Better British Aviation 1918-39

The Flamingo/Hertfordshire was faster than the DC3/C47, although marginally shorter ranged.
Even if you only bring development and delivery forward by a year, then you have a pretty solid plane
for Transport command, perhaps with room for improvements or a follow on as the war
continues.

An earlier switch to monoplanes with trainers and transports will probably lead to earlier research
monoplane designs, and greater investment and revenue will mean more money and infrastructure
going into R & D.

Bring the Flamingo forward 2 years because of this, and you'll have a competitor with the DC3 before
the war, with orders and investment already in the bag for improvements and (maybe) the beginnings
of a design for a successor before the war begins.
 
To Flesh Out Post 43...
Phase 2 - 1924-37 - Introduction


I think this is the critical period, firstly because it covers two-thirds of the interwar period and it's also the period where British civil aviation fell far behind technically, i.e. sticking to biplanes, while the Americans pushed ahead with monoplanes with retractable undercarriages and closely cowled engines.

1924 was also the year Imperial Airways was formed (IIRC because state subsidised companies competing between themselves was inefficient), but a lack of money and international politics meant that the imperial air routes were developed at a snails pace. 1937 is the end of the period because it is when the Empire Air Mail Scheme came into operation and British Airways took over Imperial's routes in Europe the year before.

I have also chosen 1924 for the beginning of this phase because it's when the Imperial Airship Scheme began.
 
To Flesh Out Post 43...
Phase 2 - 1924-37 - Airships


I think there are 3 possibilities for this:
  1. The OTL Imperial Airships Scheme happens, but because they spend 4 times as much money on it the result is the construction of at least 8 airships and there's a good chance that it actually comes into operation by 1930 instead of only getting as far as completing the prototypes.
  2. As 4 times as much money is being spent on Civil Aviation 1919-24 in my TL some of that will be going into airships and there is a strong possibility that something like the Burney Scheme is approved early on in that period and is operating by 1924 when the Labour Government nationalises it. The OTL R.100 and R.101 would be prototypes of second generation airships to replace the types that came into service in 1924, but because more infrastructure is in place and because of experience from the first-generation machines they are ready in 1927 instead of 1930.
  3. They put all the money into Imperial Airways and developing better aeroplanes. That would be the best use of the money in the long term. Cool is an expression I dislike, however, I do find the idea of a successful Airship Service serving the Empire and both Americas between the World Wars cool.
 
Maybe with Early Air Warning and Anti Submarine airships too.

Go with the number 2 compromise, remember, it's not rule of cool, it's a butterfly.

:extremelyhappy:
 
I also thought that aircraft of greater range would be needed for the Imperial Air Routes, which would be based on the Handley Page V/1500.

In OTL, the service of the V-1500 was rather quickly curtailed, and the Atlantic was crossed, rather, by a Vickers Vimy. However, you may be right in that use of the Pulverizer would more efficiently spend 4 times the money. It is curious that the Vimy's offspring, the Virginia, filled your 1924-1937 time-span as the backbone of the heavy night bomber force, in the RAF.
 
In OTL, the service of the V-1500 was rather quickly curtailed, and the Atlantic was crossed, rather, by a Vickers Vimy. However, you may be right in that use of the Pulverizer would more efficiently spend 4 times the money. It is curious that the Vimy's offspring, the Virginia, filled your 1924-1937 time-span as the backbone of the heavy night bomber force, in the RAF.
Off the top of my head I think 160 V/1500s were ordered from more than one firm, but I don't know how many were actually built. I think the short RAF service of the four engine V/1500 had a lot to do with it being more expensive than the twin engine aircraft based on the H.P. O/400 and Vimy combined with the minimal funding of the RAF between 1919 and 1934.

I haven't got my Putnams out, but I have a feeling that Handley Page did have a modified V/1500 in Newfoundland in 1919, but Vickers were ready to take off first. If the subsidies result in enough passengers and freight being carried there would have been a point where its better to operate a small number of high capacity aircraft instead of a larger number of smaller capacity aircraft with the same combined capacity.

The RAF's 3 bomber-transport squadrons were still operating a derivative of the Vickers Vimy Commercial when World War II broke out. However, that was a combination of the aircraft built to Specification C.16/28 not being a good enough improvement on the Vimy derivatives and the excessive time it took the Bristol Bombay into production, it was ordered to a 1931 specification (C.26/31) and was ordered into production in 1936 specification (47/36).

The Vickers Vimy Commerical and its successors turned out to be not very commercial. Handley Page did better with its airliners which AFAIK up to the H.P.42 were all based on the O/400 and W series bombers.

I'm jumping the gun, but IOTL the H.P.43 built to C.16/28 was a smaller twin-engine version of the H.P.42. The sole H.P.43 prototype was converted into a monoplane named the H.P.51 for C.26/31, which in turn effectively came the prototype of the H.P.54 Harrow.

ITTL what I want to happen is for the H.P.42 and 43 to be monoplanes in the first place. 40 Monoplane H.P.42s are built for Imperial Airways instead of the 8 OTL H.P.42 biplanes and the 2 Short Scyllas. The RAF meanwhile buys 200 Harrows instead of the OTL Heyford and Fairey Hendon because H.P. submits the Monoplane H.P.43 to Spec. B.19/27 too. The 100 Harrows of OTL are still built bringing the total built to 300. The Harrows built instead of the 62 cancelled Hendons are used to equip the bomber-transport squadrons and the order for 80 Bombays placed with Short & Harland IOTL doesn't happen.
 
Fairey built a long-range monoplane which flew from Cranwell to Karachi in 1928. It's a shame that nothing practical came of it rather than just something to crow about. A problem with a monoplane is field characteristics and wheel brakes. Handley Page did good work with high-lift devises which would help with landing speed. Kurt Tank, working for Rohrbach on monoplane transports, developed wheel brakes to handle the blistering 70 mph landing speeds.
 
I had a skim through my copy of my Putnams on Handley Page...

213 V/1500s were ordered including 3 prototypes from Alliance Aircraft, Beardmore, Graheme-White Aviation, Handley Page and Harland & Wolff including 50 from Handley Page with Napier Lion engines. 63 were actually completed including the prototypes.

The RAF loaned F7140 to Handley Page for an attempt to win the Daily Mail transatlantic crossing prize. The syndicate organising it wanted Raymond Collishaw to be the pilot but he was chosen to command the RAF contingent at Archangel. The aircraft was unloaded at St John's on 12th May 1919 and flew on 8th June, but meanwhile Alcock and Brown who had arrived last made their flight on 14/15 June 1919.

However, J9136 the third prototype was used for a proving flight to India in 1919. While it was there it made a bombing raid on Kabul.

The V/1500 used as the test-bed for the Napier Lion was flown by Keith Park and Sholto Douglas, whoever they were.

It does say that the V/1500 was used for 3 demonstration civil flights, but no details of the proposed civil version.
 
However, J9136 the third prototype was used for a proving flight to India in 1919. While it was there it made a bombing raid on Kabul.

The V/1500 used as the test-bed for the Napier Lion was flown by Keith Park and Sholto Douglas, whoever they were.

It does say that the V/1500 was used for 3 demonstration civil flights, but no details of the proposed civil version.

The bombing raid on Kabul was on the Sultan's harem. All his wives were terrified and ran out on the street. He surrendered.

A V-1500 carried 40 passengers on a half-hour hop. They weighed 6022 pounds. There weren't any windows so it wasn't a sight-seeing trip. I don't even know if they had seats. The next month, that aircraft had a forced landing in a field, with little damage. It was repaired and crashed on take-off, destroyed. There were no details of a civil version because it was too big, expensive and maintenance hoggish to even think of it, until you came along with too much money. It was roughly twice the weight of W8 or Vimy transports, and well more than twice the trouble. It didn't get folding wings because of any naval intentions.
 
The bombing raid on Kabul was on the Sultan's harem. All his wives were terrified and ran out on the street. He surrendered.

A V-1500 carried 40 passengers on a half-hour hop. They weighed 6022 pounds. There weren't any windows so it wasn't a sight-seeing trip. I don't even know if they had seats. The next month, that aircraft had a forced landing in a field, with little damage. It was repaired and crashed on take-off, destroyed. There were no details of a civil version because it was too big, expensive and maintenance hoggish to even think of it, until you came along with too much money. It was roughly twice the weight of W8 or Vimy transports, and well more than twice the trouble. It didn't get folding wings because of any naval intentions.
Did twice the trouble come from having twice as many engines?
 
Did twice the trouble come from having twice as many engines?

Compare empty weight. 8325/17000 lbs. (without termites). Plus, with engines of the era, one or more was bound to give trouble. Better engines were around the corner, but the V-1500 hadn't reached the corner yet. The significant long range flights by Fairey VLR and Wellesley single engine airplanes came somewhat later.
 
Compare empty weight. 8325/17000 lbs. (without termites). Plus, with engines of the era, one or more was bound to give trouble. Better engines were around the corner, but the V-1500 hadn't reached the corner yet. The significant long range flights by Fairey VLR and Wellesley single engine airplanes came somewhat later.
Fair enough.

I still think that it was a pity that it wasn't developed further though. It was called the V/1500 because its 4 RR Eagles produced 1,500hp. The aircraft fitted with Napier Lions had a high cruising speed for the era and at least for experimental purposes I wish there had been a V/2600 with 4 RR Condors. Furthermore I would have liked the Type V to have been followed on by a Type Y in the same way that the Type O was succeeded by the Type W.
 
Just curious, will there be a WWII and Post War follow up to this?
With my track record I doubt that this thread will get much further than the early 1930s. E.g. I didn't finish No Aircraft Carriers And More Battleships For Germany or Fleet Carriers And No Light Fleet Carriers - Effects On The Smaller Navies - Mark 2.
 
To Flesh Out Post 43...
Phase 2 - 1924-37 - Imperial Airways - Routes


IOTL the company was formed on 1st April 1924 on the recommendation of the Hambilng Committee. It started operations in Europe the same year. However, the firm was under capitalized and it grew at a very slow rate. It took over Cairo to Basra from the RAF until 1927. However, it did not extend that route to Karachi and then Delhi until 1929. This line was extended to Calcutta, Rangoon and Singapore during the course of 1933, Brisbane in Australia in December 1934 and Hong Kong in 1936. The line from Cairo to Cape Town was opened in stages 1931-32 and a branch from Khartoum to West Africa opened in 1936.

Thanks to quadrupled government funding, which included building the airports, W/T facilities and meteorological services as well as more generous subsidies to the airlines the predecessors of the Company had done more by 31st March 1924 ITTL than the OTL Imperial Airways did by the end of 1936. That is:
  1. The two firms that became its European Division were flying to every major European capital by 31st March 1924. This was still on the Government's "to do list" in September 1939.
  2. The firm given the job of developing the Far East line began operating from Cairo to Basra in 1921. By 31st March 1924 it had reached Australia and Hong Kong.
  3. The firm given the job of developing the line to South Africa extended operations from Cairo to Cape Town in stages 1921-22 and in 1923 opened the branch from Khartoum to West Africa.
I chose 1937 as the cut off date for this phase because Imperial Airways had its unwanted European routes transferred to British Airways Mk 1 in 1936 and the Empire Air Mail Scheme (EAMS) approved in 1934 came into operation in 1937. ITTL an EAMS is approved in 1924 instead of the OTL Imperial Airship Scheme and it came into operation in 1924.

The real Imperial Airways struggled for the first 12 years of its existence. One of the reasons it took so long to establish the lines to the Far East and South Africa was Indian, Iranian and South African nationalism. Another thing I haven't mentioned yet was that the Italian Government banned Imperial Airways from flying across its territory until 1936. It was a regularly used as a political football the left and right. Its third problem was lack of finance. It was intended to be a "Million Pound monopoly," but only half its shares were ever purchased. Robin Higham who is my main source for this thought that the £2 million spent on the Imperial Airship Scheme would have been much better spent on Imperial Airways.

ITTL Imperial Airways was formed to implement the EAMS, but another of its tasks was to set up a line to South America via Lisbon and Bathurst in the Gambia by 1929, which it achieved on schedule. IOTL the South American line was another route that was still on the "to do list" when the Second World War started. It also extended the West Africa branch of the Cairo to Cape Town line to Bathurst and the Far East line to New Zealand by 1939, both of these rotes were open about 10 years earlier than OTL.

ITTL my intention is to start the joint transatlantic service with Pan Am in 1936, possibly with Supermarine Type 179 "Giant" flying boats.
 
With my track record I doubt that this thread will get much further than the early 1930s. E.g. I didn't finish No Aircraft Carriers And More Battleships For Germany or Fleet Carriers And No Light Fleet Carriers - Effects On The Smaller Navies - Mark 2.

If you need someone to bounce ideas off, just ask. I'd like to see where this goes.
 
Nice to see the airports getting a break. This is a far more significant improvement than it might seem.
As you seem to be the resident expert, how does the following fit in with what happened in OTL?
  1. A centrally planned network of airports in the British Isles;
  2. A programme of concrete runway construction in the UK and along the Imperial Air Routes in the early 1930s. This would officially be an unemployment relief measure, but unofficially be to make the airports useable in all weathers and allow for heavier aircraft to be operated.
 
As you seem to be the resident expert, how does the following fit in with what happened in OTL?
  1. A centrally planned network of airports in the British Isles;
  2. A programme of concrete runway construction in the UK and along the Imperial Air Routes in the early 1930s. This would officially be an unemployment relief measure, but unofficially be to make the airports useable in all weathers and allow for heavier aircraft to be operated.
If the question is "How does it fit in with OTL?", it doesn't. It completely upsets the applecart. OTL, aircraft were designed to fit available airfields covered in fine English grass. The use of the term "English grass" is intended as it is the term I recall used, and not British or UK grass. The Air Ministry spent much time determining specifications for aircraft and calculating performance loss due to short grass field characteristics. They would rather use catapult or rocket assist take-off methods for Manchester bombers, but, OTL, both good runways and assisted take-off methods had been forgotten and neglected since the Government couldn't see funding any improvements whatever. There are problems involved, like who operates civil airports and benefits from the Government shilling. On the bright side, such innovations as monoplanes seem much more likely, and passengers on Imperial flights suffer reduced air-sickness due to improved gust response from reduced wing ares. Things get much better when you have too much money.
 
Top