For the most part, it'd be smaller, lighter, and have smaller wings. There appeared to be claims that the wings would be thinner -- I'm not sure what effects it would have on our aircraft.
Was single seat Firefly possible?
- Thread starter Admiral Beez
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Indeed. During Operation Corporate in 1982, RAF squadrons of Harrier GR.3s went south with the task force and performed successful strike missions. Subsequently, RAF Harrier squadrons became an almost permanent fixture on Britain's 'Harrier Carriers'; the GR.7s and 9s, not optomised for the air-to-air mission took over in the fleet defence role once the Sea Harrier was retired.
- Thread starter
- #83
Admiral Beez
Major
I would've loved to see what the FAA could have procured if:
- The FAA free of RAF and Air Ministry inference
- The FAA maintains the lead of the Griffon program
- The FAA demanded a single-seat, folding-wing fighter instead of the Fulmar in Specification O.8/38.
Last edited:
That reminds me of a quote my father was fond of saying "If the Queen had balls, she'd be King"...
Truthfully, it seems like they had considered a single-seat and twin-seat Firefly to replace the Fulmar. While the Fulmar racked up a surprising amount of kills, the navigator wasn't necessary, and largely helpless. Some had taken to throwing toilet paper at enemy planes (I'm not sure if it saved a single Fulmar, but I'll give you one thing -- it's creative).
Shortround6
Major General
The navigator was necessary in some situations. A number of the ferry flights of single seat fighters to Malta had one and sometimes two Fulmars providing navigation for the formation.
The Navigator may have been made redundant by better radios (nav aids) as WW II went on but what was the state of the art in 1938?
The Navigator may have been made redundant by better radios (nav aids) as WW II went on but what was the state of the art in 1938?
The USN seemed to be fine with a single-seater...
- Thread starter
- #87
Admiral Beez
Major
I wonder if the navigator ever brought a Sten gun or something heavier into the rear seat.
Shortround6
Major General
We have been over this a number of times.
The US was facing different weather conditions. The US also was known to send dauntlesses or other multi seat aircraft with fighter formations at times.
- Thread starter
- #89
Admiral Beez
Major
The USN's RDF system was designed to be used by a single crewman. The US system was the YE-ZB, a UHF (line of sight) transmitter which transmitted a Morse code letter denoting 15 degrees of a circle. The US were also heavily trained in distant navigation, http://www.skywaves.ar88.net/Docs/YE-ZB Presentation.pdf
The British RDF was intended for two crew. The fellow in the rear of the Fulmar was a navigator, but an observer/RDF operator.
Last edited:
A large number of F4F-4s went into the drink at Midway when they couldn't get their ZB homing gear to work.
Shortround6
Major General
Thank you for the link.
Unfortunately for the British this device was in prototype form undergoing testing when the Fulmar was ordered. The US was also not sharing with the British in 1938-39. British only shared radar (and other things) with the US in 1940. The Firefly was being ordered before US-British cooperation and sharing was really established.
The Observer's seat swivelled and in combat he would typically face rearward, so the pilot literally had eyes in the back of his head, which was invaluable during combat.
Didn't the USN serve in the Atlantic to some extent?
That's actually a smart move -- I'm not sure how much it slowed up the fighters, but it worked.
And the RN's system wasn't. I'm curious about two things.
- When did the RN develop RDF systems?
- Why wasn't the RN as well trained in overwater navigation?
So basically, you'd get a morse code letter 24 times as you did a three-sixty?
How long would it have taken to have modified the RDF system to use a single individual from when it was first used on the Fulmar, to a new aircraft? Could this have been done, reasonably speaking, for use in a single-seat fighter? I'm also curious if it would have been possible to increase overwater navigation training for RN:FAA crews for this purpose.
- Thread starter
- #94
Admiral Beez
Major
Not long at all. It was a choice, not a necessity to require a dedicated crewman to run the system. The single-seat Seafire and IIRC Sea Hurricane had a radio beacon system, as did the Martlet.
There's more info on the RN's radio beacon system here RN carrier homing beacon
Weird that you would choose to use two guys when one would do the job.
The RN system was in use years before the USN ZB system. The USN was just completing the transition to their homing system in early 1942.
The RN FAA was at least as well trained as the USN for over the water navigation.
- Thread starter
- #97
Admiral Beez
Major
AIUI, when HMS Ark Royal commissioned in 1938 she was already equipped with its RDF system and with aircraft equipped with the R.1110 (homing beacon W/T receiver).
Some info on RAF and FAA radio direction finding here. My ipad is about to die so I'll do some digging once it's charged up.
Last edited:
- Thread starter
- #98
Admiral Beez
Major
Here's some info..... Armoured Aircraft Carriers
It was agreed that Fleet Air Arm Fighters were required for the following duties:–
(1) To destroy enemy shadowers.
(2) To intercept enemy striking forces.
(3) To destroy enemy spotters and to protect our own.
(4) To escort our own striking forces to their objectives.
2. Functions 1, 2 and 3 could be met by a Single Seater using the homing beacon as a navigational aid. Function 4 was considered to be problematical but apart from this it was agreed that there would be many occasions when fighters would be required to fly over the sea outside beacon range of their parent ship. It was therefore considered to be a sound policy to develop a 2 Seater fighter having navigational facilities, provided this did not entail a serious reduction in performance compared to a Single Seater.
That's why the Fulmar has two seats. Not because two crew were needed to operate the radio-beacon system, but navigation was needed beyond the beacon's range, and it was thought a second man would be useful in this regard. I imagine any pilot flying far from his carrier above clouds and fog in the North Atlantic would welcome a dedicated navigator, at least until his added weight meant you died in a dogfight.
Good info here Fleet Air Arm homing beacons. Page 5 of the linked article includes a chart showing that the beacon was ineffective once the aircraft exceed 180 miles from the carrier. This is where the Fulmar's rear seater was considered useful. On page 4, there's a section called (1.3.2) Ease of Operation and Reliability in the Aircraft which refers the easy use of the audible beacon system by the pilot. "With the beacons now in use a homing bearing is provided aurally once a minute when required. The pilot does not have to perform a d.f. operation, and his vision is not distracted."
It was agreed that Fleet Air Arm Fighters were required for the following duties:–
(1) To destroy enemy shadowers.
(2) To intercept enemy striking forces.
(3) To destroy enemy spotters and to protect our own.
(4) To escort our own striking forces to their objectives.
2. Functions 1, 2 and 3 could be met by a Single Seater using the homing beacon as a navigational aid. Function 4 was considered to be problematical but apart from this it was agreed that there would be many occasions when fighters would be required to fly over the sea outside beacon range of their parent ship. It was therefore considered to be a sound policy to develop a 2 Seater fighter having navigational facilities, provided this did not entail a serious reduction in performance compared to a Single Seater.
That's why the Fulmar has two seats. Not because two crew were needed to operate the radio-beacon system, but navigation was needed beyond the beacon's range, and it was thought a second man would be useful in this regard. I imagine any pilot flying far from his carrier above clouds and fog in the North Atlantic would welcome a dedicated navigator, at least until his added weight meant you died in a dogfight.
Good info here Fleet Air Arm homing beacons. Page 5 of the linked article includes a chart showing that the beacon was ineffective once the aircraft exceed 180 miles from the carrier. This is where the Fulmar's rear seater was considered useful. On page 4, there's a section called (1.3.2) Ease of Operation and Reliability in the Aircraft which refers the easy use of the audible beacon system by the pilot. "With the beacons now in use a homing bearing is provided aurally once a minute when required. The pilot does not have to perform a d.f. operation, and his vision is not distracted."
Last edited:
Kevin J
Banned
I think in peacetime that maybe recruitment would be a problem, high staff turnover, I thinks its called, if you don't have your navigator. In wartime, are we looking at 10 percent of sorties ending in combat? The FAA must have been right, the Fulmar was our highest scoring naval fighter with the Sea Hurricane a close second.
You mean losing track of where you are, running out of gas, and ending up in the drink?
Users who are viewing this thread
Similar threads
