NACA 1942 report to extend the range of bombers

[Temistocle]

In 1942 NACA made a reasearch about extending the range of the AAF bombers using tank wing trailers and gliders. Here the figures of the proposals, taken form the following report.

 

[Archibald]

Either it would have confused the hell out of LW pilots... or it would have turned the bombers into matches and flying bonfires.

 

[Temistocle]

I add another report here, from 1943, this time to extend the range of fighters:

 

[Sherman Tank]

Either it would have confused the hell out of LW pilots... or it would have turned the bombers into matches and flying bonfires.

Would've been useful for ferry flights from the continental US factories to European or Pacific airbases.

 

[Foo Fighter]

I reckon tanks in bomb bays would have worked better for ferrying, less drag.

 

[Temistocle]

Hi, an interesting test to improve the range of escort fighters in 1943, from Aeroplane Monthly, April 1988.

At the National Archives in London there are 4-5 documents about fighters towing (and in flight refueling), but they are not digitized...

(I am not sure if it deserves a separate thread)

 

[hesham]

At the National Archives in London there are 4-5 documents about fighters towing (and in flight refueling), but they are not digitized...

Thank you dear Temistocle,

may they are related ?.

 

[Dilandu]

I reckon tanks in bomb bays would have worked better for ferrying, less drag.

On the other hand, tanks in bomb bay did not produce additional lift. Tanker-wing compensated (partially) for its weight by generating its own lifting force.

 

[Foo Fighter]

Thank you, learned something. I totally ignored the thought that the unit could generate lift, something for me to use to improve my assessment of other projects too.

 

[iverson]

Towing is not free, though. The extra lift comes at the cost of higher drag and stability problems when under tow. The drag puts additional strain on the tow plane's engines, which may have to operate outside designed, cruising conditions and burn more fuel as well. Station keeping under tow puts strain on the pilots of both aircraft--something that becomes an issue over long ranges, particularly with a single-pilot airplane. These issues were problems even with relatively short-range tows of troop carrying gliders.

 

[Dilandu]

Towing is not free, though. The extra lift comes at the cost of higher drag and stability problems when under tow. The drag puts additional strain on the tow plane's engines, which may have to operate outside designed, cruising conditions and burn more fuel as well. Station keeping under tow puts strain on the pilots of both aircraft--something that becomes an issue over long ranges, particularly with a single-pilot airplane. These issues were problems even with relatively short-range tows of troop carrying gliders.

That's why this technology did not stay for long, especially as speed of aircraft started to rise fast, and drag losses became much more problematic.

 

[nuuumannn]

I agree that towing isn't the most efficient means of extending range. Although not a means of extending the range of bombers, the Soviets tried towing fighters as a means of providing defence en route, first with Tu-4s towing MiG-15s in what was called the Burlaki (which translates to "strong man" according to a Russian friend of mine) programme, where a MiG was towed by the Tu-4 and released at the right time to defend the bombers, but it was found the pilot in the fighter got very cold and was cramped during the lengthy transit, so the project was dropped. IFR offered far better prospects; the RAF Tiger Force was supposed to operate IFR tasked aircraft, including Consolidated Liberators. Avro even drew up a version of the Manchester with IFR equipment as a tanker.

 

[Spyinthesky]

I would presume also beyond the technical issues one has to consider the strategic issues involved in daylight bombing raids using this set up flying over large areas of enemy occupied territory, if there is any semblance of effective defensive air presence and effective radar. They would soon cotton on to what was happening and create effective counter tactics and intercept at the most inconvenient section of the flight when both would be sitting ducks, meaning even at the sniff of the presence of defensive fighters being forced instant release some breaking up of the bomber stream in the uncoordinated process and potential total disruption of the whole concept without even having to physically engage with the bombers defending fighters in that instance and biding their time. At best it would have been a short term asset I suspect.