What are your country's "if-only" aeroplanes?

AMF · Dec 10, 2007

After the Second World War, there were a number of Germans who speculated along the following lines: our cities would not have been destroyed if only the Messerschmitt Me 262 had entered service earlier / had been used as a fighter instead of as a bomber.
Many Britons say "We would have a much greater aerospace industry if only we had built the TSR 2 (or Hawker P. 1216)", and many Canadians say the same about their aerospace industry and the Avro Canada Arrow.

I am looking for more examples of hypothetically important aeroplanes like this, both civil and military, that would have, in your or other people's opinion, greatly benefited the country in which it was built.
Of course you can cite examples from other countries than your own, too. No ASB please ("if only we had the Super Hornet at Pearl Harbor"), cool looks of the plane are not enough, either.
Thank you very much in advance for any contribution!

The Dean · Dec 10, 2007

The single most significant aircraft the Miles M-52 The Miles M52 supersonic research aircraft, was within a few months of flying as the world’s first aircraft to ‘break the sound barrier’ when the Government cancelled the contract. Various explanations for the cancellation from official sources were contradictory and conjecture by ‘aviation experts’ over the years did little to clarify the confusion. Even in the late 1990s, when official papers became available under the ‘50 year rule’, in the Minutes of the Government Committee that dealt the fatal blow to British aviation, and Miles Aircraft and Frank Whittle in particular, the ‘facts’ are surprisingly missing.

Here is a picture of a scaled down remote controlled prototype that was dropped from a Mosquito in 1948 and flown at 1,000mph by it's controller in the Mosquito.

Notice the fully moveable tailplane later used on the Bell X-1 and the North American F-86 Sabre.

Admiral Brown · Dec 10, 2007

Well, I think it would be the Pulqui II (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FMA_IAe_33_Pulqui_II). I mean, it wouldn't have changed much, because it wouldn't have been used in the field anyway, as we weren't involved in any war till 1982. But, being a jet plane designed and produced in the country, in 1953 (!), it would still have been something important.

Thande · Dec 10, 2007

I've always had a soft spot for the Saunders-Roe SR.53

And its never built big brother, the SR.117 rocket interceptor.

rcduggan · Dec 10, 2007

the Flying Wedge comes to mind

and also the Bat-bombers that would win the war for us.

Mike Stearns · Dec 10, 2007

The Arrow

That was a danm cool airplane.

roastpuff · Dec 10, 2007

Mike Stearns said:
The Arrow

That was a danm cool airplane.

Damn straight. Canadian MiG-31, twenty years ahead of the MiG-31's introduction.

Heck, it'd still be flying today, I bet you. A MkV Arrow, anyone?

general_tiu · Dec 11, 2007

Yeah. How about the Centennial of the Philippines?

Admiral Canaris · Dec 11, 2007

The JAS 39 Gripen. If we'd been able to sell it for a profit, we'd still be able to afford a Defence Force...

seraphim74 · Dec 11, 2007

PZL TS-16 Grot
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PZL_TS-16_Grot
If only Soviets let us build our own combat planes... After some modernization we would have now a sensitive training plane for our pilots. TS-11 Iskra was good, but its time is definitely over.
Besides, a light, supersonic combat-training plane build in the on of 60s could have been qute successful on international market.

Hendryk · Dec 11, 2007

In 1940, France had two really good planes that were either in the process of being deployed or rolling off the assembly lines, and who, had they been available in greater numbers, would have made the Luftwaffe's job a hell of a lot more difficult (though it's an open question whether that alone would have been enough to change the German offensive's outcome). They were respectively the Dewoitine D-520 and the Bloch MB-155:

juanml82 · Dec 11, 2007

Admiral Brown said:
Well, I think it would be the Pulqui II (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FMA_IAe_33_Pulqui_II). I mean, it wouldn't have changed much, because it wouldn't have been used in the field anyway, as we weren't involved in any war till 1982. But, being a jet plane designed and produced in the country, in 1953 (!), it would still have been something important.

Not only that plane, but there were also a bunch of nice prototypes over the following years witch never entered production as there was no budget to make them (the IA35 IIRC for instance). Overall, I think that for Argentina (as many other contries) it wasn't just a matter of a particular aircraft but an overall better support for the military aircraft industry, witch could have ended up developing in a similar way as Brazilian Embraer - witch is now the world's third aircraft manufacturer, behind Boening and Airbus

Lord Insane · Dec 11, 2007

Admiral Canaris said:
The JAS 39 Gripen. If we'd been able to sell it for a profit, we'd still be able to afford a Defence Force...

Well, we built it anyway, but Sweden quite simply doesn't have the political clout to aid in selling. Most countries would either buy from the USA or from the Soviet Union/Russia.
Of course, we do not have the industrial capacity to build enough in any case.
Come to think of it, what does this mean for Sweden's economy and defence industry in Superpower Empire: China?

Hendryk · Dec 11, 2007

LordInsane said:
Come to think of it, what does this mean for Sweden's economy and defence industry in Superpower Empire: China?

Ah, I'm afraid I'll have to apologize to admirers of Swedish aircraft on this one. While Version 1.0 of my TL did have China using licence-produced Saab fighters throughout the second half of the 20th century, I have since then revised the Chinese domestic R&D capabilities upwards. At the moment post-WW2 aircraft-related issues are still in a state of flux, but a history of the Chinese Air Force (in my TL, that is) will be released soon which will address them.

This, however, does not come from a change of heart as far as Saab planes are concerned. I still think they're great both technically and aesthetically.

Derek Jackson · Dec 11, 2007

Had the original design been a bit better to avoid metal fatigue might the De Haveland Comet have given the UK a long term lead in jet Civil Aviation?

Thande · Dec 11, 2007

Derek Jackson said:
Had the original design been a bit better to avoid metal fatigue might the De Haveland Comet have given the UK a long term lead in jet Civil Aviation?

It still had the issue of being an order of magnitude smaller than its American competitors...

Dan1988 · Dec 11, 2007

The Lockheed L-2000 and the Boeing 2707.

AMF · Dec 11, 2007

Thank you very much, everyone, for your contributions so far!

fhaessig · Dec 11, 2007

Not sure if that counts as it's not properly an AEROplane, but...

Hermes

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hermes_(shuttle)

For WWII vintage, I'd say the Arsenal VG-33 to 39 ( fighter with 20mm gun + 4 machine guns, speed 558 ( VG-33), 590 ( VG-36 ) or 625 ( VG-39 ) kph in early 1940 )

merlin · Dec 11, 2007

In reply to Hendryk:
Sure the Dewoitine D.520 & Bloch MB-155'S were good aircraft - especially having canon(s), but the quantum jump would have been to have had the development of the latter speeded up. That is the Bloch MB-157, with a 'cleaner' airframe and a Gnome-Rhome 14R-4 engine - giving 1,700 hp at 26,250ft. The prototypes components, prior to assembly, were en-route to Poitiers, when they were captured by a German column on June 9, 1940. It wasn't until March 1942 that it first flew (minus the armament), performance - 441 mph at 25,750 ft!!
How different the French Air Force would've been in '41!?