- Thread starter
-
- #41
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
It was around 2-3 months sailing time to get anything from Britain to Singapore. Crating, uncrating, loading/unloading not included.If the A-M had been watching events in SEA with a critical eye, from the time Germany launched Unternehmen Barbarossa, & effectively quashed the likelihood of an invasion of the UK, it may not have been too late to reinforce Singapore.
You might find the following thesis on Fighter Comand strength in terms of the numbers of squadrons and trained pilots in 1940/41 interesting. Note how FC never reached the 80 squadrons of single engined day fighters seen as necessary in Dec 1940. That was at least in part due to units being siphoned off for the ME.Kind of what I meant by
Not sure where but I have definitely read that L-M refused to release fighters for overseas deployment but it could have been referring more to Spitfires than fighters in general. If the A-M had been watching events in SEA with a critical eye, from the time Germany launched Unternehmen Barbarossa, & effectively quashed the likelihood of an invasion of the UK, it may not have been too late to reinforce Singapore. History shows us that there was a significant lack of agility in the way this was handled, as was much of the conduct of the war in the early years. Plus, they did not have any suitable aircraft to use in an effective attack role, though maybe even Hurribombers would have been better than the poor old Blenheim.
Assuming that the decision were made the RAF has six months from the launch of Barbarossa to choose what to send, with all the maintenance support etc. Assemble the staff, find shipping and escorts which has to be drawn from existing purposes for an extended period, for a trip around the world and then send them by sea around Cape Horn, deliver them, assemble them and set up the bases and be ready in position. Can it be done? Yes but it would be close, very close. The only source would be from UK squadrons as the Middle East is actively using all it has. Hence the OTL dribble of old or unfit for UK service types that actually happened and we note that offers of Middle East cast offs were turned down. A comparison might be Operation Torch where an army was created and transported from scratch and launched across the Atlantic but that was with resources not being used in battle otherwise and itself took 11 months to arrive not 6 months and across one ocean not three. The US contribution to Torch was impressive under the circumstances but not a real model I feel.Kind of what I meant by
Not sure where but I have definitely read that L-M refused to release fighters for overseas deployment but it could have been referring more to Spitfires than fighters in general. If the A-M had been watching events in SEA with a critical eye, from the time Germany launched Unternehmen Barbarossa, & effectively quashed the likelihood of an invasion of the UK, it may not have been too late to reinforce Singapore. History shows us that there was a significant lack of agility in the way this was handled, as was much of the conduct of the war in the early years. Plus, they did not have any suitable aircraft to use in an effective attack role, though maybe even Hurribombers would have been better than the poor old Blenheim.
I like the idea, but I wonder at the time from July to Jan 1942 if it looked like the USSR might be quickly defeated, with the now entirely-UK focused Wehrmacht coming back to finish Sealion. By the time (Jan 1942) the Red Army had demonstrably stomped the Germans at the Battle of Moscow, Singapore was about to fall. We can't blame Churchill for thinking he'd better keep his best forces at home. I wonder if this thinking also led to the failures in the MTO. Now, if we want forces for Malaya it is through earlier success in North Africa that we will get them - so defeat the Italians and prevent the Afrika Corp from crossing the Med. That will give us the forces for Malaya (including my Canadian-made Gloster F5s) - and if large enough we might just force Japan to revise its southern strategy.If the A-M had been watching events in SEA with a critical eye, from the time Germany launched Unternehmen Barbarossa, & effectively quashed the likelihood of an invasion of the UK, it may not have been too late to reinforce Singapore.
The Best opportunity for that, militarily speaking, was to send a lot less "stuff" (men) to Greece. Politically speaking is more questionable.Now, if we want forces for Malaya it is through earlier success in North Africa that we will get them - so defeat the Italians and prevent the Afrika Corp from crossing the Med.
They could have kept the same Gloster naming convention, and called it the GoringCock.Göring's disappointment that the Goring is out contention.
The British Army was the seaborne escape artist of 1940-41. 330k British (and allied) troops evacuated from Dunkirk (Operation Dynamo), 25k from Norway (Op. Alphabet), and 50k from Greece (Op. Demon). The following year, Lieutenant-General Arthur Percival must have wondered why after so many successful evacuations, Churchill was now demanding that he and his 85,000 Allied troops at Singapore fight to the last man instead of trying to prepare an evacuation....British Commonwealth has got 62,000 troops in Greece (24th of April). But this was way to late to save Greece.
True. One bird of prey not used by Gloster is the Goshawk. It's two syllables. There is the failed Rolls-Royce Goshawk evaporative engine and the Curtiss BF2C Goshawk. Otherwise the name is free to use until the postwar T-45. And just look at this beautiful bird of prey - Folland had better clean up his design before it's thus worthy.Anything with 2-3 words in the name is not snappy enough once you hang Gloster in front of it. I mean who is going to write out Gloster Great Crested Flycatcher in a report?
However they had already got the troops into Greece well before Barbarossa occurred so, at the time the decision (whether wise or no) was made, it was either to keep them in North Africa or send them to Greece. In no way were they going to be sent to the Far East with all their equipment. By the autumn of 1941 efforts were being made to scrape together some sort of force to defend Syria and Iraq against any German incursion from the Caucasus. It included some of the last British operational cavalry. Nothing significant was going to be sent from the Middle East to the Far East. The Indian army had committed its regular forces to the war in the Middle East. There were no reserves uncommitted to be sent. The RAF and RIAF had negligible units and squadrons in India itself and those obsolete policing types and impressed civilian aeroplanes. I really cannot emphasise that the only place with a reserve of operational types was the UK itself.The Best opportunity for that, militarily speaking, was to send a lot less "stuff" (men) to Greece. Politically speaking is more questionable.
The British don't need to stop Rommel from landing in NA, they have to stop him from landing in time to do much of anything. This gives a little more breathing room.
By the time Rommel gets most of the 2nd German division into NA the British Commonwealth has got 62,000 troops in Greece (24th of April). But this was way to late to save Greece.
Another division to the East African campaign and other division in Egypt/Libya and the 1st Armored Brigade added to whichever division was in Egypt/Libya would certainly have made Rommel's job a lot harder.
You are quite correct.However they had already got the troops into Greece well before Barbarossa occurred so, at the time the decision (whether wise or no) was made, it was either to keep them in North Africa or send them to Greece. In no way were they going to be sent to the Far East with all their equipment. By the autumn of 1941 efforts were being made to scrape together some sort of force to defend Syria and Iraq against any German incursion from the Caucasus. It included some of the last British operational cavalry. Nothing significant was going to be sent from the Middle East to the Far East. The Indian army had committed its regular forces to the war in the Middle East. There were no reserves uncommitted to be sent. The RAF and RIAF had negligible units and squadrons in India itself and those obsolete policing types and impressed civilian aeroplanes. I really cannot emphasise that the only place with a reserve of operational types was the UK itself.
HiMy What'if, as described below requires that the F5/34 is developed and produced in Canada, outside of the British Air Ministry but as a pre-war private venture, akin to the later Gregor FDB-1. Presumably we're substituting all (most?) of CC&F's Hawker Hurricane production with the Gloster, so Stalin is not getting his Canadian Hurricanes.
In 1940 when Britain is looking for non-essential aircraft to send to Malaya, the AM team sent to look at the Brewster Buffalo and others also heads to Fort William, ON has a look at the first dozen or so thin-wing, R-1830 powered F5s. Sufficiently impressed the Air Ministry orders the aircraft to be produced for the RAF for shipment by rail to Vancouver and by sea to Malaya. Given the timing, I am likely being too ambitious on the two dozen squadrons (300 aircraft) by autumn 1941 (how many Hawker Hurricanes did CC&F produce by mid 1941?) but I expect at least a couple of squadrons of F5s to arrive in time to serve alongside the Brewster Buffalos.
And that's how we get to compare a thin-wings, streamlined and Twin Wasp powered F5 to the Ki-43 and A6M.
All the Hurricanes, but starting earlier upon Hawker-Siddeley's 1934 acquisition of Gloster, with Folland, blueprints and the first prototypes shipping out to Canada. If we follow the same timeline as CC&F's Hurricane program we'll not get any F5s into service until early 1941 at best. But if we have CC&F take on the F5 in early 1935 as an initially-private venture leading to improved P&W-powered prototypes in 1937, I think we can get production aircraft into service by 1939.What would you get rid of in aircraft production in Canada during 1940-41
That's new to me, as I believed that Canadian-built Hurricanes were complete aircraft, later on using Packard-built Merlins. For example, this Sea Hurricane at CC&F below looks complete, though I expect upon delivery customer-specific items like FAA radios may be installed.All Canadian built Hurricanes either retained in Canada or shipped to Britain to be fitted with engines and other parts.
Where is the market for your P&W powered F5 in the 1935-37 timeframe? All very well having it created as a private venture in Canada, but companies don't take that risk completely blind, especially if it is a completely new venture, and especially with the world just exiting a worldwide recession. CC&F weren't even in the aviation business until they took on the Hurricane contract in Nov 1938. They have to have some idea of who they will sell it to. And do you really expect the RAF to buy a foreign aircraft at that time? Acquisitions from established aircraft companies in the USA didn't begin until 1938 when gaps in procurement from British companies began to become apparent.All the Hurricanes, but starting earlier upon Hawker-Siddeley's 1934 acquisition of Gloster, with Folland, blueprints and the first prototypes shipping out to Canada. If we follow the same timeline as CC&F's Hurricane program we'll not get any F5s into service until early 1941 at best. But if we have CC&F take on the F5 in early 1935 as an initially-private venture leading to improved P&W-powered prototypes in 1937, I think we can get production aircraft into service by 1939.
I was more thinking that Folland, looking for someone to make his F5 flogs it to CC&F and then spends perhaps a few months contributing to CC&F's chief aeronautical engineer Elsie MacGill's updates to the F5 design. Having signed over the design and agreed to licensing terms, Folland is back in the UK to resume his work at home.Butterflies. If Folland goes to Canada in your timeframe, he doesn't set up Folland Aircraft Company in 1937 in the UK and Britain loses a major sub-contractor for Blenheim, Beaufort, Spitfire, Wellington & Mosquito components and subassemblies.
HiThat's new to me, as I believed that Canadian-built Hurricanes were complete aircraft, later on using Packard-built Merlins. For example, this Sea Hurricane at CC&F below looks complete, though I expect upon delivery customer-specific items like FAA radios may be installed.
View attachment 797375
As for them all being shipped to Britain, I thought many were intended for the USSR, presumably crated and ready to use. But that's what's great about this site, I learn stuff.
There's more info and and great pics here Canadian Warplanes 3: Hawker Hurricane