Yep. That aircraft is approximately where the main road in from Spain is now by the look of it.Is that the Rock of Gibraltar in the background?
Yep. That aircraft is approximately where the main road in from Spain is now by the look of it.Is that the Rock of Gibraltar in the background?
ITTL there is noting to stop the Air Ministry issuing a specification of a heavy fighter powered by 2 Merlin engines in 1934 which flies in 1936 and enters service with the RAF in 1938. Unless @Just Leo can provide a plausible reason why "We wouldn't have the technology," to paraphrase Oscar Goldman.
More interestingly, is there any reason that the sequence with the Beaufort and Beaufighter had to happen like it did? As I understand it the Beaufort was a revised Blenheim with bigger engines and some structural refinements - and the Beaufighter was much the same thing done to the Beaufort. What if they'd gone straight from Mercury to Hercules rather than Perseus engines. The two engines were available at roughly the same time, so it isn't a huge stretch to see them jumping straight the Hercules engine. If Coastal Command decide that they need a heavy strike fighter rather than a torpedo bomber then something looking roughly like the OTL Beaufighter isn't inconceivable.The Beaufort was built as an improved Blenheim and the Beaufighter was built out of many Beaufort parts, taking longer than was thought to get it right. The Beaufighter II with Merlin XX was the poorest Beau of all. Nobody liked it. The ATL Beau with Merlin II would be as Goldman stated, poorer, weaker, slower. It might be better to build a Merlin/Whirlwind, or the slowest of all Mosquitoes. Why not an early Hornet?
The Beaufort was a bigger design. Think Do17/Do217.More interestingly, is there any reason that the sequence with the Beaufort and Beaufighter had to happen like it did? As I understand it the Beaufort was a revised Blenheim with bigger engines and some structural refinements - and the Beaufighter was much the same thing done to the Beaufort. What if they'd gone straight from Mercury to Hercules rather than Perseus engines. The two engines were available at roughly the same time, so it isn't a huge stretch to see them jumping straight the Hercules engine. If Coastal Command decide that they need a heavy strike fighter rather than a torpedo bomber then something looking roughly like the OTL Beaufighter isn't inconceivable.
You're not going to bring it all that far forward, but diverting the effort which went into the Beaufort to it should certainly help, and Beaufighters are far more use than Beauforts.
More interestingly, is there any reason that the sequence with the Beaufort and Beaufighter had to happen like it did? As I understand it the Beaufort was a revised Blenheim with bigger engines and some structural refinements - and the Beaufighter was much the same thing done to the Beaufort. What if they'd gone straight from Mercury to Hercules rather than Perseus engines. The two engines were available at roughly the same time, so it isn't a huge stretch to see them jumping straight the Hercules engine. If Coastal Command decide that they need a heavy strike fighter rather than a torpedo bomber then something looking roughly like the OTL Beaufighter isn't inconceivable.
You're not going to bring it all that far forward, but diverting the effort which went into the Beaufort to it should certainly help, and Beaufighters are far more use than Beauforts.
Unless I'm satisfied that there is a very good reason why it can't be done the Merlin and all other engines begun after 1930 IOTL are available a year earlier in this thread.We can build it. We have the technology. We can make it poorer, weaker, slower. There was no Merlin until 1935. The water-cooled PV-12 cracked cylinder heads. The Merlins from Merlin B through Merlin F, as fitted to Hurricane, Spitfire and Battle prototypes were ramp-head trash with more problems than PV-12. In 1938, it becomes just a scramble for production numbers.
It's permissible to bring all the aero engines begun from 1930 onwards IOTL forward by one year. That's either by starting them a year earlier and/or by accelerating their R&D programmes. Service entry even earlier than that is allowed if a plausible reason can be given.
AFAIK the Hurricane and Spitfire took longer than was thought to get right too. The timetable I gave of specification 1934, first flight 1936 and service entry 1938 is exactly the same as the Spitfire and deliberately intended to be so.The Beaufort was built as an improved Blenheim and the Beaufighter was built out of many Beaufort parts, taking longer than was thought to get it right.
Yes and no.The Beaufighter II with Merlin XX was the poorest Beau of all. Nobody liked it. The ATL Beau with Merlin II would be as Goldman stated, poorer, weaker, slower.
A Mosquito entering service in 1937 in place of the Battle and Blenheim is one of my favourite ideas. It will indeed be the slowest of all Mosquitoes. However, it's all relative because they would still be a great improvement over the Battle and Blenheim.It might be better to build a Merlin/Whirlwind, or the slowest of all Mosquitoes.
At first I thought it was a very good idea. However, applying the logic applied by you to an early Beaufighter an early Hornet that would also be poorer, weaker and slower. However, an early Hornet might still be worth having even if it does have less powerful engines.Why not an early Hornet?
It's a fair cop, guv, you've got me bang to rights.The RAF and the AM were making the decisions based on available information regards to need and goals, not the whims of AH.
Possibly Rene 80? Another superalloy.
Maybe, the anecdote was that the firm Whittle was working with was sceptical about it and he had to have a bet with the welder that the stuff could be welded. Whittle won the bet.
Rene 80 and its offsprings were the only "R"s I can think of. The first superalloy was the German Tinidur, used in prototype German jets, too rare for production. Problem is that there are a bunch of qualities to have, and they didn't have enough of them at once. Tinidur became A-286 after the war, with a pinch of Mo. They had a 5 year lead on Nimonic 80, and Nimonic 80a was 4 more years. Funny thing, Mond supplied the Nimonic 80, and also had run the nickel mine in Finland that was a prime source for the Germans. The Germans did not have access to the cornucopia of riches from the Sudbury basin.
It would take me forever to find the book to get the name, but in any event it was a new alloy that British jets needed.
However I wonder how much 'need' there was. I think Whittle could go quite a long way without it, accepting the limitation in temperature etc to get other stuff worked out, perhaps altering the design a bit to make up for the lack of a superalloy. Then once it comes along in 1941 Power Jets chases more power and reliability with an already mature design.
If Merlins are the issue for an earlier Mosquito, the Sharp/Bowyer tome on the Mosquito has mention of two Napier Daggers.
I do have all the bits to do one, but can't find the nacelle rear castings that I got last year!
However if the RAF were flying in May 1940 what they were flying in May 1941... So increasing numbers of Spitfire Vs and Hurricane IIs. No Defiants, Gladiators, Blenheim Is, Battles. It wouldn't have stopped the loss of France,
Would the number of RP aircraft not be far more important that simple number might suggest? I don't think you need many PR Spits or Mosquitoes for even the French high command to know what is happening in time to stop the sickle cut?Which still allows them to be in service during the Battle of France in at least limited numbers. I wonder how 5 Mosquitos would have done attacking the Bridges of the Mass, as even the Battles managed to bring down one of them?