Alternate Aircraft of Nations

[tomo pauk]

Australian built Fairey Sea Battle III torpedo bombers on a training flight over Singapore November 30th 1941. The squadron was waiting to receive the newer Mk V powered by the Rolls Royce Griffon.

Sea Battle V

Good. The 'Sea Battle' was certainly a missed opportunity.

Alternative jets:
- F-104 with a proper wing instead of the excuse for a wing - will kill far less of inexperienced blokes. Later introduce the slanted air intakes, a-la Tornado/F-15.
- Jaguar with 1 jet engine (afterburning Spey, or RB.199, or M-53, or F-404), wing with 'dog tooth', updated electronics. An affordable alternative to F-16, Mirage 2000, MiG-23/29 (= interesting for countries buying at 'both sides', like India); appealing to countries wanting to replace their aging Mirage III, F-5 or MiG-21 fleets (again India)

 

[tomo pauk]

Rolls Royce 'militarizes' their 'R' engine, instead going with P.V.12. (future Merlin)
The Mk.I series does 1200 HP at 15000 ft on 2600 rpm; available in 1935. Aircraft:
- Battle - 290 mph
- Henley - 310 mph
- Hurricane - 330 mph
- Spitfire - 375 mph
'Mk. III' - rated for 100 oct (1500 HP at 9000 ft)
'Mk.X' - 2-speed version, 1300 HP for take off on 87 oct, 1500 HP on 100 oct. (for Wellington, Whitley; Fulmar doing 310 mph)
'Mk.XII' - 27000 rpm version, high-set S/C gearing, 1200 HP at 17500 ft, 1500 HP at 12000 ft (= Hurricane IIa does 345 mph, Spitfire II does 385 mph, or 375 mph with BP glass, Beaufighter 330 mph)
'Mk.XX' - Hooker's improved intake; fully supercharged for 1400 HP at 18000 ft and 1600 HP at 13000 ft, moderately supercharged for 1600 HP at 10000 ft and 1750 HP at 5000 ft (Spitfire III does 410 mph, Mosquito prototype recon 400 mph, Fulmar II 330 mph)
...
Consequence also being that Bristol now sees no point in making the Taurus, but instead switches to development of Hercules around the clock...

 

[Cryhavoc101]

Rolls Royce 'militarizes' their 'R' engine, instead going with P.V.12. (future Merlin)
The Mk.I series does 1200 HP at 15000 ft on 2600 rpm; available in 1935. Aircraft:
- Battle - 290 mph
- Henley - 310 mph
- Hurricane - 330 mph
- Spitfire - 375 mph
'Mk. III' - rated for 100 oct (1500 HP at 9000 ft)
'Mk.X' - 2-speed version, 1300 HP for take off on 87 oct, 1500 HP on 100 oct. (for Wellington, Whitley; Fulmar doing 310 mph)
'Mk.XII' - 27000 rpm version, high-set S/C gearing, 1200 HP at 17500 ft, 1500 HP at 12000 ft (= Hurricane IIa does 345 mph, Spitfire II does 385 mph, or 375 mph with BP glass, Beaufighter 330 mph)
'Mk.XX' - Hooker's improved intake; fully supercharged for 1400 HP at 18000 ft and 1600 HP at 13000 ft, moderately supercharged for 1600 HP at 10000 ft and 1750 HP at 5000 ft (Spitfire III does 410 mph, Mosquito prototype recon 400 mph, Fulmar II 330 mph)
...
Consequence also being that Bristol now sees no point in making the Taurus, but instead switches to development of Hercules around the clock...

Love it

If they can avoid the 'ramp head' issues that put back development by at least 18 months or more when Albert George Elliott - then Chief Engineer at RR 'inflicted' his unproven ramp head design on the as yet unproven PV-12.

As the linked document suggests a better approach would have been a parallel development with an example of PV-12 one with flat head and one with a ramp head - meaning that when the issues with the Ramp head arose the flat head version could continue to be developed and the Ramp head design parked until it can be perfected (OTL by Packard in 1941) and then applied to the design.

 

[Peg Leg Pom]

Good. The 'Sea Battle' was certainly a missed opportunity.

The POD

Early in 1938 for publicity shot Fairey take a prototype Battle and fit it with a dummy torpedo and arrestor hook. The press latches on to this as does the Admiralty and later that week Fairey receive a visit by a senior naval officer and are told "We'll take 100 on approval, when can you deliver".

 

[tomo pauk]

Love it

If they can avoid the 'ramp head' issues that put back development by at least 18 months or more when Albert George Elliott - then Chief Engineer at RR 'inflicted' his unproven ramp head design on the as yet unproven PV-12.

As the linked document suggests a better approach would have been a parallel development with an example of PV-12 one with flat head and one with a ramp head - meaning that when the issues with the Ramp head arose the flat head version could continue to be developed and the Ramp head design parked until it can be perfected (OTL by Packard in 1941) and then applied to the design.

IIRC there never was a ramp-head Merlin in service.
Packard was 1st to introduce in production a 2-piece block (on V-1650-1, aka Merlin 28), and also the bigger 1st stage impeller (12 in vs. 11.5) on the 2-stage V-1650-3 Merlins - all as devised by RR.
Packard making the big RR V12 under licence instead of Merlin can also provide:
- P-40 that goes 380-400 mph
- early (1942) P-51 going 430 mph easy-peasy
- stick two on P-70 = useful & ealy night fighter instead of the so-so OTL machine

Rolls Royce pushing all-in with big V12 also removes the Exe from picture - less resources eventually wasted. There is no pressing need for Vulture to be developed, again saves resources. A 2-stage big V12 is also a fall-back engine for aircraft using Sabre...

The POD

Early in 1938 for publicity shot Fairey take a prototype Battle and fit it with a dummy torpedo and arrestor hook. The press latches on to this as does the Admiralty and later that week Fairey receive a visit by a senior naval officer and are told "We'll take 100 on approval, when can you deliver".

Works for me.

 

[Count of Crisco]

A Reggiane re.2000 Falco of the Virginian army air corps pictured shortly after its delivery in 1940. Eighty of the planes being ordered the year prior, however Italian entry into the second world war would see only twenty three planes delivered. Virginia would then decide to build their own fighter based on this design powered by a license built Vodham VI-12t, which began production in 1942 as the Eagle. Over three hundred of these fighters would then be built, with production ending in 1948.

 

[tomo pauk]

A no "BMW 801 scenario".
As prototype, the Fw 190 gets the Jumo 211 (no DB 601 either since RLM still favors Bf 110), taking the 1st flight at June 1939, as per OTL. Despite a bit less engine power, the aircraft performs as well as the Bf 109E, mostly due to better radiator layout and less draggy U/C when retracted. Pilots like the unrestricted field of view, high rate of roll and widely-set undercarriage. More fuel (550L initially, late down to 525 due to self-sealing tanks introduction) and less drag provide far better range and endurance than what 109E does. The 109E climbs better, though, since it is lighter, so RLM continues with 109, while also green lights the Fw 190.
How the prototype of this 190 might've looked:

 

[Driftless]

What happens with the Allison V-1710 if it has a good mechanical supercharger in its early days of development?

 

[tomo pauk]

What happens with the Allison V-1710 if it has a good mechanical supercharger in its early days of development?

Stuff for a thread of it's own

My, very superficial, take on this. In mid-1941, the OTL V-1710-39 generation (the -39 was widely used on P-40 D & E, plus Mustang I) gets a 10.5 in S/C. That makes V-1710 on par with Merlin XII and DB 601N. More importantly, such V-1710s can propel the P-40 to 370+ mph, the P-39 to 380+ mph, and Mustang to 400++ mph. All before Pearl Harbor.
Carry on with development of basic engine (strengthened crankcase & crankshaft, better piston rings, intake manifold etc, as per OTL) so the ever higher boost can be used, so the lower level performance is also on par.
RAF uses Mustangs to cover Typhoons and Whirlwinds.
RAF, having P-40s in MTO, says 'there is no real need to send Spitfires there'.
The USAAF sees the light, and soes not drag their feet with P-51 program but orders them from NAA (no A-36); Dallas is second source by late 1942. Drop tank outfitted.
1st combat sorties are made in North Africa, the P-51s fare much better than P-38s. Even the P-40s are better.

A 2-stage version is flight tested in early 1942, and installed on P-40 and P-51 by mid-1942. The P-40 in question makes 400 mph, the P-51 430+ mph. Engine cannot fit on P39. USAAF orders P-40s and P-51s, P-39 is to be phase off, Bell will be licence producing P-51s.
1st combat sorties of new P-51s take place in June 1943 from East Anglia, two FGs (~50 aircraft). Within the week LW halts rocket-lobbing Bf 110s operation, 1-engined fighters fare a bit better. By July, another 2 groups are in war in ETO, with 6 FGs operating earlier models in the MTO, and 3 groups in Pacific.

 

[Cryhavoc101]

IIRC there never was a ramp-head Merlin in service.

That was my point - they squandered several years and half a million quid (in 1933-36 money) when a single production merlin cost £3000 each

The only Ramp Head Merlin's that reached service were the first 170 Merlin's that were fitted to the first Battles after that RR ditched the design - having been unable to overcome the reliability issues and pretty much built a Merlin sized Kestrel.

Packard was 1st to introduce in production a 2-piece block (on V-1650-1, aka Merlin 28), and also the bigger 1st stage impeller (12 in vs. 11.5) on the 2-stage V-1650-3 Merlins - all as devised by RR.

Arguably the first true PV-12/Merlin's where the ones built by Packard in 1941 and by RR from 1942 - before that they were effectively upsized 27L Kestrel's (which still served admirably and were called 'Merlin's' - but their DNA was Kestrel not PV-12

 

[tomo pauk]

...
The only Ramp Head Merlin's that reached service were the first 170 Merlin's that were fitted to the first Battles after that RR ditched the design - having been unable to overcome the reliability issues and pretty much built a Merlin sized Kestrel.

Indeed, you're right.

Arguably the first true PV-12/Merlin's where the ones built by Packard in 1941 and by RR from 1942 - before that they were effectively upsized 27L Kestrel's (which still served admirably and were called 'Merlin's' - but their DNA was Kestrel not PV-12

I still regard any Merlin as a true Merlin

 

[Cryhavoc101]

I still regard any Merlin as a true Merlin

As is right and proper

 

[HexWargamer]

OTL - In 1929 Frank Whittle's thesis on pure jet engines was published, and sent to the achnowledged expert on turbines, AA Griffith at the Royal Aircraft Establishment for comment. After pointing out an error in Whittle's mathematics, he went on to deride the entire concept, saying that the centrifugal compressor Whittle used would be impractical for aircraft use due to its large frontal area, and that the use of the jet exhaust directly for power would be extremely inefficient. AA Griffith had his own ideas of an in-line turbo-prop jet design. This results in 5 lost years ... after which Whittle's ideas are moved forward on a virtual shoe-string by private investors .. Griffith's ideas proceed even slower, perhaps because his negative report tainted all jets in the eyes of the Air Ministry ...

ATL - Griffith corrects Whittle's error and realises that his pure jet concept will work as described. However now he has done the same calculations in his own in-ine turbo-compressor jet he realises that it should perform even better. His enthusiatic report of the potential low weight high power engine capable of taking a fighter to the hight of a bomber in just a few miniutes is siezed upon by those fearing that 'the bomber will always get through'.

The Air Ministry send Griffith, Whittle and £1million to Rolls Royce where they are told to produce a fighter capable of taking off with 10 miniutes notice, catching and shooting down bombers that have crossed the coast at 30,000 feet and 400mph, before they reach London and all within 10 years. They do so with 2 years to spare .... by 1939, hundreds of British jet fighters are in servive...

[of course it's not all just about speed == but once you have the in-line compressor jet, building a highly maneauverable fighter around such a high power to weight ratio engine is 'easy' ... say something like the MIG-15]

 

[Draconis]

Stuff for a thread of it's own
The USAAF sees the light, and soes not drag their feet with P-51 program but orders them from NAA (no A-36); Dallas is second source by late 1942. Drop tank outfitted.
1st combat sorties are made in North Africa, the P-51s fare much better than P-38s. Even the P-40s are better.

If Allison had developed a good two stage supercharger or even a decent two-speed supercharger for the V-1710 they would have been putting them in the P-38s too. Quite likely before the P-51s would have got them. Would've worked pretty good too. With a little loss of very high altitude(above 25K feet) performance.

 

[Cryhavoc101]

OTL - In 1929 Frank Whittle's thesis on pure jet engines was published, and sent to the achnowledged expert on turbines, AA Griffith at the Royal Aircraft Establishment for comment. After pointing out an error in Whittle's mathematics, he went on to deride the entire concept, saying that the centrifugal compressor Whittle used would be impractical for aircraft use due to its large frontal area, and that the use of the jet exhaust directly for power would be extremely inefficient. AA Griffith had his own ideas of an in-line turbo-prop jet design. This results in 5 lost years ... after which Whittle's ideas are moved forward on a virtual shoe-string by private investors .. Griffith's ideas proceed even slower, perhaps because his negative report tainted all jets in the eyes of the Air Ministry ...

ATL - Griffith corrects Whittle's error and realises that his pure jet concept will work as described. However now he has done the same calculations in his own in-ine turbo-compressor jet he realises that it should perform even better. His enthusiatic report of the potential low weight high power engine capable of taking a fighter to the hight of a bomber in just a few miniutes is siezed upon by those fearing that 'the bomber will always get through'.

The Air Ministry send Griffith, Whittle and £1million to Rolls Royce where they are told to produce a fighter capable of taking off with 10 miniutes notice, catching and shooting down bombers that have crossed the coast at 30,000 feet and 400mph, before they reach London and all within 10 years. They do so with 2 years to spare .... by 1939, hundreds of British jet fighters are in servive...

[of course it's not all just about speed == but once you have the in-line compressor jet, building a highly maneauverable fighter around such a high power to weight ratio engine is 'easy' ... say something like the MIG-1]

 

[ArtosStark]

OTL - In 1929 Frank Whittle's thesis on pure jet engines was published, and sent to the achnowledged expert on turbines, AA Griffith at the Royal Aircraft Establishment for comment. After pointing out an error in Whittle's mathematics, he went on to deride the entire concept, saying that the centrifugal compressor Whittle used would be impractical for aircraft use due to its large frontal area, and that the use of the jet exhaust directly for power would be extremely inefficient. AA Griffith had his own ideas of an in-line turbo-prop jet design. This results in 5 lost years ... after which Whittle's ideas are moved forward on a virtual shoe-string by private investors .. Griffith's ideas proceed even slower, perhaps because his negative report tainted all jets in the eyes of the Air Ministry ...

ATL - Griffith corrects Whittle's error and realises that his pure jet concept will work as described. However now he has done the same calculations in his own in-ine turbo-compressor jet he realises that it should perform even better. His enthusiatic report of the potential low weight high power engine capable of taking a fighter to the hight of a bomber in just a few miniutes is siezed upon by those fearing that 'the bomber will always get through'.

The Air Ministry send Griffith, Whittle and £1million to Rolls Royce where they are told to produce a fighter capable of taking off with 10 miniutes notice, catching and shooting down bombers that have crossed the coast at 30,000 feet and 400mph, before they reach London and all within 10 years. They do so with 2 years to spare .... by 1939, hundreds of British jet fighters are in servive...

[of course it's not all just about speed == but once you have the in-line compressor jet, building a highly maneauverable fighter around such a high power to weight ratio engine is 'easy' ... say something like the MIG-15]

I think this definitely would have helped but AIUI the alloys necessary to make jet engines feasible were not quite there until somewhere in the 1939-41 period.

 

[Peg Leg Pom]

The Vickers Supermarine Firestorm of 1939

 

[HexWargamer]

I think this definitely would have helped but AIUI the alloys necessary to make jet engines feasible were not quite there until somewhere in the 1939-41 period.

Yep, quite correct = special nickel steel needed for the exhause turbine. But the Nazi's were forced to work without that for their jet PLUS the Griffith in-line can be run slower and at lower exhaust temp. (where the special steels are needed) than the Whittle .. if the concept is being worked on, the steels will be researched that much earlier (yes they were doing so for exhaust driven turbo chargers, but not same level of urgency in the eary 1930's) ..

 

[tomo pauk]

... AA Griffith had his own ideas of an in-line turbo-prop jet design. This results in 5 lost years ... after which Whittle's ideas are moved forward on a virtual shoe-string by private investors .. Griffith's ideas proceed even slower, perhaps because his negative report tainted all jets in the eyes of the Air Ministry ...

ATL - Griffith corrects Whittle's error and realises that his pure jet concept will work as described. However now he has done the same calculations in his own in-ine turbo-compressor jet he realises that it should perform even better. His enthusiatic report of the potential low weight high power engine capable of taking a fighter to the hight of a bomber in just a few miniutes is siezed upon by those fearing that 'the bomber will always get through'.

(my bold)
Please - what kind of the engine is denoted is denoted in bold there?

 

[Peg Leg Pom]

Presumably a prop hung on the front of an Axial Flow Gas Turbine.