap until better fighters come along, a P-40 with drop tanks has decent legs.

I am not sure if you mean the P-38 or the Spitfire here. ;)Sorry, I misread the post. The P-40 with a two-stage Merlin would be a good stop gap.

Earlier introduction of the P-38 may allow the lessons of long range flight in very cold weather before introduction into Europe. The proper application of 100 octane aviation fuel and the discovery of control problems from high speed dives may take less time to fix.

The Spitfire may be uncomfortable on 8-12 hour flights. The two-stage supercharger needs earlier introduction and higher production. Although not the best choice, the Vickers .50 mg should have been chosen over the .303 version. Belgian FN was building and exporting Browning based 12.7 mm and 13.2 mm machine guns, and licensing for production. They were competing for the French contract for a 13.2 gun. Sweden used the gun during the war, selling some to Finland.

In both cases, tactics will need development.
 
Please tell me there's some way to mod the Corsair so it has the necessary high altitude performance and range with drop tanks to make this viable.
The F4U Corsair would be the perfect option:
-It was already in production. It made it's combat debut in the beginning of 1943 with the USMC in the Solomon Islands.
-It rejected by the US Navy for carrier operations initially and assigned to the Marines. The Corsair is already destined for land based operations.
-The Royal Navy's Fleet Air Arm bought the Corsair for use on it's carriers. I am thinking that joint repair facilities could be set up.
The problem with the Corsair is inter-service rivalry. The ARMY and George C. Marshall would not accept a NAVY fighter. You would need something major to convince the USAAF to adopt a Naval aircraft for use in the ETO. Ernest King will probably complain too. The Marines still need a replacement for the Wildcat.
The Corsair had some growing pains OTL in it's combat debut against the Japanese but every fighter had it's growing pains. As far as modifications you can add solid wings instead of folding wings and drop tanks.

The P-38 was America's long range fighter OTL in 1943 Europe. It struggled against the Luftwaffe because of problems with the aircraft. The cockpit was unheated for one thing. modifications to the Lightning were made but it was too late. The USAAF moved on to the P-51 Mustang and the P-38 was regulated to fighter-bomber duty with the Ninth Air Force. There is a timeline by EverKing where the P-38 Lightning gets improved and stays in frontline service with the Eighth Air Force.

The P-47 Thunderbolt held it's own against the Luftwaffe OTL. Thunderbolts even shot down ME -262s. The P-47M was the first Thunderbolt to reach Berlin in 1945 but was withdrawn from service for about a month while due to engine problems. It did return in the last months of the war but by then it didn't really make a difference. The P-47N was the last of the breed but it only saw action in the Pacific in the final months of the war flying from Okinawa.

I think what needs to happen is when VIII Bomber Command arrives in England it ordered to launch a raid against Germany itself. Washington wants to show that America can hit The Fatherland. The raid is of course a disaster. The RAF say "we told you so". Rather than quit daylight bombing, Ira Eaker pushes for long range fighter support Washington listens and wants to show that they can beat the Luftwaffe.

Best Options:
1. USAAF demands a long range fighter. North American abandons the A-36 Apache and goes straight to the P-51 Mustang fighter variants.
2. Make modifications to the P-38 and P-47
3. Hap Arnold tells Marshall he needs the F4U. the Corsair comes to Europe as a interim fighter until the Mustang is ready in big numbers.

If you get a decent number of Corsairs and Lightnings in the summer of 1943 over Germany then Schweinfurt and Regensburg are not massacres. The Luftwaffe has to withdraw earlier back into Germany.
If the RAF is convinced to get into the long range fighter business then maybe Bomber Command returns to daylight bombing in 1944. Maybe RAF Fighter Command joins the Eighth Air Force in fighter sweeps over Germany.
 
Last edited:

SwampTiger

Banned
!: The Mustang entered service in late 1943. Do you want to rush the plane into service in mid-'43?

2: Agreed.

3: Arnold, or Roosevelt hears of the issue and orders Marshall to save AMERICAN lives.

4: Hawker does a better job with the Typhoon, with fewer and/or less serious issues. and a thinner wing. Someone realizes teh need for longer range before introduction and plumbs for drop tanks and fit additional interior fuel tanks. Napier engineers adapt the engine ease of production. Napier fixes the production problems earlier. They are able to continue on the high altitude project.

In regard to the Typhoon and P-39, who thought car-style doors on a fighter aircraft capable of speeds over 100 mph was a realistic method for escape from the aircraft?
 
There are a few early war candidates that could do a partial job, as @Zheng He said the P40 had pretty long legs, as did the Brewster Buffalo and the Westland Whirlwind, however all had issues with altitude performance and the Buffalo was as slow as shit. That said they could likely escort bombers almost to the Rhur.

Another, perhaps controversial, candidate is the Spitfire! The Mk VII and particularly the Mk VIII variant got the shitty end of the stick compared to the Mk IX in production terms. The Mk VIII had 122 gal of fuel compared to 85 gal of the Mk V derived Mk XI and fitted with a 90 gal drop tank or a variety of slipper tanks had over 1100 mile range, or a tactical radius of almost 400 miles.

_EYIB1HMxPkeoTsZn6_1xiPequKLXkyetjCvqL4fmzM.jpg


Edit; I found this on another forum:the Whirlwind flew escort missions as far as Antwerp, anti ship dive bombing raids with 2 x 500 pounders as far as Cherbourg and Rhubarb missions with 2 x 250 pound bombs as far as the northern outskirts of Paris.

The last mission of 137 sqn on 21st June 43 was a Rhubarb to an aerodrome at Poix Du Nord.
 
Last edited:
The F4U Corsair would be the perfect option:
-It was already in production. It made it's combat debut in the beginning of 1943 with the USMC in the Solomon Islands.
-It rejected by the US Navy for carrier operations initially and assigned to the Marines. The Corsair is already destined for land based operations.
-The Royal Navy's Fleet Air Arm bought the Corsair for use on it's carriers. I am thinking that joint repair facilities could be set up.
The problem with the Corsair is inter-service rivalry. The ARMY and George C. Marshall would not accept a NAVY fighter. You would need something major to convince the USAAF to adopt a Naval aircraft for use in the ETO. Ernest King will probably complain too. The Marines still need a replacement for the Wildcat.
The Corsair had some growing pains OTL in it's combat debut against the Japanese but every fighter had it's growing pains. As far as modifications you can add solid wings instead of folding wings and drop tanks.

The P-38 was America's long range fighter OTL in 1943 Europe. It struggled against the Luftwaffe because of problems with the aircraft. The cockpit was unheated for one thing. modifications to the Lightning were made but it was too late. The USAAF moved on to the P-51 Mustang and the P-38 was regulated to fighter-bomber duty with the Ninth Air Force. There is a timeline by EverKing where the P-38 Lightning gets improved and stays in frontline service with the Eighth Air Force.

The P-47 Thunderbolt held it's own against the Luftwaffe OTL. Thunderbolts even shot down ME -262s. The P-47M was the first Thunderbolt to reach Berlin in 1945 but was withdrawn from service for about a month while due to engine problems. It did return in the last months of the war but by then it didn't really make a difference. The P-47N was the last of the breed but it only saw action in the Pacific in the final months of the war flying from Okinawa.

I think what needs to happen is when VIII Bomber Command arrives in England it ordered to launch a raid against Germany itself. Washington wants to show that America can hit The Fatherland. The raid is of course a disaster. The RAF say "we told you so". Rather than quit daylight bombing, Ira Eaker pushes for long range fighter support Washington listens and wants to show that they can beat the Luftwaffe.

There is a way to have Corsairs flying long range, high altitude escort inn the ETO - have RAF receive and use them. Stick with early versions with wing tanks, add a drop tank as it was the case with a small run of the Corsairs in 1943.
P-38 was a problematic thing, it will nedd some modifications to be actually a viable do-all fighter. Problem is that everone wanted it, while production couldn't cope with that. It have had a good/great range and good hi-alt speed and climb.
Early P-47 outfitted with wing drop tanks were self-deploying via Iceland to the UK by August 1943. That combo gives radius of 425 miles at 25000 ft, with reserves for warm up, climb, 20 min combat, and 30 min above UK on return leg.

Best Options:
1. USAAF demands a long range fighter. North American abandons the A-36 Apache and goes straight to the P-51 Mustang fighter variants.
2. Make modifications to the P-38 and P-47
3. Hap Arnold tells Marshall he needs the F4U. the Corsair comes to Europe as a interim fighter until the Mustang is ready in big numbers.

If you get a decent number of Corsairs and Lightnings in the summer of 1943 over Germany then Schweinfurt and Regensburg are not massacres. The Luftwaffe has to withdraw earlier back into Germany.
If the RAF is convinced to get into the long range fighter business then maybe Bomber Command returns to daylight bombing in 1944. Maybe RAF Fighter Command joins the Eighth Air Force in fighter sweeps over Germany.

!: The Mustang entered service in late 1943. Do you want to rush the plane into service in mid-'43?

2: Agreed.

3: Arnold, or Roosevelt hears of the issue and orders Marshall to save AMERICAN lives.

4: Hawker does a better job with the Typhoon, with fewer and/or less serious issues. and a thinner wing. Someone realizes teh need for longer range before introduction and plumbs for drop tanks and fit additional interior fuel tanks. Napier engineers adapt the engine ease of production. Napier fixes the production problems earlier. They are able to continue on the high altitude project.

In regard to the Typhoon and P-39, who thought car-style doors on a fighter aircraft capable of speeds over 100 mph was a realistic method for escape from the aircraft?

Car-style doors were also used on P-63, IIRC there was no problems in use.
1 - Mustang is indeed the perfect option. 1st cobat sorties were done in Spring of 1942, not late 1943. forget the A-36, Americans can stick the V-1650-1 on it (in order to have better performance at altitude than historical P-51 and P-51A) in 1942, remove fuselage MGs, install drop tanks and it will cover 450-500 miles from East Anglia. RAF can install Merlin XX/45/46 on their Mustangs, stick drop tanks, again delete the fuselage MGs, and there is a performer. For full benefit, RAF can install Merlin 60 series and have 440+ mph fighter in late 1942.
2 - Agreed.
3 - I've suggested above the Corsair for the RAF. RAF was providing short-range escort for the US bombers from early 1942, this gives them longer reach.

Suggestion #4: Spitfire with extra fuel tanks in fuselage and wings, preferably MK VIII as basis.
 

SwampTiger

Banned
I agree with all above, except the issue of timing of the Mustang. The Allison Mustang was available in early 1942. The first Merlin Mustang prototype was not completed until October. Production started in June 1943. You need to have someone arrive at the concept six months to a year earlier.
 
I agree with all above, except the issue of timing of the Mustang. The Allison Mustang was available in early 1942. The first Merlin Mustang prototype was not completed until October. Production started in June 1943. You need to have someone arrive at the concept six months to a year earlier.

Sorry if it sounds like nitpick, but you've said 'The Mustang entered service in late 1943.' - that it did not.

Packard started with production of V-1650-1 in 1941, delivering 45 in that year, with production ramping up reasonably fast, eg, in May of 1942 there was 602 engines delivered. Unfortunately, that engine ended up in P-40s (and British bombers), making barely a difference.
The production of 2-stage supercharged V-1650-3 started in early 1943, Packard delivered 1st 100 of those some time in July 1943. Production of airframes (for P-51B) outstripped the engine production, making hundreds of airframes gathering dust waiting for the engines.
Thus, if we want a 'Merlin Mustang minus', the V-1650-1 need to be installed ASAP, it will provide a bit of performance advantage vs. Luftwaffe's best, along with range to cover best part of Germany. Lets recall that NAA produced 500 of A-36s (autumn 1942, winter of 1942/43), so there is a lot of slack to use for LR fighters instead.
RAF might get into a full 'Merlin Mustang' solution a bit earlier, since they have Merlin 60 series in production already by mid-1942, and retrofit those engines on the Mustangs they received (~670 total in 1941-42), minus the losses of course. Even retrofitting the earlier Merlins on those Mustangs will mean LR performers to throw against Luftwaffe.
 

SwampTiger

Banned
Yes, I overgeneralized on the Mustang. Mea Culpa

What would be the operating altitude of the single stage Merlin Mustang? My guess would be 18-22,000 feet, based on the P-40F and earlier versions of Spitfire and Hurricane.
 
Last edited:
What would be the operating altitude of the single stage Merlin Mustang? My guess would be 18-22,000 feet, based on the P-40F and earlier versions of Spitfire and Hurricane.

The aircraft's rated altitude for high speed would've been probably at ~22000 ft, not worse than Bf 109G-2 or Fw 190A of late 1942/early 1943.

How about improving Allison turbochargers earlier?

Turbochargers (made in the USA by GE mostly) were decent by mid/late 1942. Unfortunately, nobody was mass producing a proper 1-engined fighter with a turboed V-1710 ( the XP-60A was too late, the XP-40H never left the drawing board).
Allison with earlier 2-stage supercharger (a very different thing when compared with turbocharger) would've been a good thing, to cram them on the P-51s by early 1943, instead of installing them too late (late 1943) in an useless fighter (P-63).
 
Top