Why didn't the Americans & Brits produce so powerful long-range ww2 heavy bomber like the ME-264 strategic bomber?

Nov 2017
866
Győr
#2
The latest, most developed variant has never built, it was designed to produce from jun.1945, but that time the war was over...



With already exiting turbo-prop and turbojet combo propulsions, and swept back wings
 
Jan 2015
3,191
Rupert's Land ;)
#3
Nov 2017
866
Győr
#4
Victory Bomber - Wikipedia

The British already had the Lancaster, which could carry 12 tons, they didn't need longer range.
I don't think that Britsh have the enginnering knowledge (theoretical knowledge in engineering), and enough developed infrastructure (advanced wind-tunels) to produce the Victory bomber during the ww2. However ME-264 was an existing bomber.

The biggest problem of British engineering was the lack of enough strong theoretical and more importantly the higher mathematical education in their universities of technology. These huge British disadvantage in engineering education started to disappear only in the post ww2 period.
 
Last edited:

pugsville

Ad Honorem
Oct 2010
8,508
#5
Messerschmitt Me 264 - Wikipedia

Why didn't the Americans & Brits produce so powerful long-range ww2 heavy bomber like the ME-264, during the time-line of European war?

ME-264 was superior in every sense: Range bomb weigth, speed, takeoff weighth , engine power, size... in everything.
Superioir except in actual performance.

Actual performance of the ME-0264 is highly questionable.

Teh germans struggled throughout teh war to devlopm their designs. rtthe me-264 is not an exception.


ME-264 3 proototypes. with all sorts of problem that never reached opertaions. What are the actual performance figures based on ?

Messerschmitt Me 264 - Wikipedia
"The wing loading caused poor climb performance, loss of manoeuvrability, stability and the need for high take-off and landing speeds."
"Trials showed numerous minor faults and handling was found to be difficult"
 
Nov 2017
866
Győr
#6
Superioir except in actual performance. Actual performance of the ME-0264 is highly questionable.
Logical Fallacy in reasoning. Your logical fallacy is personal incredulity. Your logical fallacy is personal incredulity
Teh germans struggled throughout teh war to devlopm their designs. rtthe me-264 is not an exception.
Maybe it is partially really true, because they generally tried to produce far-far more advanced designs, because they know that their enemies have brutal numerical superiority.

ME-264 3 proototypes. with all sorts of problem that never reached opertaions. What are the actual performance figures based on ?
Concentrate on the first post, planes which were actually in operation (in small numbers)

Messerschmitt Me 264 - Wikipedia
"The wing loading caused poor climb performance, loss of manoeuvrability, stability and the need for high take-off and landing speeds."
"Trials showed numerous minor faults and handling was found to be difficult"
Because they want a superior design, but the climb performace was still good in a comparison with American and British planes.
 
Nov 2017
866
Győr
#10
When speaking about airplanes this fetishisation makes a lot of sense. Who developed jet engines? What engines are used in by aircraft today?
Jet engine is a French invention. It was invented and first patented by Maxime Guillaume in 1921 Why do you ask it?

The legendary French turbojet patent from 1921:



The word's first jet powered aircraft was the Heinkel He 178, First flight 27 August 1939



The second was Italian Caproni Campini N.1 August 27, 1940


 
Last edited:

Similar History Discussions