Boulton Paul Sea Balliol fighter

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

Admiral Beez

Captain
8,617
9,720
Oct 21, 2019
Toronto, Canada
Postwar Boulton Paul finally won their first Air Ministry contract since the Defiant, in the Balliol trainer, first flying in 1947, entering service in 1950. Originally powered by a Bristol Perseus, and looking somewhat like a single seat Skua, the post war model was powered by a RR Merlin, and IMO looks more 1940 than 1950.

254c5cd52d38c49140b18708ae5338b4.jpg


Boulton-Paul-Balliol-T2.jpg


A naval version was produced for the FAA, called the Sea Balliol, shown below, fitted with folding wings and arrestor hook for deck landings.

boultonpaul_seaballiolt21_jimgroom.jpg


There's nothing innovative or evolutionary in the Balliol's design. Can we make this into a naval fighter for introduction instead of the Fulmar? Make the Balliol a single seater and replace its single .303 mg with something more substantial, and could we have an alternative to the Fulmar, Sea Hurricane, Seafire, etc? This would also keep BP in business a little longer, having had zero other success since the Defiant.
 
Postwar Boulton Paul finally won their first Air Ministry contract since the Defiant, in the Balliol trainer, first flying in 1947, entering service in 1950. Originally powered by a Bristol Perseus, and looking somewhat like a single seat Skua, the post war model was powered by a RR Merlin, and IMO looks more 1940 than 1950.

View attachment 583228

View attachment 583230

A naval version was produced for the FAA, called the Sea Balliol, shown below, fitted with folding wings and arrestor hook for deck landings.

View attachment 583229

There's nothing innovative or evolutionary in the Balliol's design. Can we make this into a naval fighter for introduction instead of the Fulmar? Make the Balliol a single seater and replace its single .303 mg with something more substantial, and could we have an alternative to the Fulmar, Sea Hurricane, Seafire, etc? This would also keep BP in business a little longer, having had zero other success since the Defiant.
If you're going to make a single or two seat navy fighter with upward folding wings then the logical start point is the Defiant.
 
Postwar Boulton Paul finally won their first Air Ministry contract since the Defiant, in the Balliol trainer, first flying in 1947, entering service in 1950. Originally powered by a Bristol Perseus, and looking somewhat like a single seat Skua, the post war model was powered by a RR Merlin, and IMO looks more 1940 than 1950.

Very true.

A naval version was produced for the FAA, called the Sea Balliol, shown below, fitted with folding wings and arrestor hook for deck landings.

There's nothing innovative or evolutionary in the Balliol's design. Can we make this into a naval fighter for introduction instead of the Fulmar? Make the Balliol a single seater and replace its single .303 mg with something more substantial, and could we have an alternative to the Fulmar, Sea Hurricane, Seafire, etc? This would also keep BP in business a little longer, having had zero other success since the Defiant.

If it is to be alternnative to Fulmar, the second seat will most likely stay.
The Balliol featured crewmen seating one aside to the other, not one behind another, thus making the aircraft a bit more compact, if draggier.
For the Sea Balliol to be actually competitive, have it outfitted with a suitable Merlin version (X, XII, XX, 45 etc); the Mk.35 is a bad choice for a fighter, even if it makes sense for a trainer.
 
If it's going to be early enough to be a replacement for the Fulmar you'd have to make the design available in 1938 (if not before, Fairey had a head-start by basing the Fulmar on the P4/34), contemporary with the development of the Defiant. So it would probably end up being a naval single-seat development of the Defiant. And that is exactly what Boulton Paul was trying to get the Navy interested in anyway. Firstly Merlin-powered, but later on, Griffon or Centaurus powered. This is the design tweaked to meet N7/43 in its P103B form (the P103A was the Griffon version). BP's chief designer, JD North, was especially interested in producing a Navy Strike fighter and his P105 and P107 designs may have been much more suitable for the British Navy than either the Firebrand or Firecrest. See "Boulton Paul Aircraft, Unbuilt Projects" by Alec Brew. Boulton Paul's factory was always crammed with work anyway. Assuming you could get it ready in time and get the FAA to actually realise they needed a single-seat monoplane fighter well before the Norwegian campaign, it would be a worthy alternative to the BP factory producing the Blackburn Roc from March '39 to Aug '40, but with any production run more than 136 you'd start to eat into the production of Defiants (or later Barracudas).
P103.jpg


The Balliol (only later converted to the Sea Balliol) was designed with a Merlin only because of the thousands of war-surplus ones were available. It was also a three-seater (in line with the then-current fad in trainer design for taking another student along for the extra experience). So any earlier version, in a wartime environment, it would have to compete for Merlin production with all the other aircraft needing Merlins.

Although BP aircraft (not to be confused with the woodworking company) still put forward aircraft designs until the late 1950s they found the electrical / electronic /hydraulic business that had its roots in their turret designs to be a far more lucrative business. Indeed they survived in this business long after the more well-known British aviation companies had disappeared.
 
So any earlier version, in a wartime environment, it would have to compete for Merlin production with all the other aircraft needing Merlins.
Not a huge deal breaker, as we'd just be taking the Merlins used on the FAA's Fulmars, Sea Hurricanes and Seafires.
So it would probably end up being a naval single-seat development of the Defiant.
Understood, see post #3 above. Naval Defiant has been done.
 
Last edited:

Users who are viewing this thread

Back