British experimentals

[Oreo]

I've been able to find out quite a bit about German and American experimental types that never went into production, but less seems to be available about British types. Anybody want to talk about those? In particular, there was a single seat, single engine fighter made by some company (Miles, perhaps?) that could have competed with Spitfire and Tempest. What other experiments never got very far? Which ones might have been good? Which ones flew but weren't produced in quantity? How about a seriously heavy bomber, size of B-29, or bigger? Flying boats? carrier aircraft? Anybody want to discuss them? Anybody have some really good info or a website or something?

 

[Velius]

A quick search on google got me this

British Aircraft of World War II

seems like a site I'll have to take a closer look at later. I'm sure that you'll find a few interesting planes here.

 

[Waynos]

There is a book available that yu would find fascinating, it is British Secret Projects - Fighters and Bombers 1935-50 by Tony Buttler and it contains a wealth of projects, quite a few of which make you think 'I wonder'.

One of the ones I like to wonder about is the Boulton Paul project for a follow on to the Defiant which was powered by the Centaurus radial and armed with four forward facing 20mm cannon in the wings in addition to the turret. This would seem to address the two weaknesses of the Defiant, but would it have actually been any good?

 

[parsifal]

One type that has always caught my eye was the Martin Baker Mb-5

Here are its vital stats

"MARTIN-BAKER MB.5 - Second of the F.I8/39 fighter prototypes ordered in 1939 (see Martin-Baker MB.3), the Martin-Baker MB.5 (R2496) was a much-developed version, featuring a 1,900 hp R-R Griffon 83 with centra-props, and four cannon armament. First flown at Harwell on May 13,1944, but requirement overtaken by advent of jet-powered fighters, and second Martin-Baker MB.5 (R2500) not built. Flight demonstrations with R2496 continued until end-1947.

Max speed, 460 mph (740 km/h) at 20,000ft (6,100 m). Rate of climb, 3,800 ft/min (19.3 mlsec). Service ceiling, 40,000 ft (12,192 m). Range, 1,100 mis (1,770 km). Empty weight, 9,233 Ib (4,192 kg). Max gross weight, 12,090 Ib (5,489 kg). Span, 35 ft 0 in (10.67 m). Length, 37 ft 0 in (11.30 m). Wing area, 263 sqft (24.4m2)."

Martin-Baker M.B.5

 

[merlin]

Waynos: I agree with you about the Tony Butler's book, which is excellent.

Personnally prefer the Defiant single seater option. The Centauras powered model was a bigger aircraft to a night-fighter specification.

Some of my favourites, were amongst the Ground-attack aircraft to be in ready by early '44. That is twin boom pushers - Armstrong Whitworth AW.49, Boulton Paul P.99 P.100

 

[Graeme]

There is a book available that yu would find fascinating, it is British Secret Projects - Fighters and Bombers 1935-50 by Tony Buttler

Waynos: I agree with you about the Tony Butler's book, which is excellent.

What does Mr Butler have to say about the retractable pontoon Blackburn B.44 Project? I understand that it reached the mock-up stage.

Maximum speed was estimated to be 360mph at 25,000ft.

 

[red admiral]

What does Mr Butler have to say about the retractable pontoon Blackburn B.44 Project? I understand that it reached the mock-up stage.

Maximum speed was estimated to be 360mph at 25,000ft.

There isn't a great amount of detail. There were problems with the stability of the craft caused by the retractable pontoon design. It was redesigned into what was thought to be a more satisfactory design. The idea didn't come into fruition because of the ease of building forward airstrips to operate conventional aircraft.

 

[CharlesBronson]

What about this:

This project dates back to 1943 and is part of an RAF brief for a 'super bomber' with long range, adequate defensive armament and large bomb-load. The Type 'C' as the name suggests is one of several developments by Vickers in response to this brief (there were many other design from other leading aircraft manufacturers). However, it soon became apparent that at least five years would be needed to fully develop aircraft of this complexity and versatility. Coupled with the success of the Avro Lancaster and advent of practical jet propulsion made this (and the other proposals) redundant

Vickers_C_thumbs

It looks like Rutan design 8)

 

[Bigxiko]

interesting images
but that bomber looks a like freaky

 

[Graeme]

There isn't a great amount of detail. There were problems with the stability of the craft caused by the retractable pontoon design. It was redesigned into what was thought to be a more satisfactory design. The idea didn't come into fruition because of the ease of building forward airstrips to operate conventional aircraft.

Thanks for the information red admiral. Interesting concept. Some success with the Blackburn B20? May have proved to be a useful seaplane...

From this web site- BLACKBURN B20

"Would the B20 have been a success if it had gone into service? A recent biography of Wilfrid Freeman, the man ultimately responsible for the cancellation of the B20 project, says "the operational requirement for a heavy flying boat with a top speed of 340 mph was questionable". Maybe so, and of course none of the Blackburn designs of the war years were particularly liked by their crews (the Botha in particular). The B20 would not have had the range to hunt U-boats in mid Atlantic. But I bet there are a lot of Coastal Command aircrew that would have given their right arm for an aircraft able to outrun the long range Junkers 88 fighters over the Bay of Biscay or off the coast of Norway. The B20 would have been able to catch and shoot down any FW Condors it encountered. It would also have been of immense use for reconnaissance in the Mediterranean and Far East (the actions in defence of Ceylon in 1942 spring to mind). Imagine a B20 in 1943/44 capable of over 300 mph with a 57 mm Mollins gun in the nose and rocket projectiles under its wings, now that would have been a powerful weapon!"

 

[parsifal]

Charles

Very intersting....what was the theoretical advantage of the canard layout????

 

[Grampa]

Here some other pictures of that 100 ton bomber I found

 

[fly boy]

nice find guys

 

[Grampa]

I found also rumors cirkulated of an projekt for an 10 engine bomber but it might be some else phantasy, does anyone have info if this plane is true or false?

 

[red admiral]

I found also rumors cirkulated of an projekt for an 10 engine bomber but it might be some else phantasy, does anyone have info if this plane is true or false?

Its a real Avro project but not many details survive. There were a whole host of B-36 style designs with similar capability but much smaller size.

 

[Flyboy2]

That ten engined bomber is insane. Would have been hugely expensive. I like the look of that 100 ton bomber though

 

[Graeme]

There were a whole host of B-36 style designs with similar capability but much smaller size.

Including those from Bristol. Their '100-Ton' designs eventually helped with the Brabazon development.

 

[Grampa]

So the proposed but scrapped idea of a british 10 engine bomber whas true then?

 

[Grampa]

Here a hypothetical picture of an eventual planned DE HAVILLAND DH.98 MOSQUITO whit 4 engines.

 

[Grampa]

Here a Gloster Gladiator originally a bi-plane fighter converted to an monoplane called GLOSTER F5/34