Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
The Manchester had a good airframe and a pair of crap engines. Did those other aircraft have crap engines or crap airframes?
Well, that goes for all four. Forget the Botha torpedo bomber, and instead expedite the Beaufighter torpedo spec. Maybe skip the Hampden torpedo Bomber too, all hands to the Beaufighter.The Albemarle is simple. It should have been cancelled.
...then Tesla came along with the Cybertruck.Dad used to say, "You can't polish a turd."
Follow the specs that led to the Botha. Separate 1935 specs for a torpedo bomber and a general recce aircraft were merged into a single Spec 10/36 the following year to be powered by Bristol Perseus engines to fill both roles. Fulfilled by both the Botha & the Beaufort ordered off the drawing board. During the design process it became apparent that, due to rising weight, more powerful engines would be required. The Air Ministry agreed to Bristol changing to the Taurus for the Beaufort. But with production of that engine expected to be limited, Blackburn had to soldier on with the Perseus in the Botha. In service the Botha came to be intended as the GR aircraft and the Beaufort as the TB. So the Botha was on a hiding to nothing before it flew. But such was the need for aircraft, any aircraft, its development was allowed to proceed. The Botha also had a few handling problems initially. But despite the high loss rate it fulfilled a useful training role allowing better types to remain on the front line.Well, that goes for all four. Forget the Botha torpedo bomber, and instead expedite the Beaufighter torpedo spec. Maybe skip the Hampden torpedo Bomber too, all hands to the Beaufighter.
My bad, I meant Beaufort to replace Botha, not the later BeaufighterSo it is all very well saying "all hands to the Beaufighter" but first you have to decide that the Beaufort, which only reached its first squadron in Nov 1939 (just 11 weeks after the outbreak of WW2) and carried out its first mission in mid-April 1940 needs to be replaced. Anything else is just hindsight.
From "The British Aircraft Specifications File" under Spec 17/38 for the Bristol 155 subsequently transferred to AW under Spec 18/38 is worth quoting (with my emphasis):-The Albemarle is simple. It should have been cancelled. It was designed following a specification according to Wikipedia: "This sought a twin-engine medium bomber of wood and metal construction, without the use of any light alloys, in order that the aircraft could be readily built by less experienced manufacturers from outside the aircraft industry." It ended up as a poor medium bomber and its most notable role was towing gliders. It wasn't ideal for that as the engines tended to overheat due to the high power needed at low speed. However, the big issue was that the contractors for the Albemarle should have been making Mosquitos.
Has anyone actually tried?Dad used to say, "You can't polish a turd."
While I must credit them for introducing the world's first all metal, folding wing, retractable undercarriage carrier aircraft, did Blackburn ever make a good aircraft? The superlative Buccaneer, aside. The Botha needs to improve lateral visibility, for one. What the heck was its designer thinking make a torpedo bomber where the pilot has no side to side view?Attributed to the Botha, a test pilot remarked in his report that, "access to the cockpit is difficult, it should have been made impossible..."
While I must credit them for introducing the world's first all metal, folding wing, retractable undercarriage carrier aircraft, did Blackburn ever make a good aircraft?