Fairey Fulmar also designed as a single seat version alongside the Hurricane & Spitfire?

Giant Man Eating Rabbits

Giant Man Eating Rabbits

Banned
A spin-off from my earlier post

Boulton-Paul Defiant also designed as a single seat version alongside the Hurricane & spitfire?

What if alongside it's twin crew turret fighter, Boulton-Paul also designed a single engine version for the RAF Fighter competition that was ultimately won by both the Hurricane and Spitfire? Would this be possible? How effective would this fighter be especially in the BoF, BoB and against the...
www.alternatehistory.com

What if the Fairey Fulmar was also designed as a single seat version alongside the Hurricane & Spitfire?
Would this be possible?
What design changes would need to be done and what improvements would it need?, a shorter fuselage and a shorter wingspan?
Would the engines and their incremental power increase allow continued service like the Hurricane at least?
Could the design be navalized as to serve on RN carriers instead of Hurricanes & SeaFires?
How would this aircraft perform in combat, performance wise?
Could the same be done to the future Fairy Firefly design?
 

alspug

The Fairey Fulmar was designed as a very long range Fleet fighter with the goal of shooting down enemy maritime patrol aircraft and also with huge amounts of ammunition to enable repeated attacks before returning to the carrier. THe second person on board is to provide extra eye's and also the ammunition provided was huge. ie 750 rds per gun compared to 338 rds per gun(I know the number of rounds varied but for the sake of simplicity we are going with this number) in the Hawker Hurricane.

The Fairey Fulmar was designed with the Griffon engine in mind but got the Merlin and thus was not operating at the power to weight ratio it should have. THe Fairey Barracuda suffered from the same limitation.

THe Fulmar should have had 2,000hp instead of 1300 which would have certainly altered the types performance against the Zero and ME 109.

If the Fulmar is built with 2,000hp Griffon the Barracuda is more effective as well.
 

yulzari1

As above. Both the Fulmar and Firefly were built as multi role types. The Fulmar became the Royal Navy’s fighter by default. A single seat version of either would be unable to perform the other roles.
 

michael1

Yes, fairey could have designed a single seat fighter, but that wasn't what the RN wanted. By the late 1930s aircraft speed was such that there was insufficient warning time from the mk1 eyeball for aerial interception and radar wasn't yet developed. The RN then made the apparently logical decision to depend on armour & AA guns for protection. Fleet fighters were needed for strike protection, which meant range, and the RAF told them that long distance navigation over water was only possible with a dedicated navigator. Japan and the US were more used to operating in the Pacific and had naval aviators better represented in the higher command, and they both came to quite different conclusions.

So getting the Fulmar designed initially as a single seater would have only come from a different planned use of naval airpower and would probably have meant no armoured flight decks either. Modifying the Fulmar at a later stage to be a single seater is always likely to be a bad idea: it's going to make a worse fighter than converted hurricanes and spitfires and be available in smaller numbers at higher cost, although it might be easier to land on a carrier and more robust than the spitfire.
 
Giant Man Eating Rabbits

Giant Man Eating Rabbits

Banned
yulzari1 said:
As above. Both the Fulmar and Firefly were built as multi role types. The Fulmar became the Royal Navy’s fighter by default. A single seat version of either would be unable to perform the other roles.
Click to expand...

Couldn't they have both?, 2 or more sqns of Fulmars in attack and 2 or more sqns of single engine Fulmars (don't know what they'd be called) for fleet defense?
 

michael1

alspug said:
The Fairey Fulmar was designed as a very long range Fleet fighter with the goal of shooting down enemy maritime patrol aircraft and also with huge amounts of ammunition to enable repeated attacks before returning to the carrier. THe second person on board is to provide extra eye's and also the ammunition provided was huge. ie 750 rds per gun compared to 338 rds per gun(I know the number of rounds varied but for the sake of simplicity we are going with this number) in the Hawker Hurricane.

The Fairey Fulmar was designed with the Griffon engine in mind but got the Merlin and thus was not operating at the power to weight ratio it should have. THe Fairey Barracuda suffered from the same limitation.

THe Fulmar should have had 2,000hp instead of 1300 which would have certainly altered the types performance against the Zero and ME 109.

If the Fulmar is built with 2,000hp Griffon the Barracuda is more effective as well.
Click to expand...
I agree about the fulmar engine, but then more powerful engines would make most WW2 fighters better and planes should be designed with the actual achievable power in mind. Plus, quicker development of the griffon would have prompted quicker engine development elsewhere, so the advantage would have been temporary.
 

michael1

Giant Man Eating Rabbits said:
Couldn't they have both?, 2 or more sqns of Fulmars in attack and 2 or more sqns of single engine Fulmars (don't know what they'd be called) for fleet defense?
Click to expand...
This is where the small aircraft capacities of RN carriers become important. All aircraft had to be multirole (the early armoured carriers were designed for a capacity of 36 planes). Once radar was developed it was clear that a better design strategy was large aircraft capacity, at the expense of the armoured flight deck if necessary.

The RN lost out relative to the USN in two major ways, firstly it started rearmament on the basis of 1936 technology, whereas the USN started on the basis of 1940 technology, and aircraft and radar technology advanced very quickly in this period. Secondly the establishment of the RAF meant that 20 years later there were few senior officers who were primarily focused on airpower and the links between the aircraft industry and the navy were weak. So aircraft were seen primarily as an adjunct to the battlefleet (although the FAA was very efficient in that limited role) and the RN found it hard to foresee technological developments when issuing requirements.

The establishment of the RAF had an insidious progressive impact on the RN that wasn't always apparent but was arguably much more important in the long run than the normal focus on command and control, manpower, budgeting etc, which could be resolved fairly quickly if necessary (e.g. with the approach of war)
 
oldironside

oldironside

The Barracuda was actually designed around the Rolls Royce Exe, which was cancelled (along with the Vulture and Peregrine) to allow RR to focus on Merlins and Griffons.
 

Peg Leg Pom

I knocked this out a few months ago. The backstory is that after his proposal to build a single seat naval fighter is turned down Richard Fairey decides to build one anyway using as many Fulmar Parts as possible without permission from the Men From The Ministry with it flying in 1940. I guestimated a top speed of roughly 280ish Mph. While not great for a fighter it would at least be able to catch modern multi engine bombers. It's still too big, too heavy and underpowered with the modifications amounting to a shortened rear fuselage and slightly reduced wing span. There's only so much can be done to light bomber. A Single seat Sea Defiant would be a MUCH better option

1696175503494.png
 
Last edited:
Giant Man Eating Rabbits

Giant Man Eating Rabbits

Banned
Peg Leg Pom said:
I knocked this out a few months ago. The backstory is that after his proposal to build a single seat naval fighter is turned down Richard Fairey decides to build one anyway using as many Fulmar Parts as possible without permission from the Men From The Ministry with it flying in 1940. I guestimated a top speed of roughly 280ish Mph. While not great for a fighter it would at least be able to catch modern multi engine bombers. It's still too big, too heavy and underpowered with the modifications amounting to a shortened rear fuselage and slightly reduced wing span. There's only so much can be done to light bomber. A Single seat Sea Defiant would be a MUCH better option

View attachment 859317
Click to expand...

Loving it.

Is it me or do this and the B-P single seat both have the looks of the Hurricane?, strange that.
 
oldironside

oldironside

Peg Leg Pom said:
I knocked this out a few months ago. The backstory is that after his proposal to build a single seat naval fighter is turned down Richard Fairey decides to build one anyway using as many Fulmar Parts as possible without permission from the Men From The Ministry with it flying in 1940. I guestimated a top speed of roughly 280ish Mph. While not great for a fighter it would at least be able to catch modern multi engine bombers. It's still too big, too heavy and underpowered with the modifications amounting to a shortened rear fuselage and slightly reduced wing span. There's only so much can be done to light bomber. A Single seat Sea Defiant would be a MUCH better option

View attachment 859317
Click to expand...
I seem to recall someone did a very impressive 1/72 what if of a single seat Fulmar called (I think) a Fairey Pilchard. My old brain must be playing tricks on me because I can't find any trace of it.
 

Llewwyy

The Fulmar and Battle look very similar almost like they share some components, same stable. Since the premise is to make a single seat Fulmar, to improve performance, why can't the Fulmar be modified the other way to carry a torpedo or bombs? I thought it was a multi use aircraft.
 

alspug

Llewwyy said:
The Fulmar and Battle look very similar almost like they share some components, same stable. Since the premise is to make a single seat Fulmar, to improve performance, why can't the Fulmar be modified the other way to carry a torpedo or bombs? I thought it was a multi use aircraft.
Click to expand...
The Fulmar and Battle both suffer from the same issue and that is they needed more engine power in order to be more competitive. The proposal for a twin engined Battle would have made it equally as fast as the ME-110 and possibly faster. That would make it a fast light bomber with better performance than the Blenhiem and thus produced throughout WW2. Fairly Sure Peg Leg Pom did a picture of it in an earlier thread.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top