What aircraft (any side) would you develope further

[Civettone]

Here's another go at German aircraft. Besides the already mentioned Bf 109Z as Zerstorer, Aufklarer, Jabo, Begleitungsjager, ...

I would develop the Fa 223 derived Fa 284 heavy helicopter in such a way that it would be powered by a single BMW 801, and produce it in large numbers. A relatively cheap tactical transport helicopter would be the result, giving the Germans incredible mobility. Such a helicopter would be capable of transporting light armoured vehicles, supplies, troop compartments, light artillery, ... over territory otherwise difficult to reach. The Fa 223 was also to be used as a mine layer as submarine hunter.

Also the Flettner Kolibri would have to be produced in larger numbers and in a more powerful version. Using the Argus As 10 engine would be a better choice than the Siemens engine, what would also simplify production as the trainer and liaison aircraft used this engine.

The Hs 123 should have been taken back in production as it proved to be a cheap, reliable and effective ground attack aircraft. I would power it by the BMW 132K and from 1944 onwards weapon it with Panzerblitz 1 rockets.

The Hs 129 I would give a single 37mm gun. This gun fired rapidly so there was not much need for two of them as was the case with the Ju 87G. The Ju 87G only carried about 6 shells for each gun so it had a very limited endurance. The single gun for the Hs 129 could perhaps have been supplied with 12 shells. It was also a gun which could be carried relatively easy by the Hs 129, unlike the 75mm gun!

The Do 26 would have made an excellent maritime reconaissance aircraft. Because of its diesel engines it had the range for it, plus it could carry radar and bring supplies to the U-boats which in turn could refuel these aircraft giving them an endurance of days!

The Me 261 should have been given DB 610 engines enabling them to fly liaison missions to Japan without having to cross Russian territory. Passing on military and technological information could be carried out without relying on slow and endangered U-boat missions.

The Lippisch P 20 was derived from the Me 163 but was to be powered with a turbojet engine. This could well have made a true Volksjager, even easier to build than the Bf 109 and easy to fly. Also a reconaissance version of this or another Volksjager should be developed, giving the Germans opportunities to cross the Channel and keep somewhat informed and alerted of allied invasion plans.

The Fw 190C with the DB 603 engine should have been given the go ahead instead of the 190D because this engine was (semi-)operational sooner.

A high altitude version of the He 177 (A-4? but not the He 274!) with 4 coupled DB 603 engines should be built in large numbers, creating a high altitude bomber which could be escorted by the unmatched Ta 152. This combination could once again bomb Britain (but more importantly) Russia without mercy. The western allies would soon overcome the threat but Russia would have been an excellent target: Russians didn't have high altitude interceptors (except for the P-63) and would be overstretched to defend every city and industrial centra from Murmansk to Baku, all within reach of the He 177 bomber. And after that it could still be used as a night bomber. An ideal stop gap until the arrival of the jet bombers in 1945!

The V 1 should be enlarged and powered with either two As 014 engines or one more powerful As 044 engine. A bombload twice the size would have to be achieved, depending on the speed requirement of 420 mph. If it would go slower, it would be an easy target. Going faster would mean that fighter aircraft would be withdrawn from intercepting them while this was the main success of the V 1: it drew lots of allied resources in countering this new threat. For the same reasons production (but not development) of the V 2 should be stopped completely!

A thought which I also had been thinking of would be to equip the Ju 87 with a pulsejet engine in order to give it extra power in case of enemy fighters. It should be possible to build this on top of the rear fuselage, eliminating the position of the rear gunner.

That's all I can think of from the top of my head.
Kris

[delcyros]

I think I have a serious starter:

In 1937, Heinkel developed a today nearly forgotten four engined long range plane, the He-116. This airplane, while designed for postal trans atlantic missions was a land plane and used excellent aerodynamic lines by the hands of designer Siegfried Günther. The normal range with 1000 Kg payload was 3400 Km. NOTE THAT A He-116 GOT THE TOTAL RANGE WORLD RECORD WITH A RANGE IN EXCESS OF 10.000 KM PRIOR TO OUTBREAK OF WW2! The flighttime was around 46 hours. Two He-116 were delivered to Japan and continued to be used by Japan until wars end. Their fate is unknown.
And all this was done on 4x240 hp engines -imagine four more potent licence build french raidials or up to date Jumos!! That would give a nice maritime interdiction plane avaiable for the battle of the Atlantic!

[renrich]

I have advocated Drgondog's idea about the F4U being produced as a AAF fighter in earlier posts and this would have not been some fantasy. In fact I would have contracted with Republic to produce Corsairs instead of Jugs. The F4U1 had substantially more range than the P47Bs. It was ready for action earlier. Had a better climb rate and was more maneuverable. If, later on, a higher altitude capability was desirable it could have been fitted with a different super charger setup or even a turbo supercharger. Vought experimented with a turbo for the Corsair but decided the additional complication and weight was not worth the additional altitude capability for Naval use. What would have happened in early 1941 if the Vought design had been taken over by Republic in order to produce a fighter for the AAF? Of course inter service rivalry would never allow such heresy. Everyone "knew" a shipboard fighter could "never' compete with a land based design.

[kool kitty89]

The four engined variants of the He-177 would have made good bombers, and would have had much more reliable engines, though Heinkel was forbidden to create such designs he built a few prototypes independantly. The requirement that a HEAVY bomber thad doubled as a DIVE bomber was idiotic; it would have been better to make such a requirement on a heavy fighter or light bomber.

Vought certainly made some great designs, too bad the XF5U wasn't ready before the war's end, it had a powerful armament, awsome agility at most speeds, and speed only beaten by jets. It was also extremely tough, after the prototype crash-landed during a test-flight neither the craft nor Pilot (Charles Lindbergh) were seriously harmed. It would be a bit of a pain for mechanics though.

I agree about the corsair, it woul have made a good USAAF fighter, the Jug was introduced only a few months before it and the only real advantages of the P-47 over the F4U were firerpower (only slight) and ceiling (due to turbocharger) while the corsair was much more maneuverable and about as tough, and had better cocpit visibility (until the bubletop was added to the P-47), though neither aircraft had good visibility on the ground (hence Hose-Nose) and the Corsair was lighter than the thunderbolt.

[130fe]

What about the XP-67 Moonbat, or giving the P-61 bigger motors (Maybe 3350s) I think those who posted in with Whirlwind and the Schwalbe were right on two.

[130fe]

that would be too, not two-- sorry friends

[Civettone]

130fe, there is also such a thing as an edit button...

Hello Kitty, the He 177 didn't need 4 seperate engines. By 1944 the engine overcooling problems were largely sorted out and the He 177 proved to be a reliable aircraft. In the end it was the fuel shortage which ended a promising career. I suppose the main reason behind the He 277 was because that way the more powerful DB 603 could be used.

Kris

[Marshall_Stack]

It would have been nice if the USAAF would have tried a squadron of F4U1s in Europe. I think they should have also tried night bombing with the RAF. B-17s were bombing at night in the southwest Pacific against Rabaul in 1942.

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Originally Posted by 130fe

that would be too, not two-- sorry friends

Edit Button please...

[drgondog]

Originally Posted by Marshall_Stack

It would have been nice if the USAAF would have tried a squadron of F4U1s in Europe. I think they should have also tried night bombing with the RAF. B-17s were bombing at night in the southwest Pacific against Rabaul in 1942.

Why?

The US Strategic Air Force was neither trained nor equipped for night ops in Europe. Secondly, doubling up 8th and 9th AF for night ops would have made for very interesting air traffic/logistics management in terms of planning and preparation - particularly if USAAF decided to fly a mixture of day and night ops from same bases. Imagine the fun co-ordinating with RAF in context of planning and air traffic control.

Early Pacific night ops were a function of necessity as Japanese had control of air over Truk and Rabaul and target definition in harbors was actually feasible as contrasted with typical ETO conditions. But once control of air established USAAF went dominantly to day ops until LeMay changed the game for 20th AF in March 1945.

[130fe]

Sorry about that, did not know about the edit button. I know we have strick adherence policy to sticking to subject here and not wasting posting space with petty remarks. Cheers.

[renrich]

To me, the F4U idea is interesting because I believe that the Corsair represented almost the apex of recip single engine fighter design. Given the compromises that are visited on a design because of shipboard requirements, if Republic had taken the design and adapted it to AAF needs, surely the air frame would have lost weight(no folding wings, no tailhook, less stringent structural requirements, no marinised parts) and this would resulted in increased performance. Since the standard Corsair performance was right up there with the best of them, what a hot rod would have resulted.

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Originally Posted by 130fe

Sorry about that, did not know about the edit button. I know we have strick adherence policy to sticking to subject here and not wasting posting space with petty remarks. Cheers.

No worries.

You will actually see we are pretty lax around here.

[Jank]

How about the P-47 as developed into the XP-47J or XP-72? With their approximately 500mph speed, they were operating very close to the limit of propeller aircraft.

XP-72


XP-47J

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

[Civettone]

Good idea Renrich, the Corsair was one of the finest fighters and FBs of WW2. On the other hand, what the USAAF really needed was a long-range fighter. Then the Corsair would just have been another Thunderbolt which also appeared in 1943 and was superior to the enemy aircraft.

Kris