WI: Gloster's "Unnamed Fighter"

[merlin]

Interesting - I hadn't anywhere before about Hawker putting the 'brakes' on the Gloster S/S - I've only read about being too busy with Gladiator work - I have my 'own' ideas.

You need a good reason to bring forward the prototype test flight! It came OTL too late for a RAF order - as the Hurricane & Spitfire orders were well advanced.

However, with an 'order' there is potential also for export interest - considering countries that had a manufacturing license for the Mercury e.g. Finland, Sweden & Poland.

Names, I've done several posts/threads in the past on this and other forums where I've used 'Guardian' & 'Grendal' (the former I'll keep for the Gloster 'twin').

Bristol - had they own design Type 146 - for this spec., and the Type 153 for the later cannon spec. - neither of which were rated!

 

[Cryhavoc101]

This thing needs a 1200 HP engine and unfortunately Bristol's leaders are idiots so thats not going to happen.

I guess the Taurus would be a better engine

Perhaps an American Power plant?

Get Folland to start Building them in Folland Aircraft and Co on the River Hamble in Hampshire using the most powerful twin radial he can get his hands on.

Start with 4 Vickers 50s and sort out that awful looking undercarriage

Then once you start sticking radios, Armour plate behind the pilot, Self sealing tanks, tail hooks and self deploying dingy etc

If not this then get him Licence building Spitfires and be done with it

 

[SinghKing]

Thats really the clincher, with the bottleneck of Merlins and the RAF hollering for fighters this could be what helps the Gallant get into production. Maybe in 1936 when the UK realises that war's coming and starts to re-arm the obvious bottleneck with the Merlin gets recognised and an 'emergency fighter' is needed that does not rely on the Merlin. The Gallant fills that, it uses the same guns as the standard RAF machines of the time the .303 and if those are unavailable it could probably take a quartet of Vickers .50cal as an alternative so not to affect Spitfire/Hurricane construction.

The Gallant's short take off and good handling also gets the RN interested who are desperately looking for something to replace the Sea Gladiator as well as being offered to Australia/New Zealand for construction abroad to strengthen the Dominions defences. So after being set down in say 1936 and starting rather low level production for home and abroad in 1938 (the Dominion factories have yet to come online and more orders placed overseas than within the UK save the RN taking what they can), 1939 rolls along and the Gallant then is pressed into full scale production as long as it does not interfere with the Spitfire/Hurricane production and thanks to its engine it really does not.

So, any thoughts on the repercussions further afield? Given the desperation of the Polish Air Force's PZL.50 Jastrząb program, which only started in late 1936 and only got their first power-plants (Bristol Mercury engines, identical to those used by the Gloster F5/34 prototype) in June 1939 IOTL, it seems that the Gloster Gallant would have been the ideal aircraft to meet (or rather, significantly surpass) their specifications for a fighter interceptor. Could a significant number of Gallants (with the Polish Air Force ITTL probably placing a order for around 300 aircraft, the same as the number of Mercury VIII engines which the PZL ordered from the Bristol Aircraft Company IOTL to power its own planned force of Jastrząb fighters) have been exported to Poland prior to the outbreak of WW2? And given that they possessed far superior performance and firepower to anything that the Polish Air Force had IOTL, would they have had any major impact on the performance of the excellently trained Polish Air Force against the Nazi-Soviet Invasion of Poland?

Changing the outcome of the campaign may well be impossible, but how much longer could the Poles hold out ITTL? Long enough to meet the expectations of the French, the British and the German war planners (2 to 3 months) and knock some sense into Hitler from the outset of the war (he predicted a campaign lasting no longer than six weeks, and his estimate proved to be spot-on IOTL)? And given that the Nazis lost 285 aircraft, with 279 more damaged (a loss of 25% of the Luftwaffe's total air strength in the Campaign). compared to the Poles' losses of 333 aircraft in the campaign IOTL, could Air Aces in the Polish Air Force plausibly succeed in downing more German planes than they lose ITTL? What could the repercussions be for the course of WW2 from this point onwards- could the Poles' sterner defence succeed in inflicting enough losses on Nazi Germany for them to fail in their Invasion of France ITTL? Would it be possible for the production and export of the Gloster Gallant to butterfly the Battle of Britain away entirely ITTL?

 

[Mumbles]

Wouldn't that be an incentive (at least from the NZ side) to upgrade their manufacturing infrastructure?

Economies of scale make it less than viable then and now - the NZ population was only ~1.6 million in 1936, and just over 4 million now. Even Australia had trouble sustaining aircraft production with a much larger population and industrial base.

Light and light commercial aircraft aircraft wise this has been the only true NZ developer and manufacturer of note:
http://www.aerospace.co.nz/aircraft

I can see the RNZAF as a potential user of the Gallant in places like Singapore (can't be worse than the Buffalo!), but not so much as a producer.

 

[SinghKing]

Interesting - I hadn't anywhere before about Hawker putting the 'brakes' on the Gloster S/S - I've only read about being too busy with Gladiator work - I have my 'own' ideas.

You need a good reason to bring forward the prototype test flight! It came OTL too late for a RAF order - as the Hurricane & Spitfire orders were well advanced.

However, with an 'order' there is potential also for export interest - considering countries that had a manufacturing license for the Mercury e.g. Finland, Sweden & Poland.

Names, I've done several posts/threads in the past on this and other forums where I've used 'Guardian' & 'Grendal' (the former I'll keep for the Gloster 'twin').

Bristol - had they own design Type 146 - for this spec., and the Type 153 for the later cannon spec. - neither of which were rated!

Okay- Guardian and Grendel are very good names indeed. Perhaps I'll save them for the bigger and better aircraft which get developed and produced as successors to it, later on in the war. And yeah, Bristol did have their own entry IOTL for this specification, and it was by all accounts pretty poor. But the Air Ministry's Specification had already gone out in 1934, to Bristol, Gloster, Martin-Baker and Vickers, prior to the purchase of Gloster by the Hawker Company IOTL (and by Bristol ITTL).

Bristol's leaders were pretty dull IOTL, regarding their own fighter development programs- but even they'll be bright enough to see the benefit of getting two bites of the cherry, gaining two entries in the four-way competition instead of just one. IOTL, Bristol's focus was on bomber design and production first and foremost, with fighter design apparently viewed by their leadership as either a token gesture or an annoyance. ITTL, Bristol itself can focus entirely on what it does best, bombers, and leave its Gloster subsidiary company to handle all of its fighter design and development programs for them.

And regarding the export angle; with Poland, Finland and Sweden seeming to be the likeliest candidates to place orders, as I touched upon in my last post, I'm just wondering how profound an impact this fighter could actually have on the passage of WW2 in an ATL- so much so that I'm wondering whether it's guaranteed that there'll even be a Battle of Britain ITTL?

 

[sharlin]

In reality the Polish airforce is still going to be smashed to bits, its just that the Gloster fighters airdromes would be the first and probably hardest hit so any that do get airborn will be the minority.

Sweden is neutral as is Finland so there's nothing there that matters to the Germans. They might suffer slightly more casualties, but nothing untoward or dangerous.

 

[SinghKing]

In reality the Polish airforce is still going to be smashed to bits, its just that the Gloster fighters airdromes would be the first and probably hardest hit so any that do get airborn will be the minority.

Sweden is neutral as is Finland so there's nothing there that matters to the Germans. They might suffer slightly more casualties, but nothing untoward or dangerous.

Well, there was a bit more to it than that IOTL. Even though the Polish Air Force, was outnumbered by the Luftwaffe more than four to one, and its fighters were vastly outmatched by the more advanced German fighters, they remained active into the second week of the campaign, and only suffered 50 more losses (including those on the ground) in the campaign than the Luftwaffe themselves did. True, with a larger airforce, it'll be harder to relocate all of their aircraft from their main air bases to small camouflaged airfields before the outset of the war (which they largely did IOTL, leaving only trainer aircraft and auxiliary aircraft behind to be destroyed at the aerodromes). But the gulf in performance and firepower between the PZL P.11 and the Gloster F5/34 (should we still go with Gallant?) was immense.

The PZL P.11 was the most advanced Polish fighter plane yet in service IOTL; with a top speed of only 242 mph at 5 km altitude, and a pitiful top speed of 186 mph at sea level, they were outpaced by virtually all German aircraft in service, even the German bombers. Only one third of their 185 PZL P.11's even possessed half of the Gloster Gallant's armament (4 Browning machine guns, as opposed to the Gallant's 8). The other two thirds of these PZL P.11's only possessed two Browning machine guns. And less than a quarter of them possessed radios. Yet somehow, the PZL P.11 pilots still managed to shoot down 127 German aircraft IOTL, for the loss of only 100 of their own fighter aircraft. How much better would those pilots have fared if they were flying in fighter aircraft which were capable of matching, or at the very least rivalling, those of the Luftwaffe- fighter aircraft which were fast enough to actually catch the German Bombers? You'd think that it could have at least been able to delay the inevitable slightly, keeping the Polish Air Force in the fight for a bit longer ITTL.

 

[sharlin]

Very good point, it could mean that the Germans suffer higher losses, perhaps in their bombers/long range fighters, this could mean a slightly longer 'phoney war' as the Luftwaffe rebuilds.

 

[Zheng He]

This thing needs a 1200 HP engine and unfortunately Bristol's leaders are idiots so thats not going to happen.

I guess the Taurus would be a better engine

Perhaps an American Power plant?

Get Folland to start Building them in Folland Aircraft and Co on the River Hamble in Hampshire using the most powerful twin radial he can get his hands on.

Start with 4 Vickers 50s and sort out that awful looking undercarriage

Then once you start sticking radios, Armour plate behind the pilot, Self sealing tanks, tail hooks and self deploying dingy etc

If not this then get him Licence building Spitfires and be done with it

If you want an American radial you have a few choices. The engine that powered the P-35 and the P-36 rated at 1,050 and the engines the F4F and F2A used were 1,200.

 

[marathag]

http://www.aviastar.org/air/england/gloster_f5-34.php
P-Specification
WEIGHTS Curtiss Hawk 75
Take-off weight 2449 kg 5399 lb [FONT=Verdana, Arial][SIZE=-1]5172[/SIZE][/FONT] lb
Empty weight 1900 kg 4189 lb [FONT=Verdana, Arial][SIZE=-1]3975[/SIZE][/FONT] lb

DIMENSIONS
Wingspan 11.63 m 38 ft 2 in 37 ft 4 in
Length 9.76 m 32 ft 0 in 28 ft 6 in
Height 3.09 m 10 ft 2 in 8 ft 5 in
Wing area 21.36 m2 229.92 sq ft 235.94 ft²

PERFORMANCE
Max. speed 508 km/h 316 mph 313 mph
Range ??? [FONT=Verdana, Arial][SIZE=-1]547 miles[/SIZE][/FONT]

Very close to the Curtiss Hawk, that the RAF didn't much care for in 1940 despite the French finding it far more maneuverable than the Me-109

Both would gain weight with self sealing tanks and armor

 

[Just Leo]

The first F5/34, K5056, had no provision for armament, such as holes. The second, K8089, had holes but carried ballast, not guns, apparently. The fuel tank carried 68 gallons. Greater tankage would be required, but no information seems available to determine how, where, and how much. Self-sealing and armor wouldn't help performance, except in battle. The question of engine type is questionable. I prefer the P&W R-1830, but, at the time, engines were improving and some fighters which could have been better with the narrower R-1830 suffered for being adaptable to the larger diameter Wright R-1820. For British use, such latest developments would be questionable, and reliance on Bristol engines would leave the Perseus, a marginal improvement, and the Taurus, troublesome in its service life, but with better future promise, which remained unfulfilled due to losing its tooling for Sabre production. Such specialized tooling would also be a potential problem for overseas production. For fantasy purposes, the Hercules would fill the bill nicely, although it was truly truculent in its development curve, and its weight a serious problem requiring some redesign effort. The Hercules was the right diameter. The undercarriage was un-aerodynamic but had an endearing simplicity, and could have served as a dive brake for subsequent bomb delivery in the FB role. For naval use, the one-piece wing would have to become three piece to allow a fold, along with various naval installations and their subsequent structural strengthening. The name Gannet has been suggested, but no-name, or Generic, is fine too.
The time line for development and production was very late, and would have made more sense had it been built instead of, rather than subsequent to the Glad.

 

[Zheng He]

Very close to the Curtiss Hawk, that the RAF didn't much care for in 1940 despite the French finding it far more maneuverable than the Me-109

Both would gain weight with self sealing tanks and armor

The RAF did make good use of the Curtiss Hawk in East Africa and India-Burma where one squadron used them into 1943. Frankly a Curtiss Hawk equivalent fighter designed and built in the 1930s and then deployed to North Africa, Burma, and Malaysia would serve them well.

 

[merlin]

Okay- Guardian and Grendel are very good names indeed. Perhaps I'll save them for the bigger and better aircraft which get developed and produced as successors to it, later on in the war. And yeah, Bristol did have their own entry IOTL for this specification, and it was by all accounts pretty poor. But the Air Ministry's Specification had already gone out in 1934, to Bristol, Gloster, Martin-Baker and Vickers, prior to the purchase of Gloster by the Hawker Company IOTL (and by Bristol ITTL).

Bristol's leaders were pretty dull IOTL, regarding their own fighter development programs- but even they'll be bright enough to see the benefit of getting two bites of the cherry, gaining two entries in the four-way competition instead of just one. IOTL, Bristol's focus was on bomber design and production first and foremost, with fighter design apparently viewed by their leadership as either a token gesture or an annoyance. ITTL, Bristol itself can focus entirely on what it does best, bombers, and leave its Gloster subsidiary company to handle all of its fighter design and development programs for them.

And regarding the export angle; with Poland, Finland and Sweden seeming to be the likeliest candidates to place orders, as I touched upon in my last post, I'm just wondering how profound an impact this fighter could actually have on the passage of WW2 in an ATL- so much so that I'm wondering whether it's guaranteed that there'll even be a Battle of Britain ITTL?

The 'names' I mentioned were not given as suggestions for you to use, but illustrations of names I had previously used for comments on the aircraft, and therefore intend to 'use' myself.

Exports - I don't see 'big' orders more like manufacturing licenses - Finland had one for the Blenheim for example. Poland - there is a lot of internal politics regarding Polish Air Force aircraft - there still used PZL P.11s while the P.24s were exported! However, they have scope to re-engine the Gloster S/s with French Gnome-Rhone 1,000 hp engine.

In action - it would help in '39 in Poland yes, but not greatly. Knock-on effect - RAF Polish Squadrons see action earlier, more confidence in their experience with 'modern' monoplanes!

 

[Errolwi]

It's arguably more trouble than it's worth to set up a production line in NZ rather than just shipping out already built aircraft, NZ being at the very end of everybody's supply and logistics chain. The industrial capacity wasn't really there - IOTL the most sophisticated aircraft built in NZ during WWII was the Tiger Moth.

Nz also has higher priorities than fighters I.e. historically Wellingtons, Hudsons and Catalinas, with poorer types filling the gap when these weren't available for home service. The RNZAF would have had Catalinas earlier of engines had been available.

 

[SinghKing]

The 'names' I mentioned were not given as suggestions for you to use, but illustrations of names I had previously used for comments on the aircraft, and therefore intend to 'use' myself.

Oh, and I was so looking forward to using them too... Don't worry; I'll keep looking for alternatives. What about the 'Gloster Gawain' and/or the 'Gloster Galahad' after the knights of the Arthurian Legend? After all, wasn't Gawain supposed to have been the 'Welsh Knight'? For Gloster, he's the closest thing to a local mythological hero that they have...

 

[sharlin]

The Galahad works well as a name

 

[Some Bloke]

In action - it would help in '39 in Poland yes, but not greatly. Knock-on effect - RAF Polish Squadrons see action earlier, more confidence in their experience with 'modern' monoplanes!

Maybe as a corner cutting measure they're assigned to Gallants rather than Hurricanes.

 

[sharlin]

That would make a LOT of sense, give them an aircraft they are familiar with. You could also forgo the MB emergency fighter (as cute as it was) and then have the Gallant declared the Emergency Fighter.

 

[Some Bloke]

Given the fact that the Australians were already making extensive use of the Twin Wasp, then maybe an upgrade with this engine might be on the cards at about the same time.

 

[Zheng He]

Some of these on Malta to start the war would be nice.