HS 123C: Dedicated Escort Fighter

We know how fast a 1000hp Bf109 would have been, because the early marks were that fast. They were too fast to plink, even before getting into the issue of the MK103 being unable to work in the Bf109 historically and the earlier and bigger MK101 being even less likely to work; the issues wasn't that there wasn't enough space for the barrel to fit between the engine so much as the gun was simply too big to fit in the fuselage of the Bf109. If the Bf109 sacrifices speed to shoehorn the huge cannon somehow in the fuselage sacrificing speed for being able to fly low and slow like the HS129 minus the armor it would be mincemeat for enemy ground fire.

I'm not sure how many times it is needed to repeat:
a) that Hispano engines were with penty of space within the Vee, the DB 601/605/Jumo 211 were not.
b) that an even faster Fw 190 was tried as a tank buster, but with a less accurate rockets and probelmatic (doe to being wing-installed) MK 103

Depends on the quality of pilot necessary. High skilled Bf110 pilots were not expendable for such a limited goal (though they were sacrificed en masse in August 1941 anyway to no gain), marginal pilots who could fly trainers and with it the easy to fly HS123 could be used for such a mission. If the plan is made early enough they could train up the barely adequate recruits on an abbreviated training program for use with ground attack aircraft like the Hs123 where they could afford to be lost in significant numbers. That is what the Luftwaffe did IOTL from 1942 on with the Nachtschlachtgruppen, they took their worst aircraft and pilots and had they fly harassment missions where both the aircraft and pilot were expendable. Payload is less important than accuracy and 450kg of payload is plenty for attacking the radar sites with ground attack dive bombers. Yes multiple hits with a 20mm with wreck even a Sturmovik, but how many of those did the Brits have around radars in 1940? They were retraining the bulk of their low level AAA to defend airfields and cities and issuing Lewis guns to make up the slack because there were not enough to go around of the heavier weapons.
http://ibiblio.org/hyperwar/UN/UK/UK-Defence-UK/UK-DefenseOfUK-IX.html
Plus they'd have dedicated aircraft to napalming/dropping incendiaries and cluster munitions on AAA to suppress/eliminate them and let other aircraft attack the target.

... but then the biplane would've been the best tool vs. the best defensive air force in 1940. That would've been using marginal pilots to knock out the crucial item of the RAF FC network. With napalm that is not invented yet.
We know how well served the Luftwaffe the neglection of training, now let's throw the pilots with small hours into the meat grinder.
The bolded part is wrong is so many ways.
 

Deleted member 1487

I'm not sure how many times it is needed to repeat:
a) that Hispano engines were with penty of space within the Vee, the DB 601/605/Jumo 211 were not.
Prove it. Create a diagram showing the engine space differences and include a MK101 and 103 to scale to show how it would fit in the fuseage of the Me109 and between the engine.

b) that an even faster Fw 190 was tried as a tank buster, but with a less accurate rockets and probelmatic (doe to being wing-installed) MK 103
Rockets are less accurate, but more able to be fired quickly without much aiming from a fast aircraft; even jets could do it, hence why they were desireable for fast aircraft that cannot use cannon for lack of time to aim. Wing installation wouldn't solve the problem either, it was still too fast. MK108s could be used for ground attack against masses of soft targets where aiming wasn't a big deal or shooting at bombers, but they made their aircraft too heavy, unmaneuverable, and slow. See what happened to the Sturmböcke.

... but then the biplane would've been the best tool vs. the best defensive air force in 1940. That would've been using marginal pilots to knock out the crucial item of the RAF FC network. With napalm that is not invented yet.
We know how well served the Luftwaffe the neglection of training, now let's throw the pilots with small hours into the meat grinder.
The bolded part is wrong is so many ways.
I've already demonstrate in post 3 or 4 that the Germans have a primitive version of napalm that they already had used in Spain, Poland, and France. Yes it would have been fine had the Luftwaffe thought to do what I'm suggesting and understood how important and vulnerable the radar network was. German pilot training was too much for the demands of war in 1940 and too little after 1942, but for easy to fly biplanes using poor pilot material in expendable aircraft they could afford those losses. They did the same thing with the Nachtschlachtgruppen IOTL after 1942.
 

Deleted member 1487

Perhaps in terms of the cannon firing figher-bomber you're looking at the Hurricane IID for inspiration:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vickers_S
Two underwing guns, mounted one beneath each wing panel each in conformal gun pods, were fitted to Hawker Hurricane fighters which were issued to No. 6 Squadron RAF. They served in North Africa from mid-1942 where they achieved considerable success; claims included 148 tanks hit, of which 47 were destroyed, plus nearly 200 other vehicles. However, they suffered heavy losses, mainly to ground fire (the Hurricanes were poorly protected) and also lacked effectiveness against the Tiger tank. In 1944, the aircraft served in the Far East, mainly firing HE ammunition against road and river transports.

Tests in the Far East showed a high level of accuracy, with an average of 25% of shots fired at tanks striking the target.

  • Weapons of comparable role, performance and era
  • Bordkanone BK 3,7, 37-mm the closest German equivalent used by the WW II Luftwaffe

The Hurricane was just a different design of aircraft than the Me109, so couldn't simply mount two BK37s, let alone two MK101/103s, in wing mounts. The Hurricane was just designed with bigger, sturdier wings, but even then 75% of shots were misses and losses were very high to ground fire due to the compromised speed and maneuverability. Tomo, you complain about my heartlessness for HS123 pilots against radar sites in 1940, but you're proposing some at least as dangerous for the pilot and aircraft with the Me109-Bordkanone combo assuming it would even work. The most they ever successfully used was underwing pod mounted MK108s with the late G-series Me109s.
 
I'm looking at Lagg-3-37 as inspiration. I don't recall suggesting installing two of the MK 101/103/BK 3,7 on the 109 wings; Stuka is another story.

The NS-37 was 80 cm longer than the MK 101, Soviets installed it (NS-37) on the Lagg without problems. The VK-105 was a spin-off from the HS 12Y engines, making the installation of the big gun in such a way possible. MK 101/103 will also have about 2/3rds of recoil force than NS 37.
Bf 109 was much smaller a target than the Hurricane, and fuselage-installed gun is about as streamlined as it gets, while there is no possibility for asymetric firing that will throw the aim. Tank-hunting 109s will not be depending on fighter escort in the Eastern front.
 

Deleted member 1487

Soviets installed it (NS-37) on the Lagg without problems.
In terms of layout maybe, but the structure could not handle it:
https://wiki.warthunder.com/index.php?title=LaGG-3-34
But the 37 mm NS-37 cannon significantly increased the plane's weight and affected its center of gravity, which seriously reduced its flight characteristics. In addition, the plane's structure poorly withstood the cannon's strong recoil. Further production of this model was stopped in connection with the unacceptable drop in its flight characteristics.

These planes where used during the battle of Stalingrad with great success against enemy bombers. However recoil and center of gravity issues plagued the plane and the extra weight caused them to suffer from worse performance then then other laGG-3 planes, which where already some what under powered. The fact that Il-2 were considered just as effective against ground targets and the test flight of the Yak-9T which proved a much better platform for the NS-37 gun spelled the end to this variant of the LaGG-3 with only 40 being produced.

That was with an engine that was 1260 hp, not 1000hp of the 100 octane HS 12Y suggested.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lavoc...ations_LaGG-3_.28data_for_LaGG-3_series_66.29
Powerplant: 1 × Klimov M-105PF liquid-cooled V-12, 924 kW (1,260 hp)

The VK-105 was a spin-off from the HS 12Y engines, making the installation of the big gun in such a way possible. MK 101/103 will also have about 2/3rds of recoil force than NS 37
The HS 12Y would have sub-1000hp without 100 octane fuel, so at least 300hp or more weaker than the Soviet engine, which was already under powered for the LaGG 3 with the cannon.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lavoc...ations_LaGG-3_.28data_for_LaGG-3_series_66.29
Powerplant: 1 × Klimov M-105PF liquid-cooled V-12, 924 kW (1,260 hp)

The Soviet engine was also significantly different dimensions:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Klimov_M-105#Specifications_.28VK-105.29
  • Displacement: 35.101 Liters (2,142.2 cu in)
  • Length: 2,027 mm (79.8 in)
  • Width: 777 mm (30.59 in)
  • Height: 945 mm (37.20 in)
  • Dry weight: 575 kg (1,266 lb)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hispano-Suiza_12Y#Specifications_.2812Ycrs.29
  • Displacement: 36.05 l (2,199.9 in³)
  • Length: 1,722 mm (67.8 in)
  • Width: 764 mm (30.08 in)
  • Height: 935 mm (36.81 in)
  • Dry weight:
  • 12Y-25:475 kg (1,047 lb)
  • 12Y-45:515 kg (1,135 lb)
 
Top