Long-range Spitfires and daylight Bomber Command raids (was: #1 Jet of World War II)

On Wed, 27 Aug 2003 01:07:03 -0400, AVM Stickney, Air Member for
Research & Development reported:

[American Rev]
As I see it, a civil war between to elites clashing for power.

I was going to post ans incisive and fact-filled rebuttal, mentioning
the cultural drift that had taken place in the 150 years previous to
the American Revolution, and the sea change that occurred during the
French and Indian Wars, when the Colonists realized that they could,
indeed form organized troops of European quality, and the inconsistant
and, in general foolish policies of His Majesty King George III's
Governments,

It depends what you mean by foolish. There was an internal logic to
them, even if it produced counter-productive results when actually
applied. The real problem was the new-found determination on the part
of a British government to face up to the problems of reconciling
colonial and wartime expenditure with colonial tax receipts:
appointed governors and local colonial assemblies had been clashing
for generations prior to post-1762 episodes.

But it gre to about 500 lines. FOr brevity's sake,
might I refer you to James Stokesbury's "Navy and Empire". which
covers the era in a rather fair and factual manner - even if he is a
Brit.

I have plenty of references on that period, believe me. My own
personal interpretation probably comes closest to Draper's in most of
the essentials.

[Vulture-engined Typhoons, aka The Tornado]

Oh, yes. the Vulture. inline engines, if they aren't horizontally
opposed pancakes, like to be upright or inverted. Both upright and
inverted is not a good idea. It's danged fortunate that the 12"
supercharger impeller from the Vulture matched the requirements to
build a 1st (Aux) stage for the 2-stage Merlin. That almost made it
worth the trouble.

Hives did claim that the latest Vulture [IV? - last mooted production
version) was going to eliminate many of the operational problems
experienced with it, but even so it was better to cut the losses and
expand Merlin production and development. But by that stage he was
getting interested in the Whittle engine and had the Griffon coming
along, so he could afford to take a broader view of things.

Let me just pause and interject the prospect of the Tornado: the
airframe problems with the elevator mass balance leading to structural
disintegration in flight should be entertaining enough, let alone the
prospect of using an engine, incredibly enough, which was actually
*less* reliable than the Sabre. Now there was a war-winner, albeit
not for the British. Better still, think of all the Sabres that would
have freeded up for the Sabre Lancaster project....

Yes, but relatively the Mustang was worse. The RAF gave it a service
ceiling of 25,000 feet, so I think it's out of the running for
operations at or above that height. Where it could really stand out,
though, was on operations from ground level up to 15,000 feet, where
it really did have superb performance, un-matched by any other type at
the time. I'm confident they could have been used very successfully
and more agressively in that environment than they were.

The AAF's numbers for the P-51 gove a Combat Ceiling (500'/min) for
Military Power at 'bout 27,500', at 8600#, and roughly 30,000' for the
-81 engined P-51A. Normal power is, of course, rather a bit lower.

I should correct myself, the RAF gave the Mustang I a service ceiling
of 30,000ft, but the RoC at those heights was clearly inferior to the
Spitfire V. The only USAAF report on the Mustang I/P-51 I've seen
quotes a "fighting ceiling" of 20,000ft and goes on to criticise the
loss of power over 18,000ft, before recommending increased altitude
performance. The same can be said about the USAAF on the P-51A,
limiting it's useful service ceiling to about 25,000ft.

The only real problem as I see it is supply: by the summer of 1943
production has ceased, and the existing Mustang Is are being expended
from a stock imported a year or so earlier. Given that production
ended in favour of the Merlin Mustang, which we want in this ATL just
as much as historically, and the Mustang II was produced in too little
quantity to be relevant, we're stuck with a dwindling supply of ageing
aircraft.

Well, there were a lot of Mustang IIs (P-51A), you just weren't
getting them. Most were going to the MTO, and some to the CBI
Theaters. Perhaps some horse-trading could have been done.

There don't seem to be a lot of them even then: a couple of groups of
A-36's, a few squadrons of F-6's and a couple of squadron's worth of
Mustang IIs in the RAF.

Well, yes, and the British could produce equally practical and
effective aircraft. Like the Brabazon. And let's not forget US
efforts like the Goblin here. Not much excess structural weight on
display there....

Well, pratical if you're building something to take the Royal Mail and
a few King's Messengers out to Inja, with stops along the way.

But even then the Brabazon was a complete turkey.

The
payload/structure weight ratio's still pretty unfavorable.

Diabolic, more like.

Even BOAC
bought Constallations and Strats, postwar.

Holding patterns around the Tudor and Comet, basically. Less haste,
more speed might have been a better governmental approach in the
immediate post-war period.

That would indicate the rear tank was measured in imperial gallons as
well, which brings us back to the pleasant synchronicity of
Supermarine, A&AEE and Wright Field preferring 40-43 gallons as a
stable rear tank load in a Spit IX (I forget the weight of petrol in
pounds 7 or 8 lbs per gallon? This would make a Mk IX tolerably
stable with 240lbs behind the pilot with the CoG movement somewhere
about 10 inches behind the datum). I have to admit, that sounds well
beyond a balanced, bob-weighted, enlarged-horn-balanced Mk Vc.

1 Imperial Gallon is 7.2# of petrol, for most purposes. But I agree,
I'd say that the Mk V is pretty much out, as far as more fuselage fuel
goes.

Depends on the size of the tank, to my mind. I think a 75-gallon Spit
IX.XVI tank is too much for the probable stability limits, fair
enough.

[drop tanks]

Sure but this was done for various under-fuselage drop tanks, and was
done for under-wing drop tanks on the Hurricane II and Typhoon Ib.
Clearly the engineering capacity was there; my question is was there
a strucutural reason (as Supermarine claimed with MK210) to prevent
it?

The only thing that I can thing of is torsional strength of the wing -
It micht be prone to flutter.

It was a problem on all Spits to a degree, but the Vc should have been
usable, and should have been able to take wing tanks if the IXc could.

[likely scenarios for LR fighters in FC in 1943]

Yeah - the Ground-up scenario will be pretty much Come as You Are.
Then again, there micht be a call for a slightly enlarged
Merlin-powered Westland Whirlwind. (With a properly sorted out fuel
system)

I can't see the Whirlwind surviving the Beaverbrookisation of the MAP
in 1940, at a time when the BoB demanded defensive fighters and well
before any need for long-range escorts was going to be discovered.
The use of Peregrines and Westlands small design department would rule
out any realistic prospect of them developing the Whirlwind afterwards
whatever happened.

[Sabre-engined Lancasters]

Not even when I point out that any fighter attempting to engage in a
classical curve of pursuit attack from behind would have to deal with
the dense defensive smoke-screen produced by four Sabres burning oil
like an Iraqi making self-destructive gestures against the Coalition
occupation?

Sounds like the USAF's MiG Evasion tactics for the COllege Eye
EC-121s, Turn away, and METO power on all operating engines. The
flood of oil would cover the MiG's canopy and force him to break off
the attack. If that didn't work, the Radar would render him sterile.

And with the Sabre-Lanc, don't forget the difficulty any attacker
would have following the violent evasions made possible by involuntary
asymmetric flight patterns after individual engine failure on full
power settings. And if you flying behiond a Lanc with Sabres made at
the Acton plant, the additional defensive capacity of the occasional
piece of fracture sleeve-valve or engine swarf being hurled out of the
exhaust manifold at you.

Like the Mexican bandit accomplices around el Jefe in a spaghetti
western, nobody can risk laughing until the CAS signals his approval
of the AMR&D's jokes by laughing himself. Anybody ill-advised enough
to continue displaying signs of amusement after the CAS stops smiling
will of course find themselves on an interesting posting to Burma.

If you take such action sir, you will hear from my Soliciters, the
firm of Lamb, Curry, and Rice are on retainer.

Oddly enough, this post is rather delayed because I was laid low by
the recurrence of some dratted Intestinal thing that I picked up in
the Tropics. That's what I get for not drinking Gin.

Well, if you get A&AEE to pass the LR Spit Vc, we might relocate your
HQ from such foetid jungles in the back of beyond and move you away
from the plague-ridden swamps of Washington.

Gavin Bailey

--

Another user rings. "I need more space" he says.
"Well, why not move to Texas?", I ask. - The ******* Operator From Hell