How wacky or implausible is this? In 1940 needing transports for the Airborne forces demanded by Churchill the RAF are looking for castoff's to use. Some one suggests that the Albermarle then being readied for production could be spared. Someone at the Ministry of aircraft production or Whitworths has a flash of inspiration and decides to commission a design study of a purpose built transport by just changing the fuselage yet use as much existing design and jig as possible. the resultant redesign had the cockpit moved forward to just aft of the front under carriage well. and with the removal of the gun turret the high line of the fuselage was extended aft to the limit of the existing bomb bay, this increased the cargo space and balance the weight of the cockpit being moved forwards. Internal fuselage tanks and other equipment were moved to the bomb bay. for access a ramp was added under the tail from the aft end of the Bombay/floor. A proposal to widen the fuselage was not pursued as it would disrupt the production to much.
There was a suggestion on APOD about that
Without such a plane or access to LL DC-3's they've only got converted Wellington's and Stirling's to flesh out the old Bombay's and the mixture of civil types in Transport Command (if/when it is formed. Without departing from reality at all, just combing the elements of the OTL Albemarle and Ensign we would get a plywood and steel tube, nose wheeled, high wing transport not dissimilar to a DC-3 sized Caribou with a usefully square (~9-10' wide) fuselage.
There's even some chance it might be quite elegant too boot… scary. Call it an Albemarle if need be, although Shane's always liked 'Navigator' for this idea (He's been playing with it for years), we could have 600 of these aircraft with no impact on OTL production of other types before October 41 OTL and while admittedly it reduces the available slack for FFO during and after its OTL production run, as such an aircraft could well be produced in larger than historical numbers (for the Albemarle), it's still minimal for the number of aircraft produced.
The A-W Albemarle has no place as a combat aircraft, yet it was produced with little impact on wider aircraft production by design, making few demands on strategic resources or manufacturing capacity and maximum use of alternatives. As far as we can tell the OTL Albemarle was roughly comparable in weight and performance to the DC-3, its superior performance and heavier empty weight reflecting the fact that it was a bomber with full military equipment. Although Shane's really only saying there's enough meat in an Albemarle to build something the size of a DC-3, he don't mean to imply a steel tube and plywood 'scrap-bin special' is going to compare as a load carrier in terms of payload miles.
Comment by Mark: This is not necessarily so. It will most likely be less efficient in ton mile terms, but will able to carry outsized bulky items up to 8'10" wide and 7'6" tall, and up to 28' long (and later of slightly larger dimensions). All by itself, this is a brand new capability. We also need to recall that such an aircraft with a ramp had long been called for in the PNG gold fields and in the mining industry in India.
Albemarle could be transformed into a transport, say by the substitution of a new fuselage (that is a good option). Rather that a mostly 'new' aircraft designed in the wake of the cancelled OTL Albemarle and of a similar size/production cost might be an attractive proposition for the RAF circa 1940-42. On a pair of Hercules it would be volume limited not weight limited, with a surplus of power for tight fields, Hot/High work or glider towing. It might also be a very convenient aircraft to use a tail ramp. Now, that sounds like hindsight, but it was used on several contemporary German designs, there was a strong demand for such an aircraft in the mining industry and even without one the floor would still be level and at a more convenient height. Twin Pegasus's would be a minimalist alternative, but might still produce a viable aircraft or NOT, dud's have their place in the greater scheme of things too.
Mark notes that the Avro team were developing the York from 1940 on a spare capacity basis. It was never a 'converted Lancaster', it was always a design in its own right, and not a bad one. This example offers a good path for a twin Centaurus/four engined heavy tactical and low-end strategic transport and for Albemarle and Navigator. What has happened in FFO is that the OTL agreement that the UK would not produce transports is a dead duck from POD.
Mark also notes that a flat floor, high wing 'Navigator' is NOT unrealistic. There was a longstanding and widespread demand across the Empire for exactly this sort of machine to move mining equipment, not least at the Wau goldfields.
The basic elements of the Albemarle OTL design allowed for rapid design of a transport aircraft. The wings essentially remained the same on the transport (using the York example), with the nacelles being lengthened to provide stowage for a longer undercarriage. The wings were then raised to the top of a new, boxy fuselage bearing a functional resemblance in cross section to that of the York. This retained a front end generally similar to the original Albemarle, which saved design time and placed both the crew and their accommodation forward. A small galley was placed in the nose for the four man crew (pilot, co-pilot/navigator, aircraft engineer/radio operator, and load master). Aft of where the leading edge met the upper fuselage, however, things would be completely different. The boxy fuselage was 10' wide internally with a height of 9' internally, this section being 31' long before starting to taper in width. Exploiting the original type of high-mounted twin tail, the aft fuselage was fitted with a tapered ramp which could be lowered to the ground. An arrangement is then possible that the ramp, when lowered, brought down with it a tapered wedge of the fuselage sides. When lowered, these two side pieces were then themselves folded outward, giving the ramp a uniform width of 9'. However, a disadvantage of the design was that no object higher than 7'6" could be brought up the ramp without jacking the aircraft up. Later addition of a hydraulic system which allowed the Albemarle to lift its tail by lowering the nose solved this problem. There were also two side doors just under the aft of the wing. This is a flying cargo truck. It would also be useful as a personnel transport, air navigation trainer and aerial ambulance. The Albemarle transport could be fitted as a glider tug.
The second outgrowth of the Albemarle could be Shane's far more elegant Navigator. This would not be a flying truck at all, but an airliner style personnel transport. Again, the general nature of the original Albemarle wings and tail might be retained but that is not essential as Navigator, like Albemarle transport, would not use strategic materials in any quantity.