Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

1939 "Fast Jet" Research is No.1 German Priority

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • 1939 "Fast Jet" Research is No.1 German Priority

    January 1939,

    Herman Georing convinces Adolph Hitler to Fast-Track Jet Engine Research and Airframe Designs for both:

    Jet-Propelled Fighters
    Jet-Propelled Long-Range Strategic Heavy Bombers


    September 1939,

    Germany has made RAPID Advances and has excellent working prototypes for both.

    They pass all flight tests and are capable of higher altitudes and greater speeds way beyond that of coventional prop-driven aircraft.

    Are Britain and Europe screwed?

    Cheers
    Roger, I see them. Attacking now

  • #2
    Not in the longer run. Assuming all the technical problems of jet engines can be resolved in five years vs ten and these things appear, then the British (& by extension the US) start their own crash programs. A few more years and they have caught & passed Germany in production of equally performing aircraft.

    For the German jet aircraft to make a real difference they have to be much better combat planes than the Me262 & other types actually produced. So unless there are other significant gains in aircraft technology one loses certain capabilities. Particularly the dive bombing technique that was so usefull for the Luftwaffe. Looking at the ranges for the Arado 234 or Me262, and the maintinance down time, its hard to see the same tonnage of bombs delivered in the battle of France or the battle of Britian.

    ie: over five hundred Luftwaffe bombers delivering precision dive attacks were critical to preparing the way for Guderians attack at Sedan. Would just two hundred Arado high speed bombers, with a smaller payload each and less accurate delivery have accomplished the same effect?

    To gain air superiority for the battle of France, and then fight the Battle of Britian the Me 262 has the be several orders of magnitude more reliable than historically. Otherwise there are not enough remaining to fight the latter battle. Similarly the jet bomber must be as relaible as a Doiner or Henkeil bomber. In 1940 the engines of both represented ten years of refinement and thirty years of experince with piston aircraft engines. The same reliability for the Luftwaffes jet engines must be obtained in five years.

    To fly a truly effective jet air force in 1939 the Germans would need to develop two generations of aircraft in those five or six years. In that case then yes the Allies would be screwed, unless they can accomplish two generations worth of jet aircraft development in five years or less.

    Comment


    • #3
      Its hypothetical?

      Yeah, but I mean't, assuming all major technical and reliability issues are over-come within 12-18 months and full production proceeds straight after that.

      In WWII, Germany had some of the Finest Scientific Minds - America, Britain and the Soviets all scurried to snatch them up after the war.
      How would the space-race have gone without the German Scientists and their Rocket Technology?

      During the war, Hitler put Jets on low priority prefering Tank production and others first.
      The arrival of the Me262 late in the war and in only relatively small numbers is IMO why it didn't have much of an impact on the war.

      Tell me if I'm wrong but wasn't only one Me262 shot down by a prop-plane in WWII? - Me262 was shot-down as it attempted to land?

      Cheers
      Roger, I see them. Attacking now

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Aussie Dave View Post
        Its hypothetical?

        Yeah, but I mean't, assuming all major technical and reliability issues are over-come within 12-18 months and full production proceeds straight after that.

        In WWII, Germany had some of the Finest Scientific Minds - America, Britain and the Soviets all scurried to snatch them up after the war.
        How would the space-race have gone without the German Scientists and their Rocket Technology?

        During the war, Hitler put Jets on low priority prefering Tank production and others first.
        The arrival of the Me262 late in the war and in only relatively small numbers is IMO why it didn't have much of an impact on the war.

        Tell me if I'm wrong but wasn't only one Me262 shot down by a prop-plane in WWII? - Me262 was shot-down as it attempted to land?

        Cheers
        Yes, Braun and his team were the top scientists in rocket research, but we are talking about jet planes.
        Many Me-262 were downed in combat by propeller Allied fighters, and at least in one occasion also by a soviet ace pilot. The Me-262 was at his best as an interceptor against bombers, but as a dog-fighter it lacked the agility and turning rate of its propeller driven opponents.

        Comment


        • #5
          wasn't the first jet aircraft an Italian Caproni?

          anyways, had German some jets early in production as fighters - say Me262's - operational in late 1942 - early 1943 the result - long explained in the many what if books by historians - would result in a bloody suprise for the bomber command and 8th air force over the Reich....

          ..... but with results to drag the war longer and see German cities nuked into surrender... or Soviet occupation!

          once germany failed to seize Moscow in 1941, and once the US entered the war, it was over. whatever germany did.
          "Freedom cannot exist without discipline, self-discipline, and rights cannot exist without duties. Those who do not observe their duties do not deserve their rights."--Oriana Fallaci

          Comment


          • #6
            But what if...

            Originally posted by Proconsul View Post
            Yes, Braun and his team were the top scientists in rocket research, but we are talking about jet planes.

            The Me-262 was at his best as an interceptor against bombers, but as a dog-fighter it lacked the agility and turning rate of its propeller driven opponents.
            Yes but we're assuming those Brilliant Rocket Scientists are now working on Jet Propulsion, and Germany is putting most its available resources into the project.

            Most of all the EARLIER Fighter Aircraft in WWII as the war progressed, were refined even further.
            eg: The Spitfire Mk.I is inferior compared to a Spitfire Mk.IX

            If the Me262 had arrived in late 1940 and in large numbers, it would proverbly have time to be refined with greater manoverability and speed, or NEW airframe designs produced for lessons learned from the Me262.

            What about the IMPACT a Heavy L/Range Strategic Bomber capable of altitudes that are way beyond the reach of Allied Fighters of that period?
            (Allied Fighters are unable to intercept and German Bombers can operate with impunity.)
            Last edited by Aussie Dave; 24 Nov 06, 13:47.
            Roger, I see them. Attacking now

            Comment


            • #7
              in 1940!!

              well, had some been able to fly.... what about mass production?

              it's quite far fetched in 1940, sometimes despite resources and scientists, you can't go faster than the music... as I often say. "you can't take nine woman to make a baby in a month"... (but it would be fun to try!)
              "Freedom cannot exist without discipline, self-discipline, and rights cannot exist without duties. Those who do not observe their duties do not deserve their rights."--Oriana Fallaci

              Comment


              • #8
                Don't worry, theres no sugar...

                Originally posted by piero1971 View Post
                in 1940!!

                well, had some been able to fly.... what about mass production?

                it's quite far fetched in 1940, sometimes despite resources and scientists, you can't go faster than the music... as I often say. "you can't take nine woman to make a baby in a month"... (but it would be fun to try!)
                In an earlier post I said "Passes ALL Flight Tests" and "Full-Production Proceeds"

                Its all Hypothetical, it is all far fetched and it never happened, but what if...

                We also know man made Rapid and Massive Advances in Technology during WWII, in all modern wars actually.
                (Ironic but - War Inspires Man to Do Great Things.)

                HaHa, We have many sayings that true, How about: "Many Hands Make Light Work"or "Two Heads Are Better Than One"

                cheers
                Roger, I see them. Attacking now

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Aussie Dave View Post
                  In an earlier post I said "Passes ALL Flight Tests" and "Full-Production Proceeds"

                  Its all Hypothetical, it is all far fetched and it never happened, but what if...

                  We also know man made Rapid and Massive Advances in Technology during WWII, in all modern wars actually.
                  (Ironic but - War Inspires Man to Do Great Things.)

                  HaHa, We have many sayings that true, How about: "Many Hands Make Light Work"or "Two Heads Are Better Than One"

                  cheers
                  Give it up Dave. You’re up against the “it didn’t happen so it couldn’t happen” mentality. I’ve stopped trying to do alternate histories after my thread on Sealion which started with 'Assuming that the Germans achieved air superiority'… had someone say I read that part but since that couldn’t happen I ignored it.
                  Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it whether it exists or not, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedy. -- Ernest Benn

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Aussie Dave...dont listen to Tsar. Take your idea and do some research. Then you can develop your idea into something the naysayers cant easily slam.

                    "Yes, Braun and his team were the top scientists in rocket research, but we are talking about jet planes."

                    When Allied inteligence interviewed VonBrauns team post war they were non plussed to discover the Germans had taken their intital research from the American Robert Goddard. They saved themselves several years of research by studying Goddards earlier work on fuel/energy and motor/firing chamber experiments. I dont know where the British got their early development work for their own antiaircraft rockets of 1940 - 41 from. Perhaps they had their own lonely prewar rocket engineer.

                    Goddards work was ignored by the US aircraft industry, which was focusing it research effort in other directions. (Motor power & reliability.) The US aircraft industry also put negligable effort into jet type engine ideas as well. The bottom line was their customers would not pay for research on this completely unproven jet idea. (At least Goddard was able to build some sucessfull rocket motors). It was not until the Luftwaffe, the RAF, the USAF begain throwing money at this, & other untested ideas, that they became reality. or were proven useless. In theory it is possible for serious jet engine research to start inthe 1920s, tho I've been told the metals industry would not have had the high temperature materials available until the late 1930s however much money was piled on that problem. Several other complex problems in other industries were reciving attention & these techniques had to be developed before reliable turbine jet engines could be built. Pulse jets (like the V1 buzz bomb used) or perhaps ram jets would have been possible with pre 1940 metal technology, at least according to my friend here.

                    Which leads to the question of when exactly did anyone first put the idea for a turbine jet engine from paper to test bench?
                    Last edited by Carl Schwamberg; 25 Nov 06, 07:10.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      The jets were useful in defense from the bombers.

                      I also think they would be a real problem for Allied fighters with appropriate tactics and when their primary mission is not to shoot down bombers. Turn rate or not, if you have much more powerful engines, the height/speed energy potential will always play in your favor. You have to turn to dofight but you don't have to dogfight to fight figthers.

                      However, I don't believe they could have made long-range jets in WW2 and then how do you turn it into a war-deciding weapon? You don't win from defense.

                      I also don't think that the fuel supply available to the Germans would have supported bombing with early jet bombers.

                      %%

                      There are a few things that would have gone much better with jet but only in combination with realizing a few other facts.

                      Mainly, the lousy reconnaissance that the Germans did all through the war. A jet reconnaissance system that you can use while the enemy has air superiority could have made a huge difference in a number of areas.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Carl Schwamberg View Post
                        Which leads to the question of when exactly did anyone first put the idea for a turbine jet engine from paper to test bench?


                        The key to a practical jet engine was the gas turbine, used to extract energy to drive the compressor from the engine itself. The gas turbine was not an idea developed in the 1930s: the patent for a stationary turbine was granted to John Barber in England in 1791. The first gas turbine to successfully run self-sustaining was built in 1903 by Norwegian engineer Ægidius Elling. The first patents for jet propulsion were issued in 1917. Limitations in design and practical engineering and metallurgy prevented such engines reaching manufacture. The main problems were safety, reliability, weight and, especially, sustained operation.
                        Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it whether it exists or not, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedy. -- Ernest Benn

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          after all it's not that far fetched and you dont' necessary neeed hordes of german scientists. Italian flew the first operational jet powered plane in 1940...the Campini-Caproni - not a great plane, but still....
                          http://www.regiamarina.net/arsenals/...jet/jet_us.htm

                          so having that one, armed, mass-produced under licence in Germany in 1939, is not a far-fetched hyptosis.

                          with 2 machine guns and speeds above anything that was flying then (ok, it will be tough to shoot down Swordfich biplanes with such a fast plane).

                          with a few sqadrons of such planes in 1939 it would blast out of the skies any allied bombers... battle of England could have been easier too. but in the end, not much difference
                          "Freedom cannot exist without discipline, self-discipline, and rights cannot exist without duties. Those who do not observe their duties do not deserve their rights."--Oriana Fallaci

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            my mistake, the German Henkel He.178V1 was, on August 27, 1939, the first jet plane in the history of aeronautics.
                            "Freedom cannot exist without discipline, self-discipline, and rights cannot exist without duties. Those who do not observe their duties do not deserve their rights."--Oriana Fallaci

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              If you take a close look at the Caproni engine design you will see it had some fundamental flaws making it unsuitable for a combat aircraft. An outstanding experimental machine it was not a first generation combat aircraft like the Me262.

                              If I am reading the text in that web site correctly the compressor of the Capronis engine was a piston powered rather than turbine powered like the German & British designs. Perhaps this is understandble as high speed turbines kept disintigrating on the lab bench in 1935.

                              Comment

                              Latest Topics

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X