Which WWIIcountry is in the frontier of the aerospace?

[delcyros]

I agree in the swept back wing. It takes postively effect at transsonic speeds, only. However, in the timeframe up to 1945, the germans developed more than this in the aerodynamic department:

deltawings
area rule
leading edge slots
wing boundary layers
bell shaped lift distibution for a stable flying wing
negative swept wing
variable wing geometry
basic understanding of faster than the speed of sound flight

This is making them the leaders in aerospace aerodynamics technology in my mind. The powerplant department can be divided by rocketry (germans, the US had an advantage with Goddart in an earlier timeframe) and jet engines (debatable).If you argue, that the Nene alone will make the British leading, than you miss my point. The Nene was kind of pinnacle of centrifugal flow design. Not a bad configuration, but limited. The BMW-018 axial engine was planned for the powerplant for bombers (Ju-287 to be more concrete), there was well probability to fit it under it´s wings. However it did not came to this. You know it. The F-9 is a POST WAR axial design, which benefitted from german experiances (esspecially the combustion chambers and turbine blade design). While it is true that it is based on the F-2, it was impossible with the british technology to field reliable axial jet engines with enough poweroutput during ww2. Unlike the germans. They did it. Think of the Jumo-004, imagine it would lead to more advanced engines based on it´s design in the 50´s. This is no argument, as is the argumant of the F-9. On the other side the DB-007 and Jumo-004 E are the most modern jet engines of ww2. Technologically more advanced than even the Nene or Dervent-V. They just had not the same poweroutput.
The british centrifugal flow engines are excellent in the timeframe till wars end, but these designs are not as advanced as axial designs. By the way, no british jet engine, centrifugal or not, was nearly produced in the numbers of the german axial engines during ww2. And the german design was far beyond british capabilities (afterburner, dual flow, fan)You can easily show a race if needed:
W-2B/early Dervents -BMW-003/Jumo-004B up to 2000 lbs of thrust
D.H. Ghost -DB-007 up to 3000 lbs of thrust
Dervent V -Jumo-004 E/H up to 4000 lbs of thrust
Nene -(Jumo-022) up to 6000 lbs of trhust
-BMW-018 up to 8000 lbs of thust
and because you need more, ()=never left it´s drawing board:
(DB-016) up to 28.600 lbs of thrust
And keep in mind that post war designs benefitted from excamination of german axial jet engine designs and construction charts of planned designs. It is interesting that british often refer the RB-39 of 1945 as the worlds first jet engine with diagonal (axial AND centrifugal) compressor (which actually was the german HeS-011) and dual flow (which was indeed
the german DB-007). You can argue that the german designs are not reliable or that they faced big problems to hit even 3000 lbs, not to speak of 5000 lbs. All agreed, but they are under no circumstances BEHIND the british jet engine development during ww2. Indeed they have been more innovative in many ways.
Sources to Rolls Royce Nene:
www.tanks45.tripod.com/Jets45/List of engine:
quote:
"...the "R.B. 41 Nene", which was first bench tested in november 1944 well making over 4000 lbs of thrust..."
Compare also the soviet development of Nene copies: RD 45 (based on UK sold Nene) and VK-1 (improved by means of better heat resistent materials) show a significant thrust difference. The development of Nene 1-10 surely not decreased fuel consumption, only.
I will source the net for further sources, if needed. Additional articles supporting that the Nene in 1944 did not made (but was capable to) 5000 lbs of thrust:
G. Norman, A comprehensive analysis of soviet post war jet engines up to the mid 50´s, in: L.H. Behrens, Probleme zur frühen Strahltriebwerkentwicklung, AVA (Stuttgart 1972), page 312-387.

P. le Goyet, Évolution de l´aviation entre 1939 et 1945, in: Revue d´histoire de la deuxieme guerre mondiale, Vol. 73 (Paris 1969), passim.

D. Richards/H.S.George Saunders, Royal Air Force 1939-1945, Vol. III (London 1953), page 56f.

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

I will agree with you there. The Germans were quite influential on modern day jet designs and you can still see the influence in many aircraft today. The problem is that most of these designs were so far ahead of what they were able to produce that it would not have been possible during WW2.

As for the engines. I will say the German concept was quite advanced but the lack of metals they required made them behind the British and the US. Had the Germans had the proper metals they could have built some great engines and the 262 may have been more capable if it had had engines built with better metals hence not having a 10 hour life span.

Originally Posted by Glider

As well as the engines where we are ahead in Europe, we should be adding the wings. I think I am right in saying that most of the international joint projects the UK have the design lead in wing design.

For military applications we should also add Ejector seats. Even the US Navy use our seats.

No. The NACA was the world leader in airfoil design work. Unfortunately for the Allies, until the mid 1930's the fruits of this research were made public and utilized by virtually every nation. A book of aifoils shapes and the wind tunnel results of dynamic testing were published every year and made available at a very low cost.

Airfoil design really came down to the number of aero-engineers doing research and the windtunnels they had to work with. Only the USA had high atmosphere pressurized tunnels to do sub-scale research. In the 20 atmosphere tunnel a 1/20th scale airfoil facing a 20 mph free stream airflow gave the same results as a full scale model facing a 400 mph airflow in a 1 atmosphere tunnel - excepting mach effects. This tunnel, which began operation in the very late 1920's or early 1930's was used to develop most of the wing airfoils, and many of the prop airfoils, used by WWII aircraft.

Tables such as this:



with data such as this:



were made available to the world by the USA during the 1920's through the mid 1930's in the interest of advancing the world knowlege of flight. The wings of the Spitfire, FW190, Bf109, and many other planes all derived from NACA published data. Later the exhaust from this tunnel was used to drive first an 11" and later a 24" high speed tunnel. Some of that data was made public as well but much of it was kept secret as WWII approached.

In March 1936 the USA completed its 8 foot high speed wind tunnel, capable of free-stream airflows of up to 575 mph:



As you can see it was massive. Similarly massive was the 19 foot 2.5 atmosphere high-pressure tunnel which began operation in 1939:



These tunnels required a huge investment that only the USA was willing to make. And the giant 8,000 HP electric motors required to power them were exclusive to the USA, deriving from the locamotive industry. No other nation had windtunnels anything like this.

It should be noted that while research from about 1936 on was kept secret, the British were not excluded from access to the research results and British research requests were often granted, especially after the US entered the war.

=S=

Lunatic

[plan_D]

The British developed the Delta Wing. In fact, the first flight of a delta wing aircraft was made by Britain not long after the war. That design became the Vulcan.

[plan_D]

And you're missing my point, the F.9 was developed from the F.2. The MetroVic F.2 being the first British axial-flow engine, bench tested in 1941.

[KraziKanuK]

Originally Posted by plan_D

The British developed the Delta Wing. In fact, the first flight of a delta wing aircraft was made by Britain not long after the war. That design became the Vulcan.

How would class the Me163?

[plan_D]

Swept wing!

http://jnpassieux.chez.tiscali.fr/images/Me163_2.jpg



http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...don.750pix.jpg

That picture is of the wonderful Vulcan, a delta-wing bomber.

[Glider]

To RG
Sorry for any confusion. I was thinking of the modern era where there is no doubt that British Wings are generally used in most of the international developments in Europe.
The latest airbus has British engines, wings and landing gear. As for the pre war, I agree with your statement but in the post war development of aerodynamics and other technical advances the sharing of information became a one way street and it wasn't from the USA to the UK.
I don't blame or accuse the American People, it was the good old politics of business that got in the way to the detriment of both sides.
I also recognise that without the Marshall Plan all of Europe would have been economically stuffed. That must be the single most generous act ever.

I agree, the Marshall plan was the single most generous act by any nation in history.

It bothers me sometimes when I see people (mostly British - you know who you are) berate the USA for not having entered the war against Germany earlier. What they fail to understand is that Wilson tried to avoid WWII by a similar plan after WWI, but Britain and France would have none of it and insisted on reperations. The way the USA felt was that after bailing the Allied powers out of WWI we were ignored as to how the peace would be managed - and that caused WWII.

Anyway - don't get me started on how the EU is exporting unemployment through their subsidized Airbus... we been down that one before

=S=

Lunatic

[the lancaster kicks ass]

hey now wait a minute there RG........

firstly the Marshall plan wasn't simply you warm, kind hearted americans trying to help their fellow man, it was just as much to stop us falling to communism, it is not the single most generous act ever at all, more an attempt to keep some airbases in Europe open to you...........

and what do you mean you "bailed us out" in WWI?? your joining of the war made little impact to be honest, far less than you are implying, and as for you "feeling ignored" in the peace disscussions after WWI and that leading to WWII, well that's really pissed me off!! Wilson was there at the peace talks, he was one of the big three, how exactly are you feeling left out?? YOU WERE THERE!! then you decide to set up the league of nations, then it wasn't approved in america, it was the american people's fault that you didn't join!! then you have the absolute nerve to claim that if you were at the peace talks, which you were, you and you alone could have prevented WWII, that's complete **** and you know it...............

and the walls street crash, the fault of you americans might i point out RG, was just as much a cause of WWII than anything else...........

[Glider]

Sorry Lanc but I am going to side with RG on the value of the Marshall Plan. Don't forget that the Americans paid a lot of money so that european companies could build european designs for european airforces. Yes there was an element of not wanting us to fall to the russians, but I have never heard of anyone complaining about it this side of the pond. Americans are not stupid and must have known that they were building business competition for the future as the UK and Germany alone were close to par on research and technical ability.
It would have been cheaper for the USA to churn out more aircraft and give them to our airforces and I doubt that we would have said no.

As for the Wall Street crash, the USA was a massive economy and no doubt made mistakes. However they learnt and dug themselves out of the hole faster than most other nations, including ours.

I am very proud of the UK and what we have achieved with few resources but its churlish and foolish not to recognise what others have achieved or done

[the lancaster kicks ass]

yes america came out of the walls street crash better than most, that's not the point, the crash made the situation worse in germany, a chance which hitlet seized......

[plan_D]

It was the tank that beat Germany in World War 2, not the US. The Allies out-numbered the German forces with armour and the Germans had no way of stopping tanks in World War 1. The US didn't bail the Allies out at all.

You can shut up about the Airbus anyway, since recently there has been accusations being thrown around the WTO about the US funding of Boeing. You just don't like to admit, your country does the exact same thing.

[the lancaster kicks ass]

so you're with me than Pd??

[plan_D]

I'm grateful of the US for the Marshal Plan but that doesn't mean I'm going to start bowing down and saying it's the most generous thing ever, no! It was to cover the US own back more than anything.