What aircraft (any side) would you develope further

[Magister]

Republic XP-72

Capable of 490mph at 25,000 feet.

Pratt & Whitney 28 Cylinder R-4360 rated at 3,450hp

Production models were to be armed with four 37mm cannons. (The prototype had six .50's)

After the first test flight in February 1944, the USAAF immediately ordered 100 P-72's but that order was cancelled after it was determined that they needed longer range escort fighters instead.

[delcyros]

Have You ever thought about the weight and recoilforces of four 37 mm guns? Mounted in the wings? Seems for me that they had almost no experiance with wingmounted cannons...
Beside of the fact that the recoilforces alone would render that plane out of control with a single shot, the additional weight of guns, ammo and structural reinforcements of the wing would reduce it´s performance heavily.
I would like to see the Vampire for UK and the Shiden for Japan earlier!
Second would be I 230 and P 63, last but not least Fw-187.

[Jabberwocky]

One more from me

Spitfire

Sounds strange, but bear with me. Range became something of an issue after the inception of the Mk V and the need to pursue German fighters further into Europe as the war progressed. Similarly, the P-47 and later P-51 took over from the Spitfire as the primary fighter type against the LuftWaffe in mid 1943, mostly because they could reach further. In 1939 the Mk I Spitfire had 85 imp gal internal tankage, by 1945 most Spitfires had between 122 and 160 imp gall. The Mk XVII had 175 and the post war Mk 24 flew with 190 imp gal.

Start with the Mk I and keep it with the basic 85 gal (85 total). Go to the improved 96 gal tanks in the Mk II (96 total). Add the 31 gal rear fuselage to the Mk V as a permanent tank, to be filled for L/R missions (127 gal). Add the wing leading edge tanks to the early Mk IX (149 gal). Add the full sized rear fuselage tanks to all production after 1943 (LF Mk IX, LF Mk V, Mk VIII, Mk VII, Mk XIV, Mk XVI) and the eventual total comes to around 190 imperial gallons, or about a 225% increase in capacity by 1943. 30 gal drop tanks are avialable by mid 1941, 45 and 90 gal tanks available by mid 42 and the 170 gal ferry tank available by late 1942. Long range tankage goes up to 280 imp gallons (1270 litres, 335 US gallons). Effective range is more than doubled.

[MacArther]

The bell P-59 Airacomet. Improve the flaps and aireolions (cant...spell...must... hit head... on wall) so it would be a better contender with other planes. Improve the engine output, get new British engines, or just make new American engines. Another thing I would develope, the ever famous "flying Pancake". Get it into action by 1943, give it 4 50 cals and 2 20mms, it would make the Lufftwaffe think twice about attacking bombers if it were used as an escort. Also, imagine the havoc it would reak on the Japanese fleets. Not sure, but wasn't it able to carry about 2000lbs of bombs too?

[Magister]

delcruos - Frankly, I don't think that such an obvious consideration (recoil forces of the cannons) could have escaped the engineers. And I don't think that even you believe that, "Beside of the fact that the recoilforces alone would render that plane out of control with a single shot,"

Unfortunately, we'll never know.

For further information on the XP-72:

http://home.att.net/~jbaugher1/p72.html

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Originally Posted by book1182

How about the He 177 with four engines instead for the two engine lay out. I know it was actually two engines combined but that caused a lot of fire problems.

They already did that. They designed and built the He-274 and the He-277.

Heinkel He 274
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Type: High Altitude Heavy Bomber
Origin: Ernst Heinkel AG (later assigned to SAUF, Suresnes, France)
Models: V1 and V2
Production: Two prototypes
First Flight: December 1945 by the French
Engine:
Daimler-Benz DB 603A-2 inverted turbocharged V12
Horsepower: 1,850hp
Number: 4

Dimensions:
Wing span: 44.20m (145 ft. 2¼ in.)
Wing Surface Area: N/A
Length: 23.80m (78 ft. 1¼ in.)
Height: 2.10m (6 ft. 10½ in.)
Stabilizer Span: N/A

Weights:
Empty: 21,300kg (46,964 lb.)
Loaded: 38,000kg (83,786 lb.)
Performance:
Maximum Speed (Sea Level): 267 mph
Maximum Speed (11,000m): 360 mph (580 kph)
Cruise Speed: N/A
Range: 4250km (2,640 miles)
Initial Climb: N/A
Endurance: N/A
Service Ceiling: 46,915 ft (14,300m)

Armament:
N/A

Avionics:
N/A



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Notes:
Originally designated He 177 A-4, the He 274 was a high-altitude development of the He 177. Like the He 277, the He 274 dispensed with coupled engines and mounted four single powerplants. While originally considered a version of the He 177, growing incompatability of parts led to the redesignation to He 274 and reassignment of the project to SAUF. French resistance workers conspired to slow down development of the He 274 so that the prototypes were not ready at the time of the German withdrawal in July 1944. The French took possession of the prototypes and redesignated them ASA 01A. The prototypes finally flew in December 1945 with French markings.
http://www.warbirdsresourcegroup.org/LRG/he274.html

Heinkel He 277
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Type: Heavy Bomber, Recce and Anti-Shipping Aircraft
Origin: Ernst Heinkel AG
Models: V1 to V3, B-5, B-6 and B-7 Series
Production: N/A
First Flight: Late 1943
Engine:
B-5:
Daimler-Benz DB 603A inverted V12
Horsepower: 1,850hp
Number: 4

B-6:
Jumo 213F
Horsepower: 2,060hp
Number: 4

Dimensions:
Wing span (B-5): 31.44m (103 ft. 1¾ in.)
Wing span (B-6): 40.00m (131 ft. 2¾ in.)
Wing Surface Area: N/A
Length: 22.15m (72 ft. 8 in.)
Height: 6.66m (21 ft. 10½ in.)
Stabilizer Span: N/A

Weights:
Empty (B-5): 21,800kg (48,067 lb.)
Loaded (B-5): 44,490kg (98,096 lb.)
Performance:
Maximum Speed: 354 mph (570 kph)
Cruise Speed: N/A
Range (B-5): 6000km (3,728 miles)
Range (B-6): 7200km (4,474 miles)
Initial Climb: N/A
Endurance: N/A
Service Ceiling: N/A

Armament:
N/A

Avionics:
N/A



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Notes:
An attempt by Heinkel to rectify the problems of the He 177 by mounting four single engines in place of the dual coupled engines, the He 277 was originally met with indifference by Goering. Heinkel was actually banned from developing this aircraft and secretly proceeded by designating it the He 177B. During a meeting with Hitler, Heinkel mentioned the aircraft as a solution to a specification Hitler was making. Hitler ordered the type into production, at which point it reclaimed it's legitimate name of He 277. Numerous prototypes were built but on July 3, 1944 production was halted as the German aviation industry focused on fighter production..
http://www.warbirdsresourcegroup.org/LRG/he277.html

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Now for my developments I would have hurried up the development of the Ta-152 as well as the Ta-183 and the Me P.1011 having flown the last two in early 1944 (again this is only if I had been in charge).

[Jank]

Fiat G.56.

[Magister]

Fun with numbers:

Hispano II 20mm- each gun weighs 50kg
M4 37mm - each gun weighs 96kg

Weight of each projectile
Hispano II 20mm - 130gr (4.59oz)
M4 37mm - 680gr (23.99oz or 1.5lbs)

Rate of fire
Hispano II 20mm - 600rpm
M4 37mm - 140rpm

Muzzle Velocity
Hispano II 20mm - 880ms
M4 37mm - 580ms

Four Hispano II 20mm cannons spew 40 rounds per second
Four M4 37mm cnnons spew 9.3 rounds a second

Total weight of spewage
Four Hispano II 20mm cannons spew 11.46 lbs of projectiles per second
Four M4 37mm cnnons spew 13.94 lbs of projectiles per second

[Jabberwocky]

More fun with numbers;

Average distance between shots;

Hispano II 20mm- 22m
M4 37mm- 65m

Energy in joules at muzzle (Ball round);

Hispano II 20mm- 47168.48
M4 37mm- 116383.52

Amount of High Explosive per round;

Hispano II 20mm- 10.2 g TNT
M4 37mm- 45.36g Tetryl

**Tetryl is 1.39 times more powerful than TNT.**

Potential chemical energy;

Hispano II 20mm - 27744
M4 37mm- 171497.088



**PS the 37mm HE round is 608 grams, M/V is 608 m/sec which means 4 of them put out 12.45 lbs/sec **

[Magister]

Great information Jabberwocky. Where does your data come from?

[Jabberwocky]

Mix of sources.

I have some of the USAAF and RAF armourers handbooks on my HD. Mostly for Hispano, M2 20mm and .303 Browning, but some other exerpts as well.

The information on energy comes from Rings excellent P.R.O documents web site.

Other general use web sites are Tony William's and Emmanual Gustin's excellent web-pages.

[cheddar cheese]

Originally Posted by Jank

Fiat G.56.

There were a couple of G.56 protoypes that flew but I hevent been able to find any performance figures, do you have any?

I'd have hurried Re.2006 development, that would have been one swell fighter.

[P38 Pilot]

For me, I think the He-277B-5 up there should've been massed produce for stragetic bombing in either Britain, or in Russia probably softening up Moscow or Stalingrad.

I think the Gloster Meteor IV should've been massed produced sooner and sent into the skies to dogfight the Me-262.

[delcyros]

Funny?

Compare the recoilforces with each design. You will find out that an excess of 10% of the airframes weight was prevented.
Sample (roughly datas):
Fw-190 A 8
(4 MG 151 /20 and two MG 131/13):

Position:
engine/cog - none
engine cowling: two MG 131/13
wingroots: two MG 151/20
midwing: two MG 151/20
outer wing: none
muzzle vel.: MG 131: 750 m/sec.
MG 151/20: 790 m/sec.
projectile weight: 0.034 Kp (MG 131); 0.115 Kp (MG 151)
basic energy: MG 131: 25.5 Kg/m²; MG 151: 90.85 Kg/m²
Not included gaz effects (and position, since cog position is always more stable) that are around 414.4 Kg/m². The take of weight is about 4 tons. You may agree that it is in the 10% limit and the plane is heavily armed for it´s weight class. You may also compare it with Me-262, Yak-3, Ki-84, Spitfire, Tempest, whatever You want.

Now we deal a 6 ton´s plane with four 37 mm guns:
position: mid wingprojectile weight: 0.68 Kg;
muzzle vel.: 580 m/s
basic energy: 394.4 Kp/m²(37mm)
That are 1577.6 Kp/m²! That is not only exceeding the 10% limit but also beeing nearly a quarter of the planes mass. Such heavy recoilforces would be impossible to deal with by using the wing only! You cannot simply fit any weapon you want on an airframe. For special pruposes, like interception sorties it is possible to exceed the limits for the costs of performances (but it remained unsuitable for the Fw-190 to refit it with MK-103 because of the heavy recoilforces in the mid wing position). !