Can it Carry Bombs?

[tchizek]

Yes I have always thought that jet recon would have had more impact.

I did have one thought yesterday after I logged off, I would expect the Allied air forces to begin stationing high altitude fighters along the good recon paths. With radar warning it is fairly likely that Mosquitoes or P-38L or later would be able to intercept even a jet.

I would expect to see this soon after these high altitude fast radar tracks start showing up above interesting locations.

 

[The Dean]

I did have one thought yesterday after I logged off, I would expect the Allied air forces to begin stationing high altitude fighters along the good recon paths. With radar warning it is fairly likely that Mosquitoes or P-38L or later would be able to intercept even a jet.

I would expect to see this soon after these high altitude fast radar tracks start showing up above interesting locations.

The Ar234's "top" speed of 460mph was within the grasp of several piston engined fighters and certainly Meteor F1s and F3s. Standing patrols were however an uneconomical method of deploying fighters. Strangely the Ar234 recce flights over the Normandy beachhead in OTL were not detected by radar. Perhaps the significance of the trace of one very fast high altitude contact was dismissed as a false reading on the equipment.

 

[tchizek]

The Ar234's "top" speed of 460mph was within the grasp of several piston engined fighters and certainly Meteor F1s and F3s. Standing patrols were however an uneconomical method of deploying fighters. Strangely the Ar234 recce flights over the Normandy beachhead in OTL were not detected by radar. Perhaps the significance of the trace of one very fast high altitude contact was dismissed as a false reading on the equipment.

Yes standing patrols are uneconomical but all of war is uneconomical, the Allies have fighters to spare and once (if) they figure out that these high speed high altatude traces are not false readings it makes sense to try to intercept.

My point with the standing patrols is that if they have to take off and climb to 30K the fighters are going to have more trouble catching the AR234s. Where as if the fighters are already at 30+K they can be vectored in to catch them even if the base speed difference is greater than you indicate.

I had thought that the 460mph was for a fully loaded bomber version but the references I can find don't indicate a difference between the Recon and Bomber versions...

 

[The Dean]

Yes standing patrols are uneconomical but all of war is uneconomical, the Allies have fighters to spare and once (if) they figure out that these high speed high altatude traces are not false readings it makes sense to try to intercept.

My point with the standing patrols is that if they have to take off and climb to 30K the fighters are going to have more trouble catching the AR234s. Where as if the fighters are already at 30+K they can be vectored in to catch them even if the base speed difference is greater than you indicate.

I had thought that the 460mph was for a fully loaded bomber version but the references I can find don't indicate a difference between the Recon and Bomber versions...

Sure thing, you're right the Allies would have figured it out and put up interceptors. They might even have risked sending their Jets up to protect a valuable asset. I always thought the figure of 460mph was a maximum speed, rather like 305mph was the B24's top speed but it cruised at 215 with a fully loaded maximum of 260.

 

[Deleted member 1487]

They would need to know about the intruder. TTL the radar doesn't seem to pick them up, which seems strange. But yes, there should be something that can catch the jet recon. Question: what range did the meteor or other allied fighters have? Could they actually escort bombers, or would they be out of fuel?

 

[The Dean]

They would need to know about the intruder. TTL the radar doesn't seem to pick them up, which seems strange. But yes, there should be something that can catch the jet recon. Question: what range did the meteor or other allied fighters have? Could they actually escort bombers, or would they be out of fuel?

All of the first generation Jet aircraft had pretty limited range. To begin with only a flight time of less than one hour! Bomber escort was not an option at their stage of development, they were most suited as interceptors. The Meteor had a range of just over 500 miles about the same as the Me 262, if the Vampire and F80 Shooting Star made it into service they had ranges of 1,000 miles and 1,200 miles. So more like a Spitfire's range than a Mustang's.

 

[esl]

The Ar 234B could reach 460mph @ > 9km altitude. What allied plane could do that in 1944?

Mustang could only do 450mph @ 28000 ft.
Mustang could only do 438mph @ 33000 ft.
Mustang could only do 390-400mph @ 38000 ft.

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/mustang/mustangtest.html

P-47 could do 431mph @ 31,000 feet
P-47 could do 403mph @ 38,000 feet
P-47N could do 467mph @ 32,000 feet, but could not fly above that altitude
P-47D could do 418mph @ 36,000 feet, but could not fly above that altitude

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/p-47/p-47.html



Reportedly Spitfire XIV could do 445mph @ 38,000 feet.
http://www.fourthfightergroup.com/eagles/spit14pt.html

So none of the Allied planes could catch the Ar 234 in 1944.

It looks like Spitfire 21 could reach 467mph @ 38,000 feet with oxgene tanks.

However Spitfire 21 had alot of problems and was not operational until Jan 1945.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superm...Merlin_powered_variants)#Mk_21_.28type_356.29
Historically it was planned by 1945 to have four engined Ar 234C in production which was estimated to reach ~ 550mph @ altitude [>9km]. It was 'hoped' that production would reach 500 per month by the end of that year.

Meteor III could do 495mph while earlier Mk I could do 415mph while altitude topped out at 40k. As a rule jets don't lose top speed at altitude in the manor in which prop planes do.

 

[tchizek]

The Ar 234B could reach 460mph @ > 9km altitude. What allied plane could do that in 1944?

Mustang could only do 450mph @ 28000 ft.
Mustang could only do 438mph @ 33000 ft.
Mustang could only do 390-400mph @ 38000 ft.

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/mustang/mustangtest.html

P-47 could do 431mph @ 31,000 feet
P-47 could do 403mph @ 38,000 feet
P-47N could do 467mph @ 32,000 feet, but could not fly above that altitude
P-47D could do 418mph @ 36,000 feet, but could not fly above that altitude

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/p-47/p-47.html

Well yes but I was doing some checking in my references and found that the AR234 had a max service ceiling of 10km (~32K feet). And was ~15mph slower at that altitude, the 461mph speed was reported at 8km altitude (~26K feet).

I also dug up similar numbers to what you were showing above, which would seem to indicate that the only way the allied piston engine (or jets for that matter - the Meteor was only about rated at 410mph at 40K feet) was to be above it and dive to catch it.

Which was why I was suggesting standing patrols - the P-47D, P-51H, and P-38L all service ceilings well above 36K, with a 6-10K altitude advantage they could all gain the 50-70mph needed to catch the AR234...but in order to do that they had to be in the right position and each aircraft would only get one pass.

Plus all of these fighters had time in the air in excess of 10 hours, so the standing patrols could be done with few aircraft change overs.

Historically it was planned by 1945 to have four engined Ar 234C in production which was estimated to reach ~ 550mph @ altitude [>9km]. It was 'hoped' that production would reach 500 per month by the end of that year.

The problem here is that 550mph is getting into shock-stall range unless the designer has a grasp of the behavior of the air at near Mach speeds the aircraft will be destroyed when it hits that speed. Witness all of the problems that the US had with near Mach dives in the high performance fighters in the middle of the war.

 

[The Dean]

You are missing the point of the term maximum speed besides it could not be maintained constantly without either running out of fuel rapidly or overheating engines. Looking at sterile tables of performance figures does not give an accurate picture of an aircraft's combat capability. Some of the very latest machines, Typhoon, Lightening II and Raptor are no faster than Phantoms, Eagles, Flankers or Fulcrums. A difference of a few mph isn't the deciding factor.

 

[tchizek]

You are missing the point of the term maximum speed besides it could not be maintained constantly without either running out of fuel rapidly or overheating engines. Looking at sterile tables of performance figures does not give an accurate picture of an aircraft's combat capability. Some of the very latest machines, Typhoon, Lightening II and Raptor are no faster than Phantoms, Eagles, Flankers or Fulcrums. A difference of a few mph isn't the deciding factor.

No I am not missing that point, the point to maximum speed at a given altitude is that if they (the target aircraft) is aware they are being tracked they will accelerate to the max speed, plus dive. So the chase aircraft needs to be close to as fast.

Also I am well aware that in real life there is up to 50mph speed difference (plus or minus) between the listed max speed of a class of aircraft and its actual top speed.

Differences can include how careful the mechanics are about waxing the aircraft, you can gain/lose 10mph just on a paint job. How loaded the aircraft is, test runs are almost always light but a live aircraft that is low on fuel will gain 5-10mph. A good pilot can gain additional speed by trimming the aircraft carefully. Headwind/tailwind makes a big difference (but this difference will not make much of a difference in a chase scenario).

The point to comparing max speeds at a given altitude is that the two numbers are comparable, two aircraft with a 50mph difference in stated max speed are likely to have a comparable difference in real max speed.

It gives a defined comparison as opposed to an opinion about what the different speeds are.

 

[esl]

The point to comparing max speeds at a given altitude is that the two numbers are comparable, two aircraft with a 50mph difference in stated max speed are likely to have a comparable difference in real max speed.

It gives a defined comparison as opposed to an opinion about what the different speeds are.

That was exactly what I was after. Far to much of AH posts are mostly opinion punctuated with occasional facts often taken out of context. There is always an unaviodadly baised in nature. You need to look to tests and stats inorder to arrive at a more balanced POV. At these altitudes the Ar 234 would have been very difficult to interecept, but not impossible, which is what you want for a recon plane. Most of these piston fighters would take 1/2 an hour to get upto those altitude , at which point the jet would be just too far out of range. Jets atleast are alot better at climbing. I gather post war models of the Meteor could climb to altitude in just 9 minutes.

The Germans had the most advanced windtunnels in the world at that time and were becoming more and more aware of the need for faster jets to employ swept wings witness the designs of P-1101 and Ta 183 etc. Its not improbable to expect an Ar-234 C with increased swept wings.

 

[alt_historian]

That was exactly what I was after. Far to much of AH posts are mostly opinion punctuated with occasional facts often taken out of context. There is always an unaviodadly baised in nature. You need to look to tests and stats inorder to arrive at a more balanced POV. At these altitudes the Ar 234 would have been very difficult to interecept, but not impossible, which is what you want for a recon plane. Most of these piston fighters would take 1/2 an hour to get upto those altitude , at which point the jet would be just too far out of range. Jets atleast are alot better at climbing. I gather post war models of the Meteor could climb to altitude in just 9 minutes...

But his point is that the planes could be patrolling at altitude around important sites... then when the 234 is detected, they would increase speed then dive. Those two things should do it in terms of giving them enough speed to make a pass.`

 

[esl]

But his point is that the planes could be patrolling at altitude around important sites... then when the 234 is detected, they would increase speed then dive. Those two things should do it in terms of giving them enough speed to make a pass.`

The problem is simple. That could only work for a point defense situation protecting a fixed location, because the number of fighters you'd need to cover an front line during day light hours would have been astronomical...especially if your only trying to intercept a lone recon jet.

http://www.pilotfriend.com/photo_albums/timeline/ww2/Arado%20Ar%20234%20Blitz.htm

Shows the C model would get up to 530mph and 11km service ceiling.

 

[Douglas]

Just thought I'd pop in and mention that one of the (alleged) reasons that Speer was able to tell Hitler no was because they were...intimate friends.

 

[Riain]

The Meteor-Ar234 situation is probably a lot like the Mosquito-piston fighter a year earlier or the V1-piston fighter in 1944. The fighters just don't have a margin of performance to make intercepts exept in the most advantageous circumstances. Certainly not a ground launch scenario. However I'd think an F3 Meteor with long nacelles (mach 0.8 limit, the 262's limit was m 0.84) and 2400lb Derwent IVs could put a cramp on Ar234 missions once tactics were worked out, perhaps standing patrols and early intercepts before 'draggy' bombs were dropped and the Ar234 couldn't hit 460mph.

Just as an aside, the prospect of jet vs jet combat in WW2 was tantalisingly close, more's the pity.

 

[whatisinaname]

It's a very orginal idea. I like it very much.

But would't Russians make a lot of dummy tanks, trucks, and artillery to deceive German reconnaissance(IIRC this should be standard Red Army practice)? Your ATL outcome of Operation Bagration might be too optimistic for German.

Hi Jonathan Kan

The size of the build up was too big for the Russians to hide.
The outcome, come from Hitler allowing more freedom of movement.

Thanks for the support and comments.

Whatisinaname

 

[whatisinaname]

Here you have another delighted reader.

Hi Kurt_Steiner

Welcome

Whatisinaname

 

[whatisinaname]

Hi all

Instead of trying to reply to you one at a time, I thought I would do it this way.

The Ar-234B will be replaced by the C version in 1945, the C had just over 20% more range than the B and would be as fast at full power as a Me-262.

Full power was normally used to exit, but several times (in OTL) during 1944/45 Ar-234B1 recons were bounced by allied fighters and managed to get away.

Radar was not that good (in 1944/45) at tracking a single high speed aircraft travelling at over 400mph at 30,000 feet, so it would be very hard to intercept a recon aircraft over the UK and impossible over France (no Radar).

The F3 would address this, but never stop it completly....

Thanks for all the comments etc, they are great

Whatisinaname

 

[tchizek]

The problem is simple. That could only work for a point defense situation protecting a fixed location, because the number of fighters you'd need to cover an front line during day light hours would have been astronomical...especially if your only trying to intercept a lone recon jet.

http://www.pilotfriend.com/photo_albums/timeline/ww2/Arado Ar 234 Blitz.htm

Shows the C model would get up to 530mph and 11km service ceiling.

Except you don't patrol the whole front lines, who cares if the Germans see a local offensive? By the time they respond the offensive has already occurred. Battalion, Regiment, Division level offensives we don't care if the Germans see these...they are prepared and executed within a couple of days at the most, not enough time for the Germans to restructure their forces to respond.

The Allies would put a standing patrol over Corp/Army/Army Corp level offensive preparations. And there are lots of Allied fighters in the air at all times anyway, what is needed is the radar operators to recognize the trace and vector all available aircraft to intercept.

It might take several squadrons worth of fighters to do it but I think some AR234 flights would get knocked down. Thats with piston engine fighters, once the allies have jets in the air, it becomes much harder.


As for the AR234C...well that was projected, and as I said earlier the difference between mid/high 400mph speeds and mid/high 500mph speeds is actually a huge jump aerodynamically and propulsion wise. I would rather stick with known figures rather than projected figures for an aircraft that was not built.

 

[whatisinaname]

Except you don't patrol the whole front lines, who cares if the Germans see a local offensive? By the time they respond the offensive has already occurred. Battalion, Regiment, Division level offensives we don't care if the Germans see these...they are prepared and executed within a couple of days at the most, not enough time for the Germans to restructure their forces to respond.

The Allies would put a standing patrol over Corp/Army/Army Corp level offensive preparations. And there are lots of Allied fighters in the air at all times anyway, what is needed is the radar operators to recognize the trace and vector all available aircraft to intercept.

It might take several squadrons worth of fighters to do it but I think some AR234 flights would get knocked down. Thats with piston engine fighters, once the allies have jets in the air, it becomes much harder.


As for the AR234C...well that was projected, and as I said earlier the difference between mid/high 400mph speeds and mid/high 500mph speeds is actually a huge jump aerodynamically and propulsion wise. I would rather stick with known figures rather than projected figures for an aircraft that was not built.

Hi tchizek

Please note that several Ar-234Cs were built and flown, see link - http://rareaircraf1.greyfalcon.us/picturesi/aa54.jpg

Whatisinaname