Alternate Aircraft of Nations
- Thread starter Count of Crisco
- Start date
The RN will get its hands on a heavy freighter with the ability to go anywhere in the world in hours without refueling over the dead bodies of every officer in the RAF over the rank of Flying Officer.
Its okay with all this additional capability Britain can just expand the RN and Royal Marines and bin the 100 year RAF experiment and reduce the Army to a Part time Guards Brigade for state events in London.
Why? What did you think they used for fuel? Senior Service and all that is actually Senior Vampiric Undead Service after all
Well they DO need someplace to 'store' the spare parts and odd-n-sods after allIts okay with all this additional capability Britain can just expand the RN and Royal Marines and bin the 100 year RAF experiment and reduce the Army to a Part time Guards Brigade for state events in London.
Randy
Driftless
Donor
You got me thinking about a twin-engined version of the Wellesly I had seen some years ago:
(from Beyondthesprues.com - a "Whiffy site")
That craft would have also been an interesting plane for long-range maritime work. Maybe modify the panniers for carrying depth charges?
For early British bombers that is a nice looking planeYou got me thinking about a twin-engined version of the Wellesly I had seen some years ago:
(from Beyondthesprues.com - a "Whiffy site")
That craft would have also been an interesting plane for long-range maritime work. Maybe modify the panniers for carrying depth charges?
You got me thinking about a twin-engined version of the Wellesly I had seen some years ago:
(from Beyondthesprues.com - a "Whiffy site")
That craft would have also been an interesting plane for long-range maritime work. Maybe modify the panniers for carrying depth charges?
That would be something that was built as a partner for the Handley Page Harrow or as an alternative to something like the Fairey Hendon. Very much a mid 1930's aircraft obsolete by the start of the war. I could also see a trimotor version being built.
Last edited:
That 2 engine Wellesley reminds me of something.
en.wikipedia.org
Boulton Paul Overstrand - Wikipedia
McPherson
Banned
You got me thinking about a twin-engined version of the Wellesly I had seen some years ago:
(from Beyondthesprues.com - a "Whiffy site")
That craft would have also been an interesting plane for long-range maritime work. Maybe modify the panniers for carrying depth charges?
Get rid of that DRAG, George. the eliminated dead weight and slipstream disruption removed =s 20 knots.That 2 engine Wellesley reminds me of something.
View attachment 657995
Boulton Paul Overstrand - Wikipedia
1937
With the Spanish Civil War raging next door Portugal decides its Aerial defences need upgrading to deter either side from using its airspace. As a result they place an order with Vickers for 48 Venom light fighters.
1938 With a need to replace their obsolete Nimrod fighters and production for the Portuguese contract coming to end the FAA orders 100 Venoms.
With the Spanish Civil War raging next door Portugal decides its Aerial defences need upgrading to deter either side from using its airspace. As a result they place an order with Vickers for 48 Venom light fighters.
1938 With a need to replace their obsolete Nimrod fighters and production for the Portuguese contract coming to end the FAA orders 100 Venoms.
Honest question:. Was the Vickers a better design than the Gloster F5/34? I always liked the lines on the Gloster....
From what I have read they were about on Par with each other. They were the two Best out of that competition.
The Gloster probably had more development potential than the smaller, lighter venom. The Venom seems to be more akin to the first Japanese monoplane fighters, just much better armed.
McPherson
Banned
I don't know. The situation requires clarification and context. The designs were land-based and really no better than an A5M Claude which was a carrier based fighter. I would be most unhappy trying to justify "development" further.
I think your comparison to the Claude is a little unfair. The Gloster was at least 40mph faster than the Claude with 8 machine guns instead of 2. The Claude even had a fixed undercarriage and open cockpit....
McPherson
Banned
The Gloster was very much based off the Gladiator. Also the A5M, I think, could outclimb and outturn the Gloster. As for the Claude being open cockpit? Quite true, but I noticed something.
Mitsubishi A5M,"Claude". In 1934, the Imperial Japanese
Gloster F5/34 K5604 (9905279) Framed Print. Media Storehouse
I see a semi-open cockpit and a stretched fabric over tubes and stringers barrel for the F5/34?
Last edited:
The Gloster was an entirely fresh design, not a monoplane Gladiator. It had a modern stressed skin monocoque fuselage not the traditional cloth covered stringers over a warren girder frame.
McPherson
Banned
I checked. When I'm wrong, I'm wrong (^^^). Still think it is not a good candidate for development.