|
Re: All metal Mosquito ??
Sorry, but it is clearly not like with like. An aluminum skin of that thickness needs lots of frames and stringers behind it for stiffness and out of plane loads, the wood composite needs much less back up structure, and no mechanical fasteners. Besides the weight of the frames and stringers, there is considerable time required for assembly, and many chances for error in installing the fasteners - these become crack starters and shorten the fatigue life considerably. That is one of the big advantages of composites (wood or otherwise) over fabricated metal.
I'm surprised that no one has mentioned one of the biggest draw backs to wooden structures - environmental deterioration of the wood and glue. The RCAF learned this the hard way, watching the Oxfords, Ansons and Cranes in the BCATP literally dissolve in the Canadian winters when they were not meticulously maintained. It is interesting to note that when the RCAF established several reserve light bomber squadrons right after the war they could choose between two light bomber fleets already paid for and stored in Canada: several hundred brand new or nearly completed Mosquitoes at Downsview, and about 50 well used B-25s left over from 5 OTU on the west coast. The Mosquitoes were all sold or scrapped within a few years, the B-25s carried on in RCAF service until the early 1960s.
I'm also surprised nobody has mentioned a more direct comparison: the wooden fuselage Spitfire tested during the war, using Mosquito fabrication techniques. Maybe somebody could dig up some figures on that project?
|