WesWorld

DeHavilland Australia D.H.93 Albatross II (1940)

Dedicated long-range reconnaissance/maritime patrol

General characteristics

Crew: 6 (pilot, copilot, radio operator, navigator, radar operator, observer)
Length: 72ft
Wingspan: 102ft
Height: 22 ft
Wing area: 1,040 ft²
Empty weight: 24,000 lb
Loaded weight: 37,000 lb
Powerplant: 4 × Rolls Royce Peregrine inline piston engine, 870 hp each

Maximum speed: 300 mph
Cruise speed: 210 mph
Range: 2,400 nmi
Service ceiling: 20,000 ft
Rate of climb: 1,000 ft/min


Started as a modified D.H.91, the D.H.93 turned into a completely new aircraft. Unlike the 91 it uses conventional aluminum construction. It also replaces the Gipsy majors with more powerful Peregrines to allow greater fuel capacity. It also has a strengthen rear fuselage, third fin, tip tanks, ASV radar, and sleeping quarters for long range missions. No armament is carried but flares and smoke rockets are carried in the aft fuselage.

While I do find myself questioning whether it is possible to substitute an all-metal airframe within the 3,000 pounds or so between the empty weight of the OTL Albatross and this design, I'll accept it for the time being as an engineering possibility.

Why such the RAAF would want such an aircraft more the question. A loing-range reconnaissance aircraft I could see, but one that is not armed in any way, nor can carry any significant offensive armament, seems a waste of money. If detected by the enemy, it cannot defend itself nor does it have the speed or ceiling to escape. I just don't see the niche mission this machine is designed to fill.

This plane is mainly a maritime patrol aircraft very much like the Fw200. For its intended missions, defensive armament would not help very much, while adding weight and drag. Compared to the Fw200 the DH93 would have superior performance that would allow it to better evade enemy aircraft. And if need be, in wartime it would be fairly simple to modify the airframes with hard-points for bombs and rockets.

The primary mission of the RAN is the protection of the SLOC of Australia to the rest of the world. An aircraft than can keep track of potential threats to said SLOC is of most importance.

As to why the RAAF? Well OTL the RAAF currently operates all the AP-3C Orions.

I remember that we discussed this on IRC that one time, but I didn't know you'd not planned to give the aircraft any armament. Kinda seems like a bit pointless to me, to be honest...

It seems more prudent to design the aircraft with the weapons capacity, and just not mount them until needed.

I guess I can add two small bomb bays fore and aft of the wing box as well as provisions for 20mm cannons and provisions for wing hardpoints. But other than ASW weapons are detrimental for most of the missions these planes are supposed to perform. Unlike the Fw200's I don't expect to be hunting a lot of merchants.

Some wing bays for DCs is probably enough. I can't see any other ordnance being carried and bombs could easily be carried instead of DCs. 500lb would be the max for wing bays. A dorsal turret with a couple of MGs would make good sense.

Overall though the main question in my mind is this; is this superior to a Sunderland? Yes its a nice concept but a Sunderland can do everything this can with more crew, better habiltibility and it can land on water and go to remote places this plane can't land on. If this had early MAD gear then I'd say it had some ASW merit. As it stands its useful for coastal patrol, but probably no more effective than a smaller plane would be. The RAF uses Ansons and Beuforts for its coastal needs and Sunderlands for its long-range patrols.

Mind you this would make a better airliner than the original DH.91, I think Quantas might have a good little airliner here for its long-range routes.

Well compared to the Sunderland, this aircraft has significantly superior performance, and I already have a mid-range flying boat. Were range and speed is concerned, flying boats simply cannot match equivalent sized land based planes in performance. The Luftwaffe had quite a number of decent flying boats, but they used the Fw200 instead for the very long range missions.

The Fw200 Condor might have racked up some impressive successes, but it's heyday was over the moment convoys obtained fighter cover - even Hurricanes from CAM ships were able to deal with Condors operating as lone wolves. It was also a very fragile aircraft. I'd be leery of basing on decisions on "it's as good as the Condor" analogies.

True, but this plane is faster and has better performance than the Condor. And unlike the Condor it won't be hunting convoys.

Quoted

Originally posted by Desertfox
True, but this plane is faster and has better performance than the Condor. And unlike the Condor it won't be hunting convoys.

It may be faster than the Condor (in its *unarmed* state) but it is slower than most carrier fighter aircraft in service.

And if it is not searching for convoys, what will it be searching for? Task Forces? That would be a suicide mission. Single merchantmen? That would be a waste of resources.

Since I saw you just posted it earlier, Foxy - an updated CAC Pelican might be a better choice for a naval patrol craft than the Albatross II.

Quoted

Originally posted by BruceDuncan
It may be faster than the Condor (in its *unarmed* state) but it is slower than most carrier fighter aircraft in service.

Slower than some of the latest catapultable float-planes, too.

A Catalina managed to shadow the entire Japanese Task Force for a while at Midway. And the Catalina has significantly lower performance. That said the primary missions for these aircraft will be directed more towards search and track of lone raiders ala Bismark/Graf Spee/Emden and submarines in long-range cover of convoys, as well as nighttime tracking of enemy task forces. In peacetime they are also very useful in search-and-rescue ops.

300mph is pretty fast especially if the aircraft has a significant head start.

The Pelican will have its uses, but I want something with more range and speed than the Pelican.

Quantas wanted an airliner version for its international routes, so a civilian version will be available for export with a capacity of 30 passengers.

I'll add it to the airliner thread.