Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
There were very few land based planes deployed by commonwealth forces in Korea. According to wiki The only front-line unit from a Commonwealth air force to serve under BCFK was Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF) No. 77 Squadron, which initially flew P-51 Mustang fighters and later converted to Gloster Meteor jets. British and Canadian aircrews also served with the RAAF. The only Royal Air Force contribution was a wing of Short Sunderland flying boats based at Iwakuni in Japan. British Commonwealth Forces Korea - WikipediaWas English Electric Canberra ever considered for the Korean War?
And if it was, why not deployed there?
Wikipedia:
"In May 1951, the Canberra entered RAF squadron service, No. 101 Squadron being the first to receive the type. In a testament to the aircraft's benign handling characteristics, the transition programme for the Canberra consisted of only 20 hours in the Gloster Meteor and three hours in a dual-control Canberra trainer ".
The transition program is short, Meteor pilots with combat service are available and there is demand for a fast bomber with the bomb load higher than of jet fighter bombers used through the war.
Wiki again:
"The production of the Canberra was accelerated as a result of the outbreak of the Korean War, orders for the aircraft increased and outpaced production capacity, as the aircraft was designated as a "super priority". A further five squadrons were able to be equipped with the Canberra by the end of 1952; however, production in the 1951–52 period had only been half of the level planned, due to shortages in skilled manpower, material, and suitable machine tools. "
I assume that European needs are of top priority and if (allegedly) just half of the units are equipped by the end of 1952, there is little chance to equip all units in Europe until the Armistice in July 1953.
Or were there other reasons to keep Canberra out of the Korean War?
There were very few land based planes deployed by commonwealth forces in Korea. According to wiki The only front-line unit from a Commonwealth air force to serve under BCFK was Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF) No. 77 Squadron, which initially flew P-51 Mustang fighters and later converted to Gloster Meteor jets. British and Canadian aircrews also served with the RAAF. The only Royal Air Force contribution was a wing of Short Sunderland flying boats based at Iwakuni in Japan. British Commonwealth Forces Korea - Wikipedia
there are political and bureaucratic obstacles as well.
Deploying a new jet for its first missions on the other side of the world is a big ask.
I'm slowly working my way through Max Hastings' re-released book on the Korean War and there are a few themes he keeps bringing up early in the book.
There was some thought at the time that this (the South Korean invasion) was a diversion by the communists who were expected to hit hard somewhere else in the World. As a result there was not the desire to go in with everything they had in what was described as a "police action" and expected to be over by late 1950. I guess this is why SAC were never going to employ the B-47. I'm therefore assuming for the same reason the Brits were not gonna send in what was for them a new, very advanced light bomber that was just coming into service. He also iterates there was some understandable reluctance by the British it invest in the war so soon after WW2.
In the chapter on the Air War he keeps stating that by the end of 1950 the allied air forces were running out of strategic targets.
View attachment 617435
There were very few land based planes deployed by commonwealth forces in Korea. According to wiki The only front-line unit from a Commonwealth air force to serve under BCFK was Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF) No. 77 Squadron, which initially flew P-51 Mustang fighters and later converted to Gloster Meteor jets. British and Canadian aircrews also served with the RAAF. The only Royal Air Force contribution was a wing of Short Sunderland flying boats based at Iwakuni in Japan. British Commonwealth Forces Korea - Wikipedia
I believe the Royal Navy supplied a carrier and Sea Furies .....
Why Sea Furies and not the Attacker or Sea Hawk? Intended strike and CAS role I assume. But underwing ordnance is possible.I believe the Royal Navy supplied a carrier and Sea Furies which carried D-day style stripes so the the yanks wouldn't shoot them.
Britain willingly gave the plans for the RR Nene to the Soviets postwar. Stalin was amazed at Britain's decision and quickly had MiG use this engine as the basis for the MiG-15.If we look back to WWII, the RAF kept the Meteor from operating beyond Allied lines.
The reasinung was to prevent it from being downed (in the event of contact) behind enemy lines and thus the new technology falling into enemy hands.
The Canberra was new tech, any bugs had yet to be worked out plus the ChiComs were hand in hand with the Soviets - the RAF was not willing to risk it.
Okay, but the FAA has the Attacker and Vampire. Why send Sea Furies.Sea Hawk F1 only entered service in 1953. The FB3 came later, so too late for the Korean War.
Okay, but the FAA has the Attacker and Vampire. Why send Sea Furies.
The North Koreans had the Lavachin La-9 and La-11 plus the Yak-9. The Sea Fury should be able to give these three a challenge. These two look ideally matched.Sea Fury had a longer range (almost 50% longer) and there were more available to make up for combat casualties.
The first RN Supermarine Attacker squadron was No 800 Naval Squadron... which got its aircraft in August 1951.Okay, but the FAA has the Attacker and Vampire. Why send Sea Furies.
the RAF kept all of their Meteors (including the night-fighter variants) out of the fighting.