Modified WW2 aircraft

I would like to have seen RR Derwents and then Nenes bolted onto British piston engined bombers like this Lancastrian with the outer Merlins replaced with Nenes.

800px-Avro_Nene_Lancastrian_VH742_Coventry_06.54.jpg
 
Agreed Dean, a jet hybrid Lancaster would have been interesting if introduced into service before wars end. I could see it carrying out special ops with 617sqn or perhaps as a pathfinder, or even a high speed recce type (if its performance was improved enough). I've always wondered why more piston types weren't modified to fly with jet engines as interim types. Even the single seat, single engined fighter types might have formed the basis for a new jet fighter.

Interesting that Justleo mentions the Miles M20 because that was also on my list and in the same scenarios that he mentions. I had read that it was quite a handy wee fighter, quite fast and very manouverable. I could see it operating effectively from carriers and in Malaya with the RAF. Didn't know that Winkle had panned it though.

Here's a question. What, if the RAF had decided to axe the typhoon because of it's many teething troubles, might they have used as a standard fighter bomber instead? Could the Hurricane have been developed much further? I'm thinking about a strengthened airframe, more powerful engine (Merlin 66?), a wing capable of carrying 2 or 4 Hispanos and 4 brownings as well as underwing bombs or rockets. perhaps a cut down rear fuselage to improve visibility. I can see this Hurricane redesign taking shape quite quickly and making its mark on cicuses and rhubarbs in 1942.
 
The Tornado/Typhoon/Tempest/Fury family were the progression of the Hurricane moving from mixed metal, wood and fabric construction to all metal. In fact the Fury was even developed into the gas turbine powered Hawk. Sir Sidney Camm's designs were never going to be dropped by Britain and eventually they resulted in the Harrier.

The sticking point was always engines, it would have been interesting to see more lightweight machines such as the Martin Baker MB5 developed and gas turbines pushed into service sooner.
 
Agreed Dean, a jet hybrid Lancaster would have been interesting if introduced into service before wars end. I could see it carrying out special ops with 617sqn or perhaps as a pathfinder, or even a high speed recce type (if its performance was improved enough). I've always wondered why more piston types weren't modified to fly with jet engines as interim types. Even the single seat, single engined fighter types might have formed the basis for a new jet fighter.

Interesting that Justleo mentions the Miles M20 because that was also on my list and in the same scenarios that he mentions. I had read that it was quite a handy wee fighter, quite fast and very manouverable. I could see it operating effectively from carriers and in Malaya with the RAF. Didn't know that Winkle had panned it though.

Here's a question. What, if the RAF had decided to axe the typhoon because of it's many teething troubles, might they have used as a standard fighter bomber instead? Could the Hurricane have been developed much further? I'm thinking about a strengthened airframe, more powerful engine (Merlin 66?), a wing capable of carrying 2 or 4 Hispanos and 4 brownings as well as underwing bombs or rockets. perhaps a cut down rear fuselage to improve visibility. I can see this Hurricane redesign taking shape quite quickly and making its mark on cicuses and rhubarbs in 1942.

Ramjet/Piston Engined Hybrid aircraft might have been possible during WW2, in that the Royal Aircraft Establishment (RAE for short) did some limited experiments with modified Spitfires/Mustangs using a prototype Ramjet, or as they called them at the time, Athodyd's, mounted in a modified radiator housing...
During tests, they found although the RAE duct added some 40-50 mph to the aircraft's speed, but the fuel consumption rocketed as a result...
As for a high speed, high altitude Recce aircraft, a modified Westland Welkin, with Derwents/Nene's replacing the Merlins...? If this had ever been adopted, then the RAF might have had the equivalent of Bell's X-16 design, some 10-20 years earlier...?
 
Ramjet/Piston Engined Hybrid aircraft might have been possible during WW2, in that the Royal Aircraft Establishment (RAE for short) did some limited experiments with modified Spitfires/Mustangs using a prototype Ramjet, or as they called them at the time, Athodyd's, mounted in a modified radiator housing...
During tests, they found although the RAE duct added some 40-50 mph to the aircraft's speed, but the fuel consumption rocketed as a result...
As for a high speed, high altitude Recce aircraft, a modified Westland Welkin, with Derwents/Nene's replacing the Merlins...? If this had ever been adopted, then the RAF might have had the equivalent of Bell's X-16 design, some 10-20 years earlier...?

The Hawk developed from the Tempest/Fury was a straightforward grafting of a Nene into the airframe. I think a simple fitting of Turbines to a Mosquito would have been best for the recce role, I think it was done experimentally. Vikings the civil airliner version of the Wellington had them fitted and it was both fast and had a reasonable range. There were Lancaster/Lincoln derivatives fitted with four turbines in fact the civilian version was the worlds first jet airliner. The could do London to Paris in 40 minutes or so.
 
The Fury shared no components with the Tempesr V, and the Sea Hawk was totally different. The Viking was all metal monocoque and the Wellington was geodetic and rag. De Havilland designed the Mossie for Merlins and wouldn't fit Griffons, let alone jets. The M-B 5 was fairly large. No attempt to turbinize conventional aircraft was successful. However, had Whittle's original proposal been accepted by the Air Ministry in 1929 and a relationship with Stanley Hooker and Rolls-Royce been nurtured, substantial timeline modification would have been made. Had James Martin worked for an acceptable aircraft production company instead of his own, some examples of his genius might have seen service. Except that he didn't like vertical fins. Fortunately, he ended up making ejection seats instead. I have so many WI's up the w(how do you spell "wazoo") that I'm constipated. Bye.
 
The Fury shared no components with the Tempesr V, and the Sea Hawk was totally different. .

Quoted from the History of the Sea Hawk on "Thunder and Lightnings" here.

While Hawker Aircraft Ltd. was introducing their Sea Fury prop-driven naval fighter in 1944, they began to consider how to apply the new jet-engine technology to the Fury design. Rolls-Royce had just introduced a new engine, the B.41 (to be named the Nene), that had adequate thrust to propel the big Fury airframe, and in November of 1944, Hawker provided a preliminary concept of a B.41-powered Fury to the British government, with the designation P.1035.
The design team, working under Sir Sydney Camm, removed the Centaurus radial engine from the nose of the Fury, moved the bubble canopy as far forward as possible, and put the Rolls engine in the middle of the aircraft, with intakes alongside the fuselage and exhaust as a tailpipe going straight out the back. After a little more thought, the Hawker engineers came up with a follow-on proposal, designated the P.1040, in December, 1944; the new design had a major refinement in that the straight tailpipe was replaced with a split tailpipe, with each outlet in the wing root; this scheme meant the wing root had to be thickened, and so the intakes were placed in the wing roots as well. This layout reduced the amount of ducting and allowed fuel to be stored both fore and aft of the engine, preserving the aircraft's center of gravity as fuel was consumed. Avoiding having a long tailpipe also meant avoiding any thrust loss effects which were keenly felt on the earlier lower powered jet engine designs.
vp401firstflight.jpg

P.1040 VP401 lifting off on her first flight; unknown origin
The Fury's distinctive elliptical wing was abandoned for one with straight edges (to simplify manufacturing) and the tailplane was raised to allow it to clear the jet exhaust. The new design also had tricycle landing gear - the first Hawker aircraft to do so; it no longer looked very much like a Fury. Armament was specified as four 20-mm Hispano Mark 5 cannon. The P.1040 was intended for RAF use. Government interest, however, was mild; the war would clearly be over before long, and both the RAF and the Royal Navy had other jet fighter designs either flying or in the works. Nonetheless, despite the end of the war, in October 1945 Camm ordered the construction of a prototype.
By this time, RAF interest had disappeared completely - their air planners believed that their latest Meteors would be the hottest thing in the air for the foreseeable future - and Hawker Aircraft, faced with massive cancellations of orders for their prop fighters, hastily modified the P.1040 design for carrier operation and submitted the proposal to naval planners in January, 1946.

I won't bother answering all of the other points but I could back up all of my other statements if required.
 
The P.1035 was based on the Fury. The P.1040 became the Sea Hawk and some sources say it no longer looks like a Fury.
 
What about conversion of prop fighters to jet power, ala the Yak-17? The P-51 could be given a similar treatment.
yak-17.jpg



I'm partial to the turboprop modification to the P-51 turning it into the Piper PA-48 COIN aircraft. The Soviets could've picked up the idea and put a turboprop on their Il-10 Shturmovik.

10379814031244289987.jpg
 
Last edited:
I think the P51 was to become the original straight wing North American Fury (there's that name again), and then the swept wing P86 Sabre. The P47 was also developed for turbine use, at least on the drawing boards and I suppose that concept became the P84.
Another 'what if'; the P82 twin Mustang as a twin engined jet fighter, but that's for another war isn't it.
I have to say I love the early Hawker jets, the P1081, 1052 and 1040 just looked right. It's a shame the Fleet Air Arm didn't have the Sea Hawk in Korea, or even a swept wing, proto Hunter. Hawker got the post war jet scene so right and Supermarine, sadly, seemed to get it so wrong. How did they persuade Pakistan to buy the Attacker?:confused:
I agree about the Hurricane not being a good development basis for a day fighter after 1940/41 but I was thinking about a pure ground attack fighter with bombs and later rocket projectiles. I think some further development could have been carried out in that direction if the Typhoon had failed to enter large scale service. With it's record of killing pilots through its design defects that was a strong likelihood in late 1941, but Wing Commander Paul Richey championed the aircrafts strength and helped bring the Typhoon into full service. I can definitely see my Hurribomber being a more potent version than the one that continued combat ops right through, almost to the wars' end.
 
A turboprop Sturmovik, that would have been interesting. I can imagine quite a lot of them in service through the 1950s and perhaps later with minor air forces. Very nice, it would have looked and sounded amazing and would have been effective in COIN operations. Although most insurgents tended to be communist backed so perhaps it would have to switch sides.:p
 
Here's another one since we seem to be inching towards the jet age. A friend of mine liked the idea of a Canberra pure night fighter as an interim 1950s type. But I think it would have been so effective for long range North Sea patrols, or even intruder ops that it might have remained in service alongside the Javelin in the 1960s. His choice would have been to fit the American B57 style tandem canopy coupled with the BI(8)s belly gun pack and possibly firestreak missiles. It would be 'tuned' for fast scrambles and high rate of climb and good high altitude performance. I always liked the idea.
 
Top