Alternate History Combat Aircraft

ctayfor

Monthly Donor
For some reason the edit function doesn't seem to be working on the above.

I was going to add, imagine if say, Packard or another allied engine manufacturer had bought a licence to manufacture the DB605 from Daimler Benz in the late '30s and it had wound up on the original P51... Or as an option in Canadian-built Hurricanes or even Mosquitos or Lancasters.
 
Last edited:
If I remember the data/info correctly, the difference in performance is more related to the Messerspit is not loaded with ammo, for example. Also, the DB engine is the DB601 or 605, not 602.
 

ctayfor

Monthly Donor
The real advantage might have been the fuel injection for dogfighting. The DB 600 series and the various marks of Merlin were more or less neck and neck through the war as far as I can tell.
 
For some reason the edit function doesn't seem to be working on the above.

I was going to add, imagine if say, Packard or another allied engine manufacturer had bought a licence to manufacture the DB605 from Daimler Benz in the late '30s and it had wound up on the original P51... Or as an option in Canadian-built Hurricanes or even Mosquitos or Lancasters.

DB 605 was 1st used in 1942, so we're probably better with US making the Merlin from the late 1930s on?
It was too bad that Packard was not approached by the British earlier than it was historically so. There is also a thing of the USAAF not having a foresight to jump on the Mustang bandwagon, instead opting to pretending that it does not exist before 1942.

Yep, no true advantage from one over the other to the end.

There was definitely advantage for the Merlin once the 60 series were introduced in service (second half of 1942), mostly due to the new type of supercharger on these Merlins. The late inroduction of the oil de-aerator also hampered the DB 601/603/605 engines, so did the imposed policy of saving the nickel, so the valves were corroding and pre-igniting the air/fuel mixture, with catastrophic consequences.
 
For some reason the edit function doesn't seem to be working on the above.

I was going to add, imagine if say, Packard or another allied engine manufacturer had bought a licence to manufacture the DB605 from Daimler Benz in the late '30s and it had wound up on the original P51... Or as an option in Canadian-built Hurricanes or even Mosquitos or Lancasters.
DB 605 was 1st used in 1942, so we're probably better with US making the Merlin from the late 1930s on?
It was too bad that Packard was not approached by the British earlier than it was historically so. There is also a thing of the USAAF not having a foresight to jump on the Mustang bandwagon, instead opting to pretending that it does not exist before 1942.



There was definitely advantage for the Merlin once the 60 series were introduced in service (second half of 1942), mostly due to the new type of supercharger on these Merlins. The late inroduction of the oil de-aerator also hampered the DB 601/603/605 engines, so did the imposed policy of saving the nickel, so the valves were corroding and pre-igniting the air/fuel mixture, with catastrophic consequences.
I made this for one of the TL-191 threads.
TL-191 P22 -- P51-w-Daimler-Benz DB 605A-1 V-12.png

my thinking was since the Union and Britain were enemies in TL-191 but Imperial Germany was the Union's ally then the Mustang could have had the DB engine in TL-191.
 
The real advantage might have been the fuel injection for dogfighting. The DB 600 series and the various marks of Merlin were more or less neck and neck through the war as far as I can tell.
The 600 was a bad design though, so it was unreliable and less powerful than the Merlin.
 
Is here anyone an aircraft expert ? I wanted to design my own airplanes and helicopters for my TL but... I lack the most essential need for that : actually knowing what an airplane or helicopter need and makes it special or not.

Because I can barely distinguish between "looks American/NATO" or "looks Russian". Possibly visualizations?
 
Is here anyone an aircraft expert ? I wanted to design my own airplanes and helicopters for my TL but... I lack the most essential need for that : actually knowing what an airplane or helicopter need and makes it special or not.

Because I can barely distinguish between "looks American/NATO" or "looks Russian". Possibly visualizations?
I'm an aviation buff but no expert. if you'd like to write up your ideas here, I and some others who frequent this thread can give you our opinions and maybe even draw up something.
A good numbers of aviation buffs hang out here so I think it would be worth your time.
 
Is here anyone an aircraft expert ? I wanted to design my own airplanes and helicopters for my TL but... I lack the most essential need for that : actually knowing what an airplane or helicopter need and makes it special or not.
I'm an aviation buff but no expert. if you'd like to write up your ideas here, I and some others who frequent this thread can give you our opinions and maybe even draw up something.
Same for me, but mostly for piston engined aircraft of the 50s and earlier.
Depending on what you need though, you can just start to ask some questions and we can try to answer them! There are people here who know much more about aerodynamic and engines, for example. A lot also depends on what level of realism you need: Its pretty easy to whip up something that at least looks plausible, but coming up with explicit, realistic performance characteristics is much, much harder.
 
Same for me, but mostly for piston engined aircraft of the 50s and earlier.
Depending on what you need though, you can just start to ask some questions and we can try to answer them! There are people here who know much more about aerodynamic and engines, for example. A lot also depends on what level of realism you need: Its pretty easy to whip up something that at least looks plausible, but coming up with explicit, realistic performance characteristics is much, much harder.
Agree, I can draw up some interesting looking airplanes (well IMHO, interesting) but I have no idea what they're flight characteristics would be like and or if they would be decent or terrible planes to fly.
It bums me out when people ask how fast or some other question about one of my designs and I have to answer with, "no idea". :frown:
 
I agree with @cortz#9 and @Leander.
I attach something that I have been working on, on and off, if nothing else to show how bad I am at this. It is from world where it was decided that the elliptical wing of the Spitfire was too much hassle so they adapted the wing from the proposed Supermarine Type 333. It took until the addition of the Merlin 61 to get it right. I give the Supermarine Vixen Mk 1 which was produced instead of the Spitfire Mk IX (and possibly the VIII).
I would be more than happy if somebody could produce a better picture.
vixen.png
 
Same for me, but mostly for piston engined aircraft of the 50s and earlier.
Depending on what you need though, you can just start to ask some questions and we can try to answer them! There are people here who know much more about aerodynamic and engines, for example. A lot also depends on what level of realism you need: Its pretty easy to whip up something that at least looks plausible, but coming up with explicit, realistic performance characteristics is much, much harder.
Agree, I can draw up some interesting looking airplanes (well IMHO, interesting) but I have no idea what they're flight characteristics would be like and or if they would be decent or terrible planes to fly.
It bums me out when people ask how fast or some other question about one of my designs and I have to answer with, "no idea". :frown:
I agree with @cortz#9 and @Leander.
I attach something that I have been working on, on and off, if nothing else to show how bad I am at this. It is from world where it was decided that the elliptical wing of the Spitfire was too much hassle so they adapted the wing from the proposed Supermarine Type 333. It took until the addition of the Merlin 61 to get it right. I give the Supermarine Vixen Mk 1 which was produced instead of the Spitfire Mk IX (and possibly the VIII).
I would be more than happy if somebody could produce a better picture.
View attachment 715518

So for a stealth bomber, I have my reality-plausibility needs for the alternatehistory filled by this :

https://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/russia/pak-da.htm

https://military-history.fandom.com/wiki/PAK_DA

Don't know which is the actually schematics but the Russians are of course not of the mood to share if not by accident, as far as I know it only happened once but it was an helicopter not a bomber or any aircraft.

UAV wise, a future stealth variation of these guys primaly built for combat, recon and bombing together. Or maybe a combo of the two as the situation in what in writing is grim.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elbit_Hermes_900


For transport I will probably have to again to rely on Russian stuff.


The main variation to this vehicles would be to be the capacity of going up like the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockh...er_(thrust_vectoring_nozzle_and_lift_fan).PNG

in order not to rely on a launch pad or airstrips since the scenario I envision is one of limited space. Also requiring little to no maintance, which is essential since "yeah we have a shiny high tech gear but it's a pain in the ass to repair if it is gets broken".
 
So for a stealth bomber, I have my reality-plausibility needs for the alternatehistory filled by this :

https://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/russia/pak-da.htm

https://military-history.fandom.com/wiki/PAK_DA

Don't know which is the actually schematics but the Russians are of course not of the mood to share if not by accident, as far as I know it only happened once but it was an helicopter not a bomber or any aircraft.

UAV wise, a future stealth variation of these guys primaly built for combat, recon and bombing together. Or maybe a combo of the two as the situation in what in writing is grim.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elbit_Hermes_900


For transport I will probably have to again to rely on Russian stuff.


The main variation to this vehicles would be to be the capacity of going up like the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockh...er_(thrust_vectoring_nozzle_and_lift_fan).PNG

in order not to rely on a launch pad or airstrips since the scenario I envision is one of limited space. Also requiring little to no maintance, which is essential since "yeah we have a shiny high tech gear but it's a pain in the ass to repair if it is gets broken".
So you want a futuristic Russian stealth multi-role aircraft with VTOL capability?
 
This is ny first attempt at making alternate combat airfcraft so here we go this is an alternate bomber used by the russian republic in TWR:
20220204_140738.jpg

A russian republic B-29 bomber (many are given to the russian republic by the us as they are switching to B-36 and B-47) that was used during the siberian war and the russian-soviet war.
 
This is ny first attempt at making alternate combat airfcraft so here we go this is an alternate bomber used by the russian republic in TWR:
View attachment 716090
A russian republic B-29 bomber (many are given to the russian republic by the us as they are switching to B-36 and B-47) that was used during the siberian war and the russian-soviet war.
Nice.
 
Top