de Havilland 4 engined unarmed bomber

[wuzak]

Did such a proposal exist?

I have read about the improved Mosquito project with two Griffons and the Super Mosquito with two Sabres, but was there a 4 engined job?

Would it have had 4 x Merlins?

What load, range, performance was it projected to have?

 

[wuzak]

Anybody?

I was hoping there was a reference in Buttler's British Secret Projects. I have a copy but don't currently have access.

If we can't find any info, how about a hypothetical?

Can we make a 4 engined high speed bomber?

I would think that we could start with 4 x Merlin 20s and open up to a choice of metal or wooden construction.

Crew - I'm thinking 3 - pilot, navigator, bombadier.

If we aim for an 8000lb bomb load, what wing span do we need? Can we match Mosquito speeds and endurance, or exceed them?

Will the size limit manoeuvrability, and thus mean less advantage over traditional heavies?

 

[vikingBerserker]

I only came across their Albatross, but it appears that it was never considered as a potential bomber. I could not find anything else.

 

[Jabberwocky]

The 4 engine Mosquito never really appears to have been studied seriously. De Havilland and the Air Ministry were busy with the DH 99/101 (the heavy/super/Sabre Mosquito/Mosquito Series II/Mosquito Hawk, or whatever you want to call it) and the Hornet and Vampire.

The Sabre Mosquito was a slightly up-scaled DH 98, meant to haul 5000 lbs internally (possibly 8000 lbs) to a combat radius of about 600 miles (roughly London to Berlin and back again) and a still air cruising range of about 1700-1800 miles. Top speed was to be somewhere in the region of 415-430 mph.

Power was to have been supplied by a, three stage, two speed Sabre E. 118 making somewhere from 2100-2200 hp. By late 1941/early 1942 its clear Napier had way too much on its plate getting the Sabre into mass production and reliable enough and development would be seriously delayed. The Griffon 61 was considered, but the performance hit from the less powerful engine basically meant the end for the project.

There was some talk of fitting the aircraft with the Rolls-Royce Eagle or even a jet engine, but by 1944 it was clear that a new generation of aircraft were in the works, and thus the development of the Canberra – which would be the closest thing to a spiritual successor for the Mosquito.

 

[Grampa]

Like this?

 

[herman1rg]

Looks nice

 

[vikingBerserker]

I agree

 

[wuzak]

Like this?

View attachment 201481

Yeah.

Where did you find that, or did you make it?

The engines seem too close together, and their props are in line so could get a bit messy!

 

[tomo pauk]

The drawing is really cool

 

[Grampa]

From a webbsite where ppl can focusting on discussion on what if - plane's. Not sure if I should out up the link to it, they are in some what a rival to this webbsites.

 

[wuzak]

From a webbsite where ppl can focusting on discussion on what if - plane's. Not sure if I should out up the link to it, they are in some what a rival to this webbsites.

You could PM interested people the link. Like me!

About the drawing....

The distance between the inner and outer engines needs to be double what it is shown there. The inner engine also needs to be moved forward, to allow clearence for the props.

 

[wuzak]

Since we are carrying a bigger bomb load thewings will probably have to be repositioned aft.

 

[fastmongrel]

From a webbsite where ppl can focusting on discussion on what if - plane's. Not sure if I should out up the link to it, they are in some what a rival to this webbsites.

Post the link if the moderators dont like it they will remove it. If you want to ask the mods if its okay to post send one of them a private message and they will discuss it and get back to you.

 

[Timppa]

If we can't find any info, how about a hypothetical?

Can we make a 4 engined high speed bomber?

I would think that we could start with 4 x Merlin 20s and open up to a choice of metal or wooden construction.

Crew - I'm thinking 3 - pilot, navigator, bombadier.

If we aim for an 8000lb bomb load, what wing span do we need? Can we match Mosquito speeds and endurance, or exceed them?

Will the size limit manoeuvrability, and thus mean less advantage over traditional heavies?

Using data from Wiki:

DH.98 Mosquito B Mk XVI
Crew: 2: pilot, bombardier/navigator
Length: 44 ft 6 in (13.57 m)
Wingspan: 54 ft 2 in (16.52 m)
Height: 17 ft 5 in (5.3 m)
Wing area: 454 ft² (42.18 m²)
Empty weight: 14,300 lb (6,490 kg)
Loaded weight: 18,100 lb (8,210 kg)
Max. takeoff weight: 25,000 lb (11,000 kg)
Powerplant: 2 × Rolls-Royce Merlin 76/77 (left/right) liquid-cooled V12 engine, 1,710 hp (1,280 kW) each

Performance
Maximum speed: 361 kn (415 mph, 668 km/h) at 28,000 ft (8,500 m)

Four engined Mosquito XVI:
Scale all dimensions by factor 1.41:
1. Wing area 908 ft2
2. Wing span 23.4 m
3. Loaded weight 51,200lb, maximum 70,700 lb (same class as Lancaster or B-17)
4. Bomb load 11,000lb to Berlin and back.

(Aircrafts don't exactly obey square-cube law though)
Same speed as twin engined Mosquito.
The crew could be the same than twin engined plane(2), added with tail gunner.

 

[nuuumannn]

Not much in Tony Butttttler's British Secret Projects as requested by Wuzak:

"De Havilland also studied a development of the Mosquito with four Merlins as a 'fast' heavy bomber but the general arrangement drawing known to have been produced has not been found. In 1941 the company did put forward a design for a high-speed unarmed night bomber, which was a fairly big aircraft of around 46,000 lb (20,866 KG) weight and it seems pretty certain that these were the same project."

Yep Jabberwock, the Canberra was a worthy spiritutal successor to the Mossie - it was initially conceived by Teddy Petter as a private project with Westland as the A.1 bomber with engines buried in the fuselage, but due to differences over things, Petter left Westland in 1945 and went to English Electric, with whom he sorted the A.1 into what became the exceptional Canberra bomber.

 

[wuzak]

Scale all dimensions by factor 1.41:

Why 1.41?

The crew could be the same than twin engined plane(2), added with tail gunner.

The Sabre Mosquito (projected 430mph, 600lb bomb load) would have used 3 crew - pilot, navigator, bombadier. Why would a 4 engined Mossie be any different? Whay would you need a tail gun?

 

[wuzak]

Not much in Tony Butttttler's British Secret Projects as requested by Wuzak:

"De Havilland also studied a development of the Mosquito with four Merlins as a 'fast' heavy bomber but the general arrangement drawing known to have been produced has not been found. In 1941 the company did put forward a design for a high-speed unarmed night bomber, which was a fairly big aircraft of around 46,000 lb (20,866 KG) weight and it seems pretty certain that these were the same project."

Thanks nuuumann

 

[buffnut453]

There's this beast designed at Supermarine by RJ Mitchell. It's unclear whether he intended it to be unarmed...but it had potential:

R J Mitchell and Supermarine: R. J. Mitchell's Bomber and his death.

 

[wuzak]

Definitely was meant to be armed

http://freespace.virgin.net/john.dell/super.JPG

 

[Timppa]

Why 1.41?
The Sabre Mosquito (projected 430mph, 600lb bomb load) would have used 3 crew - pilot, navigator, bombadier. Why would a 4 engined Mossie be any different? Whay would you need a tail gun?

I wanted the wing area and wetted area to be double the original. So with the same shape all dimensions have to be enlarged by factor of square root of 2.
Drag area doubled, parasitic drag doubled, but with twice the power, roughly the same speed.

Twin engined Mossie combined the duties of navigator/bombardier. Why would a 4 engined Mossie be any different?
When in war, I would like to have at least one gun than no guns at all. And tail gun was/is the most important of them. AFAIK B-52's still have them.