JDK's Fiendish Quiz No.1

[Aeronut]

I can think of another two asspects of glider ops that were considered but never used, soaring and towing in trains.
Again I can only comment from a British view point.
The Hotspur had its wingspan reduced by 10 feet to stop it being soarable (a lightly loaded Horsa was soarable) as it was realised that getting it down and not keeping it up was the idea..
Towing in trains was also considered, with multiple gliders being towed nose to tail by a single tug but was replaced by the simpler multiple tow (seperate tow ropes) method.
If its not either of these ideas I'm struggeling, unless you're after the fact that they were all designed to jettison (or have alternative jetsonable) undercarriages but on operations never did.

[JDK]

Oooo, so close, and the wingspan reduction is a key component.

So they were like this, then they were like that. What's the difference? (And 'getting down' isn't part of the answer.)

[Enemy Ace]

1. 20mm cannon.
2. Douglas DC-2.
3. Gliders morphed from direct combat drops of troops onto an objective (think Crete) to larger heavier transport cargo oriented craft in late war (think Horsa, Gigant). Overlord drops were not intended as direct combat drops, the gliders were to be landed in the countryside at unprotected locations. The soviets also were widely using glidersfor forward resupply by end of war.
4. Battle of Britain, if the home islands had been invaded it would have knocked England out of the war and given the axis a large span of breathing room to concentrate on the Eastern front.
5. Mausers, Browning Hi-power clones, Sten guns, DC-3 clones, Bf-108, Storch, 109's, Various models of trucks, various engines that were very closely related (i.e. R2600- BMW 801).

Ever notice how when things get slow on WIX it's time for a quiz?

[gregv]

Oooo, so close, and the wingspan reduction is a key component.

So they were like this, then they were like that. What's the difference? (And 'getting down' isn't part of the answer.)

Earlier on gliders were towed to a certain point then expected to fly themselves into the drop zone, while later on they were dropped virtually on the drop zone?

Or maybe early war gliders were used to ferry men & supplies to rallying points near the front, but later they were used to take men & material directly to the combat zone?

Fabric covering vs wood covering?

Dedicated pilots vs pilots who after the landing turned into grunts?

???

greg v.

[rreis]

ok... has it seems nobody tried to read the pdf I posted I will plunge into this work and resume, in progress, the ideas...

germany:

- theoretical use of gliders to
- deliver supplies to encircle units
- deliver troops behind the lines
- increase the cargo capacity of transport planes
- combat aircraft
- use to deliver commando troops

instead of using it to deliver normal infantry troops

(now I'm going to dinner)

[airnutz]

Methinks the crafty devill is referring to a range extending fuel tank towed behind the parent aircraft?

[rreis]

Methinks the crafty devill is referring to a range extending fuel tank towed behind the parent aircraft?

nay, nay, Sir, cargo capacity not range.

[rreis]

Another interesting tidbit: troops were expected to rip through the canvas of the glider after landing... (I'm still reading about Germany)

[airnutz]

Methinks the crafty devill is referring to a range extending fuel tank towed behind the parent aircraft?

nay, nay, Sir, cargo capacity not range.

Ahhh, thanks. That's what I get for attempting a "driveby" in a thread that jumps from bullets to brickbats...

[Jarink1]

1. 9x19mm would be my vote for most common caliber/cartridge. Used in most service pistols and nearly all non-Soviet SMGs around the globe.

4. Most decisive defensive land battle won: Kursk. More so than Stalingrad, it broke the back of the Wehrmacht and gave the Red Army the initiative for the rest of the war.
4a. Most decisive defensive air battle won: Malta. If Malta had been neutralized, Rommel would have easily gotten the supplies he needed to drive through to the Suez Canal.

[JDK]

Earlier on gliders were towed to a certain point then expected to fly themselves into the drop zone, while later on they were dropped virtually on the drop zone?

Perfect. Most initial glider use (USSR, Germany, the UK) concepts postulated a silent, unexpected insertion of small numbers of coup de main troops, with the glider equipped with a high aspect ratio wing able to glide a significant distance to the target. While this approach was only ever used occasionally, both at the start of the war (fort Eben-Emael) and at Pegasus Bridge in June 1944, the design of gliders universally changed to shorter, low-aspect ratio wings to support shorter glides with much greater loads.

It's a vague question, and I'd certainly agree other answers have merit, too; but the aspect ratio of designs changing is pretty universal element.

1. 20mm cannon.

We need details! Can you provide data to support that?

2. Douglas DC-2.

We need details... Who, ideally when & where too!

5. Mausers, Browning Hi-power clones, Sten guns, DC-3 clones, Bf-108, Storch, 109's, Various models of trucks, various engines that were very closely related (i.e. R2600- BMW 801).

All very interesting, but you might want to go and re-read the stuff around the question, again. Answer, data and argument - not just names, please. Oh, and aircraft types, as clarified earlier for Mudge.

The queries over French production of German types and the nature of the DC-2 and -3 family production have been discussed - are you taking it further, or just joining the wagon?

The 109 was in production on opposing sides when & where?

Ever notice how when things get slow on WIX it's time for a quiz?

Can't speak for Mr Cook, the main WIX quizmeister, but for me, my quizzes are set when I've got one and feel like it.

There may be another along soon.

Regards,

[rreis]

Earlier on gliders were towed to a certain point then expected to fly themselves into the drop zone, while later on they were dropped virtually on the drop zone?

Perfect. Most initial glider use (USSR, Germany, the UK) concepts postulated a silent, unexpected insertion of small numbers of coup de main troops, with the glider equipped with a high aspect ratio wing able to glide a significant distance to the target. While this approach was only ever used occasionally, both at the start of the war (fort Eben-Emael) and at Pegasus Bridge in June 1944, the design of gliders universally changed to shorter, low-aspect ratio wings to support shorter glides with much greater loads.

It's a vague question, and I'd certainly agree other answers have merit, too; but the aspect ratio of designs changing is pretty universal element.

Hi JDK. In the way you frame it, it seems the operational requirement of long distance drop or short distance drop drove the design. From what I read this was a bi-product of wanting to deliver more troops/cargo in the target area. What I mean is that if it was technology possible to have bigger cargo loads with the same glide ratios, long glider flights would still be used.

Two more pieces of trivia:

- one of the considerations given to the use of gliders were their price: for the same amount of reichmarks 20 parachutes cost, you could deliver 20 men which would be together in the drop zone, combat ready on landing, against 20 spreaded parachutists that, once landed, still needed to unplug their harnesses and re-group.

- last german glider operation was February 1945, to help the sieged troops in Breslau. A parachute was attached to the gliders so almost vertical landings could be attained in a very reduced target area.

cheers!

[JDK]

Hi JDK. In the way you frame it, it seems the operational requirement of long distance drop or short distance drop drove the design. From what I read this was a bi-product of wanting to deliver more troops/cargo in the target area. What I mean is that if it was technology possible to have bigger cargo loads with the same glide ratios, long glider flights would still be used.

Fair comment. My point is that people remember the way the heavier gliders were used, overlooking the very different tactical concept of, in particular the GAL Hotspur and DFS 230, which required them to have the high aspect ratio wings - as was noted by Aeronut (thanks!) the Hotspur actually had its high aspect ratio wing chopped a degree after design. The change to shorter flights wasn't (only) because of the need for the increase in load, but was (also) because the long range extra-covert operations weren't what was developed as the Allies' 'best plan'.

last german glider operation was February 1945, to help the sieged troops in Breslau. A parachute was attached to the gliders so almost vertical landings could be attained in a very reduced target area.

I think that'll have been a braking 'chute (probably something lost in the various translations?) which was used earlier too - Crete rings a bell, I think.

Good stuff, all very interesting, everyone.

[Aeronut]

I'd just like to point out that even with its wingspan shortened the Hotspur would float forever if landed fast and not having brakes didn't help. I do however have some drawings and reports for a plough anchor and rope arrestor system that was considered for the Hotspur
However, even though the pictures you see of the mass landings of gliders for D-day, Market Garden and the Rhine Crossing may appear chaotic, it was a planned chaos. Each pilot knew where on the LZ he was expected to land, and most achieved it, that way the troops and equipment for each unit would be consentrated.
Incedentaly I've checked my copies of the original specifications for the Horsa and Hengist and apart from the idea of parachuting from them, the idea of mass landings of troops and materials was in there from the start. The idea of coup-de-main only came about once they decided that leaving the training undercarriage on with its brakes was a better idea than jettisoning the wheels and landing on a skid.
The Hotspur, Horsa and the Waco (CG4 or Hadrian depending which side of the pond you're from) all had arrestor parachutes fitted at some time it attempts to shorten the landing. Whilst the parachute was used by the Pegasus Bridge gliders it was deployed too late to be of any use.
Anyway it was not really needed on the Horsa, when with full flap and working brakes it could fly the approach in a 60 degree dive all the way to the flare and a spot landing.

I agree that gliders give a better consentration of troops on the ground, I've witnessed a drop of 128 paratroops onto a hot and high DZ with a slight tailwind, even though the troops left at 2 a second and jumped from 800 feet, first and last man out were separated by 7.5 kilometers!

[rreis]

What is, roughly, the price of 128 parachutes?

ps, it was the helicopter that killed the glider in military applications...