Who would you want to design your fighter - 1943

[SaparotRob]

I read "The Battle of Britain" waaaay back when. I always remembered Lord Beaverbrook's campaign was basically getting everyone involved. Were those pots and pans used for license built Martlets?

 

[pbehn]

I read "The Battle of Britain" waaaay back when. I always remembered Lord Beaverbrook's campaign was basically getting everyone involved. Were those pots and pans used for license built Martlets?

As with Chairman Mao. The railings in my local park were melted down and thousands of metal stretchers produced which were later used to make railings in post war London.

These Fences Are Actually World War II-Era Stretchers

The fences outside some of South London's estates are made from recycled medical equipment.

www.atlasobscura.com

 

[SaparotRob]

Oh yeah. Upon further thought, I think I'd might like to give Dayton P. Brown a chance to design my fighter.

 

[Snautzer01]

Are we not forgetting the French?

 

[tomo pauk]

Are we not forgetting the French?

What about them for purposes of this thread?

 

[GrauGeist]

Are we not forgetting the French?

Considering the myriad of "curious" designs they offered, yes.

 

[SaparotRob]

Roger that.

 

[Snautzer01]

What about them for purposes of this thread?

The french had good designers. They are as purpose full as a new plane in 43 in 6 months.

 

[Snautzer01]

Considering the myriad of "curious" designs they offered, yes.

The french had curoious designs yes . But if one was to build a brand new fighter in 6 months i bet on the french. So many fresh idears lacking a good powerplant. So serving off french design is not a smart thing to do in 43.

 

[tomo pauk]

The french had good designers. They are as purpose full as a new plane in 43 in 6 months.

The French have had some good designers in 1939-40. By 1943, the companies and institutions in non-occupied moved ahead, the French not so much.

 

[Thumpalumpacus]

They could probably have put up some good designs, but to be honest I'm afraid to imagine what they would've looked like.

 

[WARSPITER]

They could probably have put up some good designs, but to be honest I'm afraid to imagine what they would've looked like.

Good point. Although France is occupied in this time frame so escaped designers in England or the US wouldn't have to put up
with impressionists doing the design drawings as they obviously had done in France.

 

[PAT303]

The french had curoious designs yes . But if one was to build a brand new fighter in 6 months i bet on the french. So many fresh idears lacking a good powerplant. So serving off french design is not a smart thing to do in 43.

I think you are being a bit harsh, what's wrong with this stunning beauty

 

[Shortround6]

For the sake of your fellow forum members I strongly recommend a warning label in advance of such pictures.

Some of us have health issues and may be advised by our doctors to either avoid such pictures or work up to them with a progressive series of increasing ugly pictures.

 

[Thumpalumpacus]

I think you are being a bit harsh, what's wrong with this stunning beauty

 

[tomo pauk]

P PAT303 I'm not sure that membership of this forum deserved a punishment that severe.

 

[Shortround6]

We used to have some threads on French aircraft that suggested protective equipment for viewing pictures of French aircraft.

Started something along these lines.

aprons and gloves are optional.

 

[NevadaK]

The poor French...

To be fair, when I started this post I was thinking about how so many aircraft designs during the war were compromised by poor engine development, material availability, lack of a clear vision for the design, and government interference. Thinking about what went right with the Mustang, I wondered what aircraft designers were better than their circumstances. Regardless of country. To me, the Schmued led NAA design team made a fantastic airframe, but got really lucky with an engine swap. Without the Merlin, the Mustang is an almost great plane and NAA's reputation would be built on the B-25 as its most successful design.

With that said, I'm going to make a pitch for Tomio Kubo of Mitsubishi. He was the lead designer for the Ki - 46 Dinah as well as the promising Ki-83 (picture attached) as well as a number of unrealized single engine fighter designs that relied on power plants that never reached fruition. We never hear of Kubo as he never worked on an aircraft design after the war due to restrictions placed on Japanese industry. Instead, he eventually went on to head Mitsubishi Motors in the 1980's.

 

[Howard Gibson]

In 1943, any piston engined fighter plane that was to be good, needed a 2000HP engine, and I mean 2000HP at normal power. War emergency power is extra. We are looking at the RR Griffon, the Napier Sabre, or the P&W R2800.

It is worthwhile looking at fresh, new piston engined aircraft that actually were being developed in 1943. The de Havilland Hornet, the Grumman F7F Tigercat, the Grumman F8F Bearcat, the Focke Wulf Ta154, and the Mitsubishi A7M Reppu all were worked on in 1943. What was missing was the blind, screaming panic to get them in service, such as with the Hawker Typhoon in 1941.

The jet powered Me262s, Gloster Meteor, de Havilland Vampire, and the Lockheed P-80 Shooting Star all were being worked on in 1943. These were to be the next generation of fighters.

A lot of piston engined fighters developed late in the war were derived from earlier designs -- Hawker Tempest and Fury, Supermarine Spiteful, North American P-51H, Republic XP-72, and the Focke Wulf Ta152, for example. Jets were the future.

 

[Vincenzo]

A fighter design with works starting in 1943 must be a jet fighter,
piston fighter, from that time, are good only for niche use, like long range, carrier, nightfighter