what aircrafts and what tactics to crush the Sedan bridgehead ?

Wimble Toot

Banned
tomo pauk said:
In the UK there is Sabre in development
Click to expand...

Didn't work properly until 1942-3

tomo pauk said:
In the UK there is Centaurus in development
Click to expand...

Didn't work properly until after the war because of the need to get the Taurus and Hercules into volume production

tomo pauk said:
plus Merlin 1500 HP or better
Click to expand...

More Merlins = fewer Griffons - it didn't produce anything like 1500 HP before the Fall of France - how did the Merlin fares as powerplant in the Fairey Battle, Fairey Fulmar, Armstrong Whitworth Whitley, Vickers Wellington?

tomo pauk said:
Manchester can be turned into, perhaps, maybe, possibly, into a 4-engined bomber. Lets call it Lancaster.
Click to expand...

It's an original idea, but it won't catch on.:rolleyes:
 

tomo pauk

Wimble Toot said:
Didn't work properly until 1942-3
Didn't work properly until after the war because of the need to get the Taurus and Hercules into volume production
Click to expand...

Of course. My comment was a response for your statement: You then need to find working engines for the Hawker Tornado, Avro Manchester, Vickers Warwick.
Ie. the aircraft that will post-date Fall of france by many months.

More Merlins = fewer Griffons - it didn't produce anything like 1500 HP before the Fall of France - how did the Merlin fares as powerplant in the Fairey Battle, Fairey Fulmar, Armstrong Whitworth Whitley, Vickers Wellington?
Click to expand...

Merlis fared in admirable manner. The 1500+ HP Merlin is also connected with your sentence pasted above in italics.
That someone thought that a 1-engined startegic bomber (= future Fairey Battle) is a viable thing is not fault of Merlin. Or that a 2-seat long range fighter and recon in a single airfrrame are well served by one 1000-1300 HP engine, even if we recall that Fulmar downed more Axis aircraft than any FAA fighter, in a crucial time never the less.
Merlin turned the Whitley into an useful bomber, that Tiger-powered examples were not. Again, it was not a fault of Merlin that AM didn't requested a 4-engined bomber in late 1930s. Wellington was again useful bomber with any engine, along with He 111 probably the best bomber anywhere in the world in 1939/ 1940.
It is 'no Peregrines + no Vultures' = 'earlier Griffons' equation.

It's an original idea, but it won't catch on.:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

:)
 

Wimble Toot

Banned
tomo pauk said:
Again, it was not a fault of Merlin that AM didn't requested a 4-engined bomber in late 1930s.
Click to expand...

They did in 1936. B.12/36. It produced the Short S29 Stirling, the Supermarine 316/318, and designs from Vickers, Fairey, Boulton Paul, and Bristol

and again in 1939 B.1/39 which produced designs from Bristol, Handley-Page Blackburn, and Vickers again.

P.12/36 produced the Manchester and the Halifax, both supposed to be twin-engined medium bombers, both with 2000hp engines.

None of these aircraft were intended to be Merlin-powered, except the Supermarine 316
 

tomo pauk

Wimble Toot said:
They did in 1936. B.12/36. It produced the Short S29 Stirling, the Supermarine 316/318, and designs from Vickers, Fairey, Boulton Paul, and Bristol

and again in 1939 B.1/39 which produced designs from Bristol, Handley-Page Blackburn, and Vickers again.

P.12/36 produced the Manchester and the Halifax, both supposed to be twin-engined medium bombers, both with 2000hp engines.

None of these aircraft were intended to be Merlin-powered, except the Supermarine 316
Click to expand...

Yes, you are right that those specifications either were for a 4-engined job, or lead to it. I stand corrected.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top