Jump to content


Photo

MidwayŚ77 Years Ago, Today.


  • Please log in to reply
566 replies to this topic

#561 Rich

Rich

    intellectual bully ilk

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 4,384 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:WW II, Current Defense Issues, Military History in General

Posted Yesterday, 10:09 AM

Absolutely right. Now, name another one. :) There was plenty of prototypes that failed under test, and we spent no more time on them. We ruthlessly pushed airframes that would work. Witness the Germans that spent massive resources on air frames that were largely useless.

 

 

Blackburn B.44

Blackburn Roc

Boulton Paul P.92

Bristol Buckingham

Bristol Type 159

de Havilland Super Mosquito

Fairey Barracuda

Fairey Fulmer

Fairey Spearfish

Folland Fo.117

Gloster F.5/34

Gloster F.9/37

Handley Page Manx

Hawker Hotspur

Hawker P.1005

Hawker Tornado

Martin Baker MB.2

Martin Baker MB.3

Martin Baker MB.5

Miles M.20

Miles M.39B

Supermarine Spiteful

Vickers Type 432

Vickers Warwick

Vickers Windsor

Westland Welkin


  • 0

#562 Ken Estes

Ken Estes

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 14,689 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Seattle
  • Interests:USMC Tanker, Historian

Posted Yesterday, 11:43 AM

There is some irony that the Axis powers decided for war each in turn as an answer to their bankruptcy, and then set out to loot the world, requiring the entire United Nations to stop them. That was Herman Wouk's conclusion in his The Winds of War.


  • 0

#563 Nobu

Nobu

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2,483 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted Yesterday, 11:54 AM

Prewar British studies envisaged the bombing of the UK being absolutely critical in a few days, largely I suspect because we imagined the bomb loads were going to be a lot heavier than they were. We got lucky.

 

Interesting reading. My opinions on the subject are shaped by the experience of the IJNAF and IJAAF in their admittedly unsuccessful strategic air efforts against China and the Chinese after sweeping the skies over China clear of air opposition in this time period, thus enabling a textbook example of the helplessness of a people and a nation to Japanese airpower. Frustration was in Japan's inability to achieve decisive results despite these ideal conditions.

 

One can get caught up in all kinds of arguments about the nature of the nazi regime, and about all the priorities and all other kinds of things. But it comes down to the central point, if Britain went down, the war in the west was over. The US was not going to come in

 

The question in 1940 regarding US entry was likely something along the lines of would it ever, and what exactly the US was waiting for. If the answer is a British capitulation, the reality would have probably been never.


  • 0

#564 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Just Another Salisbury Tourist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 52,791 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Eloiland

Posted Yesterday, 01:49 PM

Absolutely right. Now, name another one. :) There was plenty of prototypes that failed under test, and we spent no more time on them. We ruthlessly pushed airframes that would work. Witness the Germans that spent massive resources on air frames that were largely useless.

 
Blackburn B.44
Blackburn Roc
Boulton Paul P.92
Bristol Buckingham
Bristol Type 159
de Havilland Super Mosquito
Fairey Barracuda
Fairey Fulmer
Fairey Spearfish
Folland Fo.117
Gloster F.5/34
Gloster F.9/37
Handley Page Manx
Hawker Hotspur
Hawker P.1005
Hawker Tornado
Martin Baker MB.2
Martin Baker MB.3
Martin Baker MB.5
Miles M.20
Miles M.39B
Supermarine Spiteful
Vickers Type 432
Vickers Warwick
Vickers Windsor
Westland Welkin

Many of those were good airframes,and some actually entered service. I think the mb5 was highly regarded, it was just unnecessary because the war was ending. The Windsor was reportedly good, but with mass production of the Lancaster underway it was unnecessary. Spiteful was good, and entered service. The only problem with it was the handling wasnt as good as the spitfires wing at high mach numbers. Its wings also went on to inspire a series of supermarine jet fighters like the Attacker.

Can anyone show comparable examples of the extended development of aircraft wtypes that lead nowhere, like the Arado 240 or Ta154 or Ju288? They actually built 22 ju288s, found it was no good, and cancelled it. It only took the 2 years to figure it out.
  • 0

#565 RETAC21

RETAC21

    A la lealtad y al valor

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 13,469 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Madrid, Spain
  • Interests:Military history in general

Posted Yesterday, 02:42 PM

 

 

I find the most alt-history discussion terribly shallow, it's almost always railroaded within to speculating around few Axis premises to which usually counter-arguments are, as you say, "then Nazis wouldn't be Nazis and there would be no war at all".
Also for some reason there is seldom any talk about what mistakes Allied could have done to lose. The eventual Allied strategy is so prefixed on people's minds that it is seen as inevitable path to victory any idiot could follow on autopilot. But Allied could have done bad decisions which could have costed them the war, not in the sense "Nazi flag over the Capitol Hill" but Axis achieving their war goals. Allied could have been more foolhardy, taken more risk which then could have backfired. Certainly war in the Eastern Front 1941-42 was what is popularly referred 'a close-run thing', hardly something where end-result was predetermined.
Regarding Pacific War, there Japanese had scored their Port Arthur and Yellow Sea, but never managed to score their Tsushima. Instead they whittled down their forces in bunch of battles which ended up being whole reverse Tsushima for them. Japanese could have scored a major naval victory against USA in 1942, it would not have been Tsushima but it could have effected course of war. The reason why it didn't happen was as much to bad Japanese decisions as it was US strategy and resilience.

 

 

Well, we just had an example of one good way the Allies might at least prolong the war, if not lose it...strip every movable asset from the Pacific immediately after Midway and send it to the Mediterranean in order to attempt simultaneous landings in Southern France, Corsica, Sardinia, Algeria, and French Morocco. :D

 

 

And the Balearic islands, becuase you can't never have enough enemies.


  • 0

#566 Adam_S

Adam_S

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,306 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted Yesterday, 05:02 PM


Ive always wondered what would have been the result if they had prioritized this over the 177. Though again, the bombload was mediocre compared to British contemporary designs.

https://en.wikipedia.../Heinkel_He_274

 

Even the 177 showed the design capablity of being adapted to 4 engine configuration, not unlike the Manchester/Lancaster.

Heinkel_He_177_277_274-07-640x397.JPG

 

 

There is no reason why they couldnt have done that 4 years earlier, other than apparent desire to build the 177 as a divebomber.....

 

 

There's no particular technical reason why something like that wasn't possible but there are some very valid reasons why something like that wasn't built, besides the usual Hitler was a madman schtick.

 

A design like that has only one purpose which is strategic bombing of enemy cities. The He-177 was no different really but I suspect that because it was a twin engined design, the Luftwaffe was able to sneak it through the system by pretending that it could be used for tactical support of ground forces, hence the ludicrous dive bomber requirement. Once again though, Germany's weak industrial base and the demands of the Eastern front meant that there simply weren't the resources to build up a massive fleet of heavy bombers that could only be used for one purpose.
 


  • 0

#567 Rich

Rich

    intellectual bully ilk

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 4,384 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:WW II, Current Defense Issues, Military History in General

Posted Yesterday, 07:10 PM

 

Many of those were good airframes,and some actually entered service. I think the mb5 was highly regarded, it was just unnecessary because the war was ending. The Windsor was reportedly good, but with mass production of the Lancaster underway it was unnecessary. Spiteful was good, and entered service. The only problem with it was the handling wasnt as good as the spitfires wing at high mach numbers. Its wings also went on to inspire a series of supermarine jet fighters like the Attacker.

Can anyone show comparable examples of the extended development of aircraft wtypes that lead nowhere, like the Arado 240 or Ta154 or Ju288? They actually built 22 ju288s, found it was no good, and cancelled it. It only took the 2 years to figure it out.

 

 

Windsor versus Ju 288? Both had terrible undercarriage designs. The Windsor was a good basic design, but given the numbers of Lancaster and the decision to go with the Lincoln postwar, it had no place postwar, especially given the cost of its complicated construction in order to get a pressurized cabin. So Britain had the luxury of two aircraft that were easier to build to fit the role...and the engines to mount on them, partly courtesy of Packard. The Germans had nothing like that and so were always desperate to get a workable bomber aircraft that was better than what they were stuck with, but were stymied partly because they were forced to deal with the same small circle of producers of inadequate engine designs. That they built 22 and put some in service is a measure of their desperation, not of their inability to think rationally. Similar stories for the Ar 240 and Ta 154...the Ar 240 was cutting edge design, but suffered from, again, poor engines...and being a bit too cutting edge. There the promise of performance was so great that Arado stretched out the development after cancellation.

 

Anyway, as was already pointed out, everyone designed dogs, built dog prototypes, and even manufactured dogs. Prototypes were the only was to test things then and sometimes there was a need for something that was at least better than nothing, like the P-43. It simply wasn't unique to the Germans...but they had a much smaller industrial and development base to work from, so their dogs tend to stand out even more.


  • 0




2 user(s) are reading this topic

1 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users


    shootER5