Thumpalumpacus
Major
I wonder how they'd hold up under the climate conditions. No doubt they could work from some islands without too much issue, but rain forest is hard on aircraft, even metal, much less wood.
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
I don't know, but Packard had enough to power all but the earliest units of Canada's CC&F Hurricanes and all of its production of DHC Mosquitos and Victory Lancasters.
If there is no Beaufighter, Australia still has the need. The Mosquito would do nicely.
HiToo bad for the RAF. Both Canada and Australia produced the Mosquito - so they'll take what they need from their domestic production. The first Canadian Mosquitos were completed in Sept 1941.
The first Australian Mosquito was produced in July 1943, totally 212 aircraft built at Bankstown. I see no reason the Australians can't follow the Canadian example and start earlier in time to replace their lost Beaufighters. Getting Packard engines may be logistically tricky, but any transports from the US West Coast bringing engines to Australia can sail freely until Dec 1941, and then stay well south afterward.
Good point. I suppose we'd better keep the Beaufighter then or something as good. I just want Bristol to hurry up on engines.It is unlikely that Canada let alone Australia would have been producing these aircraft much earlier than they did due to the various difficulties that had to be overcome.
Thinking postwar. Since no one during the first five years after WW2 at Hawker-Siddeley (incl. Gloster) or Vickers-Supermarine was capable of making a jet fighter equal or better than the Soviets and Americans this presents an opportunity to Bristol to match the MiG-15 and F-86. It's a tall order though, as the fastest jet Bristol's designer Leslie Frise has made is the Jet Provost trainer. Mind you, Gloster's aircraft before the Meteor was the Gladiator, so generational jumps aren't unheard of.Same drill as with similar threads: once they have contract for the Blenheim (September 1935), what kind of aircraft Bristol should've been designing and producing?
In 1940, the deficiencies of the Blenheim were that it was too slow, and its defensive armament was ineffective. Bigger engines, a narrower fuselage and deletion of the turret all were good ideas, leaving us something that would look a lot like a Beaufighter.
I am looking up alternate engines for the Blenheim and the Canadian made Bolingbrokes. Canadians tested P&W Twin Wasp Juniors (R-1535). The Hercules does not seem to have been considered.
The Blenheim was to be replaced by the Buckingham, with two Centaurus engines. This was first flown in 1943. They did 330mph at 12,000ft, and offered no advantage over a Mosquito. The aircraft had a dorsal turret, and a Luftwaffe like ventral pod. I believe they worked out that a turret would take 60mph off the top speed of a Mosquito. Delete the stuff sticking out, and it may have had the same top speed as the Mosquito. It's bomb load was 4,000lb, substantially more than most Mosquito variants.
If Bristol could not get Centaurus engines into service, could they be persuaded to use somebody else's engine, like the Double Wasp? These were used on most of the Vickers Warwicks. It might have been a good way to soup up Beaufighters, although there are some obvious political issues.
The Beaufort was not a replacement for the Blenheim as a light bomber.was replaced by the Beaufort
They were not produced at the same factory/s, or used the same design/engineering teams.Good point. I suppose we'd better keep the Beaufighter then or something as good. I just want Bristol to hurry up on engines.
It would have been impressively bad.The Westland Whirlwind, with Mercuries and fuel in lieu of the wing radiators, would be an impressive low level performer
I understand that, but with the Hampden already serving in the torpedo role, why wasn't it considered as the Vildebeest's replacement?The Beaufort was designed to replace the Vickers Vildebeest in the torpedo bomber role with Coastal Command.
I understand that, but with the Hampden already serving in the torpedo role, why wasn't it considered as the Vildebeest's replacement?
It is incredible to me that a maritime nation needing to protect both the homeland and coastal imperial territory such as Malaya, Ceylon and Australasia from naval assault did not see the need for a bomber optimized, if not dedicated for torpedo strikes. It's a wonder the Vilderbeest was specified as a torpedo bomber in the 1920s.The Beaufort nearly didn't make into production. The RAF didn't want to buy a dedicated torpedo dropper.
Same drill as with similar threads: once they have contract for the Blenheim (September 1935), what kind of aircraft Bristol should've been designing and producing? For the upcoming war, and up until ~1955 when the Mach 2 is the next 'target' for the aircraft-producing companies. Engines of the day (you can axe something to speed up a bit something else, within reasonable boundaries), aerodynamics of the day. Ditto for materials, guns, other weapons and electronics.
Upgrading the Blenheim is also okay.
Much like the RAF gave unsuitable aircraft to Coastal Command, the RAF did not see the protection of those outlying areas as their job.It is incredible to me that a maritime nation needing to protect both the homeland and coastal imperial territory such as Malaya, Ceylon and Australasia from naval assault did not see the need for a bomber optimized, if not dedicated for torpedo strikes. It's a wonder the Vilderbeest was specified as a torpedo bomber in the 1920s.
The problem was not the demand for Packard Merlins. It was demand for Mosquitos. The Americans in the Pacific wanted PR Mosquitos, but there were too many people waiting in line for them.Too bad for the RAF. Both Canada and Australia produced the Mosquito - so they'll take what they need from their domestic production. The first Canadian Mosquitos were completed in Sept 1941.
The first Australian Mosquito was produced in July 1943, totally 212 aircraft built at Bankstown. I see no reason the Australians can't follow the Canadian example and start earlier in time to replace their lost Beaufighters. Getting Packard engines may be logistically tricky, but any transports from the US West Coast bringing engines to Australia can sail freely until Dec 1941, and then stay well south afterward.
The Hampden became a torpedo bomber in 1942 because of a shortage of Beauforts.I understand that, but with the Hampden already serving in the torpedo role, why wasn't it considered as the Vildebeest's replacement?
View attachment 671579
Or, perhaps the Hampden was not torpedo equipped until after the Beaufort?
Too bad for the RAF. Both Canada and Australia produced the Mosquito - so they'll take what they need from their domestic production. The first Canadian Mosquitos were completed in Sept 1941.
The first Australian Mosquito was produced in July 1943, totally 212 aircraft built at Bankstown. I see no reason the Australians can't follow the Canadian example and start earlier in time to replace their lost Beaufighters. Getting Packard engines may be logistically tricky, but any transports from the US West Coast bringing engines to Australia can sail freely until Dec 1941, and then stay well south afterward.
Canadian interest in the Mosquito first arose in Dec 1940 when the Canadian Minister of Munitions and Supply, C D Howe, first saw it fly. It was July 1941 before talks on building them in Canada reached a conclusion. This coincided with a contract for Tiger Moths coming to an end so allowing future production plans to be altered. Drawings were sent beginning Oct. KB300, the first Canadian built Mossie, flew on 24 Sept 1942. By the end of the year 4 were flying. These were followed by 88 in 1943, 424 in 1944 and 518 in 1945 for total Canadian production of 1,034. In 1945 production moved from bombers to fighter bombers.Not many Packard Merlins produced in 1941.
The first Mosquito prototype only flew in November 1940, British production was in its early stages in 1941. There is zero chance of getting a Mosquito built in Canada in 1941, let alone Australia.