WesWorld

Heavenly Pursuits Talons Edition

Fabrica Militar de Aviones (FMA) at the Talons over Cordoba Contest announced several developments on the trade stands.

Japan is to buy two brand new I-100A fighters for evaluation alongside four ex-Fuerza Aerea Argentina standard I-100 fighters powered by Bristol Mercury radial engines. All six will be delivered by late October this year.

FMA has also revealed earlier this year Brazil ordered seven of the I.Ae 4S torpedo-bomber derivative of the revolutionary I.Ae 4 Courier mail plane. Being a carrier-optimised design modifications should be few apart from some armour and torpedo crutches. An option for an additional twenty will be excercised after successful flight tests. The Commando de Aviacion Naval Argentina was thought to have also been interested in such an aircraft for the two new carriers currently under construction in Japan. Brazil would like to place an initial order for seven of the I.Ae4S, with an option for an additional twenty (to be exercised after flight testing and when a carrier actually becomes available).

Development of the FMA M.B.2 continues to progress with few problems so far encountered. Seventy-two will be built for delivery from late 1934. All seventy-two will be built in four batches (18 aircraft each) to be delivered by Jan 1935. Aeravias Argentinas S.A. has ordered four of the airliner I.Ae 5 variant for delivery in 1935. It is hoped the prototype will fly in mid December. Designer A.K Costello in an interview for Heavenly Pursuits described the evolution of the design, "The Chief of Staff of the Air Force General Eduardo Serra was on a routine visit to the works to look over the I-100 production line when he crossed over to my desk. On it he saw a general three-view of the I.Ae.5 airliner, he studied it a while and asked me a few questions before he asked for a pencil. He said what if we add a turret, he drew one at the end of the cabin, and he then drew a ventral gun station before on the ventral view adding a bomb bay. This is how the M.B.2 was born. He saw the potential of the monoplane design and adapted it. Before he left he said to me, I want a prototype in six months on top priority, the airliner can wait. Two hours later I had the official confirmation to begin work."

Tucan also had good news at the Airshow being given an order for seventy-two T-17 ground attack aircraft and options on a further hundred.

In response to a Commando de Aviacion Naval Argentina requirement for a torpedo bomber the Atlantean firm of Spartan has developed a variant of the Vanquish bomber capable of carrying a torpedo, an extra crew member and improved defensive armament. Details are still sketchy.


Rumors have also surfaced that a new fighter is under development to replace the I-100 from 1936. Details are almost non-existant and only a small artists impression has been released but banned from public publication.

How does Argentina do it? Mexico has been trying to get export orders and FMA already has like 1,000 exports orders? I don't think anyone else has been so succesful.

BTW Royal Australian Steamship Lines will soon be ordering the civilian version of the I.Ae 4.

It was a good plane at the right time. Most of those 1000 orders have gone to Brazil though, Atlantis, Italy and Siam only ordering a handful of the type. In Italy's case, to pick them apart and see how they work.

I'm not sure that the MB.2 needs an engine, it'll just repell the ground from it's looks.

What would you expect from "Ugly aircraft inc"!

Atlantis initially purchased the I-100's to pick em apart as well but then liked the design so much decided to licence built them.

I like the B-2 Vanquish Variant, improved firepower over V-1.0

Not much of a fan of turret fighters, but that is a nice little torpedo bomber. Btw, are we still going by the year+3 standard for aircraft? I've seen a couple designs online that I'd like to introduce if that's the case.

Quoted

Originally posted by Fyrwulf
Btw, are we still going by the year+3 standard for aircraft? I've seen a couple designs online that I'd like to introduce if that's the case.

Yes, more or less.

The Vanquish B.II has a strange appearance from the humpback. Cutting down the aft fuselage and adding a different turret like the Beaufort would probably solve the looks problem.

Quoted

Originally posted by Red Admiral
Yes, more or less.

Excellent. There are a three or four propeller-driven Brit designs I want to introduce in '34 that have caught my attention, assuming RLBH consents.

Actually, since you're the expert on aircraft here, what's your opinion on contra-rotating props?

Contra-rotating props are to heavy, complicated, and uneccesary right now. Engine technology is not advanced enough to require them. They become neccesary once engines start reaching 3,000 hp. Only racing planes are reaching those HPs right now.

Are you by any chance looking at Martin Baker's planes?

No, although his MB5 is quite similar to some of the aircraft I'm looking at. Specifically I'm looking at the Folland Fo117, Hawker P1030, and Supermarine Type 391 for Sienar Fleet Systems. If RLBH lets me get greedy, I'm also looking at the Gloster F9/37 as a specialist night fighter and the Bristol F18/37 as an attack fighter. Mind you, most of them won't be produced as they would've been for the Brits if they ever entered service, but they'll still be fairly close. If RLBH gives the go-ahead, I'll have Sienar begin the half-decade long struggle for proper contra-rotating props and powerful enough engines to justify their use sometime around '37.

Which airplane used counter-rotating props in OTL 1940?

As said before, contra-props add considerably to the weight and complexity. Until 2500hp they aren't really worth it. You need a certain blade area to transmit an amount of power. The most efficient prop will have 1-blade but this isn't practical for most aircraft. The diameter of the props is limited to around 12/13ft because of the aircraft themselves. The only way to add more blade area and thus transmit more power is to add more blades, typically going 2-3-4-5. After 5 it becomes more problematic, so 6 blade contraprops were used.

On those aircraft, you're going to have real problems designing powerful enough engines for them. The smallest is the Centaurus at 2500hp. Quite an advance on the current (1934/35) radials giving around 1100hp. A lot of that can be managed by simply designing a larger engine of around 50L displacement but that'll only get you up to around 1800hp.

Quoted

Originally posted by HoOmAn
Which airplane used counter-rotating props in OTL 1940?

None, although I'm sure the concepts were around. As I said, that's just the beginning of the process. At earliest they'd be introduced in '43.

Quoted

Originally posted by Fyrwulf
I'll have Sienar begin the half-decade long struggle for proper contra-rotating props and powerful enough engines to justify their use sometime around '37.

Didn´t sound like 1943 to me so I asked...

Quoted

Originally posted by Red Admiral
On those aircraft, you're going to have real problems designing powerful enough engines for them. The smallest is the Centaurus at 2500hp. Quite an advance on the current (1934/35) radials giving around 1100hp. A lot of that can be managed by simply designing a larger engine of around 50L displacement but that'll only get you up to around 1800hp.

The Folland Fo117 is listed as having a Bristol Centaurus XII or Napier Sabre engine. Not sure on the horsepower, as it isn't listed. The Hawker P1030 is a freaking beast, it has the Eagle 46H.24 engine listed at 4,020 horsepower. The Supermarine Type 391 is also listed as having a 46H.24, although it must be a slightly different version because the horsepower is listed as 3,550.

I think all of those qualify, by quite a wide margin, as having the power necessary to effectively use contra-rotating props.

Quoted

Originally posted by HoOmAn

Quoted

Originally posted by Fyrwulf
I'll have Sienar begin the half-decade long struggle for proper contra-rotating props and powerful enough engines to justify their use sometime around '37.

Didn´t sound like 1943 to me so I asked...

I can see where you'd be confused, but I bolded the proper emphasis. What I meant to say was that the R&D effort would begin around '37 and bear fruit in the form of workable aircraft in '43 or thereabouts.

Aaaaahhhhhh....... I see.

Quoted

I think all of those qualify, by quite a wide margin, as having the power necessary to effectively use contra-rotating props.

No, I meant in the other sense, as in; Brazil is going to have an extremely hard time building an engine of requisite power to get near the performance of those types mentioned above.

Quoted

Originally posted by Red Admiral
No, I meant in the other sense, as in; Brazil is going to have an extremely hard time building an engine of requisite power to get near the performance of those types mentioned above.

Ah, that. With all respect, you haven't studied enough Brazilian history to understand just how starkly different the Empire of Brazil was from the later Republic of Brazil.

The Empire was a fully modern nation with a liberal government (in the classical sense.) Unfortunately when the pro-slaver Republicans took over and Pedro II was deposed, industrial development pretty much came to a crashing halt. Even still, the Republicans had a carry over period where the liberal policies of the old Empire allowed them to purchase two of the most advanced (and certainly the fastest at the time) cruisers in the world in 1904 and then in 1912 purchase a pair of arguably the most powerful dreadnoughts afloat (at least for a short while.) Brazil didn't even begin heavy industrialization until WWII under America's lend-lease program.

Compare that to my Brazil, where the coup failed and the Empire continued on to become a very stable nation. The economy is healthy and heavy industry is in place already with a great deal of infrastructure development having taken place in locations that still aren't developed in modern day Brazil and that development is continuing on. The military is getting the bulk of the developmental attention now because the civil framework and some of the fleshing out is done, so priorities have shifted (especially in light of the fact that the Brazilian military is no longer adequate to stand of its neighbors.) So, it's not that Brazil can't come up with a good engine with a lot of hard work (although there are a handful of nations who could turn out equal engines with half the effort), it's that the Empire has felt no compulsion to do so until now. However, now that the need exists, it'll happen and in fairly short order.

Besides, Argentina needs competition

Industrial advancement has little to do with this. To produce engines of this power you need considerable experience and large scale testing facilities, especially windtunnels to simulate flight conditions. Of course, with all that power you also need extremely large radiator surfaces. A 5 year program is probably reasonable but the company will need some design experience first. I can see competition with Argentina being quite a driving force.