-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 7
/
speculative
73 lines (68 loc) · 11.2 KB
/
speculative
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
-Alternative History stuff-
Speculative bomber types. The idea here (due to beoran on forum.freegamedev.net) is that newer types might be 'unlocked' by building enough of their predecessors, in which case it should be possible, counterfactually, to unlock types which were in fact cancelled. To aid in considering this idea, I've produced some tentative statblocks for various cancelled bomber projects, and some discussion about how they might fit into the game.
AW39 Elswick
============
Enough focus on Whitleys might have lead to the AW.39 (with Armstrong Siddeley Deerhounds), which I've named "Elswick" for the location of AW headquarters.
The additional engine power, coupled (one hopes) with a more normal wing incidence than the Whitley's 8.5°, would have provided improved speed and ceiling, as well as a probable increase in bombload and range.
However, the Deerhounds would probably have been less reliable than Merlins, pushing serviceability down.
The cost would have been higher than the Whitley, but kept down by the high standard of production engineering at Armstrong-Whitworth.
Data, with Whitley, Wellington, Manchester and Stirling given for comparison:
manf name cost speed ceil cap svp defn fail accu range blat blong entry exit flags
Armstrong-Whitworth Whitley 8000 165 176 7000 70 17 9 32 320 81 45 None 18-06-1941 ['GEE', 'H2S']
Armstrong-Whitworth Elswick 10000 186 202 7500 65 15 10 40 330 81 45 13-02-1941 03-02-1943 ['GEE', 'H2S']
Avro Manchester 20000 210 185 10350 70 12 16 45 325 81 45 05-11-1940 26-06-1942 ['GEE', 'H2S', 'OBOE']
Short Stirling 25000 200 175 14000 40 9 7 40 280 96 55 16-01-1941 08-07-1943 ['GEE', 'H2S', 'OBOE']
It provides a cheap-and-nasty option for the early part of the 'heavies' era, generally inferior even to the Manchester but with a lower failure rate. It matches the accuracy of the Stirling, with a significantly higher serviceability, but it retains much of the Whitley's vulnerability. Highlights are its long range and high ceiling. During its two years of service, it's likely to be used in fairly large numbers to attack sprawling conurbations like Berlin or the Ruhr, delivering a decent tonnage but probably at a fairly high cost to its aircrew. I'd probably build them at LOW (or perhaps MED; they are cheap after all!) for a year.
Here are some optimistic data for the Elswick:
Armstrong-Whitworth Elswick++ 10000 190 202 9000 68 12 9 42 340 81 45 13-02-1941 19-04-1943 ['GEE', 'H2S']
The increased payload and reduced vulnerability make the Elswick++ a serious contender, possibly a more economical choice than the Stirling. By carrying a near-Manchester payload for the price of a Hampden, the Elswick++ makes medium bombers remain attractive into the early part of the heavy era; I'd probably build them at HIGH until the Lanc came along a year later.
Vickers Windsor
===============
It's hard to see how the RAF could have bought any more Wellingtons from Vickers, but perhaps there's some alternate universe in which the Windsor wasn't cancelled. It's a high-altitude heavy with slightly better performance than the Lanc, but its geodetic structure is a production engineer's nightmare thanks to a continuous variation in the link elements along the chord of the wing. However, it retains the survivability advantages of the Wellington.
Data, with Wellington, Lancaster I and Halifax III given for comparison:
manf name cost speed ceil cap svp defn fail accu range blat blong entry exit flags
Vickers Wellington 12000 190 180 4500 85 8 3 36 311 87 39 None 21-10-1943 ['GEE', 'H2S']
Vickers Windsor 50000 260 270 15000 80 4 5 70 365 87 39 26-06-1943 None ['GEE', 'H2S', 'OBOE', 'GH']
Avro Lancaster I 40000 235 225 14000 80 6 4 80 350 84 44 07-02-1942 None ['GEE', 'H2S', 'OBOE', 'GH', 'PFF']
Handley Page Halifax III 32000 230 220 13500 90 7 5 75 335 63 38 30-04-1943 None ['GEE', 'H2S', 'OBOE', 'GH']
With the survivability advantages of its high ceiling and geodetic construction, the Windsor would be an attractive option. I'd probably buy them at MED, and combine them with Lancs and a solid Mossie PFF contingent for a modern and hard-hitting strike force. It's good enough to begin with that I don't really need to discuss a ++ variant.
Short Selkirk
=============
Short Bros planned a development of their Stirling, with four Bristol Centaurus engines and a 135ft wingspan; they referred to it as the "Super Stirling". I've decided to name it for another Scottish town, Selkirk.
The extended wingspan would have had many benefits: increased ceiling and payload are clear, but less obvious is its effect on reliability. Many of the Stirling's problems were caused by its long and fragile undercarriage, which was required in order to provide an adequately short takeoff run. With a greater wing area (and the prevalence of longer runways), this could be replaced with a shorter and sturdier undercart. Perhaps the 'Exactor' throttle controls would have been replaced as well. The company projected a maximum bomb load of 23,500lb, but that seems overly optimistic; still, an aircraft bigger than the Lancaster could certainly have carried a lot.
The planned armament of 0.5" guns would have made up for the likely decrease in maneuvrability caused by the aircraft's greater size; I rate its vulnerability about equal to the Stirling.
The Super Stirling would doubtless have been an expensive, difficult-to-produce aircraft, but its payload would have beaten all comers and its performance along other axes would also have been impressive.
Data, with Stirling, Halifax I, Lancaster I and Halifax III given for comparison:
manf name cost speed ceil cap svp defn fail accu range blat blong entry exit flags
Short Stirling 25000 200 175 14000 40 9 7 40 280 96 55 16-01-1941 08-07-1943 ['GEE', 'H2S', 'OBOE']
Short Selkirk 36000 210 185 18000 72 9 6 58 300 96 55 13-08-1943 02-02-1945 ['GEE', 'H2S', 'OBOE', 'GH']
Handley Page Halifax I 30000 225 200 13000 75 12 6 65 330 63 38 14-05-1941 31-03-1944 ['GEE', 'H2S', 'OBOE', 'GH']
Avro Lancaster I 40000 235 225 14000 80 6 4 80 350 84 44 07-02-1942 None ['GEE', 'H2S', 'OBOE', 'GH', 'PFF']
Handley Page Halifax III 32000 230 220 13500 90 7 5 75 335 63 38 30-04-1943 None ['GEE', 'H2S', 'OBOE', 'GH']
Overall, the Selkirk is inferior to the Lancaster; its tonnage-on-target-per-cost of 0.29lb/£ is slightly above the 0.28lb/£ of the Lanc, but with higher loss and failure rates and lower serviceability, coupled to a limited range (it still can't reach Berlin) it's not a promising option. Bearing in mind that with the help of the PFF larger cities are pretty difficult to miss even at 58 accu, it starts to look like it might have its uses. I'd probably build them at LOW. If the Lanc weren't available, though, I'd certainly prefer them to the Hal1, and they'd be a reasonable alternative to the Hal3.
Here are some optimistic data for the Selkirk, which perhaps change things:
Short Selkirk++ 36000 216 210 22000 75 8 5 60 308 96 55 13-08-1943 None ['GEE', 'H2S', 'OBOE', 'GH']
The ten-ton load combined with a slightly higher accuracy push the tonnage ratio up to 0.37lb/£, at which point it seriously competes with the Lanc; broadly speaking the Lanc wins on loss rate (and thus when enemy defences are strong) while the Selkirk++ wins on tonnage delivered in the absence of fierce opposition. Of course, the Lanc still wins at longer ranges, since the Selkirk++ will have to replace some of its load with fuel. At this point I'd probably buy Selkirks at MED and use them to flatten nearer targets and bigger cities.
Supermarine Southampton
=======================
The original favoured candidate for the RAF's heavy bomber requirement B.12/36 was Supermarine's Type 317, designed by R.J.Mitchell (better known of course for his Spitfire). The prototypes and drawings were destroyed in a Luftwaffe raid on the Supermarine works at Woolston on 26-09-1940 and the project was cancelled shortly after. What might have become of this design had the Luftwaffe been thwarted that day? Let's name it the "Southampton" after the home of Supermarine (and not to be confused with their 1925 flying boat of the same name).
Being designed before the lessons of early raids were learned, it would probably be fairly vulnerable to fighters, while its sheer size would make for a hefty payload. Coming from the Supermarine works I'd expect it to be fairly reliable, but perhaps expensive to produce.
Data, with Manchester, Stirling, Hal1 and Lanc given for comparison:
manf name cost speed ceil cap svp defn fail accu range blat blong entry exit flags
Supermarine Southampton 33000 230 220 16000 64 11 6 50 265 96 61 25-12-1940 17-11-1943 ['GEE', 'H2S']
Avro Manchester 20000 210 185 10350 70 12 16 45 325 81 45 05-11-1940 26-06-1942 ['GEE', 'H2S', 'OBOE']
Short Stirling 25000 200 175 14000 40 9 7 40 280 96 55 16-01-1941 08-07-1943 ['GEE', 'H2S', 'OBOE']
Handley Page Halifax I 30000 225 200 13000 75 12 6 65 330 63 38 14-05-1941 31-03-1944 ['GEE', 'H2S', 'OBOE', 'GH']
Avro Lancaster I 40000 235 225 14000 80 6 4 80 350 84 44 07-02-1942 None ['GEE', 'H2S', 'OBOE', 'GH', 'PFF']
The Southampton is quite clearly better than the Manchester and Stirling, probably enough to justify HIGH priority even with its £33,000 price tag. However, its limited range could be a turn-off. The Halifax I is slightly better (due chiefly to its improved accuracy, though the gains in serviceability and range, and the lower price, also help) and the Lancaster comprehensively outshines it. Nonetheless, if it were available in game, I'd consider it a welcome Christmas present indeed.
*Summary*
=========
Here are the summary statblocks for all the above types:
manf name cost speed ceil cap svp defn fail accu range blat blong entry exit flags
Armstrong-Whitworth Elswick 10000 186 202 7500 65 15 10 40 330 81 45 13-02-1941 03-02-1943 ['GEE', 'H2S']
Supermarine Southampton 33000 230 220 16000 64 11 6 50 265 96 61 25-12-1940 17-11-1943 ['GEE', 'H2S']
Vickers Windsor 50000 260 270 15000 80 4 5 70 365 87 39 26-06-1943 None ['GEE', 'H2S', 'OBOE', 'GH']
Short Selkirk 36000 210 185 18000 72 9 6 58 300 96 55 13-08-1943 02-02-1945 ['GEE', 'H2S', 'OBOE', 'GH']
Here are the optimistic data:
Armstrong-Whitworth Elswick++ 10000 190 202 9000 68 12 9 42 340 81 45 13-02-1941 19-04-1943 ['GEE', 'H2S']
Short Selkirk++ 36000 216 210 22000 75 8 5 60 308 96 55 13-08-1943 None ['GEE', 'H2S', 'OBOE', 'GH']