WesWorld

Lavochkin IK-38 all-metal carrier-based monoplane fighter with enclosed cockpit and retractable landing gear
Wingspan - 10.0; Length - 9.0m; Height - 3.0m; Wing Area - 18.5m2
Crew - 1; Engines - x 1,100HP Miliukov in-line engine; Empty weight - 2,060kg; Maximum weight - 2,700kg
Defensive armament - 2x 7.62mm ShTAS machineguns, 1x 20mm ShVAK cannon
Top speed - 352kts; Maximum altitude - 12,200m;
Maximum range - 1,200nm

ANT-38 all-metal monoplane bomber with retractable landing gear
Length - 14.60m; Wingspan - 21.3m; Height - 4.0m; Wing Area - 69.7m2
Crew - 4; Engines - 2x 1300hp Mikulin M-35 in-line engine;
Empty weight - 6,1500kg. Maximum weight - 11,350
Armament - 1x 14mm mg in nose, 1x 14mm mg dorsal turret, 1x 14mm mg in ventral mount
Top speed - 276kts. Maximum altitude - 10,000m
Maximum range - 3,6000nm
Combat radius with 2,000kg bombload - 1,000nm at 225 kts
Combat radius with 3,000kg bombload - 500nm at 225 kts


ANT-35b Heavy Bomber- Improved version of the ANT-35
Wingspan - 39m; Length - 23.6m; Height - 6.2m; Wing Area - 188m2
Crew - 8; Engines - 4x 1700HP Miliukov-35 in-line engines; Empty weight - 17,000kg; Maximum weight - 38,550kg
Defensive armament - 6x 14mm machineguns in 3 turrets (Dorsal, Tail, Belly), 2x 14mm machineguns in nose
Top speed - 286kts; Maximum altitude - 10,000m; Maximum range with no bombload - 6,500nm at 235kts
Combat radius with 10,000kg bombload - 1,250nm
Combat radius with 4,000kg bombload - 2,400nm


ANT-35-MP Radar-equipped maritime patrol aircraft
Wingspan - 39m; Length - 23.6m; Height - 6.2m; Wing Area - 188m2
Crew - 8; Engines - 4x 1700HP Miliukov-35 in-line engines; Empty weight - 17,000kg; Maximum weight - 38,550kg
Defensive armament - 2x 14mm machineguns in 1 tail turret, 2x 14mm machineguns in nose
Top speed - 286kts; Maximum altitude - 10,000m; Maximum range - 6,000nm at 235kts
Combat radius - 2,500nm

Hi!

I have not followed all discussions here in the past but I have two questions:

- Isn´t a radar equiped aircraft a bit early in 1938? I understand radar tech is avaiilable in WesWorld easier and earlier than historical but so far I thought we´re talking large, bulky, expensive and to some degree experimental devices.

- Your heavy planes feature 1700hp engines. 1700hp is quite powerful for the era. Has inline engine tech already reached that level that early? If so I´d like to know because the most powerful inline engine the RSAF uses has ~1400hp (radials up to 1500) which is based on a 1941er RR Merlin 45 (the F-6H fighter is comparable to the Spitfire Mk V). Adding 300hp would be quite an interesting increase!

Quoted

Isn´t a radar equiped aircraft a bit early in 1938?

We have submarines with snorkels in service already. Might as well have a countermeasure too.

Quoted

but so far I thought we´re talking large, bulky, expensive and to some degree experimental devices.

That's why I put it on one of the largest heavy bombers in the world and allocated 5,000kg for its weight

Quoted

Your heavy planes feature 1700hp engines. 1700hp is quite powerful for the era. Has inline engine tech already reached that level that early?

Power to weight ratio is 0.85hp/lb. It's a big, heavy engine.

The cavity magnetron hasn't been invented yet (it will be next year and I've the news post ready for that eventuallity) and without that you'll never have a short enough wavelength to pick out a snorkel.
We haven't got to centrimetric wavelengths yet and I don't suppose we will until 1942-43 even following the +3 years rule.

I've no problems with the engines with the figures and explaination you've given.

A centimetric radar set is too early, agreed. But WW 1938 is about right for early airborne radars such as ASV and Rostock.

Due to RA suffering the psoting failure I had yesterday I'm posting this on behalf of him.

Quoted

We have submarines with snorkels in service already. Might as well have a countermeasure too.

On the other hand, schnorkels actually existed then. The only ASV radar set was on an Avro Anson used for trials. It didn't work that well and worked even worse in service as ASV Mk I.

You need centimetric radar to pick up a small object like a schnorkel.

Quoted

Has inline engine tech already reached that level that early?

It's like a bigger RR Griffon engine or a DB 603. They both gave about 1700hp at low altitude for early versions.

What are you taking as combat radius? Its not the radius as given in planebuilder as you need to allocate some fuel to taxi, take-off, climb, combat and reserve. Realistically you're looking at about 1/3rd the range.

Quoted

Originally posted by Hood
The cavity magnetron hasn't been invented yet (it will be next year and I've the news post ready for that eventuallity) and without that you'll never have a short enough wavelength to pick out a snorkel.
We haven't got to centrimetric wavelengths yet and I don't suppose we will until 1942-43 even following the +3 years rule.

The Soviets actually invented the cavity magnetron in the late 1930s and published specs and drawings in a technical journal; they just never pieced it together with radar, and the German spies apparently didn't figure it out, either.

I've never been able to figure out our radar rules: it seems to me that we're well over the +3 years advancement rule, but then we aren't supposed to have PPIs or cavity magnetrons. How many independent countries are working on radar in addition to the IRL research programs? As near as I can tell:
- Russia
- UK
- US
- Atlantis
- Italy
- India
- Japan
- Netherlands?
- Germany
- SAE?

And those are just the countries I think are actively researching radar; a lot of other folks have it or have manufacturing licenses. I'd almost say we're more at a +5 years advancement, just without PPI and the cavity magnetron.

So I have no problem with Russian centimetric radar, BUT... I think this is a good opportunity to discuss our radar advancement rules, because I feel we've been pretty inconsistent about radar.

Germany is staying with the 3-year rule for deployment, though there's a bit more research and a bit less deployment than historical (there's also more work being done on fixed site radars than was done so early, given WW Germany's lower-than-OTL emphasis on the offensive).


The US is also, currently, running with the 3-year rule.

Quoted

What are you taking as combat radius? Its not the radius as given in planebuilder as you need to allocate some fuel to taxi, take-off, climb, combat and reserve. Realistically you're looking at about 1/3rd the range.

I generally give fighters about that, to allow a good amount of time for dogfighting.

Bombers get about 37%, because their bomb run dosen't last as long as a fighter may need for dogfighting.

Quoted

Your heavy planes feature 1700hp engines. 1700hp is quite powerful for the era. Has inline engine tech already reached that level that early?

It is similar in power to the Mikulin AM-38 used in the Il-2, which is a 1941 engine in a 1941 plane so 1938 falls in the 3 year rule...

... and I really see no problem there because Italy already has the 1800hp Isotta Fraschini Asso 1000 in service in its Macchi M.167s (since 1932), not to mention the 2540hp Fiat A.60 Ciclone engine.



Japan's Radar, the Tomoe Tele Raypointer (tm), was created based on the works and ideas of Christian Hülsmeyer, Richard Scherl, Gregory Breit and Merle Antony Tuve (which, according to AWNR's star reporter, Professor Tomoe most likely 'borrowed'). It was just a small story bit I created for fun with the Tele Raypionter being as big as Hood, Lexington and Saratoga put together thus competely useless for the use aboard a ship or in a plane (though the professor believed that bigger is better).

I do glance a little bit at the Navalism tech tree where the Radar tech has a "1925: Futuristic (+5): primitive "modern" search RADAR" level. So I would think we are on that level or one step higher (which we do not have in the tech tree yet) with a slightly better than primitive "modern" search Radar.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cavity_magnetron

Quoted

Originally posted by Brockpaine
How many independent countries are working on radar in addition to the IRL research programs? As near as I can tell:
- Russia
- UK
- US
- Atlantis
- Italy
- India
- Japan
- Netherlands?
- Germany
- SAE?

And those are just the countries I think are actively researching radar; a lot of other folks have it or have manufacturing licenses.

Canada isn't doing a lot of fundamental research, but since Canada does have access to both US and Commonwealth lines of development, they're moving in the kind of post-Tizard directions since I'm not aware of any direct US-UK cooperation. That being said, the only radar I specifically have deployed are larger CXAM-1 clones on my carriers, BB/BCs, and aboard the two airships that should be finished around now. The Ontarios are planned to complete with CXAM-1 sets, but it may be likely something better is developed before they near completion. All other recent ship designs have a decent amount of space set aside for radar and other electronic equipment, but a more compact and lighter system is desired before I consider so equipping the smaller ships I'm building at the moment. I haven't put much (or any, really) thought into airborne sets, besides the Airship ones.

Canada historically, once the war began created the CSC type and SW1C naval radars.

http://jproc.ca/sari/sarrad1.html

Quoted

Originally posted by thesmilingassassin
Canada historically, once the war began created the CSC type and SW1C naval radars.

http://jproc.ca/sari/sarrad1.html

I know. Unfortunately, most of the technical details make my eyes glaze over (Radar just doesn't seem to agree with me for some reason, on a comprehension level). From what I've read tho, those sets don't seem all that great, and Canada's been working on the concepts longer, and should be able to produce better.

Italy was pretty much going to stick with the historical development path but simply build more examples. I've been meaning to get around to write something up about it.

Here, the actual radar technology doesn't seem to be particularly advanced over the historical one, but there are far more sets being produced and in use. Production was actually the hard bit for radar, not building a working prototype. Everyone knows how useful radar is, so there is a massive push for it - especially in unexpected places.

All the longwave radar sets are fairly similar in capability regardless of which country manufactured them. It's only really with the centimetric sets that the UK jumped ahead; however, the magnetron isn't a difficult idea to jump to, the germans, japanese and italians all did it independently. The problem was in knowing what sort of radar set was wanted, and then producing in quantity.

Is Russia going to have; 1, an airbourne surface search radar set? 2, in production? 3, with centimetric wavelength and useful range? I think it's no, no, no for anyone at current.

Quoted

Originally posted by Red Admiral
Is Russia going to have; 1, an airbourne surface search radar set? 2, in production? 3, with centimetric wavelength and useful range? I think it's no, no, no for anyone at current.

But I think Russia will have it soon. 1940 at the least, IMHO.

I could buy a 1940 date much easier than 1938 but only for first generation sets and with dubious reliability.

At this stage I'm not sure the mental link between "must find snorkel" and "let's use a radar" would be made in 1938 given the only thing they can find is big aircraft or groups of them and ships.

Radars don't like water waves and you need to filter out those false echoes.

As for development of airborne types I have an experimental AI set fitted inside a Wellington bomber. Gives some idication of size and weight. A producton variant is under development but the IR sensor will make it into service before radar does.