Anderman

Donor
Time for another british aviation thread. So what if W.E.W Petter went to Supermarine/Vickers instead to English Electric after leaving Westland Aircraft in 1944?

What would be the impact on the Supermarine design of this time like Attacker, Swift Scimitar?
Will the Canberra analog be build by Supermarine/Vickers and what could be the impact on TTL Vickers Vailant design?
 

Anderman

Donor
Just Passing...

...How relevant is W.E.W. Petter?

He was the designer behind the English Electric Canberra and Lightning. Quite important aircraft for the brits.
And after the death of R.J. Mitchell the man behind the Spitfire Supermarine was less successful.
 
W.E.W Petter was only with English Electric Until 1950 when he moved to Folland aircraft as managing director. If he goes to Vickers /Supermarine and stays there then perhaps not only the Canberra and the Lightning are built by Vickers but also the Midge and Gnat. If all the OTL Vickers projects proceed only differing in design detail under W.E.W. Petter. This could well make Vickers/Supermarine the most important aircraft manufacturer in the UK and result in some interesting mergers as well as overseas sales.
 
Thank you...

...The Canberra is my all-time favourite successor to the Mosquito.

The Gnat I have sat in, but I prefer the Canberra at Solway Aviation Museum.
 
Petters's problem was that he was a awkward bastard to deal with.
IIRC he refused to modify the Gnat with larger wheels so as to allow for rough field operation thereby ceding the NATO Basic Military Requirement 1 (NBMR-1) contest to Fiat with their G.91 aircraft. Obstinacy in not wanting to compromise his design vision saw a hundred or so direct sales and several hundred licensed production models missed out on.
 
To be fair to Petter he was probably right, how many G.91s ever flew off a grass field with a full military load.
If the requirement states that it needs rough field capability, which for the Gnat meant larger wheels and associated changes, and you don't provide that then you're automatically disqualified regardless of how much it's subsequently actually used operationally over the aircraft's lifetime. The idea of the light fighter was a good one but throwing away the chance of around a 75% increase in the number of aircraft produced, even if mostly licensed production, because you feel the changes violate the design ethos is just silly. It was also a self-inflicted wound in that it probably helped stop the development of the more advanced variants that were discussed but never followed through on.
 
Last edited:
Excellent point.
Perhaps take page from Dassault - company's designer team was not the best in the world, but marketing department was top-notch. It is all about delivering what costumer has ordered and wants to pay for.
 
If the requirement states that it needs rough field capability, which for the Gnat meant larger wheels and associated changes, and you don't provide that then you're automatically disqualified regardless of how much it's subsequently actually used operationally over the aircraft's lifetime. The idea of the light fighter was a good one but throwing away the chance of around a 75% increase in the number of aircraft produced, even if mostly licensed production, because you feel the changes violate the design ethos is just silly. It was also a self-inflicted wound in that it probably helped stop the dvelopment of the more advanced variants that were discussed but never followed through on.

In reality Rough field generally translates into the ability to operate from roads, poor quality concrete/tarmac airfields etc. Plus the Gnat was about half the weight of the G91.
 
In reality Rough field generally translates into the ability to operate from roads, poor quality concrete/tarmac airfields etc. Plus the Gnat was about half the weight of the G91.

I've just had a quick look at the specifications for both aircraft at Wikipedia. The Gnat was 27mph faster and had a service ceiling 5,000 feet higher. The Fiat had an extra 215 miles of range and could carry 50% more warload (1,000lbs for the Gnat vs 1,500 for the Fiat).

It seems the Gnat would have been more survivable in a war zone. It might be stretching a metaphore, but a Henley instead of a Battle?
 
Top