Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
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.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 Swiftwww.baesystems.com
They were making the right types of fighters, just not well or quickly.
Spitfire - one off one trick pony. They had no track record of designing fighters.
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?Supermarine had a far better track record with their fighter designs than Bell...
Supermarine had a far better track record with their fighter designs than Bell...
The P-39 more or less served in every theatre as well.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?
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.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?
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.Spitfire - one off one trick pony. They had no track record of designing fighters.
Especially considering they were swallowed up by Lockheed and the facility that produced F-16s are now producing F-35sGeneral 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.
Spitfire - one off one trick pony. They had no track record of designing fighters.
Exactly. Same goes for Vickers-Supermarine, with its successors still involved in most UK aerospace programs.Especially considering they were swallowed up by Lockheed and the facility that produced F-16s are now producing F-35s
Wasn't the Mustang was 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.Wasn't the Mustang a British order?