WesWorld

Yeah I meant He 100 B-6... just got carried away with visions of a huge radial engined fighter with Turkish red sqaures on it...

Anything is going to be better than the He-112. Great aircraft 3 years ago, not so hot now (but still the king of the slower and older fighters).
Winning the top five slots isn't everything, a nation that can wield fighters superior to its nearest competitior in terms of age, size, speed and armament still has an advantage even if it isn't a 750kmh six 20mm cannon armed H-24 engined monster.

The He-100 B-6 looks like:

Heinkel He-100 B-6

General Type:
Airplane = 1
Airship = 2
Orbiter = 3
1

Year of First Flight: 1939

Description

Carrier or Rough Field
Monoplane
Conventional Fuselage

A follow-on version of the WW He-100A, equipped with 2 20mm MG-201 cannons in the wing roots and 2 11mm MG-111s in the nose decking, a 10mm armored seat for the pilot (+130 pounds), and self-sealing fuel tanks (+96 pounds). The fuselage is stressed for the ETC-250 centerline rack, which can carry a 250 kg bomb or a 300 liter drop tank.










Characteristics:

Weight (maximum) 6,600 lbs
Weight (empty) 5,695 lbs

Length 29 ft
Wingspan 33 ft
Wing Area 177 sq ft
Sweep 1 degrees

Engines 1
DB-601E
Piston

1,400 hp
at 18,000 ft


Crew 1


Typical cost $0.032 million in 1939
Total number procured 2000


Performance:

Top Speed 386 kts = 444 mph
at 18,000 ft
Mach N/A

Operational Ceiling 40,500 ft

Range 600 nm = 691 miles
with 79 lbs payload
83 lbs released at halfway point

Climb 3,245 fpm

Cruise 270 kts = 310 mph
at 28,000 ft

Corner Speed 259 KIAS =
343 kts at 18,000 ft
Mach N/A
Turning Rate 20.7 deg/sec
Radius 3,217 ft



Internal Data:

Intake / Fan Diameter 10 ft

Bypass Ratio 85

Engine Weight 1562 lbs
Overall Efficiency 22.5 percent

Structural Factor 1.00

Number of Wings 1
Number of Fuselages 1

Limiting Airspeed 450 kts
Wing Ultimate g Load 10.00 g
Wing Taper 0.5
Wing Thickness at Root 1 ft

Tail / Canard Factor 0.4

Number of Nacelles 0
Length 9 ft
Diameter 3.25 ft
Fullness 0.45

Fuselage Diameter 3.75 ft
Fuselage Fullness 0.35

Pressurized Volume 0 percent
Cargo Decks 0

Cleanness 86 percent
Unstreamlined section 1.15 sq ft

User equipment 1,350 lbs

Quoted

Originally posted by Rooijen10
I would think that the B-6 would be a modified from

Quoted

the production standard

(i.e. B) thus illegal.

Seeing as the B-6 is a production model thats not an issue.

Australia's entries:


The first plane is the Fokker America/Australian Aviation AA-13 Mustang I (P-51A). The plane was designed with the RR Merlin in mind, but due to delivery and integration issues, the first batch was delivered with Allison V-1710 instead.

Captain Robert Henry Maxwell (Bobby) Gibbes will be flying her.



Wing span: 37 ft (11.27 m)
Length: 32 ft 3 in (9.82 m)
Height: 12 ft 2 in (3.70 m)

Weights:
Empty: 6,433 lb. (2,918 kg)
Gross: 8,600 lb (3,901 kg)
Max T/O: 9,000 lb (4,082 kg)

Performance:
Max Speed: 390 mph (628 km/h)
Ceiling: 31,350 ft. (9,555 m)
Range: 350 miles (563 km)
Max Range: 2,550 miles (4,104 km)

Powerplant:
Allison V-1710-81 1,200 hp, 12 cylinder V engine.

Four .50 caliber machine guns, external bomb load of 1,000 lbs. (453 kg.)


***


The second entry will depend on whether its a twin or single. If a twin, it will be a most interesting plane...



BTW I was thinking, the twins compete separately from the singles, why not have another competition slot for naval fighters?

Quoted

Originally posted by Desertfox
The first plane is the Fokker America/Australian Aviation AA-13 Mustang I (P-51A). The plane was designed with the RR Merlin in mind, but due to delivery and integration issues, the first batch was delivered with Allison V-1710 instead.

Hmmm, looks familiar.

Note sure why you've design around the RR Merlin as it's not going to be around for much longer. Much more work is being done on the Griffon and Vulture for future aircraft.

Australia will stick with the Merlin longer than other countries. Australia prefers reliability over performance, and the Merlin will be more reliable than the Griffon. However, the next Aussie plane will be very interesting as it will have two coupled Merlins...

Quoted

Originally posted by Desertfox
Australia will stick with the Merlin longer than other countries. Australia prefers reliability over performance, and the Merlin will be more reliable than the Griffon. However, the next Aussie plane will be very interesting as it will have two coupled Merlins...

That only really works if Australia is capable of building Merlins themselves (very doubtful).

Have you found anywhere to put enough radiators on that twin Merlin design yet?

It's not too hard to start a license engine factory in Australia. Especially for an engine like the Merlin. Considering that Canada is developing like 10 different engines, Australia building a couple license versions is not far fetched at all.

The aircraft in question will be big enough for those radiators...

Quoted

Originally posted by Desertfox
It's not too hard to start a license engine factory in Australia. Especially for an engine like the Merlin. Considering that Canada is developing like 10 different engines, Australia building a couple license versions is not far fetched at all.

It's not really reasonable though considering that Australia was barely able to produce a handful of steel tube aircraft historically. The technical capability isn't there. It isn't there in Canada either, but that's another story.

Coupled Merlins, interesting. I can only think of Fairey's Gannet-like designs historically.

Quoted

Originally posted by Desertfox
Considering that Canada is developing like 10 different engines

Orenda Engines currently has 4 or 5 engine projects ongoing, most of them being developments of British engines and concepts, rater than scratch-built.

Orenda also produces the Merlin at the moment, and will be producing Merlin-related engines for some time. Having a production run set aside for the Aussies shouldn't be a major problem, if needed.

Quoted

Originally posted by Red Admiral
It isn't there in Canada either, but that's another story.

The story being that I spent about 10 years developing and ramping up Canada's industrial and intellectual base in this and other areas to support interesting projects, and not be reliant on British and American hand-me-downs.

Point for Shin, if anyone is counting. One wonders why RA finds it hard to believe that the nation that built one of the most advanced aircraft of its time cannot apparently build copies and improvements of British designs at this time in WW? I hardly doubt Canada is building 20,000 Merlins a year here, and Shin did do 10 years worth of setting up to get to this point.

If we're just limited to what was done historically, why don't we just go read a history book, eh?

Not to mention that it would certainly put a crimp into Italy's ambitions if it were limited to historical aircraft engine production capabilities.

Quoted

Originally posted by Red Admiral

Quoted

Originally posted by Desertfox
It's not too hard to start a license engine factory in Australia. Especially for an engine like the Merlin. Considering that Canada is developing like 10 different engines, Australia building a couple license versions is not far fetched at all.

It's not really reasonable though considering that Australia was barely able to produce a handful of steel tube aircraft historically. The technical capability isn't there. It isn't there in Canada either, but that's another story.

Coupled Merlins, interesting. I can only think of Fairey's Gannet-like designs historically.

Truth be told between 1936 and 1945 Australia went from building deHavilland Tiger Moths to constructing Mustang fighter bombers, having progressed through design and/or manufacture of the Wackett trainer, the Wirraway and Boomerang, Beaufort torpedo bombers, Beaufighters, and Mosquitos. Engine manufacture and development followed a similar progression. Given ten years of development effort invested in an aeronautical industry, Australia could have an effective, independent aero industry manufacturing state of the art aircraft.

Canadian development was similar though greater in number and variety of aircraft produced.

Ok guys lets keep things cool here.

This is a Talons thread about Talons, not a thread about the story of WW aviation. We take it as read most nations in WW have better capabilities than OTL, even nations like Denmark, Chile, Nordmark and China have vastly better aero industries than OTL. Therefore we can't single out any one nation. There is no dobut in my mind that Canada and Australia have had British help in setting up production lines via de Havilland and Rolls-Royce over the past years.

Foxy, we have six twin-engined fighters now so it will have to be a single-engined type.
Not sure why you didn't go straight for the Merlin P-51 (ahem AA-13) but it looks a decent design for 1939. Still that gives you another year to perfect the design of the twin-engined type with the coupled-Merlins.

The Fairey Monarch is the only other coupled engine that operates like the Gannet's Mamba, the Vulture I guess is a coupled Peregrine so counts as a coupled engine. I'm assuming that Australia's coupled Merlin is taking the Vulture concept one step further with a more powerful engine. 2,200hp seems achievable at first, the Vulture could make 3,000hp just. A coupled Merlin would equal that and be better at altitude depending on the supercharger (twin-speed two stage?).

Update

There is one slot left but all twin-engined slots are now filled.

If no-one claims the last slot it will go to an NPC of my choice.

Further update.

Slot now gone.

Hoo and Parador still haven't declared types yet but I know the rest of the other gaps are being filled in with fighters and pilots.

Expect at least one F-6E and either a second or a F-8C.

Sorry for not providing stuff in detail. It was a busy weekend with preparations for our wedding. Hopefully I´ll be able to provide more these days - also on our other project.

Quoted

Originally posted by Hood
Update

There is one slot left but all twin-engined slots are now filled.

If no-one claims the last slot it will go to an NPC of my choice.

Byzantium will send the same pilot and same plane as last year if that final slot can't be filled.

That said, if we can get Greece into Talons I'll forgo the Byzantean entry.

Which slots do you have for China ? Two Single or one Single and one twin engined ?

Single:
Black painted Gangchuan F6B ; Lt. Liu Chui-Kang