Did the RAF have designs for a long range escort fighter?

Freebird · Mar 26, 2013

MikeGazdik said:
I guess I should have been a little more specific. What I am wondering is once the war began, and it became obvious that daytime bombing needed an escort fighter, was there work then to develop an aircraft?

Well it never was obvious until 1943 was it?
The British gave up on long-range daylight bombing pretty quickly so there was no pressing need for long-range escorts.

If for whatever reason the U.S. bailed, couldn't fulfill the mission, whatever and the RAF needed to conduct both day and night bombing.

Why?
If the US wasn't there the British would still continue to develop more night bombing strength.

MikeGazdik said:
I knew there was no long ranger fighter (single engine) even really dreamed of by any of the allies. Certainly the U.S. learned this the hard way.

The Germans didn't have any long-range single engine escorts in the early to mid war either.

However the British were in fact working on a long range single-engine fighter - just not for the RAF

The Air Ministry specification N 9/39, and updated N 5/40 was for the development of a long-range single-engine fighter with a range of over 1,000 miles, which finally became the single-seat Firebrand and the twin-seat Firefly.
The only long range escorted bombing missions would be FAA, not RAF, hence the need for long range fighters

mhuxt · Mar 26, 2013

Martin Baker MB5? Don't know if it was designed as an escort, however it seems to have had both speed and long legs.

I believe the dH Hornet was to be used as an escort for "Tiger Force" bombers, had the Pacific war lasted longer.

Jenisch · Mar 26, 2013

freebird said:
WIf the US wasn't there the British would still continue to develop more night bombing strength.

It's what I said above: no US, but lots of Lend-Lease planes. A daylight bomber force with fighter escort perhaps would be of the RAF interest here.

Freebird · Mar 26, 2013

Jenisch said:
I think the British problem was economic. The British needed to maintein an already large number of single-seat fighters to defend their island. If escort fighters would also be employed, perhaps it would be beyond of what FC could have.

Not at all. If they had wanted to develop them they certainly could have done so, there was no economic impediment

But I'm not certain of what I wrote above. Before Germany invaded the USSR, paralell with a strategy to survive, Britain was working to built of force of 4000 heavy bombers to destroy the German industry. The British were not thinking in return to the continent for a long time. I think that in such situation, the British Army would be smaller, and hence more personal could have been asigned to the RAF. I also think that with the Americans supplying fighters such as the P-38, and bombers like the B-17 and the B-24, the British might well have been considerating built a daylight long-range fighter force. However, after the US entered in the war, my view is that the British abandoned immediately the plan to operate a daylight bomber force with fighter escort. My opinion is that the guys of the RAF thought, as they warned the Americans to not fly unnescorted missions in daylight, something like: "ah, the yankees would be slaughtered, but they have long-range fighters, they would just bring them after that".

No, again not correct. there is no documentation that I'm aware of that the RAF planned large scale escorted daylight bombing during 1941.

Jenisch said:
It's what I said above: no US, but lots of Lend-Lease planes. A daylight bomber force with fighter escort perhaps would be of the RAF interest here.

The RAF did not ever plan to carry out mass daylight bombing in the event that the US isn't in the war, nor did Lend-Lease factor into the plans, as they didn't know that it was coming.
The British DID in fact get some B-17s in 1941, but they were thought to be unsuitable and were not used.
Had they in fact thought about daylight bombing they would have ordered some more B-17s, rather than rejecting them
Nor in fact did the US have a long range escort even planned, as pre-war US doctrine was for unescorted daylight bombing, as it was thought the heavily armed formations of B-17s could defend themselves.
It wasn't until they actually tried it out that they realized that it didn't work, and they quickly changed plans to include escort fighters

Jenisch · Mar 26, 2013

freebird said:
there is no documentation that I'm aware of that the RAF planned large scale escorted daylight bombing during 1941.

You not gonna find, because they didn't.

Nor in fact did the US have a long range escort even planned, as pre-war US doctrine was for unescorted daylight bombing, as it was thought the heavily armed formations of B-17s could defend themselves.
It wasn't until they actually tried it out that they realized that it didn't work, and they quickly changed plans to include escort fighters

This is what I wrote in the previous post. The British were aware of this and they were also aware that the Americans had long range fighters, such as the P-38. Given the British experiences with daylight bombing, including with the use of the B-17, the heavy losses the Americans suffered were not a surprise to them. But as I said the British also knew the Americans had long-range fighters, so they probably would put them into action, and so they did. The RAF then didn't need to worry with a long-range fighter and could continue it's night bombing effort, again as was done historically.

Balljoint · Mar 26, 2013

The P-51 was a British plane outsource to North American. Kindelberger and his German design crew apparently did an end run around the military and strategy/tactics experts. Though the P-51A was an ugly duckling interceptor, it blossomed into a long-range air superiority marvel as the P-51B. The pieces were all there earlier if the need had been recognized. So it was doable.

Jenisch · Mar 26, 2013

Balljoint said:
The P-51 was a British plane outsource to North American. Kindelberger and his German design crew apparently did an end run around the military and strategy/tactics experts. Though the P-51A was an ugly duckling interceptor, it blossomed into a long-range air superiority marvel as the P-51B. The pieces were all there earlier if the need had been recognized. So it was doable.

Sooner or later they would put the Merlin in that thing, which BTW had the poor altitude performance already expected by the engineers due to the engine used. If the US didn't went to the war and the British could and desired a daylight bomber force, they would have the Mustang avaliable.

tomo pauk · Mar 26, 2013

Uh-oh. German design crew designed P-51?

The Basket · Mar 26, 2013

Single seat Defiant.

GregP · Mar 26, 2013

There was nothing inherently wrong with the Allison that including the turbocharger wouldn't cure after some teething problems were ironed out. The problems took about 9 months to fix on the P-38 in the ETO, but they were fixed. The only reason the Allison used a turbocharger was the US Army Air Corps ASKED for it specifically. Allison asked the USAAC twice, if not three times, whether a 2-stage supercharger was desired and the USAAC said, "No!" every time.

So ... the USAAC got exactly what they ordered. When they bought Merlins and paid $6,000 each to Rolls -Royce as royalty, I bet the USAAC wished they had funded the development of the 2-stage supercharger! But they never did. Go figure.

No question the P-51A lacked altitude performance. I just wish they had added the turbo to the P-51A. It might have made quite a difference. In the end, there was and IS nothing wrong with the Merlin P-51 at all; a classic if ever there was one.

But the Allison P-51 could have been everything the Merlin variant was ... if it had been allowed to be. Alas, it wasn't and isn't except for today when warbirds rarely get above 14,000 feet anyway.

Shortround6 · Mar 26, 2013

Balljoint said:
The P-51 was a British plane outsource to North American. Kindelberger and his German design crew apparently did an end run around the military and strategy/tactics experts. Though the P-51A was an ugly duckling interceptor, it blossomed into a long-range air superiority marvel as the P-51B. The pieces were all there earlier if the need had been recognized. So it was doable.

Aside from the vast number of things wrong here the provision of 180 US gallons of fuel in an AMERICAN design is in no way, shape or form anything out of the ordinary, strange or revolutionary.

Early P-38s had 400-410 gallons before the fitting of self sealing tanks dropped the capacity to 300 gallons 150 gallons per engine.
First 33 P-39s had 170 gallons before the fitting of self sealing tanks dropped capacity to 120 gallons.
XP-40 had 158 gallons, inherited from the P-36. Early P-40s had 180-160 gallons. The P-40C dropped to 135 but most of the later ones (except the strippers) had 148-161 gallons.
P-47 had 305 gallons.
F2A Buffalo had 160-240 gallons
F4F started with 160 gallons in unprotected tanks.

The Provision of 180 gallons of fuel may be a little on the high side but nothing really out of the ordinary for an American fighter, especially if you were trying to "up" the competition ( the P-40) to get the contract.

Shortround6 · Mar 26, 2013

GregP said:
When they bought Merlins and paid $6,000 each to Rolls -Royce as royalty, I bet the USAAC wished they had funded the development of the 2-stage supercharger! But they never did. Go figure.

It is easy to figure, Rolls waived the Royalty fee for the duration of the war. Except perhaps for some nominal amount like $1.00 per engine.

stona · Mar 27, 2013

mhuxt said:
Martin Baker MB5? Don't know if it was designed as an escort, however it seems to have had both speed and long legs.

I believe the dH Hornet was to be used as an escort for "Tiger Force" bombers, had the Pacific war lasted longer.

The Martin Baker fighters were probably too late.
The MB 5 prototype didn't fly until May 1944 so that one is definitely out.
The MB 3 would have had similar range I think,and first flew in May 1942. I suppose if the RAF made a massive volte-face,abandoned three or four years of development of technology and tactics for night time bombing,and adopted daylight bombing,it could have been developed into an escort fighter by 1943. It would have been easier just to use an american option.
Cheers
Steve

yulzari · Mar 27, 2013

Shortround6 said:
It is easy to figure, Rolls waived the Royalty fee for the duration of the war. Except perhaps for some nominal amount like $1.00 per engine.

Once the war ended Rolls Royce made it clear they would now need royalty payments if Packard were going to keep on making Merlins.

Packard ended production PDQ and the Twin Mustang had to use Allisons, even though the performance was reduced. Rolls Royce went on to sell licences for the Nene, Tay and Spey to the USA.

Balljoint · Mar 27, 2013

Shortround6 said:
Aside from the vast number of things wrong here the provision of 180 US gallons of fuel in an AMERICAN design is in no way, shape or form anything out of the ordinary, strange or revolutionary.

Early P-38s had 400-410 gallons before the fitting of self sealing tanks dropped the capacity to 300 gallons 150 gallons per engine.
First 33 P-39s had 170 gallons before the fitting of self sealing tanks dropped capacity to 120 gallons.
XP-40 had 158 gallons, inherited from the P-36. Early P-40s had 180-160 gallons. The P-40C dropped to 135 but most of the later ones (except the strippers) had 148-161 gallons.
P-47 had 305 gallons.
F2A Buffalo had 160-240 gallons
F4F started with 160 gallons in unprotected tanks.

The Provision of 180 gallons of fuel may be a little on the high side but nothing really out of the ordinary for an American fighter, especially if you were trying to "up" the competition ( the P-40) to get the contract.

My rather broadly painted point is that will rather than technology was the missing factor. Had ether the AAF or RAF desired a long range escort fighter, the A-36 could have been instead the P-51B. The bomber powers that were didn't want escorts even if they had to fly at night or take horrendous casualties.

Three parameters came together in the P-51; fuel capacity, burn rate and altitude performance. IMO the P-51B was the first to attain the needed balance of these, and did so rather promptly after the need for air superiority and bomber escorts was made clear.

Readie · Mar 27, 2013

Howabout the Westland Welkin - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia ?

There was the Mossie Beaufighter that fitted the 'heavy fighter' with long range specifications for escorting bombers deep into enemy territory.

Other than these, there was no British long range fighter available.
'The bomber will always get through' mantra stifled development.

Cheers
John

Shortround6 · Mar 27, 2013

Balljoint said:
My rather broadly painted point is that will rather than technology was the missing factor. Had ether the AAF or RAF desired a long range escort fighter, the A-36 could have been instead the P-51B. The bomber powers that were didn't want escorts even if they had to fly at night or take horrendous casualties.

Three parameters came together in the P-51; fuel capacity, burn rate and altitude performance. IMO the P-51B was the first to attain the needed balance of these, and did so rather promptly after the need for air superiority and bomber escorts was made clear.

The A-36 proper could not hope to be an escort fighter for B-17s. It used a special low altitude version of the Allison. Other Allison Mustangs might have worked to some extent, But please remember that trying to put a rear fuselage tank in an Allison Mustang is a very doubtful proposition.
You also give a bit too much credit to the designers/engineers or perhaps to cause and effect. July 42 sees both the British doing preliminary studies for putting a Merlin 61 in a Mustang and North American getting a contract to build TWO Merlin Mustangs. Aug 42 sees metal starting to be cut. Aug 26th 42 sees NA get a contract for 400 P-51Bs (Merlin powered).

Sept 42 sees the first flight of an A-36
Oct 42 sees first deliveries of the A-36 to the US forces.
Oct 8th sees North American Dallas get a contract for 1350 P-51Cs
Oct 16th sees first flight of a Merlin powered Mustang in England.
Nov 30th sees the first flight of a XP-51B in the US. Radiator and air scope must be redesigned.
April 1943 sees 2500 P-51Ds ordered.
May 5th sees the first flight of a production P-51B.
The P-51B was designed and ordered in large quantities well before the so called " need for air superiority and bomber escorts was made clear".
The NEED for air superiority had been clear since well before the BoB.

To add to this timeline.

Aug 17th 1942, First 8th Air Force Bombing Mission. 12 -B-17s, escorted by 4 squadrons of Spitfires attack marshaling yards at Rouen and Sotteville in northern France. This was followed by small raids against lightly defended targets in France, Belgium,and the Netherlands.

Early October 1942 sees the 13th raid ans the first use of the B-24 against Lille.

Nov/Dec of 1942, the weather turned bad and only 12 more raids were flown. 27 raids total by the end of the year. At this time several thousand B-51Bs &Cs are on order.

It was as much coincidence that the P-51 was available for escort use as anything else.

stona · Mar 27, 2013

And it was due to the happy coincidence of the presence of the P-51 in the ETO that in 1944 a Luftwaffe fighter was 7 times as likely to be shot down in the west as it was flying a comparable sortie in the east
Cheers
Steve

buffnut453 · Mar 27, 2013

Great post Shortround. Couple of observations.

Shortround6 said:
The NEED for air superiority had been clear since well before the BoB.

Entirely agree. I suspect the main problem is that the "bomber will always get through" crowd believed that well-armed bomber formations would provide their own local air superiority. Even with the P-51, air superiority (or at least parity) was only ever temporary, never persistent...not until the Allies were able to forward-base fighters on mainland Europe.

Shortround6 said:
It was as much coincidence that the P-51 was available for escort use as anything else.

Precisely. The only thing the RAF could have done differently was to envisage the need to obtain air superiority at long-range in the mid/late 1930s. That simply wasn't going to happen because nobody believed there was such a need. Look at the single engine designs that came out of that period (including Me109, Hurricane, Spitfire, P-36/P-40), none of which were viable long-range escort fighters.

Balljoint · Mar 27, 2013

Shortround6 said:
The A-36 proper could not hope to be an escort fighter for B-17s. It used a special low altitude version of the Allison. Other Allison Mustangs might have worked to some extent, But please remember that trying to put a rear fuselage tank in an Allison Mustang is a very doubtful proposition.
You also give a bit too much credit to the designers/engineers or perhaps to cause and effect. July 42 sees both the British doing preliminary studies for putting a Merlin 61 in a Mustang and North American getting a contract to build TWO Merlin Mustangs. Aug 42 sees metal starting to be cut. Aug 26th 42 sees NA get a contract for 400 P-51Bs (Merlin powered).

Sept 42 sees the first flight of an A-36
Oct 42 sees first deliveries of the A-36 to the US forces.
Oct 8th sees North American Dallas get a contract for 1350 P-51Cs
Oct 16th sees first flight of a Merlin powered Mustang in England.
Nov 30th sees the first flight of a XP-51B in the US. Radiator and air scope must be redesigned.
April 1943 sees 2500 P-51Ds ordered.
May 5th sees the first flight of a production P-51B.
The P-51B was designed and ordered in large quantities well before the so called " need for air superiority and bomber escorts was made clear".
The NEED for air superiority had been clear since well before the BoB.

To add to this timeline.

Aug 17th 1942, First 8th Air Force Bombing Mission. 12 -B-17s, escorted by 4 squadrons of Spitfires attack marshaling yards at Rouen and Sotteville in northern France. This was followed by small raids against lightly defended targets in France, Belgium,and the Netherlands.

Early October 1942 sees the 13th raid ans the first use of the B-24 against Lille.

Nov/Dec of 1942, the weather turned bad and only 12 more raids were flown. 27 raids total by the end of the year. At this time several thousand B-51Bs &Cs are on order.

It was as much coincidence that the P-51 was available for escort use as anything else.

We largely agree. Kindelberger was trying to sell the Brits the B-25, but they wanted a fighter (interceptor) in that they were a bit preoccupied with the BoB at the time. Kindelberger had been to Germany and was up to speed on the LW. There may be some pixie dust in that the design was done by Edgar Schmued, a German who had worked with Willie M. The point being that North American knew what it would take to match up against the LW. But I doubt that long range aspect was a concern. Rather that a damn good design had the elasticity to morph from an interceptor to a long range escort/air superiority fighter.
I wasn't suggesting that the A-36 be used for escort. But if the effort that went into the A-36 was instead directed to a "long-range, high altitude escort" directive, the P-51B could have been produced earlier.
We do disagree about recognition of the recognized need, as opposed to the actual need, for escort fighters, at least by the bomber people. When the first P-51Bs went into action, Eaker assigned them to Ninth for tactical operations, though Arnold got them to the Eighth fairly promptly.
As to the RAF and long-range escort question, if they had wanted one they had the bits and pieces around to assembly a P-51B.

Did the RAF have designs for a long range escort fighter?

Master Sergeant

Staff Sergeant

Staff Sergeant

Master Sergeant

Staff Sergeant

Senior Airman

Staff Sergeant

Creator of Interesting Threads

Senior Master Sergeant

Major

Major General

Major General

Major

Tech Sergeant

Senior Airman

Chief Master Sergeant

Major General

Major

Captain

Senior Airman

Users who are viewing this thread

Similar threads