New Airplanes in WWI (ISOT)

Lets suppose you get to give a single new airplane design and a single prototype
to a participant of World War One. You can offer the Austro-Hungarians the
design for a B-52 if you wish. However, that might prove a manufacturing
challenge to them (and one can only wonder about their supply of jet fuel).

Your goal is to change history. You can hope for a German victory or just that the
Allies win faster. It's up to you.

So, what design do you offer, remembering that this design must be manufactured, fueled,
and armed by the natives?

My first guess, a Fairey Swordfish in 1914 should be buildable and dominate the
skies. The speed, range and bombload would be simply unknown at the time. With a
thousand mile range and a 1,600 lb bomb it would be a great strategic bomber. It
should hold its own even in 1918 though I would not expect the war to last so long.
Again, it's no F-16 but it should be buildable.

Or for a more advanced plane how about a Grumman F-4 without the turbocharger.
I'm not sure the industry of the time was able to build large complex machines of sheet
aluminum, but if so this is a nice plane for world war one.

"Charles Talleyrand" wrote in message
...
Lets suppose you get to give a single new airplane design and a single
prototype
to a participant of World War One. You can offer the Austro-Hungarians
the
design for a B-52 if you wish. However, that might prove a manufacturing
challenge to them (and one can only wonder about their supply of jet
fuel).

Your goal is to change history. You can hope for a German victory or just
that the
Allies win faster. It's up to you.

snip

I'm having trouble seeing any aircraft that the combatants of the time could
build significantly changing the end results.

--
Multiversal Mercenaries. You name it, we kill it. Any time, any reality.

"Charles Talleyrand" wrote in message
...
Lets suppose you get to give a single new airplane design and a single
prototype
to a participant of World War One. You can offer the Austro-Hungarians
the
design for a B-52 if you wish. However, that might prove a manufacturing
challenge to them (and one can only wonder about their supply of jet
fuel).

Your goal is to change history. You can hope for a German victory or just
that the
Allies win faster. It's up to you.

So, what design do you offer, remembering that this design must be
manufactured, fueled,
and armed by the natives?

My first guess, a Fairey Swordfish in 1914 should be buildable and
dominate the
skies. The speed, range and bombload would be simply unknown at the time.
With a
thousand mile range and a 1,600 lb bomb it would be a great strategic
bomber. It
should hold its own even in 1918 though I would not expect the war to last
so long.
Again, it's no F-16 but it should be buildable.


Hardly, the Swordfish was catchable by most late WW1
fighters and didng have much more disposable load
than a Vimy

Or for a more advanced plane how about a Grumman F-4 without the
turbocharger.
I'm not sure the industry of the time was able to build large complex
machines of sheet
aluminum, but if so this is a nice plane for world war one.



The real challenge is to produce something that
can be built with the technology of the day.

The Hurricane has an airframe that would be
familiar to any WW1 mechanic, especially if
you stick to the fabric covered Mk1

The engine is the real problem, probably something like
the 1930's Hawker Hart would be the best option

Keith




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

"Charles Talleyrand" wrote in message ...
Lets suppose you get to give a single new airplane design and a single prototype
to a participant of World War One. You can offer the Austro-Hungarians the
design for a B-52 if you wish. However, that might prove a manufacturing
challenge to them (and one can only wonder about their supply of jet fuel).

Your goal is to change history. You can hope for a German victory or just that the
Allies win faster. It's up to you.

So, what design do you offer, remembering that this design must be manufactured, fueled,
and armed by the natives?

My first guess, a Fairey Swordfish in 1914 should be buildable and dominate the
skies. The speed, range and bombload would be simply unknown at the time. With a
thousand mile range and a 1,600 lb bomb it would be a great strategic bomber. It
should hold its own even in 1918 though I would not expect the war to last so long.
Again, it's no F-16 but it should be buildable.

Or for a more advanced plane how about a Grumman F-4 without the turbocharger.
I'm not sure the industry of the time was able to build large complex machines of sheet
aluminum, but if so this is a nice plane for world war one.

Perhaps not the airplanes but their armament, a machine gun based on
known Gatling technology but significantly lighter in weight. The
Brits used incindiary rockets on the Zeppelins, would napalm on the
trenches be a significant addition?

"Jack Linthicum" wrote in message
om...


Perhaps not the airplanes but their armament, a machine gun based on
known Gatling technology but significantly lighter in weight.

The problem would synchronising the gun with the engine.
Vickers and Lewis guns were perfectly adequate

The
Brits used incindiary rockets on the Zeppelins, would napalm on the
trenches be a significant addition?

Not really , they dropped poison gas and phsophorus
bombs as it was.

Keith

Keith Willshaw wrote:
"Jack Linthicum" wrote in message
om...
The
Brits used incindiary rockets on the Zeppelins, would napalm on the
trenches be a significant addition?

Not really , they dropped poison gas and phsophorus
bombs as it was.

And the Germans certainly had flamethrowers by the end of the war.


--
Nik Simpson

"Charles Talleyrand" wrote in message ...
Lets suppose you get to give a single new airplane design and a single prototype
to a participant of World War One. You can offer the Austro-Hungarians the
design for a B-52 if you wish. However, that might prove a manufacturing
challenge to them (and one can only wonder about their supply of jet fuel).

Your goal is to change history. You can hope for a German victory or just
that the Allies win faster. It's up to you.

So, what design do you offer, remembering that this design must be
manufactured, fueled, and armed by the natives?

My first guess, a Fairey Swordfish in 1914 should be buildable and dominate
the skies. The speed, range and bombload would be simply unknown at
the time. With a thousand mile range and a 1,600 lb bomb it would be a
great strategic bomber. It should hold its own even in 1918 though I would
not expect the war to last so long. Again, it's no F-16 but it should be
buildable.

Or for a more advanced plane how about a Grumman F-4 without the turbocharger.
I'm not sure the industry of the time was able to build large
complex machines of sheet aluminum, but if so this is a nice plane for
world war one.

Junkers had already pinoneered All alloy construction monoplanes in
WW1. The Junkers J1 is generaly accorded that honour and by all
accounts it was a succesfull designe extremely difficult to shoot
down.

My feeling is that knowledge of materials for engine development was
what kept engine weight up and kept down the performance of most of
these aircraft. For instance an engine of the quality of the cyclone
seen on Charles Lindbergs Spirit of St Louise would have immeasurably
improved the performance of these aircraft especially if fitted with
NACA style cowlings. It most certainly was easily buidable by the
fabrication techniwques of the day. Prior to that engines were bulky
liquid cooled models or clumsy rotaries.

I suspect if an engineer of the capability of Hugo Junkers had of
produced a light weight air cooled radial for mating with an Junker J1
style airframe an immensly fast and tough aircraft would have
resulted. (I would say speeds of 160-170mph). Higher speeds with
knowlege of the wing sections & aerodynamics that were developed
between the wars. Armed with machine gun and perhaps the 20mm cannon
that were appearing (and capable of punching through any armour of the
day) an effective air superiority, reconaisence and ground attack
aircraft would have resulted. Reconaisence is a particularly critical
mission.

An larger two engined aircraft capable of delivering bombs and
torpoedoes would also have been required to damage the British Fleet
and break the naval blockade strangling and starving Germany and
Austria-Hungary and it might require some higher quality bomb sights.

Such a technical leap probably would have been possible if luck had
placed the right managerial and technical people in the right
postions. The Germans and Austro-Hungarians were an inventive lot.
Had someone decided that aircraft were the way to go an invested a
little extra time. Where was that someone but?

The inventor of Radar was a German called Christian Husselmeyer. (He
called it a telemobilscope) patented in 1899 and demonstrated in 1903
it was rejected by Gross Admiral Tirpitz whom said "my people have
other ideas". Husselmeyer had been motivated by witnessing the deaths
of many people due to a collision of barges on the Rhine during a fog.
His designe had a very effective directional antena.

I have no doubt that had he received funding (and had users of Marconi
radio network not erroneously though that it interfered with Marconis
patents) the Germans could have developed radar with ranging abillity
by 1914 for opperation from capital ships for detection of the enemy.
It would have simplified high speed night time opperations. It may
have been decisive at the battle of Jutland.


It would have also changed the whole Titanic saga as its primary
purpose was collision avoidence.

However the secret is to ascertain what technolgy is advantageous and
then meld it appropriatly. The Germans repeatedly gave up technical
leads, even in microwave techniques, through bad managment and bad
luck. Doenitz had been warned in 1935 that submarine coning towers
were bing picked up by experimental german radars at 2 km range. They
could have optimised their submarines for underwater attack at that
time, instead of waiting for the type XXI but they didn't. It cost
him his son and Germany the war.

In article , "Keith Willshaw"
wrote:

"Jack Linthicum" wrote in message
om...


Perhaps not the airplanes but their armament, a machine gun based on
known Gatling technology but significantly lighter in weight.

The problem would synchronising the gun with the engine.
Vickers and Lewis guns were perfectly adequate

The
Brits used incindiary rockets on the Zeppelins, would napalm on the
trenches be a significant addition?

Not really , they dropped poison gas and phsophorus
bombs as it was.


Cluster munitions would be even more effective, although the timing
would be a challenge.

"Keith Willshaw" wrote in message ...

My first guess, a Fairey Swordfish in 1914 should be buildable and
dominate the
skies. The speed, range and bombload would be simply unknown at the time.
With a
thousand mile range and a 1,600 lb bomb it would be a great strategic
bomber. It
should hold its own even in 1918 though I would not expect the war to last
so long.
Again, it's no F-16 but it should be buildable.


Hardly, the Swordfish was catchable by most late WW1
fighters and didng have much more disposable load
than a Vimy

I said a Swordfish in *1914*, which is beyond unbeatable by the planes of
1914.

I don't even think it's catchable by fighters of 1918. A Spad XIII has a top speed of
135 mph, an Fokker D. VII has a top speed of 120 mph, and a Swordfish has
a top speed of 138 mph. Remember, a fighter has to be significantly faster than
the bomber to catch it and make repeated passes at it.

http://www.budiansky.com/planes.html#wI

"Eunometic" wrote in message om...
My feeling is that knowledge of materials for engine development was
what kept engine weight up and kept down the performance of most of
these aircraft. For instance an engine of the quality of the cyclone
seen on Charles Lindbergs Spirit of St Louise would have immeasurably
improved the performance of these aircraft especially if fitted with
NACA style cowlings. It most certainly was easily buidable by the
fabrication techniwques of the day. Prior to that engines were bulky
liquid cooled models or clumsy rotaries.

Suppose someone gives them a construction manual and a prototype
of a radial engine (probably without the turbocharger) for any common
radial engine of the 1940s. Can they get the correct alloys and build to
the needed tolerances?