Author Topic: Hamilcar Mk. X as a low-cost transport plane?  (Read 1287 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline rickshaw

  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 9337
Re: Hamilcar Mk. X as a low-cost transport plane?
« Reply #15 on: March 05, 2018, 07:37:24 pm »
The plan was, early on in the war, to dismantle the gliders and truck them to the nearest airfield/port and then reassemble them/ship them home.  Later in the war, once the "snatch" had been perfected, the plan was to "snatch" the gliders and fly them home for reuse.

Now, while that was fine in theory, realities meant that AIUI only about 25% of the gliders used in an operation were reusable.   The way they were landed, the way they were unloaded and actions of the troops and enemy were such that not many gliders survived the experience of their first operational sortie.

AIUI, the Hamilcar was like the Horsa, intended to be recovered and reused.  While a "snatch" would work with the lighter Hadrian and Horsa gliders, there was no way they could make a Hamilcar take off that way without dragging the towplane down.  So the idea was to put some engines on it (after they thought to use a P-38).   It was meant to be able to take off and fly back by itself after the "power-eggs" had flown in and been attached.  The war ended before this plan could be put to the test.
How to reduce carbon emissions - Tip #1 - Walk to the Bar for drinks.

Offline AS.12

  • Makes own decals
  • ***
  • Posts: 348
Re: Hamilcar Mk. X as a low-cost transport plane?
« Reply #16 on: March 05, 2018, 11:57:23 pm »
Found in Flight archive for November 1945:

Quote
At 47,000lb when off-tow and with full engine power the rate of descent is about 150ft/min; at 42,000lb height can just about be maintained with full power

Offline NARSES2

  • Nick was always on his mind - just ask the Pet Shop Boys
  • Global Moderator
  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 35009
Re: Hamilcar Mk. X as a low-cost transport plane?
« Reply #17 on: March 06, 2018, 12:43:12 am »
Goodness knows how they'd have got a glider tug into the field by Pegasus Bridge, it'd have needed to be a Harrier to get in and out!  :o



Not just the size, and I've been there and still can't work out how they did it  :bow:, but the ground was quite boggy as well being next to the canal
Decals my @r$e!

Offline Default Setting

  • Out of the Whiffing Closet
  • **
  • Posts: 98
Re: Hamilcar Mk. X as a low-cost transport plane?
« Reply #18 on: May 21, 2018, 04:20:42 pm »
A follow-up question: might performance have been increased by fitting the Mk. X with more powerful engines, such as the P&W R-1690 Hornet, or the Wright R-1820 Cyclone? The former is virtually identical to the Bristol Mercury in size and weight, while the latter is about 100 kg heavier--I don't know if that might result in center-of-gravity issues.
The one duty we owe to history is to rewrite it.
-- Oscar Wilde

Offline dogsbody

  • Makes own decals
  • ***
  • Posts: 398
Re: Hamilcar Mk. X as a low-cost transport plane?
« Reply #19 on: May 24, 2018, 04:24:46 pm »
I'd replace the Mercs with two Hercs. That should give it enough power.


Chris
"What young man could possibly be bored
with a uniform to wear,
a fast aeroplane to fly,
and something to shoot at?"

Offline Default Setting

  • Out of the Whiffing Closet
  • **
  • Posts: 98
Re: Hamilcar Mk. X as a low-cost transport plane?
« Reply #20 on: May 25, 2018, 08:51:37 am »
I'd replace the Mercs with two Hercs. That should give it enough power.

Good idea  :thumbsup:

Would the extra weight of the Hercules cause center-of-gravity issues? Or could they be fitted without any other modifications to the airframe?

Also, any idea of their market price in the early post-WW2 years?
The one duty we owe to history is to rewrite it.
-- Oscar Wilde