Supermarine fighters after the Spitfire?

[tomo pauk]

What king of fighters should've Supermarine been designing after the icon? Say, work starting some time past 1941. One or two engines, piston or jet engines. Obviously, several designs will be required to cater for the ever-changing state of the art and operational requirements. Requirments are that of performance, firepower, range/endurance (once that is starts to be required, talk 1944 and on), economics/production/sell-ability, safety, handling. Naval fighters can also apply. All while using engines and aerodynamics available for the designers in the UK.
Task spans from 1941 to 1955. Existing designs - from Spiteful onwards - can be axed so something better can be 'designed'.

 

[Admiral Beez]

What king of fighters should've Supermarine been designing after the icon? Say, work starting some time past 1941.

Skip the Spiteful project and expedite the Attacker (without the Spiteful's wings). Other than that, Vickers-Supermarine pursued the right aircraft, but just sucked at execution of design, planning, production... and likely in lobbying for government funding and attention. The Swift should have been in service earlier as a contender against the MiG-15 over Korea, and as the first swept wing fighter to land on an aircraft carrier it should have been in FAA service instead of the Sea Hawk and/or Venom. The Scimitar should have been supersonic and radar equipped. Keep in mind that Supermarine was a label under Vickers.

Vickers Supermarine Types 510, 517, 528 & 535

Experimental prototypes leading to the Vickers Supermarine Swift

www.baesystems.com

They were making the right types of fighters, just not well or quickly.

 

[Macandy]

Spitfire - one off one trick pony. They had no track record of designing fighters.

 

[Macandy]

Skip the Spiteful project and expedite the Attacker (without the Spiteful's wings). Other than that, Vickers-Supermarine pursued the right aircraft, but just sucked at execution of design, planning, production... and likely in lobbying for government funding and attention. The Swift should have been in service earlier as a contender against the MiG-15 over Korea, and as the first swept wing fighter to land on an aircraft carrier it should have been in FAA service instead of the Sea Hawk and/or Venom. The Scimitar should have been supersonic and radar equipped. Keep in mind that Supermarine was a label under Vickers.

Vickers Supermarine Types 510, 517, 528 & 535

Experimental prototypes leading to the Vickers Supermarine Swift

www.baesystems.com

They were making the right types of fighters, just not well or quickly.

All the Supermarine jets were atrocious designs with horrific accident rates.

 

[tomo pauk]

Spitfire - one off one trick pony. They had no track record of designing fighters.

What is exactly your problem with anything not made in the USA?

 

[ww2restorer]

According to the book written my Mike Lithgow, Supermarine had along tract record of designing fighter. Really good fighters:-Spitfire, Attacker, Swift, just to name a few.

 

[GrauGeist]

Supermarine had a far better track record with their fighter designs than Bell...

 

[SaparotRob]

Only because Petter sabotaged the cabin heater deal!
I used an exclamation point so you know it's true.

 

[GrauGeist]

You need to throw in the word Fact (followed by an exclamation point) to make it indisputable.

 

[pbehn]

Supermarine had a far better track record with their fighter designs than Bell...

In 1935/36 who had any track record? Supermarine could say they won the Schneider Trophy at least As one trick ponies go, being a front line fighter and P/R aircraft from before the war to after it finished and later operating from carriers and serving in every theatre isnt bad, which pony did better tricks?

 

[Thumpalumpacus]

Supermarine had a far better track record with their fighter designs than Bell...

The phrase "damned by faint praise" comes to mind.

 

[Ovod]

In 1935/36 who had any track record? Supermarine could say they won the Schneider Trophy at least As one trick ponies go, being a front line fighter and P/R aircraft from before the war to after it finished and later operating from carriers and serving in every theatre isnt bad, which pony did better tricks?

The P-39 more or less served in every theatre as well.
I'm not sure if the Royal Navy were completely satisfied with the Seafire?

 

[pbehn]

The P-39 more or less served in every theatre as well.
I'm not sure if the Royal Navy were completely satisfied with the Seafire?

In every theatre except Russia it was replaced as soon as was possible and it wasnt there in 1939. Maybe not completely satisfied with the sea fire, but it did it.

 

[Admiral Beez]

Spitfire - one off one trick pony. They had no track record of designing fighters.

The Spitfire remained competitive for a decade after its first flight in 1936. That's a good trick. General Dynamics made the F-16, and that's about it for fighters, but the firm and the design are not derided as one a trick pony.

Vickers-Supermarine made several fighters. Spitfire, Spiteful/Seafang, Attacker, Swift, Scimitar. You might think the latter were rubbish, but the track record of designing fighters is there.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

General Dynamics made the F-16, and that's about it for fighters, but the firm and the design are not derided as one a trick pony.

Especially considering they were swallowed up by Lockheed and the facility that produced F-16s are now producing F-35s

 

[nuuumannn]

Spitfire - one off one trick pony. They had no track record of designing fighters.

Doesn't matter. Airframe and engine combination adopted from the Schneider Trophy ensured a working partnership with Rolls-Royce. Let's also not forget that the Spitfire saw continuous improvement and remained at the forefront of piston-engined aircraft performance throughout the war, not only that, more Spitfires and Seafires were built than any other WW2 fighter, with the exception of the Bf 109. So, tell us why not having a pedigree was a bad thing? What about North American? No fighter history there, yet P-51, or maybe BFW/Messerschmitt, never built a fighter before the Bf 109?

 

[Admiral Beez]

Especially considering they were swallowed up by Lockheed and the facility that produced F-16s are now producing F-35s

Exactly. Same goes for Vickers-Supermarine, with its successors still involved in most UK aerospace programs.

Interestingly, General Dynamics bought the Alvis land systems of Vickers in 2004.

COMPANY NEWS; GENERAL DYNAMICS IS BUYING ALVIS OF BRITAIN (Published 2004)

 

[SaparotRob]

Wasn't the Mustang a British order?

 

[nuuumannn]

Wasn't the Mustang was a British order?

British order, US design, a combination made in... well... wartime...

 

[pbehn]

Wasn't the Mustang a British order?

Only placed so they could get out of it, NAA were too smart though, that IFF and sealed tank nonsense didnt work, so the Brits were stuck with it to the end of the war... suckers.