Strategic Materials

[Ricky]

A thought occcured to me.
In the opening chunk of WW2 (well, 1941 onwards), the Soviet Union was initially forced to produce many of its planes from wood, as they suffered from a lack of strategic materials like Aluminium.

What would the effect have been on British aircraft (and maybe even the war in general) if Britain had suffered a similar shortage?

(and hopefully we can avoid too much mention of the Mosquito!)

Would we have re-designed the Spitfire to be more wooden, or relied more on the Hurricane, or designed new planes...

Over to you.

[simon]

Looking at the solutions used by the Soviets, Luftwaffe and Japanese I think we would have gone along those lines, started gradually incorporating wood into the planes where possible in areas like the wing-tips and the tail surfaces.

With typical British ingenuity we probably would have seen more Mosquitoes earlier (A good thing), and more steel-tubed monsters like the AW Albermarle (Probably not a good thing). I can see the air ministry deciding that a crap bomber was better than no bomber at all.

Otherwise, we probably would have had serious second thoughts about lend-lease Fortresses and a lot more Liberators... :D But then we did have an advantage when it came to supplies of equipment that the Germans and Japanese didn't have, our good friends over the pond!

[ChrisMcD]

Simon,

I think that you do the British woodworking industry down!

There were a number of companies that produced superb wooden aircraft.

Miles did very well with the Master and M20, while DeHavilland produced a very competitive large airframe in the Albatros. You could even make a case for the Airspeed Oxford.

Compare that to the problems the Germans had with the seriously overweight Ju 322

http://www.fantastic-plastic.com/JUNKERSJu322MammutPage.htm

And a regretable tendency to break up in the air because the glue was faulty (He 162, Ta 154)

As far as I know the Russians tended to get wooden aircraft right - albeit the Laggs were a bit heavy, but the Japanese efforts were a bit overweight as well (ie Ki-106)
http://www.csd.uwo.ca/~pettypi/elevon/baugher_other/ki-84.html

[Trexx]

Interesting. It's true that many Soviet planes that utilized wood were too heavy. Wasn't the Mig 3 nicknamed 'Wooden Coffin'?

[ickysdad]

Russian planes had strucural problems with thier wooden planes though ,the glue was letting go way too easily for one.

[simon]

I don't think I'm being too harsh on the British aircraft industry. The Miles M.20 could have been good-ish for the Battle of Britain, but of limited use after that (Performance reckoned to be superior to Hurricane but inferior to the Spitfire), it probably couldn't have been in service much sooner than early 1941 anyway and it would pretty soon be facing off against the likes of the Bf109F and by September 1941 the first batches of Fw190As. If it had reached production I don't think it would have been remembered as being amongst the greats.

The Mosquito and Albatross are good examples of the British aircraft industry producing good aircraft with little requirement for strategic light alloys off the back of the private companies initiative. That said the Albatross was probably no better a candidate for conversion to a bomber than the Fw200.

The Albermarle is a good example of the British aircraft industry producing a complete dog in response to an air ministry specification for a plane to minimise use of strategic light alloys.

Left up to the air ministry there probably would have been more Albermarle type planes being ordered.

[Mark J]

Supermarine made a plastic Spitfire!

It was destroyed by bombing in 1940.

cheers

[simon]

quote:Originally posted by Mark J

Supermarine made a plastic Spitfire!

It was destroyed by bombing in 1940.

cheers


So did Airfix... :D

[ChrisMcD]

Hi Simon,

What's this about plastic spitfires?

I take your point about the Albatros, somewhere I have a photo of the first prototype with a broken back just aft of the wings - just likethe Fw 200. But, DeHavilland glued more wood on and fixed the problem! They also learnt a lot about high speed wooden aircraft (do we have a pact not to mention insects in this thread?)

But, my point was that the Brit were the only people to get advanced wooden planes into production. By the way, did you know that when we bombed the German Goldschmidt glue factory we scuppered bulk production of the Ta 154. That's why the prototypes were the last safe German wooden aircraft.

DeHavilland, by using decent glues, together with a system of balsa cores sheathed in plywood produced a structure that was still good enough for the Vampires/Venoms etc. well into the 50's

[simon]

quote:Originally posted by ChrisMcD

Hi Simon,

What's this about plastic spitfires?

I take your point about the Albatros, somewhere I have a photo of the first prototype with a broken back just aft of the wings - just likethe Fw 200. But, DeHavilland glued more wood on and fixed the problem! They also learnt a lot about high speed wooden aircraft (do we have a pact not to mention insects in this thread?)

But, my point was that the Brit were the only people to get advanced wooden planes into production. By the way, did you know that when we bombed the German Goldschmidt glue factory we scuppered bulk production of the Ta 154. That's why the prototypes were the last safe German wooden aircraft.

DeHavilland, by using decent glues, together with a system of balsa cores sheathed in plywood produced a structure that was still good enough for the Vampires/Venoms etc. well into the 50's



Yes, but we did it by accident, it was RAF bombers ditching bombs over Wuppertal that destroyed the glue factory not a deliberate attack.

If not for that lucky coincidence we might not have had that claim.

[ChrisMcD]

Lucky Coincidence?

The RAF's precision night bombing expertises is well known!

As was their superior industrial research that allowed them to know just how important the Wuppertal glue works were to final victory!

[GregP]

You'd probably have made a wooden Short Sterling. It may or may not have flown, but would have floated quite well.

Fit a keel and some advanced torpedos, and it could have been a real threat in English Channel. It even had belly guns for fighting U-Boats! Clever, those Brits!

If you had filled it with sealed empty Spam cans, it could have floated even after being damaged and would have had a pretty good shelf life.

[Kutscha]

quote:Originally posted by ChrisMcD

Hi Simon,

What's this about plastic spitfires?


In Spitfire: The History there is a chapter on the Aerolite, ie. 'plastic', Spitfire.

The first fuselage was finished in Apr 1941. A second fuselage began construction in May 1941. The fuselage was still around in mid 1945 because pieces were removed for testing.

[Kutscha]

Greg,

a 1/2 scale flying model of the Stirling (S.29) looks as if it is made of wood.

[GregP]

Sorry, I had an attack of delerious humor ... was kidding.

The 1/2 scale Sterling was a single-seater with Pobjoy radials, and it flew just fine.

I always wondered why they never fitted longer, proper wings to the Sterling. Seemed like it would have been a good move, and would have let the Sterling fly OVER tha Alps.

[Mark J]

The half-scale Stirling was found to be more manouverable than the Hurricane! Imagine a 4 engines fighter.....?
It's wingspan ( the full scale Stirling ) was limited to about 100ft due to an air ministry requirment for the planes to fit inside their 100ft wide hanger doors.

The plastic Spitfire was a serious attempt as a backup for production. In due course it wasn't required as a source of bauxite was secured for continued production of alluminium alloys.

cheers

[Groggy]

quote:Originally posted by Mark J

The half-scale Stirling was found to be more manouverable than the Hurricane! Imagine a 4 engines fighter.....?
It's wingspan ( the full scale Stirling ) was limited to about 100ft due to an air ministry requirment for the planes to fit inside their 100ft wide hanger doors.

The plastic Spitfire was a serious attempt as a backup for production. In due course it wasn't required as a source of bauxite was secured for continued production of alluminium alloys.

cheers


Mark,

I am intrigued by the Plastic Spitfire, years ago I read a RAF “in house” Magazine from 1945 that stated work had be done on the problems of design and production of plastic aircraft and that the Americans were now working on plastic aircraft for when the peace comes. There are only a couple of references seen since that time, one was in an issue of Flypast and that must have been a good twenty years ago. Has any one got anything on plastic aircraft of that period?

One of the things that made British wooden aircraft a success was cutting edge glue technology.

Did not the Italians produce a brilliant wooden single engine light weight fighter design? Was there not also a USA contract for the design and manufacture for a wooden fighter to conserve strategic materials in case there was a shortage?

[Kutscha]

Groggy, see "Spitfire: The History", chapter 8.

[Mark J]

Groggy
Not sure about the Italian wooden plane but the Americans built this

http://www.wpafb.af.mil/museum/research/p77.htm

I'll try and do a search in my books about the plastic Spitfire. I've been awear of it for some time, through different publications but have never seen a picture.

cheers

[Kutscha]

How many times do I have to say Spitire:The History?:) In is text and pics of the 'plastic' Spit.

[Groggy]

quote:Originally posted by Kutscha

How many times do I have to say Spitire:The History?:) In is text and pics of the 'plastic' Spit.


Many Thanks! The book is now on order from the Library.

Thanks Mark, They are the best pictures I have seen of the aircraft.

On reflection the Italian might have been called "Dart"???
but I can not recall the Manufacturer.

[Romantic Technofreak]

quote:
Ricky wrote:
Would we have re-designed the Spitfire to be more wooden


You British already spent your forests for your pre-steel fleet! If you consider wood supplies over the Atlantic instead, you can consider what

quote:
Simon wrote:
But then we did have an advantage when it came to supplies of equipment that the Germans and Japanese didn't have, our good friends over the pond!


To consider "what if" the North American continent would lack natural resources goes too far... [:0][8)]

For Germany, the lack of nickel was one of the most narrow bottlenecks for high-quality armament production. I don´t know what could have been done to solve that problem. Opening more mines in Norway? Or changing tanks for high-performance aircraft engines?

By the way, one of my thoughts about an "axis victory" configuration is that Japan avoids any conflict with the US and only grasps UK and Dutch posessions. There would be no Pearl Harbour, and the Philippines had to be circumvented because of the presence of US troops there. But - does anybody know if the Philippine aluminium resources wouldn´t have been crucial to supply the Japanese aircraft industry?

[curmudgeon]

quote:

To consider "what if" the North American continent would lack natural resources goes too far... [:0][8)]

For Germany, the lack of nickel was one of the most narrow bottlenecks for high-quality armament production. I don´t know what could have been done to solve that problem. Opening more mines in Norway? Or changing tanks for high-performance aircraft engines?

By the way, one of my thoughts about an "axis victory" configuration is that Japan avoids any conflict with the US and only grasps UK and Dutch posessions. There would be no Pearl Harbour, and the Philippines had to be circumvented because of the presence of US troops there. But - does anybody know if the Philippine aluminium resources wouldn´t have been crucial to supply the Japanese aircraft industry?


What about if Italy had stayed 'neutral' and had acted as a blockade breaker ... ?

[ickysdad]

Also don't forget Germany's shortage of Chromium!!!! Opening mines is only part of it ,you also have to build smelters and that takes way more time & infrastructure to build the various components for these plants/smelters.

[Groggy]

quote:Originally posted by Kutscha

How many times do I have to say Spitire:The History?:) In is text and pics of the 'plastic' Spit.


Kutscha,
Many thanks for a interesting lead, the Library have provided a copy, all I have to do is to read what promises to be 631 fun packed pages. Spotted two things already, Martin Bakers Quick release for the canopy and an investigation in to producing plywood covered wing.

[Ricky]

So could the rest of us Forum members get a brief report on the plastic Spitfire please?

(no book recommendations)

[Kutscha]

Groggy, that is the first issue of the book. The revised issue of the book has many more pages filled with info.:)

[Romantic Technofreak]

quote:ickysdad wrote:
Also don't forget Germany's shortage of Chromium!!!!

Basically this is right, but not in the same way like nickel. The world´s most important chromium deliverer was neutral Turkey, and the main difficulty for Germany was to utilize the Turkish deposits by diplomatic means. After long negotiations, Turkey signed a trade agreement that secured the chromium supply for Germany as late as 1943. In spring of 1944, the Allied forced Turkey to interrupt the economic relations with Germany. For the rest of the year, Germany was able to get her supplies from different occupied or allied countries on the Balkan Peninsula.

The difficulties with Chromium were on a certain point of time also on the other side. In summer 1943, a single Italian frogman, living undercover as diplomatic employee in the harbour town of Iskenderum (Alexandrette), a main Turkish harbour for chromium export, was able to blow up three Allied ships and damage a forth. The explosive charges were ignited by a propeller-controlled system, to secure that the ship had swam a certian distance (five sea miles) before the mine explodes, so that it should be assumed a submarine torpedo hit the ship.

The damaged ship was laid up on a Cyprus beach, and an unexploded charge was found. From this point of time, the ship hulks were controlled by the crews before leaving the harbour, while the frogman had to head home for to cure a malaria attack.

I am quoting from two German books. Titles and pages on request. I wanted to get a third one, but it is unobtainable. I even tried to import it from Spain. The bookstore asked me two times if I really wanted it. I said two times "asignacion confirmado", but they didn´t deliver it. I know it is in some public libraries in Switzerland. But this would, at least, cost me an overnight stay in Zurich and a day in a copy shop there...[:0]:(

[PMN1]

quote:

I always wondered why they never fitted longer, proper wings to the Sterling. Seemed like it would have been a good move, and would have let the Sterling fly OVER tha Alps.


Well a Super Stirling was proposed in late 1941

Wingspan 136ft and with a fuselage able to carry 6 4,000lb Cookies?? plus another 6 x 1,000lb bombs in the wings.

Powered by 4 Centarus engines it had no more height advantage than the standard Stirling and it was worked out that every two Super Stirlings would cost three standard Stirlings and wouldn't reach squadrons until 1944 - the RAF apparently wanted it because of the bombload but Ministry of Aircraft Production (MAP)didn't want the disruption to bomber production it would cause.