RAF in 1943: ideal fighter

[tomo pauk]

How would the fighter for the RAF of 1943 would've looked like if you were to design it? The plane should be in service by mid of 1943, so it can take part of invasion of Sicily and further. The airframe should allow for more than one kind of engine to be installed, and an easy conversion for FAA needs. If one thinks that RAF was already in a possession of an ideal fighter, I acknowledge that in advance Approach that would look beyond a license-built P-51 or F4U is encouraged - the design should start from a clean sheet of paper, but using historical engines & armament.

[Shortround6]

http://1000aircraftphotos.com/Contri...Bill/5624L.jpg

20mm cannon, a bubble top and a better supercharger on the MK II

[wuzak]

Not sure how available the Centaurus was in 1943.

I would suggest a Spitfire XII+. The Spitfire XII was based on the Mk V airframe, like the Mk IX. If it was based on the Mk VIII airframe, with modifications for extra tankage and longer main undercarriage, which would allow a bigger prop. Use the single stage Griffon IV/VI (as per the XII). Strengthen the wing to allow carrying underwing tanks. Reprofile the radiators for less drag/better Meredith effect. Use 4 x 20mm cannon instead of 2 x 20mm + 4 x 0.303s. Maybe if the outer gun bays are deleted that would allow some extra tankage in the wings?

Swap the single stage Griffon for the two stage Griffon 61 when it becomes available later in 1943 to get the Spitfire XIV.

[Siegfried]

Hawker Tornado with the Vulture. (ie a Typhoon with a Vulture instead of a Sabre). It was Longer ranged than the Spitfire, more fire power, the engine was easier to fix to a point of reliabillity than the Sabre. The Centaurus version years away, the Sabre wasn't really solid enough to commit to truely massiv production till the Tempest came out.

The Griffon powered "Typhoon" would also be worthwhile, more range than any spit.

[davebender]

Everything the RAF needs is already available. Just combine the parts and arrange for mass production.
.....Engines produced by Packard. Perhaps even a Griffon copy late in the war.
.....Airframes produced in Canada where aluminum is in plentiful supply.
.....Hs.404 cannon produced in England unless they want to establish a 20mm cannon factory in Canada. American made 20mm cannon should be avoided like the plague.

[tomo pauk]

How about something along the lines of 'Anglicized' Fiat G.55/56?
British in-line engine, then the hull fuel tank (some 120-130 imp gals), then pilot 'sitting' atop of the radiator. The radiator need to be shaped akin to Merlin Mustang. The wing of about the same shape as of G.55, but perhaps around 250 sq ft of area, 4 x 20mm, 130-150 rpg, maybe 2 x 30-50 imp gals in wings. Drop tanks under each wing. Bubble canopy.
The FAA version maybe 270 sq ft wing.

[fastmongrel]

Tempest II with a decent 2 stage supercharger. Its not impossible Hawker should have had the Tempest in production in time but it got moved about possibly because of the problems of the Typhoon. There was nothing that wasnt already available apart from the supercharger. If the Tempest II get going in 43 the Fury might have appeared by 45.

[tomo pauk]

Even though I like the Tempest II (Sea Fury being one of my all-time favourites), I'd like to know more about what the Centaurus was able to do reliably in 1943. The Centaurus in 1945 is not the same unit as the Centaurus in 1943. That's why the two-stage Griffon is not a contender for this thread, too.
But then, the same airframe with the R-2800 seem like a winner for me - it was available for Brits, with plenty of power and a tad 'slimmer' than Centaurus.

[fastmongrel]

Even though I like the Tempest II (Sea Fury being one of my all-time favourites), I'd like to know more about what the Centaurus was able to do reliably in 1943. The Centaurus in 1945 is not the same unit as the Centaurus in 1943. That's why the two-stage Griffon is not a contender for this thread, too.
But then, the same airframe with the R-2800 seem like a winner for me - it was available for Brits, with plenty of power and a tad 'slimmer' than Centaurus.

As far as I understand it there was nothing wrong with the Centaurus by 43 apart from the fact it wasnt being built in anything more than penny packets. Its similar tech to the Hercules so I cant see why the Centaurus couldnt have been reliable. The supercharger was a different matter and I dont think Bristol ever got a really good altitude rated blower working during the war. A heads up from Rolls Royce on blower design should have been possible, after all Bristol were forced to give help to Napiers with sleeve tech.

[davebender]

The U.S. cannot automatically produce more R2800 engines during 1943 anymore then Germany can automatically produce more DB603 engines. You need at least 2 years lead time to build a new engine factory and work it up to full capacity.

How many R2800 engines were produced during 1943? How many R2800 engines were required to meet U.S. aircraft requirements? If the U.S. does not have surplus R2800 engines then when are you planning to begin construction of a new engine factory and where will it be located?

[tomo pauk]

You can note that British in-line engine is my 1st choice
Of course, for every DB-603 produced, USA can produce 10 R-2800s? In 1942 some 11800+ were produced, in 1943 - 23700+ examples. A small number was delivered to Brits, starting from 1942, mostly for Wickers Warvick planes, since the Bristol Centaurus was not available, and Vulture was canceled.

Speaking of Centaurus, the RAF received 8th (yes, 8th) Warwick with Centaurus in late 1944. Unless someone does not step up with a more accurate & convincing data about Centaurus prior mid 1943, my take is that engine is not available for our fighter. No worries, we have plenty of good & great designs to choose from.

[buffnut453]

Just to be contrary, how about the Martin Baker MB3? The timeline fits an operational roll-out in 1943.

[tomo pauk]

Nice choice, provided that the crash of the prototype was not a fault of the design. Bubble top, just 4 cannons and we're set

[buffnut453]

My thoughts exactly. Also, the MB aircraft were much easier to maintain than their in-service contemporaries - access panels were plentiful to enable repairs almost anywhere on the airframe. And the performance wasn't shabby either. The bubbletop version would be my pick too but I suspect it might require a slightly larger fin make up for the loss of the fuselage spine. Shame the prototype crashed - the MB3 had the makings of a really superb operational fighter...and it looks GREAT!!!

[Shortround6]

For an operational roll out in 1943 it means work was started in 1941 if not 1940. My plan (evil laugh) is to send the plans and blueprints of the Sabre engine down the Thames on the out going tide, bludgeon the Bristol board of directors into having Fedden stay and working full tilt on the Centaurus engine.

The Tempest II was actually being worked on in 1942, 500 were ordered in Sept 1942, first flight was June 28 1943, Plans had been for Gloster to make the planes but work on the Meteor and production of the Typhoon interfered and the contract (now 600 planes) was transferred back to Bristol.
Since Tempest Vs were in production (slow?) in the last half of 1943 a push on the Tempest II doesn't seem quite so far fetched.