It was not supposed to be a Fleet Fighter. It was supposed to be able to deal with shadowing reconnaissance and long range bombers over the open ocean. This it could.
Miles Kestrel Naval Fighter.
- Thread starter Peg Leg Pom
- Start date
It was the only fighter on Ark Royal, and the most modern aircraft in the Fleet Air Arm prior to the introduction of the Fulmar. In 1936 it might have passed muster but when actually introduced into service it was already obsolete.
Last edited:
Amazing and outrageous - there is a sleek monoplane trainer in 1933, yet RAF introduced biplane Gauntlet fighter in 1935, and biplane Gladiator fighter in 1937. Oh, boy.
Nope
The RN has to decide it needs a high performance fighter, the Government has to agree that its a separate procurement and that the Fleet ( facing no threat that requires it) takes priority over UK air defence. Which is why the 1939 admiralty wish list was overridden The total embarked compliment of aircraft for the FAA in 1939 ( exc catapult floatplanes) is 190 a/c and fighter command only has 800 pilots.
And just to put thing into perspective by mid 42 Zero and Wildcat defenders had managed to lose 5 of 6 IJN and the USN 2 of 6 fleet carriers, and misc cve/ cvl Fulmar defenders, none at all. Despite goig into much more heavily contested seas.
They already had, which was why they bought the Gladiator which was at the time of the order being made the standard RAF fighter. All this proposal does is change the order to a higher performance aircraft that the RAF has (at that time) decided it doesn't want. Both aircraft need adapting but all in all the change shouldn't delay things by much and the FAA would be much better prepared for Norway and the Mediterranean war in 1940.
Crediting Fulmar alone for Axis not sinking more RN carriers is a foly, as it is forgetting how many merchant ships and other warships were sunk that were supposed to be protected by FAA. Foly is also blaming Zero and Wildcat for losses of their respective carriers.
On the other hand, all of the 3 major sea-borne powers failed to field a real peformer of a fighter in 1941-42, despite the technical possibilities available.
Cryhavoc101
Donor
I don't think anyone is suggesting that the FAA would have more pilots - just better planes than the Skua, Swordfish and Sea Gladiators
And both the RAF and FAA were rapidly expanding at the time
An earlier decision to have a high performance fighter would have resulted in different production requirements earlier which while maybe not changing the number or even aircraft available in 1939 might effect massive changes to the aircraft used by FAA in 1940 and 1941 and not having to rush development of the Sea Hurricane and subsequantly Seafire when it became apparent that a higher performing fighter was required for ops in a littoral environment vs land based twin / triple engined bombers and modern single engined fighters.
I think its fair to say that the FAA Pilots and aircrew performed well with the aircraft they had during that period 39-41, but the aircraft they had did not particularly perform well!
They performed outstandingly well despite the limitations of their aircraft, but how much more could they have done with aircraft worthy of them?
BlondieBC
Banned
Agreed. People too often lump together Ferry Range with Maximum Combat Range with Effective Combat Range.
BlondieBC
Banned
Doesn't mean a lot. The Japanese took what would have been a very aggressive plan if the USA was not cracking the codes. With the USA cracking the codes, the Japanese attacked into well prepared defenses. So for a partially equivalent situation, you could imagine the Germans having crack the UK codes and Enigma being secured. The UK does a major raid against something like Hamburg, but the Germans having prepared defenses with equivalent number planes waiting. UK might well lose more than 4 capital ships. Or for a more equivalent event, have the UK assemble a 4 carrier, 6 BB attack against Singapore in May 1942. But the Japanese know it is coming and have buffed the hell out of the Singapore air defense. In addition, the Japanese have their carriers sitting and waiting in ambush. UK might well lose the fleet.
hipper
Banned
quite a lot better, though it would have to be a political decision to concentrate on Naval air power at the expense of The RAF
Cryhavoc101
Donor
Would it?
Surely a decision to build for arguments sake Seafires for the RN in 1939 (or possibly even earlier - Dowdings Brother 'also Dowding' an Admiral in the Navy and at that period 5th Sea lord would result in increased orders of that aircraft earlier at the expense of for example the Fulmar or other types.
If anything this actual improves the RAFs situation because now FAA Fighter squadrons equipped with Seafire can be used to defend the UK - even if just freeing up units from 13 and 14 fighter command group squadrons and supporting units in the north of the UK to reinforce 11 and 12 groups.
And also having a pool of FAA pilots capable of flying Spitfires who could far more easily be used to reinforce depleted RAF squadrons rather than having to be OCU trained on the type first would be an improvement
And lastly in extremis Seafire is 99+% Spitfire so existing aircraft and stores can be diverted to RAF Fighter command and Production of Seafire can be changed to pure Spitfire relatively easily.
This might not please the Navy - but its raison d'être is ultimately defence of the home islands - and it always put this duty first and once the invasion scare is over aircraft stores and production will revert to the Navy.
IIRC Arthur Dowding in OTL was never 5th Sealord. He did command HMS Furious and had worked in the Air Ministry but after being raised to the rank of Admiral he was basically on the beach and ended his career Commanding HM Dockyard Plymouth Through to the end of the war.
Careful. The ghost of JustLeo will haunt you..
With some of his critycism on Skua I agree, with other I don't.
For example, Skua was about every bit capable a dive bomber as the early Aichi Val, it was introduced some 20 months earlier, and it have had a more modern apperance, with wheels making ditching less of a danger. What Skua lacked was that it was never improved, it never received more powerful engines, so the Dauntless and later Vals went ahead as more capable A/C - there is just so much one can do with less than 900 HP.
Granted, Skua was a lousy fighter.
Cryhavoc101
Donor
I did think to check that before posting and learned the same, but then got distracted (people expecting me to actually do some work on a Friday!!!! The bloody cheek of it!!) and then posted forgetting to correct it!
But still he would have been in the Navy mafia decision making group leading up to the war - it wouldn't take much to make such a change?