SaparotRob
Unter Gemeine Geschwader Murmeltier XIII
Oh yeah, before I forget; very informative post about the Albacore.
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
The Stringbag is one of the most important and underrated aircraft of WW2 in my opinion, Any aircraft which has the rare distinction of being in service from 1939 all the way through to the end of hostilities puts it into a very select category. Especially when, unlike the 109, 88, Spitfire etc, the airframe and engine were essentially the same from beginning to end bar a few tweaks.I became a fan of the Stringbag after reading posts about it here. Fairey didn't decide to just go out and build a relic as I had previously assumed. That was the airframe that met the specs as called for. And it did it's job well. I like The Admiral's "what if" of Swordfish night attack on the Kido Butai at Midway.
Don't tell "uffalo-Bay". I don't want it to get jealous.
As far as making a plane worse than the one your trying to replace, ask Curtiss, they managed it at least once.Just because the RAF gets more Spitfires it doesn't mean every other plane is cancelled, Fairy is a good point in proving the total waste or resources most of the manufactures were guilty of, the swordfish replaced the plane built to replace it, how can you make a replacement plane worse than it's predecessor, my point about the Hurricane is also why make them, they were obsolete, Spit XII's would have been more useful until the Typhoon was sorted
...except the same issue as your point about the Hurricane occurs:, surely? -You want to save Britain a lot of trouble??
Ditch the Sabre and the Typhoon. Take your thousands of freed up workers and build Griffon engines and Spitfire XIIs. You might actually come out ahead.
26 squadrons of what was considered 2TAFs most effective fighter bomber.From the beginning of 1944 the build up of 2nd Tactical Air Force resulted in more and more Typhoon squadrons being formed and by D-Day there were no fewer than twenty-six equipped with the type.
During the final European campaign, the aircraft flew in standing patrols, known as cab ranks" awaiting calls from ground forces to make immediate strikes against any German target which lay in the path of Allied troops. They disrupted enemy communications and wrought havoc amongst his transport both on land and at sea thereby playing a decisive part in many of the final battles.
Part of the reason for that is, of course, that Napier had not produced a decemt engine since the Lion, instead it designed overly complex engines of dubious serviceability.Napier was not making a lot of engines when compare with Bristol, let alone RR, with Sabre production being about 5000+ copies; Dagger being both unremarkable and produced in very low numbers. Lack of Napier's contribution in the dark days of early ww2 is especially notable.
So how to use the Napier's facilities and manpower best, so the output can be much better, particularly for 1938-42? Planning can start perhaps in 1935 so there is enough of time to shift in the high gear once rearmament starts.
The only role at which the XII excelled was low altitude interception and air combat. Useful against the 'tip and run' FW190s and V1s- but what utility beyond that?
That only 100 were built would seem to answer the question...
The question about the Typhoon is complicated. It did do good work, but it took a long time to sort out. Also nobody knows how much they cost. They may know how much the Typhoon airframe costs but the cost of the Sabre engine seems to still be covered by the official secrets act. A British official could tell how much was paid 80 years ago but then he would have to kill you....except the same issue as your point about the Hurricane occurs:, surely? -
"They madeHurricanesTyphoons because they had factories tooled up for them (and workers that knew how to make them) AND they had factories tooled up and makingMerlinsSabres inlargequantity."
3300 Typhoons is not insignificant. Neither was the role they performed in '44 /45 - one which the spit XII was far less suited to from range through to armament and structure.
The only role at which the XII excelled was low altitude interception and air combat. Useful against the 'tip and run' FW190s and V1s- but what utility beyond that?
That only 100 were built would seem to answer the question...
Totally agree with the rest of your post.
3300 Typhoons is not insignificant. Neither was the role they performed in '44 /45 - one which the spit XII was far less suited to from range through to armament and structure.
Build your Fulmar if you have too but the reason the Spit never matured into the plane it could have been is because so much time was wasted on lesser aircraft. If supermarine was free to develop the Spit we would have got the MkIII and it's development line from 1940, that means faster, better rolling longer ranged interceptors for both the RAF and FAA instead of the interim models, it's not hard at all to make the Spitfire/Seafire longer ranged, they just needed time to be developed, time Joe Smith and Supermarine didn't have because they alone were making the only front line fighter the British had. As for the Hurricane I am a huge fan of that plane but it could not survive anywhere after 1940, it wasn't fast enough to catch anything or fast enough to run away. I know I'm sounding like a one eyed fan boy but many pilots died because they fought in planes they had instead of planes that should have been, you only have to read from pilots like Johnny Johnson who often mentioned flying pointless short ranged sorties mid war over France because the Spit didn't have factory fitted aux tanks or plumbing for DT's, all of which was available from 1940-41, the blooding the RAF received ''leaning on the enemy'' would not have happened if the MkIII was in front line service.The Fulmar gets a bad rap, Try replacing it with a Spitfire I or II, now double the number of rounds per gun and put in enough fuel for around a 4 hour patrol. Won't push the fact that the Fulmar was supposed to be the fleet recon/search plane.
No one said the Swordfish was any of those things, it was the only aircraft suitable for it's environment and it was an environment it excelled in, but lets be honest, would you fight Midway, Coral Sea or Pearl Harbour with it, no.The idea that the Swordfish was some obsolete-from-birth piece of crap should be hanged, guillotined, and buried in tons of refractory concrete. It was not. It was a competent, well-executed design built to a very demanding specification.
What do you think is more important, MkIII/VIII/XII's Spitfires gaining air superiority over the channel, Med, Australia and middle East in 1941-2 or Typhoons doing ground attack in 43-44?.Could they have gotten 4800 MK XII Spitfires for the cost of 3300 Typhoons? More?? Less???
According to Robertson in Spitfire Story of a Famous Fighter the first 45 XIIs used Vc airframes and had a 48 gallon upper fuel tank and A 37 gallon lower tank. The lower mounting of the Griffon meant that there was no room for the oil tank under the engine so it was moved to the rear fuselage. The last 55 used the VIII airframe and had a 36 gallon upper tank and a 49 gallon lower tank. The upper tank was downsized to make room for the oil tank. In either case the total was 85. The XIIs did not have the VIIIs wing tanks but I would presume that would be an easy add.The question about the Typhoon is complicated. It did do good work, but it took a long time to sort out. Also nobody knows how much they cost. They may know how much the Typhoon airframe costs but the cost of the Sabre engine seems to still be covered by the official secrets act. A British official could tell how much was paid 80 years ago but then he would have to kill you.
So we will never know if the British got a good return for their pounds Stirling spent.
Could they have gotten 4800 MK XII Spitfires for the cost of 3300 Typhoons? More?? Less???
Could a Spit XII 'improved' made up some of the difference in capability?
The Typhoon did not spring into being full formed and ready to go.
It wasn't until part way through the 4th production batch that it got the Sabre IIb engine and the bubble canopy (not exactly at the same time.)
While they started slinging a pair of 500lb bombs under the wing in late 1942 the Rockets didn't show up until Aug 1943 and the ability to carry a pair of 1000lbs was also much later than the 500lb bombs. Bombaphoons had a number of modifications from regular Typhoons even on the production lines and the Typhoons in 1944 that carried a pair of 1000lb bombs usually had such modifications as a four bladed prop and larger horizontal stabilizers, not mention modified tail wheel (solid?) and the already standard Bombaphoon bigger wheel brakes.
Since some of the Spitfire XIIs are supposed to have used MK VIII airframes according to some sources(false?) part of the fuel difference could have been solved fairly easily.
A special single stage Griffon ground attack Spitfire doesn't seem outside of the realm of possibility (don't need two stage superchargers for ground attack) and while such a plane would not equal the Typhoon on a one for one basis it might well not be only 1/2 as effective (fitting four 20mm guns would not be a problem for instance) .
hat worthwhile aircraft did Fairy, Blackburn, Handley Page etc make?, what engines did anyone other than RR make that where suitable for front line service?, why was Hawker still making totally obsolete Hurricanes in 1944?. If you look at all the suppliers of aircraft and engines only about 5 made anything worthwhile, the rest were making absolute crap or like Martin Baker spent the whole war designing a plane that finally flew after the war had ended, at least by making Spitfires the RAF would have got MkIII MkVIII, MkXXII and MkXIV's instead of the interim MkV's and IX's, maybe, just maybe they would have had time to incorporate 66G rear aux tanks and plumbing for drop tanks off the production line, instead of slippers.
but lets be honest, would you fight Midway, Coral Sea or Pearl Harbour with it, no.
What do you think is more important, MkIII/VIII/XII's Spitfires gaining air superiority over the channel, Med, Australia and middle East in 1941-2 or Typhoons doing ground attack in 43-44?.
It was designed as a high altitude fighter to replace the Hurricane and while that type was blasting about in the Battle of Britain, Typhoon and Tornado prototypes were putting up excellent speeds and rates of climb in testing, so initially they looked real good for 1940 era aircraft,