[Oh_Frustration]

IMO the FR-1 looks a lot like an A6M

[RAF_Leigh]

there was a B-26 with a jet engine in it as well

[caldrail]

So it could crash even sooner?

Incidentially, on the question of US experimental military planes, check this out!....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B-43_Jetmaster

[Guest]

You know, it's funny, really funny, how everybody questions what-if American planes, but virtually nobody questions German what-if planes. Oh yeah, there's a difference between becoming opperational and combat ready. For example, the YP-80, P-51H, F7F, and FR-1 all went opperational before the war ended, but they didn't see combat. I figured that in an alternate history, McDonnell would get the order for the engine and gun changed P-67A in about September of '44. Within a few weeks, they should have been starting production. The first planes should have rolled off the lines around late October or early November, get shipped and equip a squadron before New Year's Day. I'm getting sick and tired of arguing. Take it as a what-if and if you want me to elaborate on how I figure my stuff, then ask, don't just automatically tell me I'm wrong.

[caldrail]

No need to get upset. We're just making the historical point. if you want to make a fictional basis for a model of whatever aircraft, that's fine, as long as you make it clear that it is fiction. I wouldn't mind a model of the P-67 Bat at all, but I do accept that as a design it was a failure and never came close to USAAF acceptance. The same is true about German what-if's. Most are little more than doodles made on napkins, ideas to put under the nose of the RLM, possible future production contracts. What I do note however is the mystique that surriounds secret nazi projects, as opposed to the dry national security of 1940's America, who it must be said weren't too keen to honour their side of the technology sharing agreement once the war ended.

[Guest]

You're making a historical point on something that was said to be theoretical from the beginning. Most of the trouble with American experimental planes is the result of poor engines. Put a good engine in there and you have an amazing plane.

[caldrail]

On the contrary, there are thousands of details to sort out. As I mentioned, the P67 has aerodynamic flaws and was altered structurally in an attempt to solve them before flight testing resumed in September 1944. Note that testing originally began in December 1943 and the plane wasn't flown until January, the aircraft needing to be tested for ground handling, systems, all sorts of things. Some aircraft had ventilation problems. Others had problems with hydraulics. The Me209-I for instance (the fighter version, not the racer) had appalling handling characteristics and allowed lethal amounts of carbon monoxide into the cockpit. That's why aircraft manufacturers need to build prototypes - to find out what the flaws are before they embarras themselves or cause death and injury to others.

One important point to notice is the habitual secrecy of american technology was well rooted in the 1940's and has it's roots in intense commercial competition. The Germans on the other hand had a centrally controlled system in that period and sometimes used prototypes for public propaganda - they created myths about theirs whilst America kept everything under wraps as much as they could.