Moderator: Edi
Performance figures for the -36 werre consistently underquoted,Icehawk wrote:Hehe, I know the B-36D is a mighty plane, but 52433ft with a full bombload is a bit of a far cry from the 45,700ft listed on Globalsecurity.org as well as the 45,000ft+ in the Encyclopedia of World Aircraft.
Where do you get your sources. I find things like this interesting, but I always have a hard time finding these types of statistics/ juxtapositions? Please?Actually no.
The allies produced 80.7% of all Soviet Railroad cars, 92.7% of all
soviet railroad rails, 81.6% of all Soviet Locomotives, 59% of all
Soviet Aviation Fuel, 33% of all Soviet Explosives, 45.2% of all copper
ore% 55% of all Aluminum, 30.1% of all tires. 27.9% of all Machine
tools, 29% of all Sugar, 15% of all meat, and 59.7 of all motor
vehicles. In fact, the Soviets stopped light scout tank production
in '43 due to massive shipments of US Stuart Light tanks.
Panzerkeil Main Sitenimetski wrote:Where do you get your sources. I find things like this interesting, but I always have a hard time finding these types of statistics/ juxtapositions? Please?
Read this and you shall understand.Xenophobe3691 wrote:I don't get it...
I'll quote Stuart Slade in the thread that spawned The Big OneIcehawk wrote:Hehe, I know the B-36D is a mighty plane, but 52433ft with a full bombload is a bit of a far cry from the 45,700ft listed on Globalsecurity.org as well as the 45,000ft+ in the Encyclopedia of World Aircraft.
His source is Convair B-36: A Comprehensive History of America's "Big Stick"I've been carrying on with a hunt for B-36 performance data and finally got the solid data. Its stunning, I knew the performnce of the B-36 had been understated in public documentation. I didn't realize by how much. As a rule of thumb, the B-36s were 30 mph faster across the board than the official figures and their operational altitudes were 10,000 feet higher.
The real operating altitude of a fully loaded fully armed B-36 (with 43,000 pounds of bombs - 4 Mark 3 devices - and fuel for a tactical radius of 3,500 miles) was 48,000 feet. The featherweights improved on that with the final configuration allowing an operating altitude of 52,500 feet under the same load conditions). The RB-36s habitually operated at around 52,000 feet but the featherweights added a lot to that. The ultimate featherweight configuration allowed an operating ceiling of 59,000 feet. This was very rare and a more typical operating altitude for the RB-36 featherweights was 55,000 feet. By the way, the RBs carried up to 20,000 pounds of bombs in addition to their recon gear.
The featherweight conversions didn't add as much to speed as they did to altitude. Most B-36s had a sustained maximum speed using their jets in the 430 - 450 mph bracket. However, there is an interesting point that I hadn't thought of. Because of its huge wings, the B-36 was very agile above 40,000 feet and could actually out-turn an F-86. They could also turn inside a rocket salvo making them quite difficult targets to hit. Those giant wings also meant there was a big margin between stall speed and maximum speed. This wasn't true of high altitude fighters; they had a very narrow maximum speed/stall speed margin and, at a B-36 operating altitude, firing their guns usually stalled them out.
This data has two implications. One is that the Luftwaffe is out of the game. They have nothing that can even begin to cope with the actual performance of the Aluminum Overcast. Even their paper projects are outclassed.
Assuming that it works (and the US had no end of problems with their own fliying wing designs), so what?Also just keep in mind that by 1948 der Vaterland could also respond with THIS amoung a few other nasty little things.
Just to show that Germany could strike back if necessary. Also by 1948 assuming his rocketness Von Braun has been well supplied they could also have the first ICBMS and could also easily develope SAM deterrents to the B-36 assuming their airforces aren't good enough.Assuming that it works (and the US had no end of problems with their own fliying wing designs), so what?
Do you have any fucking idea how hard it was to just get the godamnIcehawk wrote:Just to show that Germany could strike back if necessary. Also by 1948 assuming his rocketness Von Braun has been well supplied they could also have the first ICBMS and could also easily develope SAM deterrents to the B-36 assuming their airforces aren't good enough.
Alt hist peice inwhich germany gets nuked into cinders...Xenophobe3691 wrote:I don't get it...MKSheppard wrote:Actually, Germany manages to stake out a peace treaty on the
ostfront, and The USSR probably cedes 1 shitlaod of land,
probably most of the Ukraine and ByeloRussia.
AAnd everything is all happy happy in Der Vaterland until one
day in 1948, German Air Defense Radars start picking up hundreds
of 'very large' targets appraoching at 16,000 meters and at
700 km/h
That also assumes that Germany would even work on a strategic bomber in the absence of US entry into the war, or if they could get it working by 1948 even. As for ICBMs, I don't think so. Atlas wasn't even deployed until the late 1950s and that was much more sophisticated than anything Germany could have hoped to attain in the 1940s.Icehawk wrote:Just to show that Germany could strike back if necessary. Also by 1948 assuming his rocketness Von Braun has been well supplied they could also have the first ICBMS and could also easily develope SAM deterrents to the B-36 assuming their airforces aren't good enough.
Actually, I didnt think it was THAT bad. Considering the amount of progress they accomplished with it in real history while being bombed constantly, I assumed that with the US completely out of the War, work and progress on the tech could flow much smoother and faster and by 1948/49 they might be able to have something.MKSheppard wrote: Do you have any fucking idea how hard it was to just get the godamn
V-2 to work? The Germans poured the equivalent of the Manhattan
Project into getting that damn thing to work, and even then they had
lots of problems. True ICBMs are still a ways into the future.
The V-2 developmental area was in Poland, outside of US Bombers,Icehawk wrote:Actually, I didnt think it was THAT bad. Considering the amount of progress they accomplished with it in real history while being bombed constantly
Big bombers would be of use against Russia to bomb targets in the far east outside their usual range. For the ICBM thing, the US IIRC didnt have them till later largely because with the war over progress naturally slowed and they had to build up the infrastructure from scratch and they also didnt show much interest untill the USSR started really getting into the nuke arena and working on their own long range delivery systems.That also assumes that Germany would even work on a strategic bomber in the absence of US entry into the war, or if they could get it working by 1948 even. As for ICBMs, I don't think so. Atlas wasn't even deployed until the late 1950s and that was much more sophisticated than anything Germany could have hoped to attain in the 1940s.
True, but wasn't it hindered by the constant damage to the industrial infrastructure and supply lines? Thats what I was mostly referring to.MKSheppard wrote: The V-2 developmental area was in Poland, outside of US Bombers,
and Peenemunde was hit only once, which inflicted minor damage,
and caused them to move everything underground.
Yes, but even in OTL they never bothered with trying to build them to hit far-east Russian targets (like those past the Urals).Icehawk wrote:Big bombers would be of use against Russia to bomb targets in the far east outside their usual range.
No, we didn't have them until the late 1950s because they were hard to do, not because progress 'naturally' slowed down -- progress on US rocketry if anything accelerated past the war (check out defense spending numbers as a %age of GDP from the US into the 1950s). We had quite the interest in in long-range rocketry after the war as well -- it was not just a reaction to the USSR's interest into nuclear weapons.For the ICBM thing, the US IIRC didnt have them till later largely because with the war over progress naturally slowed and they had to build up the infrastructure from scratch and they also didnt show much interest untill the USSR started really getting into the nuke arena and working on their own long range delivery systems.
In real life by July 1944 Germany had the big 4 engined Heinkel 277 B5 with a range of 6000km, speed of 354mph and a ceiling of 49200ft which was canned after 8 production models were finnished because they needed maximum production redirected towards fighters. In an alternate history without the US involved, they won't need to cancel it, and they will likely have a need to facilitate deep strikes into an increasingly bloody Russian conflict. I would think such craft would probably be used.Yes, but even in OTL they never bothered with trying to build them to hit far-east Russian targets (like those past the Urals).
I stand corrected on the ICBM issue then. Still one can't deny that it would be interesting to see how much quicker an unhindered Germany could have developed such weapons. The Soviets had them 2 years before the US in 1957. Germany, with the already large rocket infrastructure in place might've done it sooner but obviously not by 1948 (1955 at the latest I'd say)No, we didn't have them until the late 1950s because they were hard to do, not because progress 'naturally' slowed down -- progress on US rocketry if anything accelerated past the war (check out defense spending numbers as a %age of GDP from the US into the 1950s). We had quite the interest in in long-range rocketry after the war as well -- it was not just a reaction to the USSR's interest into nuclear weapons.
I think we europeans had russian as second language nowadmiral_danielsben wrote:In the vain of World War I without the US, what about the US staying out of World War II (presumably due to no Pearl Harbor)?
OTOH, they might need maximum production redirected to other type of aircraft on the Russian front to hold them off.Icehawk wrote:In real life by July 1944 Germany had the big 4 engined Heinkel 277 B5 with a range of 6000km, speed of 354mph and a ceiling of 49200ft which was canned after 8 production models were finnished because they needed maximum production redirected towards fighters. In an alternate history without the US involved, they won't need to cancel it, and they will likely have a need to facilitate deep strikes into an increasingly bloody Russian conflict. I would think such craft would probably be used.
Despite von Braun's skills, I don't think the Germans would get too far and especially not if the US decided to sink large amounts of money into their rocket program (the Army missile program, IIRC, was somewhat separate from von Braun's program that later went to NASA). As for Soviet ICBMs, the R-7 wasn't even really operational until 1960. I was also wrong about my dates; Atlas may have been operational as early as late 1957/early 1958.I stand corrected on the ICBM issue then. Still one can't deny that it would be interesting to see how much quicker an unhindered Germany could have developed such weapons. The Soviets had them 2 years before the US in 1957. Germany, with the already large rocket infrastructure in place might've done it sooner but obviously not by 1948 (1955 at the latest I'd say)
Maybe, its hard to say one way or the other I guess. But im still confident they could do it. As Sheps figures that were posted earlier show, Soviets got a shitload of their war making ability thanks to the allied lend lease, which in this scenario they dont have.OTOH, they might need maximum production redirected to other type of aircraft on the Russian front to hold them off.
I see your point. Personally though, since im a fan of WW2 German tech and (and Von Braun as well) and from all that I've studied into it, I still say its possible they could have one by '55 if the project went smoothly, but thats just me.Despite von Braun's skills, I don't think the Germans would get too far and especially not if the US decided to sink large amounts of money into their rocket program (the Army missile program, IIRC, was somewhat separate from von Braun's program that later went to NASA). As for Soviet ICBMs, the R-7 wasn't even really operational until 1960. I was also wrong about my dates; Atlas may have been operational as early as late 1957/early 1958.
We can agree to disagree. Thats true, even assuming they developed one for '55 (which IIRC, is about when Germany was projected to have their first nukes by in real life) it would likely be anouther 10-15 years before they could fit one with a small enough nuke so yeah it wouldnt really matter except for dick waving and bragging rights if they got it first.Furthermore, even if they did deploy some sort of ICBM, it'd be conventionally tipped and with such a huge CEP as to be utterly useless.
Yes, but that is rather idiotic. Many of the Russians slightly supported or were dead neutral so long as their food supplies were not touched and industries were not crippled. Here Hitler had a chance to welcome heartily a new people into his fold, the White Russians, but instead he decides to execute their neighbors and friends. They wre happy that they had been liberated but then realised they were taken of by barbarians, the SS Special Units.Uraniun235 wrote:What if the Germans didn't even bother with trying to conquer the Russians, but instead decided to just exterminate them altogether? (Or was that what they were already doing?)
No, but economically speaking, Russia and Germany are fairly well matched (at least according to Kennedy, 14% vs. 14.4% of the 'Total Warmaking Potential') and Russia had an advantage of its huge size and poor transportation network to screw with the advancing Germans.Icehawk wrote:Maybe, its hard to say one way or the other I guess. But im still confident they could do it. As Sheps figures that were posted earlier show, Soviets got a shitload of their war making ability thanks to the allied lend lease, which in this scenario they dont have.
Bah. I'm not a fan of German tech (or Von Braun's stuff in WW2 ... his later stuff under US funding was more fun). I still seriously doubt that the Germans would get to ICBMs several years before the US, especially as they had a lack of high-quality metallurgy to fabricate their missiles with. Furthermore, with the war in the East, his team might be pressured to concentrate on things like SRBMs and MRBMs rather than ICBMs -- which is much harder.I see your point. Personally though, since im a fan of WW2 German tech and (and Von Braun as well) and from all that I've studied into it, I still say its possible they could have one by '55 if the project went smoothly, but thats just me.
Quite, so all going well they'd have conventional ICBMs by 1955 (assuming you're right). It we assume the US project is delayed a few years, so be it. We'll still get to nuclear ICBMs first -- and solid fueled rockets ahead of you thanks to the domestic plastics industry.Thats true, even assuming they developed one for '55 (which IIRC, is about when Germany was projected to have their first nukes by in real life) it would likely be anouther 10-15 years before they could fit one with a small enough nuke so yeah it wouldnt really matter except for dick waving and bragging rights if they got it first.
It was third largest by number of warship, however it only had about five warships larger then a destroyer. It got this was because of the huge number of small convoy escorts, and because the IJN, KM and RM had all ceased to exist. Canada built few of its warships though, most of the escorts worthy of the name where UK built ships handed over the Canada because the British couldn't man themZoink wrote:
Canada had the 4th biggest navy post WW2 primarily because of its huge investment in convoy escorts.
EDIT: I think it was 3rd largest, actually.
The plane was still at the prototype stage when it was canacled, not production, it wouldn't have been in service before 1945. That assumes it gets built at all and can meet its performance goals. Reaching 49,000 feet with any sort of warload is highly unlikely and the Germans had fuckload of designs which could not work or not met there desinges performance.Icehawk wrote: In real life by July 1944 Germany had the big 4 engined Heinkel 277 B5 with a range of 6000km, speed of 354mph and a ceiling of 49200ft which was canned after 8 production models were finnished because they needed maximum production redirected towards fighters. In an alternate history without the US involved, they won't need to cancel it, and they will likely have a need to facilitate deep strikes into an increasingly bloody Russian conflict. I would think such craft would probably be used.
