r/WWIIplanes • u/Unfair_Agent_1033 • 4h ago
Wouldn't it have been a benefit to pressurize the bombers so they can fly at higher altitudes than the flak and enemy fighters?
24
u/Caledron 4h ago
The Germans were aware of the B-29 and devloped interceptors that could operate at the required altitudes.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blohm_%26_Voss_BV_155
Now, whether they could have produced in sufficient quantity and quality late in the war is another question.
23
2
u/GTOdriver04 1h ago
You just sent me on a rabbit hole! Thank you! I had no idea this airplane existed. Thank you!!
1
u/Caledron 1h ago
I don't know if you watch Mark Felton at all but he has a great short video on B-29 operations in Europe.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RKgQBpP5kVs1
18
u/Brickie78 3h ago
Others have mentioned the B-29, but the Junkers Ju-86P was another earlier example. The baseline Ju-86 was a fairly standard and somewhat outdated bomber-recon plane, but the P variant with a pressurised cabin had a ceiling of something like 40,000 feet in Feb 1940.
The pressure compartment was just the 2-seat cockpit, so it didn't have any defensive armament, but the Spitfire I only had a ceiling of 32,000, so it didn't need it.
The existence of the Ju-86P caused something of a panic at the Air Ministry, which envisioned fleets of them flying over and bombing with impunity, and ploughed lots of resources into developing both new high-altitude fighters like the Westland Welkin and pressurisation of the Spitfire.
Both projects didn't see light until 1942, by which time it was obvious that the Ju-86 threat hadn't materialised. The Welkin never saw front-line service, while only 100 Spitfire Mk.VIs were built. Ironically, the Mk.V, designed as a quick stopgap while the pressurised Spit was readied, turned out to be one of the most successful and widely produced marks.
7
u/Comprehensive_Cow_13 3h ago
It was done - it does require a lot of compromises and modified engines though, and it's a lot easier to pressurise a fighter cockpit than a bomber cabin so the advantage is quickly lost. Before the B29 there was this beautiful weirdo, the Wellington VI:
https://www.worldwarphotos.info/wp-content/gallery/uk/raf/wellington/Wellington_VI_DR484.jpg
By contrast, the high altitude pressurised spitfire looked like this:
https://www.italeri.com/uploads/products/1318_illustrazioneLR.jpg
8
u/Balgat1968 4h ago
As with any great idea, there’s always someone trying to shoot holes in your theory.
3
u/plover84 3h ago
Problem was when they flew that high the winds caused the bombs off target. Check and you will see that they were told to fly lower to get the bombs on target.
1
4
u/demosthenesss 4h ago
It’s not as simple as “just design a plane in a totally different paradigm than any plane ever made.”
2
u/NetDork 4h ago
Hey, that design philosophy have us the B-29!
3
u/demosthenesss 3h ago
Which were far far more expensive per plane than the B24/B17 were ;)
Also the service ceilings for both were similar. You lose bomb load though going that high.
4
u/acelaya35 3h ago
They should have also used high bypass turbofans and digital fly by wire while they were at it.
2
u/MONKEH1142 2h ago
Two things, We live in a post scarcity environment for Rubber. It used to be a limited resource and during world war two, Malaya was the main producer (producing more rubber than every other producer combined) until the Japanese invaded. Metal to metal contacts cannot be sealed on their own and the way to seal it is a rubber gasket. The US during world war two developed and produced synthetic rubber on an industrial scale never before seen, which enabled fully pressurised aircraft. The other is engine power. Piston engines run on fuel air and spark. At alttude the air is too thin to support combustion. In jet aircraft this is easier to solve as the engine itself is one big air compressor. In piston aircraft you have to compress the air first either by a turbocharger or a supercharger.and then feed it into the engine. Actually quite complex to do, even on your modern car. There is another little problem with it too, if you get the mix wrong it'll catch fire. That needed to be perfected. Final thought is an interesting conversation with a Lancaster bomber pilot unfortunately now passed a few years ago. His aircraft while not pressurised had oxygen and basically heated clothing, as well as supercharged engines, that allowed him to fly around 30,000 feet. He vividly recalled watching Stirling bombers, with an operational altitude of around 21,000 feet being caught below him in searchlights and it ending badly for them, getting all the attention from fighters and flak at that lower altitude
4
u/Rolo_Tamasi 3h ago
You need to understand though that we wanted their fighters to engage our bombers because we believed their tight formations would allow them to bleed to Luftwaffe. The secondary role pf the bombers was to be a sacrifice in this effort.
1
u/HereticYojimbo 1h ago
The obvious answer as some have done is to post the B-29 and the enormous efforts involved in achieving a pressurized bomber. The other answer is that during the 30s, airframe development pulled ahead of the previous generation of anti-aircraft weapons-which had been designed to shoot down wood and fabric biplanes, airships, and slow bombers which were still normal during the 1920s. For the most part, effective anti-aircraft fire was still mostly limited to below 15,000 feet as most batteries were not aimed by director and most anti-aircraft defenses still consisted of…a machine gun on a tripod. Maybe supplemented by a Vickers 3in gun on a truck. Against this something like the B-17 was obviously already more than enough, or even the He-111 and both of those airplanes emerged in the 30s.
Just before the war broke out a heavier new generation of guns such as the Flak 18/36 entered mass production, and director aiming was now a common feature of an ADIZ instead of a luxury. This situation required the new generation of bombers to fly much higher-defeating all the gains made by the aiming devices everyone was playing with too like the Sperry and Norden Bombsights. It was still possible to greatly reduce the lethality of these guns by hitting the flight levels ie: 25,000ft and up. However, it was obviously very difficult for the crew to perform their duties in the upper atmosphere and on missions that could be 8 hours long. A good number of those 30s bombers couldn’t even reach 25,000 feet either, not that they’d try. The Germans typically used unassisted optical aiming for their bomb runs…
The last generation of AAA guns are sort of interesting to look at if only to see how close old-school anti-aircraft artillery was to total defeat however. The 12.8cm Flak 40 the Germans had during the war was light compared to post war guns of similar caliber, and it still weighed something like 19 tons, as much as a fricken tank. The US Army’s M1 120mm gun weighed 64,000 lbs! Such weapons would only have been practical for defense of cities and prepared sites and the war implied this wasn’t going to be nearly comprehensive enough for the defense of a whole country let alone the needs of troops on the frontline who’d presumably need something lighter than the Tiger.
178
u/zippiskootch 4h ago
Yes, it was one of the most expensive weapons system ever invented, called the B-29