Was timely Martlet license production possible?

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

A

Admiral Beez

Captain
8,898
10,157
Oct 21, 2019
Toronto, Canada
By 1942 the British FAA was receiving folding wing Martlets, after first recieiving non-folding versions in 1941. Could Martlets have been avaialble earlier and in greater quantity by Britain license producing them? For example, instead of producing Hawker Hurricanes at CC&F (first rolled off the line in Jan 1940) could this plant have made initially non-folding Martlets? Were engines available? Would Grumman release the technical drawings?

This isn't a what if scenario. I'm interested in what was possible for Britain making Martlets.
 

For starters, it won't be up to Grumman to release the "technical drawings. The US War Dept. would have had to make that call. For this to work tooling would have been required. All the technical drawings in the world aren't going to help you unless you have tooling to go along with them. If you were diverting resources from one production line to another, this was possible IMO.
 
When CC&F produced the Grumman FF G23 Goblin, Hurricane/Sea Hurricane, Curtiss SBF/SBW did the Canadians buy tooling from British/US sources or make them locally? Would license building the Martlet at CC&F stress US tooling capacity?

Certainly engines would need to available, presenting the question of what engine? Early Wildcats were underpowered, so that's an issue.

1) Pratt & Whitney had an operation in Canada, but not an engine plant. Still this may facilitate supply.
2) CC&F had an existing relationship with Curtiss for Cyclone engines for the license-built G23.
 
Last edited:
Admiral Beez said:
When CC&F produced the Hurricane/Sea Hurricane and Curtiss SBF/SBW did the Canadians buy tooling from British/US sources or make them locally? Would license building the Martlet at CC&F stress US tooling capacity?
Click to expand...
They would have either had to acquire already made tooling or build the tooling themselves. "Tooling Capability?" The manufacture of tooling is the first step in the physical production process. Sure, you develop drawings (to include drawings for jigs and fixtures) but most of your larger structures are going to be manufactured in large tooling.

Again, many variables there, that would have been up to the customer. You seem to be under the impression that the manufacturer makes all the decisions.
 
Admiral Beez said:
IDK, I assume it involves many parties. On engines, will P&W or Wright release the engines, impacting engines they can sell to the USN/USAAC? What prices or terms will they offer?
Click to expand...
Many times the customer will dictate to the manufacturer what engine to use. Sometimes a manufacturer will spend their own money to come up with an improvement. At the end of the day, it's going to be about money and what the customer ultimately wants.

Now engine manufacturers may be permitted to sell engines directly to a foreign customer. BTW, in the US during WW2 most engines, turbochargers, radios and electronic equipment was supplied by the government (GFE). As far as prices/ terms? I think that could probably be found through internet sources.
 
Notes by Fifth Sea Lord1 of meeting held on 4 January 1940 [ADM 1/ 10752] 22 January 1940 Future policy for fighters

...

14. (3) Possible use of Foreign Types. This in practice meant U.S.A. Aircraft. The meeting considered that the types available and the possibilities of obtaining them offered no advantages over the Spitfires or Hurricanes, and that there was nothing to be gained by pursuing this suggestion further.

Armoured Aircraft Carriers
 
The only Bristol engine which would seem to fit, reasonably well, would be the Taurus. A year or so before the Martlet gets license built in Canada, let's have them building Bristol engines.
 
Admiral Beez said:
I suppose that could lead to Britain specifying and shipping over Bristol engines, like with Fairchild Canada's Bollingbrook. That would be an interesting comparison of Martlet vs. Wildcat.
Click to expand...

Amazing what a difference a few years makes (RN Photo)

 
FLYBOYJ said:
Amazing what a difference a few years makes
Click to expand...
Agreed. That's why I prefaced with "timely" production. Maybe it's not possible, as we'd need license-made Martlets to enter service before Grumman begins volume deliveries to the FAA in 1942. Now, license-built Corsairs! That's something, but same issue as the Lend Lease taps were wide open then.
 
Why would the British want to open up a new line and deal with that headache when they have access to gobs of factories being built in the US and Canada that aren't at risk of being bombed and are closer to the raw materials like wood and aluminum? (Asking for a friend.)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

Canadian Mosquito Production Dates
Replies
1
Views
319
Geoffrey Sinclair
G
G
Airspeed Oxford production standards
Replies
0
Views
299
Geoffrey Sinclair
G
Other CAC Mustang production plans?
Replies
3
Views
615
Geoffrey Sinclair
G
M
USSBS german bomber production?
Replies
7
Views
864
Barrett
B
North American production list
Replies
1
Views
586
drgondog
Menu
Log in
Register