If no Sea Gladiator, what replaces the Hawker Nimrod?

[Admiral Beez]

Had the Air Ministry refused the FAA the Gloster Gladiator or if the FAA didn't want it, what would have replaced the Hawker Nimrod?

 

[Kevin J]

Had the Air Ministry refused the FAA the Gloster Gladiator or if the FAA didn't want it, what would have replaced the Hawker Nimrod?

If our enemy in 1939/40 is either Italy or Japan then the performance of the Sea Gladiator is adequate. Germany doesn't need to come into the decision making until 1940 when they take Norway and the West Coast of France. So stick with the Sea Gladiator as Gladiators are operational overseas so there shouldn't be a shortage of spare parts. In 1940, the Hurricane becomes operational overseas, reequip with the Sea Hurricane. The MB 2 if it could be got into service quickly instead of the Roc would be my preference. Perhaps the Air Ministry should have insisted that all the radial engined fighter prototypes flying be carrier capable instead of requiring them to be for colonial use only.

 

[Admiral Beez]

If our enemy in 1939/40 is either Italy or Japan then the performance of the Sea Gladiator is adequate.

But the Sea Gladiator doesn't exist. What are the other options to replace the Nimrod?

 

[Kevin J]

But the Sea Gladiator doesn't exist. What are the other options to replace the Nimrod?

I see, I misunderstood. Well, first there are those utterly useless Henley. Don't build them, build Sea Hurricanes. Alternately a Sea Hotspur without the turret, but with wing guns, catapult spools and arrestor hook. I'd suggest the Sea Hurricane but the navy would probably want a bigger wing and wing folding. I'd still want 50 float equipped MB 2 fighters with catapults spools, and 85 MB 2s with retractable undercarriage, folding wings, catapult spools and arrestor hooks instead of the Roc. Boulton Paul would build me another 140 later instead of the Defiant TT III. I need them instead of Martlets. Using 100 octane fuel of course.

 

[RW Mk. III]

I'm going to say the Gloster F5/34 selected as design winner. It has a radial engine (could use a better one, but Pegasus can fill that roll at some point possibly?), Purportedly a shorter takeoff run than Hurricane and one would assume a concomitant landing force reduction on arrestor gear. It was designed with a mind to good airframe survivability in belly landings which I would think could only help in carrier operation. Like previous suggestions the decision to navalize the aircraft has to be made right quick. Ideally they are working on it right at design stage.

It's not available as soon as Gladiator but still checks a lot of boxes. Would give the FAA a real needed air to air punch during the Norwegian campaign imo. (If it's ready)

 

[fastmongrel]

The MB2 only flew in mid 1938 its not going to be in service for at least 2 years or even longer because MB had no factory to build it in, another factory is going to have to build it. Or a shadow factory set up.

As for a replacement for the SeaGladiator there isn't one unless you can squeeze some Hurricanes out of the RAF. All the usual suspects by Glister, Vickers and Bristol are not going to be available till mid 1940 at the earliest.

 

[swampyankee]

I suspect that one problem at this time is about the time when the FAA was being placed under RN control, and the staff expertise was still developing. Could the FAA even ask the right questions to develop a Nimrod replacement? I think the answer is "No!" as shown by the Blackburn Roc.

Returning its aviation arm back to the RN about the time WWII was starting was lousy timing.

 

[RW Mk. III]

I suspect that one problem at this time is about the time when the FAA was being placed under RN control, and the staff expertise was still developing. Could the FAA even ask the right questions to develop a Nimrod replacement? I think the answer is "No!" as shown by the Blackburn Roc.

Returning its aviation arm back to the RN about the time WWII was starting was lousy timing.

The real necessary ingredient is the FAA being returned to the RN about ten years prior at the latest. A more sympathetic air Ministry is also very desirable. I believe had the timing been such the FAA would have probably had aircraft of equivalent quality (but probably not quantity) to the Japanese and American navies by 1940.

 

[Kevin J]

The real necessary ingredient is the FAA being returned to the RN about ten years prior at the latest. A more sympathetic air Ministry is also very desirable. I believe had the timing been such the FAA would have probably had aircraft of equivalent quality (but probably not quantity) to the Japanese and American navies by 1940.

Better still, the RNAS is retained in 1919. Only the RFC becomes the RAF.

 

[swampyankee]

Given what the FAA ordered in about this timeframe, they would order a monoplane flying airbrake from Blackburn.

 

[Hardlydank]

They could get a license to produce the F3F as the successor

 

[fastmongrel]

FAA would have probably had aircraft of equivalent quality (but probably not quantity) to the Japanese and American navies by 1940.

What aircraft in service in January 1940 in the US and Japanese navies was noticeably better than the RNs equivalent aircraft. Remember no Zero no Wildcat no Dauntless no Val's only one I can think was much better was the Kate

 

[fastmongrel]

Could the FAA even ask the right questions to develop a Nimrod replacement? I think the answer is "No!" as shown by the Blackburn Roc.

The Roc was an Air Ministry order pre the RN taking over the FAA

 

[tomo pauk]

Make more Sea Skuas.

 

[RW Mk. III]

What aircraft in service in January 1940 in the US and Japanese navies was noticeably better than the RNs equivalent aircraft. Remember no Zero no Wildcat no Dauntless no Val's only one I can think was much better was the Kate

The superlative a5m jumps to mind.



Edited for spelling.

Also the more I think on Tomo's point the more I actually like it. Without travelling further back in time and developing a different aircraft, the Skua is the best bet. If one could convince them not to build any rocs and just build all skuas the FAA wouldn't have been too too badly off. Still not a great situation but at least they'd be choc a bloc with quite good dive bombers that have at least -some- utility as fighters (just not against 109's).

 

[fastmongrel]

The superlative a5m jumps to mind.

A superb aircraft but not massively better than the SeaGladiator or F3F. The early success of Japanese aircraft was often down to the pilots who were the best most experienced pilots in the world at the time.

 

[RW Mk. III]

A superb aircraft but not massively better than the SeaGladiator or F3F. The early success of Japanese aircraft was often down to the pilots who were the best most experienced pilots in the world at the time.

The specs appear close but it does have a better rate of climb (not drastic but still), and enough level and dive speed advantage to control the terms of engagement (wiki and Google numbers). While not devastating advantages if a theoretical IJN flight is attempting to attack RN carriers. Flip the scenario and the RN attackers are in for a very tough time assaulting the IJN carriers imho.

The A5M's should be able to avoid any turning fight if they have the wherewithal to.

 

[Shortround6]

The Sea Gladiator was pretty much the only game in town. The Fulmar was already in development for replacing the Skua as a fighter but would not be ready in time.

So your only real choices are planes that could be produced and issued to squadrons in a relatively short period of time. The Gladiator was already in production. It was, in large sense, also an interim fighter as it was meant to tide the RAF over from the total failure of the F.7/30 specification/program until the "new" monoplane fighters could be gotten into production and issued to service units. The Gladiator was a private venture, not the result of an air ministry specification.

Given that problem of the time crunch the only real alternative was to put catapult spools, an arrestor hook and hopefully a two pitch prop on a fabric wing Hurricane.

Again, anything that required establishing a production line was not going to make it into service in time. You wind up in the same situation the US Navy was in. A few monoplane Buffaloes on one or two ships and Grumman F3Fs on everything else. For the British it would have been a handful of Hurricanes and the old Nimrods.

edit, lets remember that without the Gladiator the Hawker Fury and Gloster Gauntlet would have carried on a few more years until there were enough Hurricanes.
The only real way for there to be no Sea Gladiators was if there had been no land Gladiators.

 

[swampyankee]

The Roc was an Air Ministry order pre the RN taking over the FAA

So the FAA couldn't even ask the right questions over a dozen years after its creation. This does not* bode well after it loses some percentage of experienced staff when it's removed from the RAF


* Added in edit. I can't write sarcasm, so needed to be explicit.

 

[Admiral Beez]

A superb aircraft but not massively better than the SeaGladiator

What is a Sea Gladiator? It doesn't exist, that's why we're chatting today. We're trying to replace the Nimrod without the Gladiator. If you want to stay on topic you need to compare the A5M and F3F with the Nimrod.

What aircraft in service in January 1940 in the US and Japanese navies was noticeably better than the RNs equivalent aircraft?

If the RN is still operating the Nimrod in January 1940, the answer is plenty. Of course serving alongside the Nimrod is the Skua, so that's something modern at least.

Did Bristol propose a successor to the Bulldog that could be considered?