Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
The Baillol looks pretty sleek to me, certainly more so than the sluggish Fulmar. Remove the dual controls and give the other chap the Fulmar's navigation radio.The problem I could see with a side-by-side design is that it would require a wider fuselage, which would add drag, in all likelihood.
using side by side seating is a problem no matter how sleek the nose.
The second man in the Mosquito or any side By side fighter had the same issue.Also not much use for rearward vision.
The second man in the Mosquito or any side By side fighter had the same issue.
Enough said, I suppose side-by-side is a dead end. What are the other options?So did one-seat fighters, for that matter. The point, though, is that a wider fuselage will add to power requirements. Even without the wider fuselage. the two-sea Battle with a Merlin had mediocre performance. Put the two crew side-by-side, it's draggier.
Enough said, I suppose side-by-side is a dead end. What are the other options?
Yes, indeed. And usually saner heads at the FAA or AM prevailed, as outside of the Fulmar, Firefly, Venom and Vixen every operational British-designed carrier fighter (sorry DB Skua, you don't count) was a single seater. But it's the late 1930's, the Air Ministry is somehow ignorant of the growing performance of both land and sea based single-seat fighters, so we're stuck with two seats.My own opinion: halving the crew. Outside of nightfighters, I don't see two-seat fighters being very competitive.
The second man in the Mosquito or any side By side fighter had the same issue.
I suppose we could give him a rearward or swivel seat like on the Bf 110.
Yes, indeed. And usually saner heads at the FAA or AM prevailed, as outside of the Fulmar, Firefly, Venom and Vixen every operational British-designed carrier fighter (sorry DB Skua, you don't count) was a single seater. But it's the late 1930's, the Air Ministry is somehow ignorant of the growing performance of both land and sea based single-seat fighters, so we're stuck with two seats.
How about a dedicated fighter variant of the Skua? Delete the bomb cradle, dive brakes and rear gun, put eight guns in the wings, streamline the canopy. As it was, whilst it was definitely slower, the Skua had a better rate of climb than the Fulmar.
One upside of a Henley fighter could be the internal ordnance bay, which could be used for fuel, cameras and of course small bombs.If so, what is the up side?