Essential and Dispensible WW2 aircraft.

On Oct 3, 8:09 pm, The Amaurotean Capitalist
wrote:
On Tue, 02 Oct 2007 05:06:23 -0700, Eunometic
wrote:

P-51; the P-38 had sufficient range to cover untill the P-47M with a
wett wing which actually
could excede the range of the P-51.

The P-47N wasn't available until nearly a year and a half after the
P-51B; good luck trying to sell a long-range P-47 available in
mid-1945 to Arnold when he demanded a long-range escort fighter for
the ETO in mid-1943.

Gavin Bailey

Yes but the P-47B or P-47C didn't have the tail tank and therefor
range yet.

If pressed to find a solution to extra tankage it would have been
possible to introduce a tanked wing earlier i feel.

On Wed, 03 Oct 2007 06:10:50 -0700, Eunometic
wrote:

Yes but the P-47B or P-47C didn't have the tail tank and therefor
range yet.

The D didn't get it until the tear-drop canopy version, IIRC. In any
case, the N variant didn't turn up until the Merlin-engined P-51 -
with rear fuselage fuel tanks - had been in action for more than a
year.

If pressed to find a solution to extra tankage it would have been
possible to introduce a tanked wing earlier i feel.

Possibly; but when know that despite extending fighter escort range
being a critical priority for the USAAF, the P-47D with increased
internal fuel capacity wasn't available until well into 1944. You
might as well speculate what might have happened if the USAAF had
actually increased the internal fuel capacity of the Spitfire VIIIs
and IXs they had been using in the MTO for a full year before Giles
and Arnold got another two Spit IXs from the UK to do the same.

Or you could speculate about the USAAF overcoming institutional
resistance to the P-51 before the RAF had to ram the initial test
reports of the type down Arnold's throat.

One of the critical factors overlooked in all this is the pressure for
monthly production output to sustain combat operations. One reason
that the USAAF could rely upon the Merlin-engined P-51 is that it
didn't entail the reduction or cancellation of other types currently
in production.

Gavin Bailey


--
Solution elegant. Yes. Minor problem, use 25000 CPU cycle for 1
instruction, this why all need overclock Pentium. Dumbass.
- Bart Kwan En

Uzytkownik "Eunometic" napisal w wiadomosci
ps.com...

Soviet Union

Essential

Illushian Sturmovik, Pekelatov Pe2, Tupolev Tu 4, I-16

Obvious typos: Ilyushin Shturmovik, Petlyakov Pe-2, Tupolev Tu-2 (Tu-4
Bull's first flight: May 1947).

Why do you think I-16 was essential? It was outdated at the time of
'Fall Barbarossa' and suffered great loses (both on the ground and in
combat). Replaced by MiG-3, Yak-1/Yak-3 and Yak-7/Yak-9 series. Yak-3
entered in 1944 was most succesful of all 1/3/7/9 series. Yak-7/Yak-9
being parallel to Yak-1/Yak-3 could be marked 'dispensible'; on the
other hand Yak-9 with 16769 built (all versions, 1942-48) was most
produced Yakovlev's piston fighter.

I would add La-5/La7 series. La-5 (without Gorbunov and Gudkov) entered
production in 1942 and followed by its modification La-7 (1944) was the
best Soviet fighter of WWII.

I would add also Polikarpov Po-2 to the essentials. It was very usefull
in supporting insurgents behind German lines which was more significant
than on any other war theatre.

Missed Ilyushin Il-4, the most important Soviet medium bomber.

Unsure; Yakalove, LaGG, MiG series of fighters seemed to overlap in
function. The MiG 3 only failing to secure production because its
engine was needed.

Typos again: Yakovlev.

Yak fighters belong the essentials IMO. LaGG-1/LaGG-3 (Lavochkin,
Gorbunov & Gudkov) was failure. It was replaced by La-5 (Lavochkin's own
modification of LaGG-3).

MiG-3 was essential at the beginning of German-Soviet war being the only
operational fighter of contemporary design (Yak-1 was not yet
operational and most aircraft were damaged on the ground and abandoned).
It suffered losses due to lack of experienced pilots but the airframe
was comparable to contemporary enemy's fighters. It played great role in
defending Moscow in 1941, Leningrad and Stalingrad. Shifted to the Far
East by 1943, where it saw no action.

--
JasiekS
Warsaw, Poland

On Oct 4, 9:33 pm, "JasiekS"
wrote:
Uzytkownik "Eunometic" napisal w wiadomoscinews:1191326783.161221.83770@w3g2000hsg. googlegroups.com...

Soviet Union
Essential
Illushian Sturmovik, Pekelatov Pe2, Tupolev Tu 4, I-16

Obvious typos: Ilyushin Shturmovik, Petlyakov Pe-2, Tupolev Tu-2 (Tu-4
Bull's first flight: May 1947).

Why do you think I-16 was essential?

Maybe the VVS soviet airforce was better of without the rata since it
cost many pilots lives without much benefit. Having said that late
model I-16 were almost as fast as the Hawker Hurricane.

The MiG 3 and Yak 1 was only just beginning delivery and the latter
had quality problems.


It was outdated at the time of
'Fall Barbarossa' and suffered great loses (both on the ground and in
combat). Replaced by MiG-3, Yak-1/Yak-3 and Yak-7/Yak-9 series. Yak-3
entered in 1944 was most succesful of all 1/3/7/9 series. Yak-7/Yak-9
being parallel to Yak-1/Yak-3 could be marked 'dispensible'; on the
other hand Yak-9 with 16769 built (all versions, 1942-48) was most
produced Yakovlev's piston fighter.

I would add La-5/La7 series. La-5 (without Gorbunov and Gudkov) entered
production in 1942 and followed by its modification La-7 (1944) was the
best Soviet fighter of WWII.

I would add also Polikarpov Po-2 to the essentials. It was very usefull
in supporting insurgents behind German lines which was more significant
than on any other war theatre.

Missed Ilyushin Il-4, the most important Soviet medium bomber.

Unsure; Yakalove, LaGG, MiG series of fighters seemed to overlap in
function. The MiG 3 only failing to secure production because its
engine was needed.

Typos again: Yakovlev.

Yak fighters belong the essentials IMO. LaGG-1/LaGG-3 (Lavochkin,
Gorbunov & Gudkov) was failure. It was replaced by La-5 (Lavochkin's own
modification of LaGG-3).

MiG-3 was essential at the beginning of German-Soviet war being the only
operational fighter of contemporary design (Yak-1 was not yet
operational and most aircraft were damaged on the ground and abandoned).
It suffered losses due to lack of experienced pilots but the airframe
was comparable to contemporary enemy's fighters. It played great role in
defending Moscow in 1941, Leningrad and Stalingrad. Shifted to the Far
East by 1943, where it saw no action.

--
JasiekS
Warsaw, Poland

Thankyou.

On 2 Oct, 13:06, Eunometic wrote:
Essential and Dispensible WW2 aircraft.
***********************************************
I've created a list of aircraft of WW2 that were essential to that
side and also others that were dispensible in the sense that their
place could easily have been taken by other aircraft or that were so
ineffective that they were not needed at all.

A great deal of effort was spent on aircraft that did not perform and
were 'war loosers' while there was also a great deal of duplication of
effort on aircraft that added nothing special and detracted from gains
in production.

United Kingdom

Essential:
Hurricane; had to be avialable in numbers for battle of britain
Spitfire; had to provide quality fighter throughout the war an
amenable to all rolls.
Mosquito; night bomber, night fighter, fast day bomber and most
importanty reconaisance aircraft par excellance.
Lancaster; easy to fly, devastating war load.
Wellington: Britains Medium bomber and an important coastal command
aircraft.

Non Essential:
Beaufighter; not a useless aircraft as it could take damage but its
roll could have been taken by others. It kept bristol busy.
Hampden;
Halifax; a good aircraft but Lancaster was better.
Stirling; a waste of time although a saluatory lesson.
Tempest and Typhoon: These aicraft had very poor high altitude
performance and the typhoon had handling difficulties, was not
particularly fast due to its thick wing and its airframe tended to
snap of at the tail
By 1942 Supermarine was producing the Spitifre Mk XII which had a
single stage Griffon engine and could outrun the Tempest. Although
the mk XII also had poor altitude performance its handling was better.
It would be early 1944 before the Mk XIX entered service which had a
two stage Griffon.

Germany:

Since Germany lost the war I found it hard to determine what to put in
non essential so I've added the column 'might have'

Essential:
Me 109: Hurricane vintage aircraft but remained competitive untill
1945 when Me 109K-4's were capable of 455mph and 48000ft service
ceiling and even then there were versions such as the Me 109K-14 with
a two stage supercharged DB603L engine starting production but not
delivered as well as the DB603DSCM engine touching on 2000hp at 1.98
atm boost there were test of 2.3 and 2.4 atm going on at DB which
suggests a power of 2400hp and speed of 470-480mph.
The aircraft should have been replaced far earlier with something that
had lighter contol forces and better speed. It would have performed
better with superior fuel.

Fw 190: this aircraft filled in many of the Me 109's weaknesses.

ju 88: night fighter, high speed bomber, dive or slant bomber,
maritime patrol etc.

Ju 87: Devastating in combined arms breakthrough warfare and deadly
accurate. When its days were over it lived on as a night bomber and
ground attack aircraft with one of the lowest per mission loss rates
of any Luftwaffe aircraft.

He 111: early bombing workhorse
Do 217 Only 1200 produced but still effective as a night bomber and
guided missile carrier.
Arado 234: the jet aircraft provided essential reconaisance: it was
the first and only aircraft to survey the Normandy beach-head. Two
prototypes flew about 36 missions with their engines being reliable
during this process. They were both shot down by their own German
FLAK.
Fi 103 or V1. Extremely cheap to produce consumed massive allied
resources.

Non essential:
Do 17
Me 110: its role as a night fighter could have been taken by the Ju
88, I am aware of its success in the Early Polish and Soviet Campaigns
but I don't think these were decisive.

Might Have
Me 210/410 Quite a good aircraft that was to replace the Ju 88 and
Me 110. Fast, advanced armament, bomb bay, efficient etc but simply
too late due to programm mismanagment to survive in allied skies.
Me 262; probably was effective in staving of defeat by a few weeks.
He 219; succombed to political problems; an excellent night fighter
and unlike the Me 110 and early Ju 88 it had the speed to chase down
British bombers once diversionary raids and feints had been
ascertained.
He 177: engine problems were not tackled agressively. The B series
with 4 seperate engines could have made up the bulk of production and
provided the Luftwaffe with a reliable long range bomber of
exceptional performance
had courage preceded arse covering.

USA:

Essential:

P-40 USAAF effective fighter of excellent quality; it was quite
effective with appropriate tactics.
P-38 Had the range and performance to protect US bombers. It
prevented the German Airforce from fielding heavy aircraft firing
rockets, or impunely attacking bombers under the protection of heavy
armour.
B-17 Hightly survivable high altitude bomber.
B-24 Longer ranged then the B-17; its only virtue.
B-29 Defeat of japan almost impossible
B-25 Versatile and easy to fly in all theatres of war.
Wildcat, Hellcat, dauntless, avenger
P-47 Ready far earlier than the P-51.

Non Essential
B-26 not as versatile as the B-25 and for a medium bomber too
demanding of runway conditions.
Helldiver: too many handling problems.
P-51; the P-38 had sufficient range to cover untill the P-47M with a
wett wing which actually
could excede the range of the P-51.

Vought corsair: took to long to perfect for carrier opperations;
Hellcat did a good enough job. Had the Ki 84 been available in
numbers and supplied with 100/130 octane fuel the corsair would have
been essential

Japan:

Essential:

Mitsubishi A6M zero and Betty.
Dinah, Ki 84

Non essential
All army types apart from the dinah and Ki 84

Soviet Union

Essential

Illushian Sturmovik, Pekelatov Pe2, Tupolev Tu 4, I-16

Unsure; Yakalove, LaGG, MiG series of fighters seemed to overlap in
function. The MiG 3 only failing to secure production because its
engine was needed.

I think the concept of essential and non essential is absurd to be
honest - sorry,

Guy

On Oct 8, 9:33 am, guy wrote:
On 2 Oct, 13:06, Eunometic wrote:





Essential and Dispensible WW2 aircraft.
***********************************************
I've created a list of aircraft of WW2 that were essential to that
side and also others that were dispensible in the sense that their
place could easily have been taken by other aircraft or that were so
ineffective that they were not needed at all.

A great deal of effort was spent on aircraft that did not perform and
were 'war loosers' while there was also a great deal of duplication of
effort on aircraft that added nothing special and detracted from gains
in production.

United Kingdom

Essential:
Hurricane; had to be avialable in numbers for battle of britain
Spitfire; had to provide quality fighter throughout the war an
amenable to all rolls.
Mosquito; night bomber, night fighter, fast day bomber and most
importanty reconaisance aircraft par excellance.
Lancaster; easy to fly, devastating war load.
Wellington: Britains Medium bomber and an important coastal command
aircraft.

Non Essential:
Beaufighter; not a useless aircraft as it could take damage but its
roll could have been taken by others. It kept bristol busy.
Hampden;
Halifax; a good aircraft but Lancaster was better.
Stirling; a waste of time although a saluatory lesson.
Tempest and Typhoon: These aicraft had very poor high altitude
performance and the typhoon had handling difficulties, was not
particularly fast due to its thick wing and its airframe tended to
snap of at the tail
By 1942 Supermarine was producing the Spitifre Mk XII which had a
single stage Griffon engine and could outrun the Tempest. Although
the mk XII also had poor altitude performance its handling was better.
It would be early 1944 before the Mk XIX entered service which had a
two stage Griffon.

Germany:

Since Germany lost the war I found it hard to determine what to put in
non essential so I've added the column 'might have'

Essential:
Me 109: Hurricane vintage aircraft but remained competitive untill
1945 when Me 109K-4's were capable of 455mph and 48000ft service
ceiling and even then there were versions such as the Me 109K-14 with
a two stage supercharged DB603L engine starting production but not
delivered as well as the DB603DSCM engine touching on 2000hp at 1.98
atm boost there were test of 2.3 and 2.4 atm going on at DB which
suggests a power of 2400hp and speed of 470-480mph.
The aircraft should have been replaced far earlier with something that
had lighter contol forces and better speed. It would have performed
better with superior fuel.

Fw 190: this aircraft filled in many of the Me 109's weaknesses.

ju 88: night fighter, high speed bomber, dive or slant bomber,
maritime patrol etc.

Ju 87: Devastating in combined arms breakthrough warfare and deadly
accurate. When its days were over it lived on as a night bomber and
ground attack aircraft with one of the lowest per mission loss rates
of any Luftwaffe aircraft.

He 111: early bombing workhorse
Do 217 Only 1200 produced but still effective as a night bomber and
guided missile carrier.
Arado 234: the jet aircraft provided essential reconaisance: it was
the first and only aircraft to survey the Normandy beach-head. Two
prototypes flew about 36 missions with their engines being reliable
during this process. They were both shot down by their own German
FLAK.
Fi 103 or V1. Extremely cheap to produce consumed massive allied
resources.

Non essential:
Do 17
Me 110: its role as a night fighter could have been taken by the Ju
88, I am aware of its success in the Early Polish and Soviet Campaigns
but I don't think these were decisive.

Might Have
Me 210/410 Quite a good aircraft that was to replace the Ju 88 and
Me 110. Fast, advanced armament, bomb bay, efficient etc but simply
too late due to programm mismanagment to survive in allied skies.
Me 262; probably was effective in staving of defeat by a few weeks.
He 219; succombed to political problems; an excellent night fighter
and unlike the Me 110 and early Ju 88 it had the speed to chase down
British bombers once diversionary raids and feints had been
ascertained.
He 177: engine problems were not tackled agressively. The B series
with 4 seperate engines could have made up the bulk of production and
provided the Luftwaffe with a reliable long range bomber of
exceptional performance
had courage preceded arse covering.

USA:

Essential:

P-40 USAAF effective fighter of excellent quality; it was quite
effective with appropriate tactics.
P-38 Had the range and performance to protect US bombers. It
prevented the German Airforce from fielding heavy aircraft firing
rockets, or impunely attacking bombers under the protection of heavy
armour.
B-17 Hightly survivable high altitude bomber.
B-24 Longer ranged then the B-17; its only virtue.
B-29 Defeat of japan almost impossible
B-25 Versatile and easy to fly in all theatres of war.
Wildcat, Hellcat, dauntless, avenger
P-47 Ready far earlier than the P-51.

Non Essential
B-26 not as versatile as the B-25 and for a medium bomber too
demanding of runway conditions.
Helldiver: too many handling problems.
P-51; the P-38 had sufficient range to cover untill the P-47M with a
wett wing which actually
could excede the range of the P-51.

Vought corsair: took to long to perfect for carrier opperations;
Hellcat did a good enough job. Had the Ki 84 been available in
numbers and supplied with 100/130 octane fuel the corsair would have
been essential

Japan:

Essential:

Mitsubishi A6M zero and Betty.
Dinah, Ki 84

Non essential
All army types apart from the dinah and Ki 84

Soviet Union

Essential

Illushian Sturmovik, Pekelatov Pe2, Tupolev Tu 4, I-16

Unsure; Yakalove, LaGG, MiG series of fighters seemed to overlap in
function. The MiG 3 only failing to secure production because its
engine was needed.

I think the concept of essential and non essential is absurd to be
honest - sorry,

Guy

I don't disagree, but it has resulted in an interesting, on-topic
thread.

On 8 Oct, 15:23, " wrote:
On Oct 8, 9:33 am, guy wrote:





On 2 Oct, 13:06, Eunometic wrote:

Essential and Dispensible WW2 aircraft.
***********************************************
I've created a list of aircraft of WW2 that were essential to that
side and also others that were dispensible in the sense that their
place could easily have been taken by other aircraft or that were so
ineffective that they were not needed at all.

A great deal of effort was spent on aircraft that did not perform and
were 'war loosers' while there was also a great deal of duplication of
effort on aircraft that added nothing special and detracted from gains
in production.

United Kingdom

Essential:
Hurricane; had to be avialable in numbers for battle of britain
Spitfire; had to provide quality fighter throughout the war an
amenable to all rolls.
Mosquito; night bomber, night fighter, fast day bomber and most
importanty reconaisance aircraft par excellance.
Lancaster; easy to fly, devastating war load.
Wellington: Britains Medium bomber and an important coastal command
aircraft.

Non Essential:
Beaufighter; not a useless aircraft as it could take damage but its
roll could have been taken by others. It kept bristol busy.
Hampden;
Halifax; a good aircraft but Lancaster was better.
Stirling; a waste of time although a saluatory lesson.
Tempest and Typhoon: These aicraft had very poor high altitude
performance and the typhoon had handling difficulties, was not
particularly fast due to its thick wing and its airframe tended to
snap of at the tail
By 1942 Supermarine was producing the Spitifre Mk XII which had a
single stage Griffon engine and could outrun the Tempest. Although
the mk XII also had poor altitude performance its handling was better.
It would be early 1944 before the Mk XIX entered service which had a
two stage Griffon.

Germany:

Since Germany lost the war I found it hard to determine what to put in
non essential so I've added the column 'might have'

Essential:
Me 109: Hurricane vintage aircraft but remained competitive untill
1945 when Me 109K-4's were capable of 455mph and 48000ft service
ceiling and even then there were versions such as the Me 109K-14 with
a two stage supercharged DB603L engine starting production but not
delivered as well as the DB603DSCM engine touching on 2000hp at 1.98
atm boost there were test of 2.3 and 2.4 atm going on at DB which
suggests a power of 2400hp and speed of 470-480mph.
The aircraft should have been replaced far earlier with something that
had lighter contol forces and better speed. It would have performed
better with superior fuel.

Fw 190: this aircraft filled in many of the Me 109's weaknesses.

ju 88: night fighter, high speed bomber, dive or slant bomber,
maritime patrol etc.

Ju 87: Devastating in combined arms breakthrough warfare and deadly
accurate. When its days were over it lived on as a night bomber and
ground attack aircraft with one of the lowest per mission loss rates
of any Luftwaffe aircraft.

He 111: early bombing workhorse
Do 217 Only 1200 produced but still effective as a night bomber and
guided missile carrier.
Arado 234: the jet aircraft provided essential reconaisance: it was
the first and only aircraft to survey the Normandy beach-head. Two
prototypes flew about 36 missions with their engines being reliable
during this process. They were both shot down by their own German
FLAK.
Fi 103 or V1. Extremely cheap to produce consumed massive allied
resources.

Non essential:
Do 17
Me 110: its role as a night fighter could have been taken by the Ju
88, I am aware of its success in the Early Polish and Soviet Campaigns
but I don't think these were decisive.

Might Have
Me 210/410 Quite a good aircraft that was to replace the Ju 88 and
Me 110. Fast, advanced armament, bomb bay, efficient etc but simply
too late due to programm mismanagment to survive in allied skies.
Me 262; probably was effective in staving of defeat by a few weeks.
He 219; succombed to political problems; an excellent night fighter
and unlike the Me 110 and early Ju 88 it had the speed to chase down
British bombers once diversionary raids and feints had been
ascertained.
He 177: engine problems were not tackled agressively. The B series
with 4 seperate engines could have made up the bulk of production and
provided the Luftwaffe with a reliable long range bomber of
exceptional performance
had courage preceded arse covering.

USA:

Essential:

P-40 USAAF effective fighter of excellent quality; it was quite
effective with appropriate tactics.
P-38 Had the range and performance to protect US bombers. It
prevented the German Airforce from fielding heavy aircraft firing
rockets, or impunely attacking bombers under the protection of heavy
armour.
B-17 Hightly survivable high altitude bomber.
B-24 Longer ranged then the B-17; its only virtue.
B-29 Defeat of japan almost impossible
B-25 Versatile and easy to fly in all theatres of war.
Wildcat, Hellcat, dauntless, avenger
P-47 Ready far earlier than the P-51.

Non Essential
B-26 not as versatile as the B-25 and for a medium bomber too
demanding of runway conditions.
Helldiver: too many handling problems.
P-51; the P-38 had sufficient range to cover untill the P-47M with a
wett wing which actually
could excede the range of the P-51.

Vought corsair: took to long to perfect for carrier opperations;
Hellcat did a good enough job. Had the Ki 84 been available in
numbers and supplied with 100/130 octane fuel the corsair would have
been essential

Japan:

Essential:

Mitsubishi A6M zero and Betty.
Dinah, Ki 84

Non essential
All army types apart from the dinah and Ki 84

Soviet Union

Essential

Illushian Sturmovik, Pekelatov Pe2, Tupolev Tu 4, I-16

Unsure; Yakalove, LaGG, MiG series of fighters seemed to overlap in
function. The MiG 3 only failing to secure production because its
engine was needed.

I think the concept of essential and non essential is absurd to be
honest - sorry,

Guy

I don't disagree, but it has resulted in an interesting, on-topic
thread.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

agreed

guy