Successful Supermarine Scimitar

What would it take to make the Supermarine Scimitar a successful naval fighter? Objective is to replace the Venom and skip entirely the Sea Vixen as FAA fighters, with all production going to the Scimitar.

Supermarine-Scimitar-F1.jpg


First off, we need to get the Scimitar faster. I suggest making the mods from the supersonic Supermarine 545 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supermarine_545

Next, we need to focus on the Scimitar for the Audacious class carriers, or make it safer (slower) for the smaller Illustrious class.

And the aircraft needs to be safer, with shattering canopy for ejection, and means to overcome this...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q9Q9a3XEl04
 
Last edited:
First of all, the Scimitar in the photo is missing the main gear doors, and more importantly, the horizontal tailplane.

The Supermarine 545 may or may not have been at all supersonic, probably not. Joe Smith didn't have great luck, or technological wherewithall to design jet airplanes, and trans-sonics had him stumped. The crescent wing was borrowed from HP and was mostly an affectation, IMHO.

The aircraft had to be made to stop leaking every fluid put into it, and over-all component reliability had to be improved.

To replace Sea Vixen, additional components and crew have to be added.

To achieve supersonic speeds, Smith would have to start reading some important foreign papers by Whitcomb, Kuchemann, et al.
 
Even if it was supersonic and safe it would need a radar for it to make the Sea Vixen superfluous.

The problem with trhe Sea Vixen isn't that there is something wrong with the aircraft, but that it took 8 years to reach service in the most dynamic period of jet aircraft development ever. If it had entered service in 1956 like the Javelin then it would be considered awesome, particularly if paired with the supersonic SR177 in CAGs.
 
It might be quite easy...

In the 1950s Supermarine was developing a two-seat all-weather-fighter version of the Scimitar for the FAA. However, the firm was building the prototype when the project was cancelled as part of the 1954 Defence Review, which also killed the Hawker P.1083 and Supermarine Type 545.

At about the same time the Admiralty decided to have the DH.110 developed into the Sea Vixen to Specification N.139.

So find a reason for the Royal Navy to continue with the two-seat Scimitar instead of the DH.110.
 
Here is the entry about if from Page 380 of Putnams Supermarine Aircraft since 1914 by C.F. Andrews and E.B. Morgan.

One aircraft, XH451, ordered as a Devloped Scimitar to specification NA/38 from Vickers Ltd under contract 6/Air/11268/CB.5(b) dated 23rd September 1954 This was to have been a two-seat version FAW (Fighter All Weather) Type 556 fitted with Ferranti Air Pass radar and guided weapons. Afer a mock-up was made work was suspended on 24th April 1955, and it was officially cancelled on 25th July 1955, due to a production order for the two-seat D.H.110.
Norman Friedman writing in British Carrier Aviation said this about the two-seat Scimitar.

However, one Development Scimitar (XH451), a two-seat all-weather fighter (FAW), was ordered on 23 September 1954 to NA38. It would have been fitted with Ferranti Airpass radar and with guided missiles, and it would have been area-ruled, with new afterburning engines. Work on the mock-up was suspended on 27 April 1955, and the project was cancelled on 25 July 1955. There was just not enough money for two ongoing two-seat fighters. The Sea Vixen, the specialised all-weather fighter, was further along, and it had a higher priority. The two-seat Scimitar was justified partially as a strike bomber, but that project was killed in favour of the much superior Buccaneer.
 
A fistful of Scimitar developments

According to the Putnams book on Supermarine aircraft more than a score of Scimitar variants were studied. Here is the list...

Type 505 - none built a Type 508 without undercarriage
Type 508 - Type 505 with undercarriage - XV133
Type 522 - N.9/47 - no details of engines - Strike aircraft
Type 525 - N.9/47 3rd P - 2 Avon - XV138 developed into Type 544
Type 526 - F.3/48 - 2 Avon - Type 525 with swept back wing
Type 529 - N.9/47 Developed - 2 Avon RA.3 - XV136
Type 537 - N.9/47 - 2 Avon - Strike
Type 539 - N.9/47 - 2 Avon - Trainer and Variant designs
Type 544 - Scimitar F1 - Avon - N.113D and production
Type 555 - N.9/47 3rd (P) N113P - 2 Avon - N113P with method lift augmentation
Type 556 - 544 Development - 2 Avon RA.7R - DH110 competitor with Red Dean AAMs
Type 558 - N113P Mk 2 - 2 Avon RA.24 - Project
Type 560 - Scimitar F Mk 1 - 2 Avon RA.24 - 51st production Type 544 de-navalised
Type 561 - Scimitar Development - 2 Avon RA.24 - Low-level atomic bombers
Type 562 - Naval Scimitar - 2 Avon RA.24 - 101st aircraft single-seater
Type 563 - Scimitar for Swiss Air Force - 2 Avon RA.24 - 143rd aircraft two seater
Type 564 - Naval Scimitar - 2 Gyron Junior PS43 - two-seat Type 563 developed
Type 565 - Scimitar for RAF with 2 Avon RA.24 - single and two seat de-navalised strike
Type 566 - Naval Scimitar with 2 Avon RA.24 - single and two seat naval strike with Sperry control system
Type 567 - Naval Scimitar with 2 Avon RA.24 - single and two seat naval
Type 572 - Scimitar for RAF, 2 Avon RA.24 – de-navalised tactical reconnaissance
Type 574 - Scimitar with 2 Avon RA.24
Type 575 - Scimitar for RCAF
Type 576 - Supersonic Scimitar, 2 Avons and one DH Spectre rocket motor - Mixed Power Interceptor

N.9/47 refers to Specification N.9/47 the British government specification that XV133, 136 and 138 were built to.

The Type 526 was a RAF version to Specification F.3/48 that the Hawker Hunter was built for the RAF.

I presume N113P Mk 2 means a Scimitar F Mk 2 to Specification N.113P (for production) as Spec. N.113D (for development) was for the 3 Type 544 prototypes and N.113P was the production specification for the Mk 1. It could also mean there was a Spec. N.113P2 for a Mk 2 version.
 
One wonders how Supermarine would have done postwar had Mitchell lived. Best I can tell, Supermarine basically had two successful aircraft lines; the Spitfire and all its derivatives; and the Walrus and its derivatives. The latter, often forgotten, was one of the most successful amphibian aircraft used on battleships and cruisers, ideal for nasty weather ops in the North Atlantic.

So, Mitchell lives on in good health, perhaps never being replaced by Joseph Smith, the designer of the post-war Attacker, Swift and Scimitar jets. One likes to think we'd see something truly amazing from the father of Spitfire, though expectations may be disappointed.
 
IOTL the Scimitar began as a straight wing aircraft with no undercarriage to be launched on a trolley and land on the projected flexible deck, which was being tested at about the time Specification N.9/47 was issued.

I think it would have helped if what became the Scimitar had been designed with swept wings and a conventional undercarriage from the start.

All the British fast jet projects of the 1950s might have taken less time to develop and been more successful if the Miles M.52 hadn't been cancelled.
 
I visited the USS Intrepid museum in New York this past week and was surprised not to see the museum's Supermarine Scimitar, shown below on the ship from a 2006 visit. Does anyone know what happened to it?

xd220-newyork-060527.jpg
 
Moved to the Empire State Aerosciences Museum, Glenville, NY.
Thanks. Shucks, outside of Concorde, it was the only British-built aircraft on display at the Intrepid museum. The AV-8 Harrier of course is British designed, but US built to USMC requirements.
 
Top