First UK Co-operative AAR!

[El Pip]

Yes, but theres no harm in us looking at what the Yanks have to offer, if there better it will spur on our cevelopment, if there worse we can laugh!

Nothing wrong with looking, or even borrowing ideas. Just not the engines, unless you really need a laugh.

Your correct, but I just like to keep things a little historical, I'd like to find a 37-38 design for a realy neat torp bomber, designed by us Brits.

There's not really much really wrong with a Barracuda. It sprung from a design specification issued in 1937 but was worked on slowly. The same specification launched earlier wouldn't hit engine supply problems and would benefit from the work done on the F.5/34 (or whatever we call it ). Trim the weight (by not expanding the specifcation halfway through) and with the original design engine the Barracuda would have been a fine aircraft.

Indeed, but it doesn't even need that if we went Skua and F5.3/4, it is easily concivable that they would come into service before the war.

Except for the torpedo bomber shaped hole which has to be filled with something. My vote is an early(ish) Barracuda but properly engined.

 

[SirCliveWolfe]

Nothing wrong with looking, or even borrowing ideas. Just not the engines, unless you really need a laugh.

Thats my idea alright...

There's not really much really wrong with a Barracuda. It sprung from a design specification issued in 1937 but was worked on slowly. The same specification launched earlier wouldn't hit engine supply problems and would benefit from the work done on the F.5/34 (or whatever we call it ). Trim the weight (by not expanding the specifcation halfway through) and with the original design engine the Barracuda would have been a fine aircraft.

Yeah the Barracuda could have been a fine plane, but not IMO if rushed into service. A date of early 1940 would be ideal.

Except for the torpedo bomber shaped hole which has to be filled with something. My vote is an early(ish) Barracuda but properly engined.

Well personally mine is for the Skua until early 1940 and then the Barracuda with the Bristol Centaurus (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bristol_Centaurus ) which gave the Hawker Sea Fury (in 1945) 2,480hp and a top speed of 435mph with a range of 680 miles (without drop-tanks). The amazing engine was not ready IRL until 1942 but could easily have been brought forward a year or so if the FAA are willing to fund Bristol's research.

 

[Braedonnal]

OOC:

All OOC:
The sea Fury would be the next generation for '41/'42, it is a realistic timeframe if the Admiralty had put in the effort sooner. The design origniated in '37 with Hawker and the Bristol Centuris engine started to be developed in '38 so '42 as the 'next gen' plane could verry easily work.

There was a reason why the Tornado, Typhoon, Tempest and Furies came so late; very severe problems with getting the engines to work right. I can't see them being ready until historical dates unless one wants devote the time and energy into it but this would cost dearly in reality. It is ever the problem with militaries, 'Do I go with what works now or do I wait for the better aircraft that might not be ready for years?' Stick with the Hurricanes and Spits and variants thereof, war will be here sooner than you think. Remember anything that flies in 1937 as a prototype won't likely be ready for squadron use by late 1939, early 1940 (check most aircraft's development times, you'll see that is true).

You are correct in that the Seafire would work, but it was always a fudge, it was very bad to land, fragile (by carrier standards) and difficult to introduce folding wings. The Gloucester would be easier by the design standards, especialy with their experiances in carrier designed aircraft.

The Sea Fury did have some pretty bad problems (did I read something about the tail liking to fall off?) and honestly you might be better off with slightly taller hangars (the reason they could not be used) on your carriers so you can have Corsairs much later. The Gloucester craft isn't bad but that rate of climb is hardly Zeroesque as claimed (11 min to 20,000 ft aka quite average).

Again were not that ahead, we just give a fig about aircraft, something that the admiralty did not at the time. The real problem here, as IRL will be getting it past Nevile.

Well, one thing you have to realize is that given the current state of the RAF I am guessing they must come first. They haven't built much as of yet and in HOI 1.3, that's bad news. Sticking with navalized versions of air force designs (even considering that the naval versions will be even less capable than the land version due to additional weight) has the effect of simplifying construction--we'd call it gearing. Of course, what Neville has to say on the matter will decide if funds for these projects will be possible.

PS: Oh yeah, our radial engines weren't bad at all, just those liquid cooled engines of ours stank to high heaven.

 

[Adaml83]

OOC:

OOC:The Sea Fury did have some pretty bad problems (did I read something about the tail liking to fall off?) and honestly you might be better off with slightly taller hangars (the reason they could not be used) on your carriers so you can have Corsairs much later. The Gloucester craft isn't bad but that rate of climb is hardly Zeroesque as claimed (11 min to 20,000 ft aka quite average).

I think that was a problem with the Typhoon also. Considering the emphasis on what I consider catching up in terms of carrier planes, it might be better to at least go with the best we can get now, then develop something better later.

Still means we need a new torpedo bomber...

PS: Oh yeah, our radial engines weren't bad at all, just those liquid cooled engines of ours stank to high heaven.

Yes, quite good. Besides their own engines being underpowered, why do you think France got American radials?

 

[unmerged(44587)]

Firstly the Sea Fury is one of my favourite aircraft, but I think March 1937 is too early for it even to be a gleam in Sydney Camm's eye!

IRL it was air ministry specification F18/37 that got Camm working on what became the Typhoon, just as the Hurricane was entering production, and then in Jan 1938 he got the full details of what was required.

There were 2 versions, the Tornado with Rolls Royce Vulture engines and the Typhoon with Napier Sabre engines. Both engines had their problems which delayed everything, then from May 1940 Rolls Royce had to devote all their energy to the Merlin and Hawker had to go flat out on Hurricanes, which delayed the project further, but on the plus side allowed more time to design and develop, and the Sabre engine won out. But even in Sept 1941 when the first Typhoons entered squadron service it still wasn't really ready, plagued by engine faults and a with a tendency for the tail to come off.

Quote:- "In the first nine months of its service life far more Typhoons were lost through structural or engine troubles than were lost in combat, and between July and September 1942 it was estimated that at least one Typhoon failed to return from each sortie owing to one or other of its defects. Trouble was experienced in power dives - a structural failure in the tail assembly sometimes resulted in this component parting company with the rest of the airframe. In fact, during the Dieppe operations in August 1942, when the first official mention of the Typhoon was made, fighters of this type bounced a formation of Fw 190s south of Le Treport, diving out of the sun and damaging three of the German fighters, but two of the Typhoons did not pull out of their dive owing to structural failures in their tail assemblies."
(http://www.pilotfriend.freeola.com/... history/WW2/new aircraft6/Hawker Typhoon.htm)

And it's performance was disappointing. Except at low level, where it was phenomenally good. With a lot more work it went onto become a devastatingly effective ground attack fighter. From it, with a different, thinner wing, evolved the Tempest, and then the Sea Fury.

In our game, so far it seems aircraft are 6 to 12 months ahead of real life[and quite realistically so IMHO]. So maybe the specification that was filled by the Typhoon is known as "F18/36" or something. But I don't think Sydney Camm knows much about the Sea Fury at this time, and it's not the kind of thing to bandy-about in public so-to-speak But everyone in the know probably thinks that F18/36 Tornado/Typhoon will be a fantastic interceptor. But these are big aircraft (by the standards British fighter aircraft of the time); will they fit onto the aircraft carrier? I think some people will worry about this And maybe they will speak up at the meeting? If anyone there knows the Specification? Perhaps someone at Shorts does?

 

[SirCliveWolfe]

All OOC:

OOC:
There was a reason why the Tornado, Typhoon, Tempest and Furies came so late; very severe problems with getting the engines to work right. I can't see them being ready until historical dates unless one wants devote the time and energy into it but this would cost dearly in reality. It is ever the problem with militaries, 'Do I go with what works now or do I wait for the better aircraft that might not be ready for years?' Stick with the Hurricanes and Spits and variants thereof, war will be here sooner than you think. Remember anything that flies in 1937 as a prototype won't likely be ready for squadron use by late 1939, early 1940 (check most aircraft's development times, you'll see that is true).

Have you got any details on this I have not been able to find anything apart from one sentance with "compression effects" in it. That's why I asked about how long it would take to get the Gloucester into service, I think it may be too long.

Yes but 1940 is more than acceptable, it is unlikley that we would face enemy air power without our own land-based craft. Wolfe wants to see anything that can be pressed into service ASAP but also to look for the 'best-of-the-best' for the next gen.

The Sea Fury did have some pretty bad problems (did I read something about the tail liking to fall off?) and honestly you might be better off with slightly taller hangars (the reason they could not be used) on your carriers so you can have Corsairs much later. The Gloucester craft isn't bad but that rate of climb is hardly Zeroesque as claimed (11 min to 20,000 ft aka quite average).

All I've ever heard about the Fury was good... but you may well be correct.

On the Corsairs, your probably correct but at the moment it is probable that the RN would be aiming to use a British design. Also we would have to find a good reason to make taller hangers, as we wouldn't know about the Corsair yet.

Well, one thing you have to realize is that given the current state of the RAF I am guessing they must come first. They haven't built much as of yet and in HOI 1.3, that's bad news. Sticking with navalized versions of air force designs (even considering that the naval versions will be even less capable than the land version due to additional weight) has the effect of simplifying construction--we'd call it gearing. Of course, what Neville has to say on the matter will decide if funds for these projects will be possible.

PS: Oh yeah, our radial engines weren't bad at all, just those liquid cooled engines of ours stank to high heaven.

Your correct, BUT this is a Admiralty meating, after we talk to Nevile we may be forced to accept simple navalisation of RAF planes, but at the moment we would be looking for the best possible aircraft at the momnet.

The best answer would probably to get together with the RAF and put forward a joint proposal on the Fury/Sea Fury.... I'm sure those fly-boy's would love the Fury as well.

 

[SirCliveWolfe]

Firstly the Sea Fury is one of my favourite aircraft, but I think March 1937 is too early for it even to be a gleam in Sydney Camm's eye!

...snip

In our game, so far it seems aircraft are 6 to 12 months ahead of real life[and quite realistically so IMHO]. So maybe the specification that was filled by the Typhoon is known as "F18/36" or something. But I don't think Sydney Camm knows much about the Sea Fury at this time, and it's not the kind of thing to bandy-about in public so-to-speak But everyone in the know probably thinks that F18/36 Tornado/Typhoon will be a fantastic interceptor. But these are big aircraft (by the standards British fighter aircraft of the time); will they fit onto the aircraft carrier? I think some people will worry about this And maybe they will speak up at the meeting? If anyone there knows the Specification? Perhaps someone at Shorts does?

I'm not saying the sea fury per sae but that is the best example of the kind of thing that he would come up with for use of a carrier in 1937/38.

The Typhoon was not really used on British carries, so it is more likley to be like a sea fury, if not so good. But all the aspects for something close to it are there for a 1939/40 prototype entering service in 1941/42/43.

 

[SirCliveWolfe]

All OOC:

OOC:

I think that was a problem with the Typhoon also. Considering the emphasis on what I consider catching up in terms of carrier planes, it might be better to at least go with the best we can get now, then develop something better later.

That's Wolfe's main concern as well, he's just interested to see if this Gloucester can be put into service soon... unfortunatly I doubt it.

Still means we need a new torpedo bomber...

Yes, that is the major concern, the Skua's good for now but not the future

Yes, quite good. Besides their own engines being underpowered, why do you think France got American radials?

Well they are French!!

 

[Adaml83]

All OOC:

All OOC:That's Wolfe's main concern as well, he's just interested to see if this Gloucester can be put into service soon... unfortunatly I doubt it.

Well, the RAF hasn't put much effort into going after the Spit quite yet, while not perfect, it might be possible to swoop in and get a contract. Also I think it might be closer to getting something into service than Gloucester's design.

Yes, that is the major concern, the Skua's good for now but not the future

Skua's a dive bomber Wolfey...either way, as soon as the meeting's over there's gonna be a new set of design requests to issue.

 

[El Pip]

OOC:

I think that was a problem with the Typhoon also. Considering the emphasis on what I consider catching up in terms of carrier planes, it might be better to at least go with the best we can get now, then develop something better later.

It's not catching up though is it? No-one at the moment is ahead by much, if at all. The USN is still mucking around with SBC Helldivers (biplane) with even the Devestator and Buffalo still a glint in the designers eye. Everybody's planes are awful except the Japanese who have the A5M. A project authorised right now and given funding would be there or there abouts with everyone else.

Of course as the RAF is probably going to get priority in aviation terms, so then the FAA hits problems.

Yes, quite good. Besides their own engines being underpowered, why do you think France got American radials?

Because the French are possibly the worst engine builders in the western world so they had to buy someone elses? Because the American ones were free(ish) and everyone elses cost money? Because they couldn't afford a decent British one?

Seriously US radial engines were ok. But when only one US inline liquid cool engine get used throughout the entire war, and is replaced with a Merlin once the politicians stop being stubborn, you do have to question at least parts of 30s/40s US engine development.

 

[unmerged(44587)]

Well, I feel that in order to get a Sea Fury you must have had a Tempest, and to get a Tempest you need first a Typhoon

By '44 the RAF was only really interested in jet fighters as the way ahead, but the Fleet Air Arm saw the Sea Fury as a 'stop-gap', so Hawker sold them the design as a carrier bourne aircraft. If in 1937 the Navy (thank goodness the Navy runs the Fleet Air Arm ) had been interested, then Camm would have designed a carrier version of the Tornado/Typhoon. Perhaps the land based 'plane would after all have been called the Tornado, and the carrier version the Typhoon (as Sea Typhoon just sounds wrong IMHO]

So get Dury to mod away and the Navy can get Typhoons, maybe in late '40 at the earliest: what level of C.A.G. would they be part of? Nobody knows that they will be disappointing as a fighter, but they will end up great at attacking ships with cannon, bombs and rockets!!! That's where this is leading The great hope of a carrier fighter will end up being the strike aircraft! While something else will have to become the fighter.

But in the meantime, what will the Navy operate between now and late '40/early '41? Probably Sea Gladiators and then Hurricanes by '39 which will be a leap forward for British naval aviation. IMHO by the time the Gloucester is ready you would have been better to have gone straight to the Typhoon.

So yes Wolfey, go for those Typhoons - later on they will evolve into Tempests and you might get Sea Furies into service by '44 if you really pull out all the stops!

 

[unmerged(44587)]

It's not catching up though is it? No-one at the moment is ahead by much, if at all. The USN is still mucking around with SBC Helldivers (biplane) with even the Devestator and Buffalo still a glint in the designers eye. Everybody's planes are awful except the Japanese who have the A5M. A project authorised right now and given funding would be there or there abouts with everyone else.

Of course as the RAF is probably going to get priority in aviation terms, so then the FAA hits problems.

I think that hits the nail on the head Pippy.


I am of course playing the role of historical feel, just playing with the neurons in everyone's head and not actually at the meeting, unless I'm someone from the Admiralty whose job is to keep track of what the boffins, engineers and designers are up to and is frantically passing notes/whispering in ears... o

 

[SirCliveWolfe]

All OOC:
Well, the RAF hasn't put much effort into going after the Spit quite yet, while not perfect, it might be possible to swoop in and get a contract. Also I think it might be closer to getting something into service than Gloucester's design.

Yes thats what I thourght, perhaps we could use Glousters/Fairey's experiance to navalise them? What happened IRL?

Skua's a dive bomber Wolfey...either way, as soon as the meeting's over there's gonna be a new set of design requests to issue.

Yes... I really ment it would be an ok stop-gap 'strike plane' rarther than an actual torp bomber.

 

[SirCliveWolfe]

Well, I feel that in order to get a Sea Fury you must have had a Tempest, and to get a Tempest you need first a Typhoon

ues... ofcourse. I was just saying that the plane would look and 'feel' more like a Sea Fury than a Typhoon/Tempest, as it was the only deravitive that served upon RN aircraft carriers. Not that he design would be the actual Sea Fury... I know I wasn't very clear

By '44 the RAF was only really interested in jet fighters as the way ahead, but the Fleet Air Arm saw the Sea Fury as a 'stop-gap', so Hawker sold them the design as a carrier bourne aircraft. If in 1937 the Navy (thank goodness the Navy runs the Fleet Air Arm ) had been interested, then Camm would have designed a carrier version of the Tornado/Typhoon. Perhaps the land based 'plane would after all have been called the Tornado, and the carrier version the Typhoon (as Sea Typhoon just sounds wrong IMHO)

Yes it does sound wrong... perhaps Hawker Sea Dart

So get Dury to mod away and the Navy can get Typhoons, maybe in late '40 at the earliest: what level of C.A.G. would they be part of? Nobody knows that they will be disappointing as a fighter, but they will end up great at attacking ships with cannon, bombs and rockets!!! That's where this is leading The great hope of a carrier fighter will end up being the strike aircraft! While something else will have to become the fighter.

What would you surgest to replace the Typhoon's then? maybe a Hawker Harrier :rofl: Now that would make the Japanese look twice

Really though, by that time maybe a Corsair from the states?

But in the meantime, what will the Navy operate between now and late '40/early '41? Probably Sea Gladiators and then Hurricanes by '39 which will be a leap forward for British naval aviation. IMHO by the time the Gloucester is ready you would have been better to have gone straight to the Typhoon.

Yes thats what I fear, but it doesn't cost anything to ask the question I'm just hopeul that it can be put into service in 1938

So yes Wolfey, go for those Typhoons - later on they will evolve into Tempests and you might get Sea Furies into service by '44 if you really pull out all the stops!

Well that all depends upon Neville

 

[unmerged(44587)]

Ah! That makes perfect sense now! My fault for taking it a tad too literally!

I guess, (in an echo of IRL) the Typhoons will end up as the carrier strike aircraft, and be superceded in the carrier fighter role by Sea Tempests and then Sea Furies.


Of course, we could always call something the Sea Wolf(e)

 

[SirCliveWolfe]

Ah! That makes perfect sense now! My fault for taking it a tad too literally!

Na bother, I'm always doing that

I guess, (in an echo of IRL) the Typhoons will end up as the carrier strike aircraft, and be superceded in the carrier fighter role by Sea Tempests and then Sea Furies.

Sounds good...

Of course, we could always call something the Sea Wolf(e)

Now that sounds like an exclent idea.

Wolfe's just happy that he has someone with him who can wisped and scribble notes for him.

 

[SirCliveWolfe]

All OOC:

Well, that was certanly informative... perhaps someone can answer or interupt Wolfe and we can continue..

 

[Duritz]

OOC: Umm, let me see if I've followed this conversation correctly:

Sea Addy is a bomber and Wolfey is now fighting with a Gannett while a flocky of Tempests and Tornados approach?!?

No wonder the shipyard are confused, I thought you were there to discuss the carrier design..........

Please finish up quickly and someone PM me the modding that you all (dis)agree on so we can move on with the (real) flyboys post of the 9th.

Cheers,
Dury.

 

[Adaml83]

OOC: Let see if I can get some sense out of this.

We have a couple of options for Fighters- Seafire, Sea Hurricane (based off the Hurricane IIc), and the F.5/34

Dive bomber will be the Skua

Torp- Barracuda

None of the biplane nonsense.

Probably talk to Camm to come up with a design followup to the Hurricane with possibly two designs, one inline, one radial.

Talk to Bristol to develop the best radial engine possible. If necessary we might need to find the best out there now, see the max performance out of it, and tell Bristol to top it. Probably will mean Typhoon -> Sea Fury.

A Typhoon, along with the Firebrand could fufill the strike capability of the future airwings, unless we decide to import a better divebomber. Also the Firefly could work somewhere along the line.

Now I suppose we need a timeline for this.

 

[El Pip]

Both the SeaFire and Sea Hurricane were a bit of a mess. The Spitfire was fundamentally the wrong shape for carrier operations, while the Sea Hurricane was rushed into service. Plus with both of these still under development, and the RAF getting priority for the land based versions, I think we have to rule them out for the moment.

That does leave F.5/34. With a newer engine, not an old Mercury IX from a Gladiator, it would have Zero-esque performance and it has been under development for a couple of years. Hence I think it's about right for the current CAG.

As has been mentioned Skua for dive bomber. For the torpedo I think it has to be Swordfish sadly. Nothing is in development so nothing can be made fast enough. The specification for the Barracuda won't even be issued till next year so I think we have to rule it out. Thus the Improved Carrier CAG should be

F.5/34, Skua and Swordfish

The next model on however could end being mostly Hawkers with the Barracuda thrown in for torpedo work. Something like

Tempest (fighter), Typhoon (strike), and Barracuda.

Or maybe save the Tempest for the group after. But then your into Sea Fury territory. There is also the matter of RAF development and where they want Hawker and the engine makers going, because where they go the FAA pretty much has to follow.

Basically I don't think the FAA can really justify multiple new aircraft and engine developments, modifications of existing designs yes but not whole new aircraft. Now a single project such as F.5/34 or Barracuda would be acceptable, but not redesigning the entire air wing when it's such a low goverment priority.