What If......

[Lightning Guy]

The thing was, the RAF considered the Manchester to be a heavy bomber. If the engines had worked I don't think neither Avro nor the British government would have considered installing the four engines to make the Lancaster. Even if the British government decided they needed a better heavy bomber, I doubt it would had the appearance of the Lanc. It probably would have been something else all together.

[plan_D]

I think they would have, knowing British military mentallity, they do stick to a good design when it's needed, and they are also trying to cut costs (even in war time), designed off something that is already there benefits them, greatly.

[Lightning Guy]

Possibly, the British did develop some outstanding aircraft out of some flops. But I'm not sure they would have taken a good aircraft (the Manchester if the engines worked) and try to substantially improve it. Assuming the Vultures worked I think the RAF might have tried mounting four of them and producing a bomber of B-29 type proportions.

[cheddar cheese]

yup, meaning there would have been a better plane than the lancaster built by avro

[Lightning Guy]

But all of that would have depended upon Rolls Royce managing to make a reliable engine out of the Vulture.

[plan_D]

I think we could trust Rolls Royce to make a brilliant engine, even from scratch.

[bader]

If we didn't have the spit in the BOB i think the battle would have been lost

[Lightning Guy]

The Vulture WAS a Rolls Royce engine, so was the Peregrine, were they "brilliant?" It is true that Rolls Royce had two brilliant success with the Merlin and the Griffon, but they (like most every company) had as many flops as well.

[the lancaster kicks ass]

well if Mrs. Banks is to be belived the spit could take both.............

[cheddar cheese]

the spit could take anything according to mrs banks, including the title of best biplane fighter

[plan_D]

Did he nearly call Rolls Royce a crap engine company, when it's the BEST in the world, it was then, and it is now. Peregrine would have been good if they gave it more attention, but the government ignored them and told them to stay on the Merlin.
And the Merlin wasn't just 'good' it made the Allied Air Force. Even the last production (Built by Spain) 109s had Merlins in them. And in fact the very first prototype 109 had a Rolls Royce engine in it.

So, I'll say again, I think we could trust Rolls Royce to make BRILLIANT engine, even from scratch.

[Lightning Guy]

I stated that the Merlin and the Griffon were both fantastic engines (that's a COMPLIMENT you know). But EVERY company had it's bad moments. For Rolls-Royce the Peregrine, and the Vulture (I noticed you negelected to defend it) were too bad moments. Rolls-Royce still makes excellent engines today, but their position is probably being challenged by GE and P&W and even the Russians have started to produce some quality engines.

[cheddar cheese]

you could say that the merlin was the rolls royce of all engines

[the lancaster kicks ass]

oh you so stole that off me

And in fact the very first prototype 109 had a Rolls Royce engine in it.

however on the bad side, the prototype stuka had a Rolls-Royce in it too................

[cheddar cheese]

sure i did lanc