Actually, the B-36 had a different mission - and it was not needed. It was part of a vast program to address the situation if we were thrown back across the seas - and had to fight from the US crossing both of them. The Hughes Flying Boat is another example of this. There was a fine ultra long range medium bomber as well - with in line engines (pushing and pulling - on the centerline). None were given priority because they were not needed.
My mother was trained to make a camera from a shoe box, and film and developer chemicals with household materials - so she could be an emergency photo recon person if UNSUPPORTED by a logistic tail. She ended up training bombradiers and gunners with aiming cameras - because we didn't get invaded! But we had lots of contingency plans.
Perhaps my favorite memo showing our resolve is one by Groves advising top leaders in the know that we might have to absorb several (!!) atomic bombs if Germany got it first! We were NOT going to surrender!
Nakajima G10N Fugaku
Moderators: wdolson, Don Bowen, mogami
-
Philodraco
- Posts: 61
- Joined: Fri Jun 07, 2002 9:05 pm
- Location: War Room
-
el cid again
- Posts: 16980
- Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2005 4:40 pm
RE: Nakajima G10N Fugaku
There are no photographs of this never built or prototyped aircraft. There are drawings. One is published in Francillon.
I think there is a model at Nakajima - and I bet you can get a picture of it. The National Diet Library has an Army section that would probably be able to find it- and they sort of speak English. [They read your letter and reply - just don't give the reply to a grammarian]
I think there is a model at Nakajima - and I bet you can get a picture of it. The National Diet Library has an Army section that would probably be able to find it- and they sort of speak English. [They read your letter and reply - just don't give the reply to a grammarian]
RE: Nakajima G10N Fugaku
This page offers something to make WitP art http://www.j-aircraft.org/xplanes/hikoki_files/g10.htm
Perennial Remedial Student of the Mike Solli School of Economics. One day I might graduate.
RE: Nakajima G10N Fugaku
Sid sez:"My mother was trained to make a camera from a shoe box, and film and developer chemicals with household materials "
This was very common in the Boy Scouts as well..You can also use a Quaker Oats canister, (or any closed box for that matter.)
As for the concept of very long-range 4+ engine bombers, look at the Douglas B 19 on the bottom of all my current posts..It flew well before Pearl harbor, and was nearly as large as the later B 36, (whose designers learned from the development of the B 19...)
This was very common in the Boy Scouts as well..You can also use a Quaker Oats canister, (or any closed box for that matter.)
As for the concept of very long-range 4+ engine bombers, look at the Douglas B 19 on the bottom of all my current posts..It flew well before Pearl harbor, and was nearly as large as the later B 36, (whose designers learned from the development of the B 19...)
-
castor troy
- Posts: 14331
- Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2004 10:17 am
- Location: Austria
RE: Nakajima G10N Fugaku
ORIGINAL: el cid again
I was aware of the G10N project - but it could not have produced a plane (on half power 2500 hp engines) before about 1948 - nor a full power version (which was to use engines which were in effect coupled on each shaft)
before about 1950.
Even the Ki-91 - with 4 engines - is a bit late for the war - but it made RHS so you can see that for yourself. [At least it made the 5 more historical mods - it was dropped by EOS in favor of a more aggressive bomber program]
We don't do planes that cannot produce early enough in 1945 to have some impact on the war - and we much prefer planes in earlier years to excessive devotion to 1945 models.
Now if we did a mod starting mid war - that might be different. We could run it out to 1946 - or even later.
Still - I barely believe in 4 engine bombers for Japan - and I think a 6 engine job is a very poor investment. See my public and private debates with Nemo on the subject! If Germany could not make even 60 Me-264s, even admitting Japan did better than Germany relative to the size of its air industry, I don't believe in vast numbers of 4 engine planes - never mind 6 engine ones. And every time you lose one of those - what an investment you have lost = more than 3 fighter planes in WITP terms (and more IRL). [WITP cost = 126 for G10 and 36 for a 1E fighter or 54 for a 2E fighter or bomber]
Didn´t Germany build like 1500 Me 264 and made 300 operational. Rest was destroyed before, not operational or being captured? Only 60 built seems a bit low I think...
RE: Nakajima G10N Fugaku
ORIGINAL: castor troy
ORIGINAL: el cid again
I was aware of the G10N project - but it could not have produced a plane (on half power 2500 hp engines) before about 1948 - nor a full power version (which was to use engines which were in effect coupled on each shaft)
before about 1950.
Even the Ki-91 - with 4 engines - is a bit late for the war - but it made RHS so you can see that for yourself. [At least it made the 5 more historical mods - it was dropped by EOS in favor of a more aggressive bomber program]
We don't do planes that cannot produce early enough in 1945 to have some impact on the war - and we much prefer planes in earlier years to excessive devotion to 1945 models.
Now if we did a mod starting mid war - that might be different. We could run it out to 1946 - or even later.
Still - I barely believe in 4 engine bombers for Japan - and I think a 6 engine job is a very poor investment. See my public and private debates with Nemo on the subject! If Germany could not make even 60 Me-264s, even admitting Japan did better than Germany relative to the size of its air industry, I don't believe in vast numbers of 4 engine planes - never mind 6 engine ones. And every time you lose one of those - what an investment you have lost = more than 3 fighter planes in WITP terms (and more IRL). [WITP cost = 126 for G10 and 36 for a 1E fighter or 54 for a 2E fighter or bomber]
Didn´t Germany build like 1500 Me 264 and made 300 operational. Rest was destroyed before, not operational or being captured? Only 60 built seems a bit low I think...
Here is the ME 264...
http://www.luft46.com/prototyp/me264.html
Castor Troy..Is it possible you are thinking of the Me 323?
Had the Nazis been able to build 1500, (or even fly 300 ME 264's), certain other English-speaking nations might be speaking German today..[X(]
Actually the numbers you quote seem more correct for the Me 262 Jet fighter/bomber..
-
el cid again
- Posts: 16980
- Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2005 4:40 pm
RE: Nakajima G10N Fugaku
Got to watch those versions numbers. There was a Me-262 - a jet fighter - the Me-263 - a rocket fighter - and the Me-264 - a bomber.
Only a tiny number of Me-264s ever flew - you have more fingers on one hand - and the only production series ever contemplated never was authorized to get the floor space, labor, engines or duraluminum it would have required. The series was considered several different times - but never got the priority needed. I regard it as the most serious of German bomber projects other than the He-177 and the Condor - both of which technically were operational 4E bomber projects. The former was a disaster - for one due to a design concept error they tried to make a heavy "dive bomber" - and it was a very bad idea; a second design concept error was to attempt to mount two diesel engines (!!)
together to drive each airscrew - to reduce the air resistence of four propellers - and that was at least as bad a concept in practice; it is hard to think of a plane program with more fires and crashes than the He-177. The latter was a improvisation on a civil airframe that never had a chance in terms of being a truly viable combat aircraft - its only virtues were range and availability when nothing else was. IJN may be lucky it didn't get the thing into service.
The other candidate for a serious bomber program was the Ju-290 program. It managed some impressive special operations and long range communications flights - including more than one to Japan with Italian crews! But it was too late in development, too large for European airfields, even more expensive (and therefor hard to justify material/labor/plant wise) than the Me-264, and probably not well enough built in the package. For details on all these programs see a new (2006) book Luftwaffe Over America.
Only a tiny number of Me-264s ever flew - you have more fingers on one hand - and the only production series ever contemplated never was authorized to get the floor space, labor, engines or duraluminum it would have required. The series was considered several different times - but never got the priority needed. I regard it as the most serious of German bomber projects other than the He-177 and the Condor - both of which technically were operational 4E bomber projects. The former was a disaster - for one due to a design concept error they tried to make a heavy "dive bomber" - and it was a very bad idea; a second design concept error was to attempt to mount two diesel engines (!!)
together to drive each airscrew - to reduce the air resistence of four propellers - and that was at least as bad a concept in practice; it is hard to think of a plane program with more fires and crashes than the He-177. The latter was a improvisation on a civil airframe that never had a chance in terms of being a truly viable combat aircraft - its only virtues were range and availability when nothing else was. IJN may be lucky it didn't get the thing into service.
The other candidate for a serious bomber program was the Ju-290 program. It managed some impressive special operations and long range communications flights - including more than one to Japan with Italian crews! But it was too late in development, too large for European airfields, even more expensive (and therefor hard to justify material/labor/plant wise) than the Me-264, and probably not well enough built in the package. For details on all these programs see a new (2006) book Luftwaffe Over America.
RE: Nakajima G10N Fugaku
Sid sez: "The former was a disaster - for one due to a design concept error they tried to make a heavy "dive bomber" .
Trivia: EVERY German land bomber was made to be used as a dive bomber because the pre-war philosophy was that was the only way to ensure accuracy!.
The Do 17/Do 217 series had a dive break in the form of a spreading tailcone which opened like a clamshell.
The Ju 88 series had the dive brakes mounted under the wings.
(The FW 200 Kondor is not figured into this "claim" of mine as it was never visualized during design as a land bomber), and in fact the addition of ANY bombload later on caused structual failure of the fuselage and many just "broke in half" just aft of the wingroot.
Only the Brits and the Americans worked at creating a better "level delivery" bombsight before the war, and some bombsights (like the one on Guy Gibsons' Lancasters) were a matter of lining up nails in a sheet of plywood and deliverg the bomb against the Moehne and Eder dams when the dam towers lined up with the nails.
Trivia: EVERY German land bomber was made to be used as a dive bomber because the pre-war philosophy was that was the only way to ensure accuracy!.
The Do 17/Do 217 series had a dive break in the form of a spreading tailcone which opened like a clamshell.
The Ju 88 series had the dive brakes mounted under the wings.
(The FW 200 Kondor is not figured into this "claim" of mine as it was never visualized during design as a land bomber), and in fact the addition of ANY bombload later on caused structual failure of the fuselage and many just "broke in half" just aft of the wingroot.
Only the Brits and the Americans worked at creating a better "level delivery" bombsight before the war, and some bombsights (like the one on Guy Gibsons' Lancasters) were a matter of lining up nails in a sheet of plywood and deliverg the bomb against the Moehne and Eder dams when the dam towers lined up with the nails.
RE: Nakajima G10N Fugaku
Yeah... The Condor was a good patrol bomber, though...
I'm not sure they envisaged the He-177 as a dive bomber. Don't know for definite, obviously...
I'm not sure they envisaged the He-177 as a dive bomber. Don't know for definite, obviously...
We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.
-
castor troy
- Posts: 14331
- Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2004 10:17 am
- Location: Austria
RE: Nakajima G10N Fugaku
ORIGINAL: m10bob
ORIGINAL: castor troy
ORIGINAL: el cid again
I was aware of the G10N project - but it could not have produced a plane (on half power 2500 hp engines) before about 1948 - nor a full power version (which was to use engines which were in effect coupled on each shaft)
before about 1950.
Even the Ki-91 - with 4 engines - is a bit late for the war - but it made RHS so you can see that for yourself. [At least it made the 5 more historical mods - it was dropped by EOS in favor of a more aggressive bomber program]
We don't do planes that cannot produce early enough in 1945 to have some impact on the war - and we much prefer planes in earlier years to excessive devotion to 1945 models.
Now if we did a mod starting mid war - that might be different. We could run it out to 1946 - or even later.
Still - I barely believe in 4 engine bombers for Japan - and I think a 6 engine job is a very poor investment. See my public and private debates with Nemo on the subject! If Germany could not make even 60 Me-264s, even admitting Japan did better than Germany relative to the size of its air industry, I don't believe in vast numbers of 4 engine planes - never mind 6 engine ones. And every time you lose one of those - what an investment you have lost = more than 3 fighter planes in WITP terms (and more IRL). [WITP cost = 126 for G10 and 36 for a 1E fighter or 54 for a 2E fighter or bomber]
Didn´t Germany build like 1500 Me 264 and made 300 operational. Rest was destroyed before, not operational or being captured? Only 60 built seems a bit low I think...
Here is the ME 264...
http://www.luft46.com/prototyp/me264.html
Castor Troy..Is it possible you are thinking of the Me 323?
Had the Nazis been able to build 1500, (or even fly 300 ME 264's), certain other English-speaking nations might be speaking German today..[X(]
Actually the numbers you quote seem more correct for the Me 262 Jet fighter/bomber..
Ooops!! [X(][X(] Sorry of course I misread it and ment the Me262. [8|]
-
el cid again
- Posts: 16980
- Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2005 4:40 pm
RE: Nakajima G10N Fugaku
ORIGINAL: Terminus
ORIGINAL: Dili
That happens from time to time. We just have to remember the employment doutrine of the first IFV´s - infantry fighting vehicles in 1960's-70's. All soldiers using firing ports in vehicle and only getting out 100m from objective...even in 80's the M3 Bradley came with firing ports(they are now covered by armor).
What this has to do with mounting 400 machineguns in a six-engined, 122-ton aircraft and intending to use them for strafing escapes me...
This was intended to shoot down bombers from above. It is simply a giant version of escort bombers dating from the same time frame -
- modified as an air defense vehicle rather than an escort - and
it would not have worked very well.