Any FAA jet fighters good for Korean War?

[Admiral Beez]

Had the British expedited their arrival and/or development, would any of the FAA's jet fighters first flying from the 1940s up to the Venom in 1951 have been able to stand up to the MiG-15 over Korea?

Supermarine Attacker (first flight July 1946)
Hawker Sea Hawk (Sept 1947)
deHavilland Sea Vampire (Sept 1943, RAF version)
deHavilland Sea Venom (April 1951)

And if not, what of the swept wing Sea Hawk? With sufficient funding and interest from the government, the Hawker P.1052 might have made it to Korea. How does it fair against the MiG-15?

Hawker P.1052: Sea Hawk gets new Wings

poll Introduction: The Hawker P.1052 is an aircraft which is often forgotten, but is an important stepping stone in the lead-up to the Hunter, a stepping stone between it and the Sea Hawk that came before it. Not only did it help create this link, but it also gained valuable information for the...

forum.warthunder.com

 

[GTX]

While I am sure the pilots would make a good account of themselves (just look at RAAF operations in Korea with Gloster Meteors) but they would be largely outclassed in terms of performance.

 

[Admiral Beez]

While i am sure the pilots would make a good account of themselves (just look at RAAF operations in Korea with Gloster Meteors)

There's also the Sea Meteor.

The swept wing Hawker looks as good as the MiG-15.

 

[EwenS]

Supermarine beat Hawker to the carrier deck by 18 months with a swept wing derivative of the Attacker. Supermarine Type 510.

Supermarine type 510/517/528/535

Hi! Supermarine type 510/517. https://www.baesystems.com/en-uk/heritage/vickers-supermarine-types-510-517-528-535 "The Vickers Supermarine Type 510 was, to all intents and purposes, a Vickers Supermarine Attacker fitted with a thin swept wing and tailplane. The Vickers Supermarine Type 510...

www.secretprojects.co.uk

The first USN swept wing carrier aircraft was the Grumman F9F-6 Cougar. The prototype swept wing Grumman XF9F-6 Cougar didn't fly until Sept 1951 with service entry in Dec 1952, too late for the Korean war.

North American began the project to navalise the F-86 in Jan 1951, but it was Dec 1951 before the prototype FJ-2 flew and a further year before carrier qualification tests took place. But due to handling problems production aircraft went to the USMC for use from shore bases.

 

[EwenS]

There's also the Sea Meteor.

View attachment 760604

The swept wing Hawker looks as good as the MiG-15.

Sorry but there was no "Sea Meteor" officially.

EE337 was an ordinary Meteor F.3 converted for deck trials in 1947/48. Eric Brown made the first carrier landing of a British twin-jet aircraft on HMS Implacable on 8 June 1948 and the photo may be of that event as the carrier is definitely Implacable. The A-frame arrester hook came from a Sea Hornet and it got uprated Derwent V engines, improved brakes, strengthened fuselage and undercarriage. Deck trials with it on Implacable continued into 1949.

A second aircraft EE387 was similarly converted and carried out deck landings on Illustrious in Oct 1948, June 1951 and in 1952. But it only carried out touch & goes on the smaller light fleet carrier Triumph in Feb 1951.

This pair were also used ashore at the A&AEE for jet familiarisation and deck landing training before becoming ground instructional airframes in the mid-1950s.

Earlier in Aug 1945 the prototype Meteor DG202/G had been craned aboard the Pretoria Castle for deck handling trials.

Later the RN acquired various other Meteor Marks but none went aboard a carrier. Two seat T.7 for jet training from 1949 (because the 2 seat Vampire trainer had yet to be developed), TT.20 for target towing (conversions from NF.11) and U.15 & U.16 as targets (conversions from F.4 & F.8 respectively).

 

[Admiral Beez]

Sorry but there was no "Sea Meteor" officially.

True, but admittedly none of the FAA jets I mention above were made available for Korea, either being not ready or deemed ill-suited or otherwise unavailable.

Why wasn't the Attacker sent to Korea? The CAG the RN sent to Korea consisting of Seafires and Fireflies would not have looked out of place in the earlier war. Here's HMS Triumph off Korea in July 1950 - I half expect to see a Swordfish in the back. Thankfully later arrivals included the superlative (for a prop) Sea Fury.

Your Supermarine Type 510 looks like a Swift. It's shameful that the Swift first flies in 1948, but does not enter service until 1954. Meanwhile the MiG-15 first flies in Dec 1947 and enters service in 1949.

 

[bf109xxl]

It's shameful that the Swift first flies in 1948, but does not enter service until 1954. Meanwhile the MiG-15 first flies in Dec 1947 and enters service in 1949.

The Soviets felt themselves defenseless against high-altitude bomber raids. They had no mass-produced high-altitude engines. The Soviets had also no superalloys with sufficient quality for turbochargers before the copying of the B-29. This explains the incredible rush for series production of the MiG-15. The British, on the other hand, could take their time. And of course the incredible luck of acquiring Nene and Derwent by the Soviets - you'd have to be a great thinker to sell Stalin the latest engines. Even if you're very hungry.

 

[EwenS]

True, but admittedly none of the FAA jets I mention above were made available for Korea, either being not ready or deemed ill-suited or otherwise unavailable.

Why wasn't the Attacker sent to Korea? The CAG the RN sent to Korea consisting of Seafires and Fireflies would not have looked out of place in the earlier war. Here's HMS Triumph off Korea in July 1950 - I half expect to see a Swordfish in the back. Thankfully later arrivals included the superlative (for a prop) Sea Fury.

View attachment 760728

Your Supermarine Type 510 looks like a Swift. It's shameful that the Swift first flies in 1948, but does not enter service until 1954. Meanwhile the MiG-15 first flies in Dec 1947 and enters service in 1949.

Well firstly in the early postwar period the RN had a manning problem which was at its worst in 1947 and took several years to resolve. So the light fleet carriers were preferred over the fleets as they needed smaller crews. Generally between about 1947 and the mid-1950s there was only a single fleet carrier in the front line fleet - Implacable, Indomitable and then Eagle (plus Illustrious as the trials and training Carrier) - and that ship was the flagship of the Home Fleet. The Med and Far East Fleets made do with light carriers.

The production Attacker wasn't ordered until Oct 1948, with the first flying on 4 April 1950, just a couple of months before the Korean War started. And it still had teething problems to be resolved. By the time these were resolved, service trials etc completed, it was 21 August 1951 before it reached the first front line squadron (800). 803 followed in Nov 1951 and 890 in April 1952 (initially as the pool sqn for the other two). The Attacker was never more than stopgap so no more front line squadrons formed on the type. And with few aircraft available each squadron only had a strength of 8. That increased to 12 when 890 disbanded at the end of 1952.

They began to deploy aboard the Eagle (which itself was only accepted into the RN on 31 Oct 1951) in March 1952. She was the only front line carrier to embark the type for other than trials. As with any new type it took a while for her to work up with a new aircraft type as she participated in a variety of NATO exercises in the Atlantic & Med.

800 sqn disbanded on 1 June 1954 while 803 converted to the Sea Hawk FB.3 in Aug 1954.

Only 145 production Attackers of all versions were built for the RN (another 36 of the land based version were built for the Pakistan Air Force). After its withdrawal from the front line sqns it went on to serve with 3 RNVR squadrons through to 1957 as well as a total of 7 second line units. I do wonder however if the Colossus class, while in little better than original WW2 fit, were considered too small to operate jets for more than trial purposes.

Turning to the USN for a minute, it seems that until Korea they didn't believe it was possible to operate a swept wing jet from the carriers they had at the time. Hence, amongst other things, the new generation of supercarriers that they were planning.

 

[Admiral Beez]

I suppose USN jets were off the table for the British in this now post-LendLease era. Had HMCS Magnificent been capable, and had they arrived a decade earlier, RCN Banshees (entered USN service in 1948) would have been interesting over Korea as the first Commonwealth naval jet fighters in theatre. Though this video calls them MiG-15 Bait.

 

[EwenS]

I suppose USN jets were off the table for the British in this now post-LendLease era. Had HMCS Magnificent been capable, and had they arrived a decade earlier, RCN Banshees (entered USN service in 1948) would have been interesting over Korea as the first Commonwealth naval jet fighters in theatre. Though this video calls them MiG-15 Bait.

The Mutual Defense Assistace Act 1949 helped the supply of equipment to NATO countries. However, IIRC, there were some political difficulties between the US and Britain to be resolved before the British Forces could benefit.

So it was Dec 1952 before Canadair built Sabre 4 began to arrive in Europe for the RAF as a stopgap pending the arrival of the Hunter and Jan 1953 before TBM-3E Avengers arrived as a stopgap pending the arrival of Fairey Gannet in service. But there would be no point in getting US carrier capable jets if you don't have the carriers to operate them from. A Colossus was not an Essex.

France on the other hand was an earlier recipient of MDAP aid, particularly as it was seen to be fighting Communism in Indochina.

 

[Admiral Beez]

But there would be no point in getting US carrier capable jets if you don't have the carriers to operate them from. A Colossus was not an Essex.

Considering their slow speed and small size, I'm amazed at how many CATOBAR jets were able to operate from the Majestic/Colossus class, even after angled flight decks and other significant modifications into the 1960s and beyond. We have the British, Dutch and Indians flying Sea Hawks from theirs, the Canadians flying Banshees, the Brazilians, Australians and Argentinians flying Skyhawks and the Argies also Panthers and Super Etendards, and the Aussies with Sea Venoms. Those are some versatile little ships.

 

[EwenS]

Considering their slow speed and small size, I'm amazed at how many CATOBAR jets were able to operate from the Majestic/Colossus class, even after angled flight decks and other significant modifications into the 1960s and beyond. We have the British, Dutch and Indians flying Sea Hawks from theirs, the Canadians flying Banshees, the Brazilians, Australians and Argentinians flying Skyhawks and the Argies also Panthers and Super Etendards, and the Aussies with Sea Venoms. Those are some versatile little ships.

The only time I can identify when an RN Colossus probably operated the Sea Hawk was during the post modernisation trials of Warrior. She was refitted 1955 to Aug 1956 and was given a 5.5 degree angled deck, uprated arrester gear, catapult and mirror landing system. She was the only RN Colossus/Majestic to get an angled deck. The modernisation was designed to allow her to operate Sea Hawk & Gannet.

She operated "a variety of aircraft" in various short trips to sea in Sept/Oct for trials purposes only. No operational squadrons were embarked.

In January 1957 she was selected to participate in Operation Grapple, the H bomb tests at Christmas Island. For that she had helicopters & Avengers. She returned home in Oct and was decommissioned in Feb1958 and placed In reserve. Her sale to Argentina was completed on 4 July 1958.

The arrival of the Sea Hawk in front line FAA squadrons from mid-1953 resulted in the first carrier deployment of the type in Feb 1954 on Eagle. It also coincided with the completion of the 3 Centaurs in 1953/54 and the relegation of the Colossus class to second line duties as training ships and transports.

 

[Admiral Beez]

I know the Argentineans failed in their trails to use the Grumman F-9 Cougar on their carrier, it would have made a good looking replacement for the Banshee in RCN service. But we've already looked at that Best non-Skyhawk replacement for HMCS Bonaventure's Banshees?