BBC 4 tonight. Jet. When Britain Ruled the Skies
Discussion
Eric Mc said:
I am right. The Air Ministry did not specify anything about the design of the fighter requirement apart from the fact that it had to be a fighter aircraft and it had to carry 8 machine guns.
I wasn't talking about only fighters. They had specs for bombers too. But I think the specifications must have said a little more than simply '8x .303 please' printed big on half a page of foolscap...Eric Mc said:
I am right. The Air Ministry did not specify anything about the design of the fighter requirement apart from the fact that it had to be a fighter aircraft and it had to carry 8 machine guns.
Apart from the other two stipulated requirements of being a monoplane design and be powered by the RR PV-12....... 
I didn't think that they were stipulated in the government requirement - but it was natural that this would be the route taken by anybody wanting to build a "modern" fighter.
The Spitfre evolved out of the failed Goshawk powered F7/30 fighter - the specification which was met eventually by a biplane, the Gloster Gladiator.
The Gladiator entered service with the RAF in 1937, barely a year before the much more advanced Spitfires and Hurricanes - which shows that biplanes were still looked on as viable fighters right to 12 months ahead of the introduction of the new monoplanes.
Aviation was progressing so rapidly in the mid 1930s that the specifications being set by governments were obsolete by the time the aircraft entered service. You could even argue that the 8 gun fighter (which seemed so impressive in 1936) was already obsolete by 1940.
The Spitfre evolved out of the failed Goshawk powered F7/30 fighter - the specification which was met eventually by a biplane, the Gloster Gladiator.
The Gladiator entered service with the RAF in 1937, barely a year before the much more advanced Spitfires and Hurricanes - which shows that biplanes were still looked on as viable fighters right to 12 months ahead of the introduction of the new monoplanes.
Aviation was progressing so rapidly in the mid 1930s that the specifications being set by governments were obsolete by the time the aircraft entered service. You could even argue that the 8 gun fighter (which seemed so impressive in 1936) was already obsolete by 1940.
I loved the bit about the ejector seat where the guy strolls up casually smoking a cigarette as if it was no big deal prior to being catapulted into the air ! Health and safety would not allow it today. It also shows you how cheap life was in that era to even consider it bearing in mind it was relatively new technology.
Another interesting part for me was when the former air crew member remarked the vulcan had the typical Avro smell- a mixture of hydraulic fluid,fuel and vomit ! Anyone on here been inside the Vulcan at Bruntingthorpe ?
Another interesting part for me was when the former air crew member remarked the vulcan had the typical Avro smell- a mixture of hydraulic fluid,fuel and vomit ! Anyone on here been inside the Vulcan at Bruntingthorpe ?
testosterone said:
Anyone on here been inside the Vulcan at Bruntingthorpe ?
There isn't a Vulcan at Bruntingthorpe.......?However, I have been inside XM607, the Black Buck #1 Vulcan, back in 1982, a few months after it came back from Ascension Island, and yes, most aircraft of that generation had s distinctive odour when in service.
Eric Mc said:
The Gladiator entered service with the RAF in 1937, barely a year before the much more advanced Spitfires and Hurricanes - which shows that biplanes were still looked on as viable fighters right to 12 months ahead of the introduction of the new monoplanes.
Aviation was progressing so rapidly in the mid 1930s that the specifications being set by governments were obsolete by the time the aircraft entered service. You could even argue that the 8 gun fighter (which seemed so impressive in 1936) was already obsolete by 1940.
The last RAF Gladiators were still in front line roles in 1941, And by 1943 the Gloster Meteor was flying. So the monoplane piston fighter had a very brief heyday that just happened to coincide with WW2.Aviation was progressing so rapidly in the mid 1930s that the specifications being set by governments were obsolete by the time the aircraft entered service. You could even argue that the 8 gun fighter (which seemed so impressive in 1936) was already obsolete by 1940.
Dr Jekyll said:
Eric Mc said:
The Gladiator entered service with the RAF in 1937, barely a year before the much more advanced Spitfires and Hurricanes - which shows that biplanes were still looked on as viable fighters right to 12 months ahead of the introduction of the new monoplanes.
Aviation was progressing so rapidly in the mid 1930s that the specifications being set by governments were obsolete by the time the aircraft entered service. You could even argue that the 8 gun fighter (which seemed so impressive in 1936) was already obsolete by 1940.
The last RAF Gladiators were still in front line roles in 1941, And by 1943 the Gloster Meteor was flying. So the monoplane piston fighter had a very brief heyday that just happened to coincide with WW2.Aviation was progressing so rapidly in the mid 1930s that the specifications being set by governments were obsolete by the time the aircraft entered service. You could even argue that the 8 gun fighter (which seemed so impressive in 1936) was already obsolete by 1940.
It was only the urgency of war that brought forward the jet engine development in so short a space of time.
Eric Mc said:
I always get the impression that Westland weren't that interested in developing the Rotodyne as they inherited the project when they were forced into a merger with Fairey by the government.
I've just been reading Gibbings' book on the Rotodyne; he worked on the project right up to cancellation, as far as he's concerned Westlands did nothing to hinder development, even keeping the project team intact. The fact Westland cancelled their own heavy lift helicopter project while continuing the Rotodyne is notable.Far more than in the case of TSR2, this is the government pulling the plug on a commercially viable product, with orders in the pipeline and several million invested already. Kaman were set to build them under licence in the US, which at a stroke eliminated two of the major failings of UK firms seeking orders across the pond; the preference of american firms to buy american, and the limitations on production speed caused by not having space to create new assembly lines quickly. An order of a dozen from BEA and or the RAF would have given Westland the chance to take firm orders and actually start building aircraft.
Edited by hidetheelephants on Sunday 13th April 19:31
Simpo Two said:
Eric Mc said:
You could even argue that the 8 gun fighter (which seemed so impressive in 1936) was already obsolete by 1940.
As bombers became more armoured, yes. Why were we late adopters of cannon?hidetheelephants said:
Were we though? The RAF issued a requirement for cannon armed fighters in 1935, but the winning bid was the Westland Whirlwind which was hamstrung by its crap engine. On paper it's a pretty good design, if the Peregrine hadn't been such a dog it might have had more success.
It was a good design in reality as long as the engines kept running. It's just that only about 120 were built so they were all basically release 1.0 with no proper development.hidetheelephants said:
Simpo Two said:
Eric Mc said:
You could even argue that the 8 gun fighter (which seemed so impressive in 1936) was already obsolete by 1940.
As bombers became more armoured, yes. Why were we late adopters of cannon?The early marks of Beaufighter also had the drum fed cannon, which had to be changed in flight by the second crewman. A far from easy task in the Beaufighter 1F nightfighters......!!
It wasn't until Martin-Baker had succesfully developed a belt-fed design as per the German MG-FF that we were able to start producing wing cannon equipped fighters. A handful of these cannon armed Spits actually saw service towards the end of the BoB, so we weren't all that far behind.
Eric Mc said:
Excellent stuff chaps.
What is the name of Gibbing's book?
It's imaginatively named 'Fairey Rotodyne'. What is the name of Gibbing's book?
A good read and quite comprehensive considering how niche it is.
aeropilot said:
A handful of these cannon armed Spits actually saw service towards the end of the BoB, so we weren't all that far behind.
But they were only introduced because it was difficult to shoot down modern bombers with rifle calibre bullets - and even when they were trialled, it was a struggle to get them working in thin Spitfire wings. By contrast Harry Hun had them fitted as standard at the outset. A year is a long time in war.Simpo Two said:
By contrast Harry Hun had them fitted as standard at the outset. A year is a long time in war.
The German MGFF was a derivative of the Oerlikon cannon. As such it had a relatively slow rate of fire and a pitiful muzzle velocity when compared to the Hispano. Indeed, despite claims to the contrary, the Bf 109E armament was about equal to that of the Spitfire I/II (in terms of weight of fire per second).The Hispano had problems initially when fitted to the Spitfire owing to flex in the wing affecting the drum magazine feed. This was fixed by the advent of the Mark Vb.
With the advent of the belt fed set up in the MkVc the Hispano came of age.
Dr Jekyll said:
Eric Mc said:
The Gladiator entered service with the RAF in 1937, barely a year before the much more advanced Spitfires and Hurricanes - which shows that biplanes were still looked on as viable fighters right to 12 months ahead of the introduction of the new monoplanes.
Aviation was progressing so rapidly in the mid 1930s that the specifications being set by governments were obsolete by the time the aircraft entered service. You could even argue that the 8 gun fighter (which seemed so impressive in 1936) was already obsolete by 1940.
The last RAF Gladiators were still in front line roles in 1941, And by 1943 the Gloster Meteor was flying. So the monoplane piston fighter had a very brief heyday that just happened to coincide with WW2.Aviation was progressing so rapidly in the mid 1930s that the specifications being set by governments were obsolete by the time the aircraft entered service. You could even argue that the 8 gun fighter (which seemed so impressive in 1936) was already obsolete by 1940.
And mega lucky not to have been shipped back in Glorious.
(makes me mega lucky too I suppose)
perdu said:
As an armourer during WWll my dad was lucky enough to have been working on Gladiators during the Norway campaign.
And mega lucky not to have been shipped back in Glorious.
A a boy I visted Hendon and clearly recall a chunk of Gladiator that had been recovered from the bottom of the (frozen) lake from which they operated. You father may well have worked on it/them. And mega lucky not to have been shipped back in Glorious.
It is sobering to ponder that we thought a handful of Gladiators might have stopped the German invasion of Norway, but we still had many lessons to learn.
Aha isn't the internet wonderful - here it is! https://www.flickr.com/photos/petercookuk/10493305...
Ginetta G15 Girl said:
The German MGFF was a derivative of the Oerlikon cannon. As such it had a relatively slow rate of fire and a pitiful muzzle velocity when compared to the Hispano. Indeed, despite claims to the contrary, the Bf 109E armament was about equal to that of the Spitfire I/II (in terms of weight of fire per second).
I did seen an argument, I don't know how valid. That if shooting at fighters machine guns had an advantage because on a small agile target rate of fire was more important, giving more chance of getting hits. But against bombers that were relatively easy to hit but could soak up dozens of machine gun bullets and keep flying, it was shell size that mattered.This would explain why the Mustang escort fighters stuck with 6 x 0.5 inch guns
I also read that the Germans estimated that shooting down a B17 typically took 3 hits from a 30mm cannon, 20 from a 20mm, or 200 from a machine gun.
This would
Gassing Station | Boats, Planes & Trains | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff