Gloster f.5/34

[merlin]

Whilst some refer to the similarities to the Zero - there is another aircraft that is more comparable - the Macchi Mc 200

Gloster: Mc 200
Span 32'' 26' 10"
Wingspan 38' 2" 35' 8.5"
Height 10' 2" 11' 6"
Wing area 230 sq. ft. 180.83 sq. ft.
Empty weight 4,190 lbs. 4,175 lbs.
Loaded weight 5,400 lbs. 5,121 lbs. (Max 5,715 lbs.)

Radial Engine 840 h. p. 870 h. p.
Max Speed 316 mph at 16,000' 312 mph at 14,750'
S/ceiling 32,500' 29,200'

Although the Italian fighter is slightly smaller, with similar power plants, they have similar performances. Only the Macchi had a service history oh WI !!

 

[Just Leo]

You can't have a WI if it existed. The Macchi had significantly less wing area and an open cockpit. Adrian Warburton shot one down in a Maryland bomber.

 

[merlin]

"You can't have a WI if it existed. The Macchi had significantly less wing area and an open cockpit. Adrian Warburton shot one down in a Maryland bomber."

The Italians after their biplanes preferred 'open-cockpits', Of Course the Macchi existed - that's the point I'm making - only the Macchi had a service life the Gloster didn't!! The 'wi' is with the Gloster not the MC 200 !

So a Maryland bomber shot one down, why is that relevant - B-17s shot Fw-190s down!

 

[Just Leo]

So a Maryland bomber shot one down, why is that relevant - B-17s shot Fw-190s down!

The difference was that this one was shot down by the pilot using fixed forward-firing guns. The fact that a B-17 left waist gunner shot down 7 German fighters on a single mission is irrelevant. Why exactly is the MC 200 relevant to the F5/34? The Regianne Re.2000 might have had greater relevance, since the FAA had ordered some.

 

[AdA]

The difference was that this one was shot down by the pilot using fixed forward-firing guns. The fact that a B-17 left waist gunner shot down 7 German fighters on a single mission is irrelevant. Why exactly is the MC 200 relevant to the F5/34?

In 2003 the Iraqis claimed an old farmer with a slightly bent and fairly rusty Mauser had shot down a USArmy AH64 Apache that the Iraqi TV filmed , lying in field behind the smiling farmer.
Shouldn't that above statement be that a US left waist gunner claimed seven German fighters on a single mission?
USAAF bomber claims were, after all, based on Iraqi information ministry confirmation rules
The Macchi was very good for a fighter that first flew in 1937 and didn't went through a number of versions in between. What compromised it was that the Germans unsportingly upgraded their Bf109D to E and than to F and the Brits their Sptifires from I to V while Macchi just waited for the Fiat and Alfa Romeo guys to stop playing with the DB601 engines they had borrowed from DB on their garages and built some.

 

[AdA]

The difference was that this one was shot down by the pilot using fixed forward-firing guns. The fact that a B-17 left waist gunner shot down 7 German fighters on a single mission is irrelevant. Why exactly is the MC 200 relevant to the F5/34? The Regianne Re.2000 might have had greater relevance, since the FAA had ordered some.

Tu2 crews claimed to chase Bf109 and shot them down with their 20mm guns a lot of times. Doesn't make the Bf109 a bad fighter. A Pe2 or Tu2 could outrun a Wildcat. Doesn't make the Grumman a bad fighter.
Trouble with Italian fighters was that always got to the party late.

 

[Just Leo]

Shouldn't that above statement be that a US left waist gunner claimed seven German fighters on a single mission?
USAAF bomber claims were, after all, based on Iraqi information ministry confirmation rules

The incident was recorded in a book called "Flying Forts" by Martin Caidin and was accompanied by his usual disclaimer. It was a special gunner, an instructor with good eyes and handled a .50 like a toothpick, and was fed extra ammo from other guns. There were no Iraqis in sight.

 

[perfectgeneral]

So if the lighter, shorter more powerful Macchi Mc 200, with less wing area and wingspan is only slower because of an open cab, what does the Gloster need all that wingspan for? How about cutting it below 36 feet so Hermes can fit it on a deck lift? That might make it faster too (325mph?). Less leading edge drag and a bit less area drag.

In your picture the blend at the back of the wing makes it look ill suited to a tee shaped lift, but the wings aren't really as deep as that. Just a little fillet near the body.

Hermes lift 36' by 36'

 

[Just Leo]

In your picture the blend at the back of the wing makes it look ill suited to a tee shaped lift, but the wings aren't really as deep as that. Just a little fillet near the body.
'

"The aerodynamic aspect of wing fuselage fillets", 1935, by H. Muttray might have influenced the larger than normal fillets. The other obvious example, definitely influenced by this paper, was the Spitfire, which had wings 4" shorter, but 12 sq ft more area, thanks to Prandtl.

 

[sonofpegasus]

In order for the Gloster F5/34 to be built there has to be a reason. The given reason for none of the F5/34 specifiation aircraft proceeding to production was that both the Hurricane and Spitfire had already been ordered into production before any of the F5/34 prototypes flew and none of them offered any advantage over the two fighters already ordered. Therefore we need a viable POD for production of the F5/34 to proceed. In the land of WI the Idea of a Taurus engined Gloster F/35 entering service in 1939 to provide an alternative to the Spitfire and Hurricane if anything happened to halt RR, Merlin production has a measure of validity.

 

[Simon]

In order for the Gloster F5/34 to be built there has to be a reason. The given reason for none of the F5/34 specifiation aircraft proceeding to production was that both the Hurricane and Spitfire had already been ordered into production before any of the F5/34 prototypes flew and none of them offered any advantage over the two fighters already ordered. Therefore we need a viable POD for production of the F5/34 to proceed. In the land of WI the Idea of a Taurus engined Gloster F/35 entering service in 1939 to provide an alternative to the Spitfire and Hurricane if anything happened to halt Rolls-Royce Merlin production has a measure of validity.

Have the RAF decide to not share their toys? They make the argument that for the opposition they're likely to face the Fleet Air Arm doesn't require the top flight airframes or engines plus raise questions over engine supplies due to manufacturing capacity. The F.5/34 specification is continued as a potential backup whilst the FAA are told to soldier on with their Sea Gladiators, Gloster starting off with the Mercury but then doing some re-design work to use the Taurus instead.

In an ideal world the introduction of the Bristol Hercules engine would have happened sooner since it was first run at the start of 1936 with the prototype giving 1,290 hp according to Bill Gunston. Not quite sure why it took until 1939 to enter production, IIRC they were splitting their efforts between too many projects as a company. If you could mate a re-designed F.5/34 to a Hercules engine I think you might of ended up with something along the lines of Grumman's F4F, that would be more than adequate to see you through the first two years or so of the war whilst you worked on its replacement.

 

[AdA]

The incident was recorded in a book called "Flying Forts" by Martin Caidin and was accompanied by his usual disclaimer. It was a special gunner, an instructor with good eyes and handled a .50 like a toothpick, and was fed extra ammo from other guns. There were no Iraqis in sight.

I'm not saying it was impossible. But an incident that extraordinary certainly was checked later with references from German casualty records. Is this a case were the German records show seven fighters lost in related missions or one of those cases were USAAF claims for a single mission totalled 100 German fighters lost and German records only have 5 losses for the whole home defence front for the whole day?

 

[arctic warrior]

So if the lighter, shorter more powerful Macchi Mc 200, with less wing area and wingspan is only slower because of an open cab, what does the Gloster need all that wingspan for? How about cutting it below 36 feet so Hermes can fit it on a deck lift? That might make it faster too (325mph?). Less leading edge drag and a bit less area drag.

In your picture the blend at the back of the wing makes it look ill suited to a tee shaped lift, but the wings aren't really as deep as that. Just a little fillet near the body.

Hermes lift 36' by 36'

First batch Macchi MC 200 did have an enclosed cockpit but the Italian aircraft didn't have radio so handsigns were used for communication - works better with an open cockpit.
Following series of MC 200 got the open cockpits - and later on radio but still open cockpit.

 

[Just Leo]

I'm not saying it was impossible. But an incident that extraordinary certainly was checked later with references from German casualty records. Is this a case were the German records show seven fighters lost in related missions or one of those cases were USAAF claims for a single mission totalled 100 German fighters lost and German records only have 5 losses for the whole home defence front for the whole day?

It's not that important to me. Is it that important to you? He certainly had witnesses.

 

[perfectgeneral]

First batch Macchi MC 200 did have an enclosed cockpit but the Italian aircraft didn't have radio so handsigns were used for communication - works better with an open cockpit.
Following series of MC 200 got the open cockpits - and later on radio but still open cockpit.

The idea of the Italian need to wave arms about, as part of conversation, having an ergonomic driver on retaining the open cockpit amuses me.

The Lift requirement sets the clipped wing Gloster apart from the Spitfire and Hurricane. On top of the engine availability requirement.

 

[sonofpegasus]

In an ideal world the introduction of the Bristol Hercules engine would have happened sooner since it was first run at the start of 1936 with the prototype giving 1,290 hp according to Bill Gunston. Not quite sure why it took until 1939 to enter production, IIRC they were splitting their efforts between too many projects as a company. If you could mate a re-designed F.5/34 to a Hercules engine I think you might of ended up with something along the lines of Grumman's F4F, that would be more than adequate to see you through the first two years or so of the war whilst you worked on its replacement.[/QUOTE]

APMEP, No need to use the heavy Herules, in 1939 the Taurus was, when it worked, giving 1200hp and Gloster had a plan to fit it to the F5/34. If The Taurus had worked from the 'get go' the Admiralty could IMHO have been sold The F5/34 with that engine as it was already slated for the Albacore. If Blackburn were leant on prehaps a Taurus engines Skua by 1939 as well. Unfortunetly the Taurus was late and never lived up to expetactions.

 

[merlin]

The difference was that this one was shot down by the pilot using fixed forward-firing guns. The fact that a B-17 left waist gunner shot down 7 German fighters on a single mission is irrelevant. Why exactly is the MC 200 relevant to the F5/34? The Regianne Re.2000 might have had greater relevance, since the FAA had ordered some.

IMHO the MC 200 is more comparable to the Gloster f.5/34 - similar sized engine, similar humpback (better visibility from the cockpit, and similar tail assembly, Whereas the Re.2000 is also a radial engine fighter (but bigger h. p.). I have read reports that the RAF were interested in buying the Re.2000 - then others that that was just a publicity stunt by Reggiane. Though it did serve with the Italian navy - nowhere in my initial post did I mention the FAA - so less relevant.

 

[AdA]

It's not that important to me. Is it that important to you? He certainly had witnesses.

It's important because the USAAF kept sending unescorted bombers deep into Germany because they believed, or wanted to believe, that they were shooting down a lot of German Fighters, therefore justifying their high casualty rates, IIRC the highest casualty rates any US service sustained in WW2.
You often said you care when good people died because they were given inferior aircraft to fight with. I care when people die because of inferior operational planning. Over claiming leads to wrong estimates and bad planning.
Over claiming masks errors and leads commanders to repeat them.

It's not a US thing. I'm pretty sure Vasco da Gama over claimed when he reported how many ships his Naus had sunk. Portuguese kings reacted by sending hopelessly small fleets against overwhelming odds because they relied on inflated kill ratios. Sometimes they never came back.

 

[fastmongrel]

APMEP, No need to use the heavy Herules, in 1939 the Taurus was, when it worked, giving 1200hp

I dont think a production Taurus ever got to 1200hp without going bang shortly after. Getting 1200hp out of a 25 litre aircooled radial is going to be hardwork in 1939 it took a lot of development to get those sort of powers.

 

[Just Leo]

I may be dense, many would agree, but I can't seem to "get" what the WI is, unless both aircraft came from countries with lethargic round engine programs. The MC became quite competitive as the MC.202 Folgore, with Db-601 engine, and improved more with Db605. Should a British engine manufacturer have obtained a license to build some? Napier had a license to build Junkers diesels. A Merlin powerplant would have been nifty, but it was the only nifty powerplant, with priorities. Sure could have used an early Griffon.