Wild_Bill_Kelso
Senior Master Sergeant
- 3,231
- Mar 18, 2022
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
The oriigins of the Fulmar lie in the P.4/34 light bomber which was already flying when the Spec for "an interim fighter" for quick production was issued in 1938. Relatively minor changes were made to the airframe to get to the Fulmar.
Once you start talking about the kind of more extensive changes you are considering, you start looking more at a clean sheet of paper design, and that will result in a longer development time. So it is not available in the historic timescale. And you then don't have the aircraft that was sought that could act as an escort fighter to protect a strike force andcwith a second seat and Observer to find its way back to the fleet.
Anything is doable. But does it meet the Spec? And can it be built in the same timescale?
A better FAA twin seat, single engine fighter for 1940?
The Fulmar was a given, made in a hurry from Fairey’s RAF project. Putting aside the inevitability of the Fulmar, and assuming the single engine, twin seater, long range, eight, fixed forward firing guns (no turret fighters, thanks), fighter requirement is a must, what other British aircraft...ww2aircraft.net
A lot of work for little result.As an idea from the other thread, if a Defiant could really manage 300 mph with that enormous, heavy, draggy power turret on the back, what if you took that out, put some fuel in it instead where the second crewman was, add a few wing guns, you might have something pretty viable for a naval fighter. If it weighs 6,078 lbs empty, how much is it without the turret?
As an idea from the other thread, if a Defiant could really manage 300 mph with that enormous, heavy, draggy power turret on the back, what if you took that out, put some fuel in it instead where the second crewman was, add a few wing guns, you might have something pretty viable for a naval fighter. If it weighs 6,078 lbs empty, how much is it without the turret?
Apparently they tested something like this idea as Boulton Paul P.94 ... with a 'calculated' speed of 360 mph per Wiki
View attachment 742797
A lot of work for little result.
A Hurricane I was about 4670lbs with it's 40ft wing span.
A big problem with the Defiant schemes is that the wing guns go where the existing fuel tanks are so you have to use some of the fuselage to restore fuel capacity.
Basically everybody wants an all metal Hurricane with folding wings with a little more fuel, and is willing to jump through hoops and scale high walls to get it by squeezing/squashing/twisting/stretching a Fulmar or Defiant to get it.
wishful thinking.I don't know what their estimate of 360 mph was based on,
The Hurricane carried 97 imp gallons total.Hurricane carried 97 Imp gal in the wings plus 28 gal in the forward fuselage for 125 gallons.
wishful thinking.
The Hurricane carried 97 imp gallons total.
The center wing of the Defiant was not under the fuselage, it extended out to where the wing started to taper.
View attachment 742808
Fuel tanks are outboard of the landing gear. There were optional long range tanks on the Defiant, unfortunately they are right where you want to move the guns to keep from screwing up the existing tanks. The long range tanks are behind the landing lights.
We are repeating a bunch of stuff form another thread that is only a few days old.
Find the figures for the Defiant II and the Hurricane II.
.
Actual figures and not estimates. The Defiant needs to pick up over 20mph to equal the Hurricane, it needs another 20mph to equal the "estimate".
The Defiant is using a rather thick wing much like the Hurricane.
The Defiant II did not pick up the speed they expected by changing the engine.
The Defiant prototype did not show a big difference in speed (only a few mph) between being flown without the Turret and with the turret, Unknown what changes they made when they fitted the turret? Change in prop, changed exhaust stacks, changed something else?
Defiant Mk I K8620 A&AEE flight test #720a
7390 lbs flying weight (normal TOGW was ~7700 lbs)
303 mph at 16,500 ft at +6.5 lbs boost
312 mph at 10,000 ft at +12 lbs boost
Easy, just put Soviet engines in the planesHow about putting a hub mounted 20mm and a couple of 12.7mm guns in the nose? Like Soviet planes.
That is a bit confusing, but I doubt their estimate was pure fantasy, they must have been basing that on something. Was the early engine set for lower power?
In a time were people shaved their heads to go a bit faster that was a thing. Big thing. Without hair.only about 25mph
The Air Ministry clearly wanted a twin seater for their carrier fighter. But the Fulmar needn't be the giant two seater it was. But if we must pursue a single seater fighter while still using the Fairey P.4/34 as a starting point rather than a cleansheet design, here's someone's attempt.The Fulmar, as it was historically, made for a pretty good armed scout. It could defend itself against anything but frontline land based fighters or Zeros, and it had a decent range plus enhanced navigation capability and radios. But as a carrier defense and strike-escort fighter it was a bit lacking.
If you took a Fulmar and ... shrunk it a bit, dropped the enormous 47' wingspan down to around 40', got rid of the second crewman and shortened the fuselage a bit, and maybe smoothed over some of the fuselage... could you then have a faster ~ 300 mph or better naval fighter that could catch / intercept the newer bombers and fight Axis fighters on a more equal basis?