No Spitfire?

[PAT303]

Why do this instead of a conformal drop tank? This just seems the more obvious solution.

Why not just fit a 30G tank behind the seat?

 

[PAT303]

1940 was a difficult time for the cats in my aquadome, they sensed something was wrong. My massive force of Hurricanes were doing their job, decimating the attacking forces of the Luftwaffe but what of the future, the Hurricane couldn't be used in offence and its time was coming to a close. Then a company called "North American" proposed a fighter better than the P-40, and this seemed like a solution. Not only to order them from the USA but license build them, a special team were sent to copy drawings and set up production in tandem in UK first using single stage Merlins and then the two stage series. Rolling off the production lines in Jan 1942 just as the US joined the war after Pearl Harbor, along with the Mustang MkIs that had already arrived at last we could start to consider taking the war to Germany.


Escorted operations of B-17s started in August 1942, in cooperation with the Tiger squadrons already in UK joint operations progressively moved deeper into Germany such that by mid 1943 allied fighters escorted B-17 bombers all the way to Schweinfurt and back.

Or you could just clean up the aerodynamics of the spit, fit internal tanks, a drop tank and away you go, at the start of 1942

 

[PAT303]

1 aspect not mentioned here is the use of the Spitfire as recon.

Again what alternative is there?

Nope is a good answer.

The PR Spits roll in WW2 cannot be dismissed, it's why I put the spit above every other single engined allied fighter

 

[pbehn]

Or you could just clean up the aerodynamics of the spit, fit internal tanks, a drop tank and away you go, at the start of 1942

There is no Spitfire, that's the thread topic.

 

[Admiral Beez]

Why not just fit a 30G tank behind the seat?

In truth, the Spitfire doesn't exist, so no to both our suggestions.

 

[The Basket]

I am thinking no Spitfire.

Is that a big deal?

I think Hurricane maybe hold the line in the BoB.

Then it's all Eastern Front, American imports and then the 2,000 bhp Hawker fighters come online.

Is the Spitfire absolutely necessary? I am thinking no. I do declare the future of the British Empire was more based on the Hurricane and not the Spitfire.

 

[Admiral Beez]

I am thinking no Spitfire. Is that a big deal? I think Hurricane maybe hold the line in the BoB. Then it's all Eastern Front, American imports and then the 2,000 bhp Hawker fighters come online. Is the Spitfire absolutely necessary? I am thinking no. I do declare the future of the British Empire was more based on the Hurricane and not the Spitfire.

At the war's beginning yes, but I'd guess out of the four British single seat, single engine fighters of the war, the Spitfire in all its guises was produced the most, and saw the most combat. Removing the Spitfire causes many butterflies. Hawker and Napier cannot make enough Typhoons and Tempests to replace the more than fifteen thousand Spitfires produced. Unlike the FAA, the RAF never took on many single seat, single engined fighters from the USA, and those they did, like the Buffalo, Mohawk, Thunderbolt and early Allison-powered Mustang were relegated to colonial or secondary roles.

 

[The Basket]

The American won't be relegated to secondary roles of they needed as primary role fighters.

 

[buffnut453]

The American won't be relegated to secondary roles of they needed as primary role fighters.

It's a big ask to expect your primary front-line fighter to be produced in the States. There would have to be some sort of licence production which simply isn't going to happen - the US needs to re-employ people as it emerges from the Great Depression. No US Government would agree to shipping off skilled jobs to Britain...that's simply not on the cards.

 

[pbehn]

It's a big ask to expect your primary front-line fighter to be produced in the States. There would have to be some sort of licence production which simply isn't going to happen - the US needs to re-employ people as it emerges from the Great Depression. No US Government would agree to shipping off skilled jobs to Britain...that's simply not on the cards.

Why not? It is easy to declare that, but not so easy to support. The USA was license building Merlins and supplying huge numbers of all sorts of war materials. If the UK dropped out of the war then there is no market for half of what the USA makes. You cant get many planes on a ship compared to the amount of refined metal and ships were being sunk a high rate until 1943. The vast majority of what the USA produced and sent to UK and USSR was not fighter aircraft.

 

[PAT303]

There is no Spitfire, that's the thread topic.

Well there will be no mustang either because Britain would be on her knee's if all the RAF had were Hurricanes and P40's for the first three years. How would Merlin engine development advance without the Spit, would 60 series Merlin production get the green light without a suitable airframe to put it in?.

 

[pbehn]

Well there will be no mustang either because Britain would be on her knee's if all the RAF had were Hurricanes and P40's for the first three years. How would Merlin engine development advance without the Spit, would 60 series Merlin production get the green light without a suitable airframe to put it in?.

I have addressed many of these issues in my posts on this thread, my last brilliant master stroke has yet to be revealed.

 

[tomo pauk]

Well there will be no mustang either because Britain would be on her knee's if all the RAF had were Hurricanes and P40's for the first three years. How would Merlin engine development advance without the Spit, would 60 series Merlin production get the green light without a suitable airframe to put it in?.

Mustang deal was signed before BoB, so the Mustang will be there.
You have the engine development story wrong, the Merlin 60 was designed for Wellington, not for Spitfire.

 

[wuzak]

Mustang deal was signed before BoB, so the Mustang will be there.
You have the engine development story wrong, the Merlin 60 was designed for Wellington, not for Spitfire.

Mustang doesn't arrive before 1942. Merlin Mustang doesn't arrive until late 1943.

P-40 isn't available until 1941.

Without the Spitfire I guess the 60-series Merlin would have been stuffed into a Hurricane. Same with the Griffon.

 

[pbehn]

Mustang deal was signed before BoB, so the Mustang will be there.
You have the engine development story wrong, the Merlin 60 was designed for Wellington, not for Spitfire.

It was designed for the Wellington, but also with the Spitfire and others in mind, if only to be used in a multi engine plane it may well have had a turbo according to Lovesey.

 

[tomo pauk]

Mustang doesn't arrive before 1942. Merlin Mustang doesn't arrive until late 1943.
P-40 isn't available until 1941.

Of course.

Without the Spitfire I guess the 60-series Merlin would have been stuffed into a Hurricane. Same with the Griffon.

Yes, unless there is someting better to stuff these engines in.

It was designed for the Wellington, but also with the Spitfire and others in mind, if only to be used in a multi engine plane it may well have had a turbo according to Lovesey.

There was about zero turbos in any kind of series production in the UK.

 

[wuzak]

The Marks with the greater fuel supply were the Mk VIII and its pressurised high altitude extended wing tip brother the Mk VII. These had the lower forward fuel tank increased from 36 Imp gallons to 48 gallons for a total of 96 gallons plus 12 more gallons in each wing leading edge. There would barely be 2000 combined VII/VIII produced. Because of the extra fuel capacity these airframes were used for the thirsty Griffon engine variants the Mk XII and Mk XIV

The original Griffon Spitfire, the IV/XX, was based on the Spitfire Mk III airframe.

The first 55 of the 100 production Spitfire XIIs were based on the Spitfire Mk V, complete with fixed tail wheel and lacking the wing fuel tanks.

 

[pbehn]

Mustang doesn't arrive before 1942. Merlin Mustang doesn't arrive until late 1943.

P-40 isn't available until 1941.

Without the Spitfire I guess the 60-series Merlin would have been stuffed into a Hurricane. Same with the Griffon.

There were approx. 150 Mustang MkIs in UK at the end of December 1941, Merlin mustangs were arriving in mid 1943, their first job was advanced pilot training for the pilots who arrived with them.

Edit... I worked in shipping for two years "in UK" just means it is suspended by a crane over the ships hold, then it is technically delivered by the most commonly used trade term "Free On Board" or FOB. That doesnt mean you can use it, or fly it, with the first Mustangs no one had seen it and didnt really know what it could do, there is a lot of work required before a lot of crated new planes become an operational squadron.

 

[pbehn]

There was about zero turbos in any kind of series production in the UK.

I am just quoting what Lovesey said, there were also zero two stage intercooled superchargers in production at the time. Page 2 middle column http://wwiiaircraftperformance.org/merlin-lovesey.pdf

 

[The Basket]

Using American is no problem. Unless it's a P-38 or P-39...errr ok relying on America is a problem!

Asking the British aviation industry to build a 350mph fighter is not going to be an easy task if a speciation was sent in 1936 or 37. The Hawker fighters are due and 2,000bhp is the cheese. And even if there is new designs out there what stopping them been hot garbage anyways.

So it's going to be Hurricanes all the way. With P-40 to bulk the numbers. Is this a bad thing? In some theatres that would be plenty. UK is no longer under threat of invasion after Barbarossa so Sopwith Camels would be enough.

The Hawker fighters will eventually appear and the USAAC will bring the thunder so no Spitfire is not fatal.

Not saying chasing Me 109F in a Hurricane is easy but it can be done.