Making Bad Designs Good

[Snowtrooper]

What's included in the big list of modifications would have resulted in a completely new aircraft. By the time the Airacuda redesign would have been complete, let alone operational, P-38 Lightning was already available in droves and was a much better long-range interceptor (never mind being able fighter and fighter-bomber), and A-20 Havoc was also being used as night fighter duty (besides being a great ground attack plane in the first place).

Also, the list is missing the most important thing: removing the most retarded idea ever, namely the separately powered APU that powered all the electrical systems including the engines. Would a plain old alternator or two installed in each engine have not sounded "high-tech" enough or what?

[KJ_Lesnick]

wuzak

Are you aware that the Germans actually dropped bombs on 8th AF formations?

Certainly they did so during one of the Schweinfurt missions.

Did it work?


Hobbes

That should be the other way round. The waste gate sits before the turbine. When it opens, air can bypass the turbine, reducing the amount of power going into the turbocompressor and limiting intake pressure.

I was just interpreting the image...


Snowtrooper

What's included in the big list of modifications would have resulted in a completely new aircraft.

You have to consider that the concept largely revolved around the design being built better from the start rather than modified...

[KJ_Lesnick]

Everybody

1. Anybody else have any designs that they'd like to bring up

2. Would anybody like to see the illustration I have for what I was trying to do with the XFM-1 with all the modifications?  My skills are limited but I can probably draw the fuselage as a basic concept to illustrate things

[tomo pauk]

The designs that are 'bad' probably can't be improved that much they become 'good'. Once we 'design' new wing, remodel fuselage, change powerplant type and/or layout, shuffle around crew and armament, that is a whole new thing.

On the other hand, if the design can be improved via some quick fixes, then it was not that 'bad' from the get go.

[KJ_Lesnick]

tomo pauk

Well the idea would involve designing it different from the start in varying degrees: Superficial modification to totally new design around the same concept.

[KJ_Lesnick]

wuzak

I'm curious about something: Would the Fairey Battle have worked if it had two engines?

[wuzak]

wuzak

I'm curious about something: Would the Fairey Battle have worked if it had two engines?

It would have worked.

Whether or not it would be any good is another matter.

[PR19_Kit]

wuzak

I'm curious about something: Would the Fairey Battle have worked if it had two engines?

Kitbasher would know, he's a built a model of one exactly like that. 

[KJ_Lesnick]

wuzak

It would have worked.

Whether or not it would be any good is another matter.

Well, it "worked" with one engine in that it flew, but it was a piece of crap.

From what I remember, the design was conceived because of a worry that international treaty would bar larger bombers (I'm not sure what constituted "larger" -- two engines, payload, range, etc...) and that it was sort of a hedge against such a thing. 

I'm not really sure if the treaty had a prayer to be honest: From what I remember, these treaties were viewed with suspicion

• The treaty would have at the least made it a war-crime to use aerial bombardment to terrorize the civilian population of another country: While it sounds perfectly reasonable to me; a lot of Air Power theorists would have opposed it on the grounds that it would make their actions criminal; the British also were using it to hold down their colonies
  
• There were proposals for providing an international armed-force: This was obviously a national security and national sovereignty issue which few if any nations wanted to be part of
  
• At least one proposal against the use of poison gas by bombers would allow an international force to bomb it's population into submission using poison gas: It reeked of hypocrisy
  

[wuzak]

Most likely a ban would be based on the weight of the aircraft, as it was with ships (displacement).

A twin engine battle may not have fit under that weight.

[tomo pauk]

Why was the Battle a piece of crap?

[PR19_Kit]

Why was the Battle a piece of crap?

The entire concept of the 'light bomber' was past its sell by date by then.

The Battle was woefully underpowered, with a very early Merlin for a relatively large aircraft. It carried only small bombs, and very few of them, and had only a single defensive 0.303 for such a slow aircraft. IIRC the Battle also had a single fixed forward firing gun too, but as it was so clumsy it had zero chance of shooting anything else down.

[Dizzyfugu]

Why was the Battle a piece of crap?

The entire concept of the 'light bomber' was past its sell by date by then.

The Battle was woefully underpowered, with a very early Merlin for a relatively large aircraft. It carried only small bombs, and very few of them, and had only a single defensive 0.303 for such a slow aircraft. IIRC the Battle also had a single fixed forward firing gun too, but as it was so clumsy it had zero chance of shooting anything else down.

That sums things up well. 

[kitbasher]

Even designer Marcel Lobelle suggested 2 engines but the Air Ministry remained wedded to an outmoded concept. 

[tomo pauk]

The Battle was, in 1940, indeed past it's 'sell date'.
It was not past the 'sell date' in the time it was introduced. The 1st monoplane in RAF? Fastest bomber when introduced? That Battle did not received better engines does not mean it was crap.
We can recall another Fairey design that served well in one set of circumstances (night attack on fleet at anchor) while suffering badly in some other set of circumstances (when contested with fighters and Flak during the day, against moving ships). Should we say that Swordfish was crap?
Then, Blenheim. The 1st aircraft that pierced fighter screen of Zeros of Kido Butai. Suffered badly when deployed past it's sell date. Great design, or crap?

BTW, the bombs of 250 lbs were not that shabby for late 1930s, the 500 lbs bombs could be carried under wing (per 'Aviation guide' book n the Battle).