Spitfire….a “stop gap” measure

[mozart]

I’ve had this book in my library for some years but never really looked at it, but with my first “Kotare experience” of the Mid 1a arriving on Tuesday I thought I’d better gen up a bit on the Spitfire (in truth the Hurricane has always been my favourite!).
 

The content of “Chapter 19 Early Service” gave me quite a shock.  
 

When I was researching and building my Hawker Demon, a 1930s fighter with a rear gunner:

 

 

I was able to trace the philosophical and technical link to the Defiant…….

 

 

…..the Air Ministry thinking of the time being that the Luftwaffe bombers would be fast, possibly heavily armoured and fly in formation.  There was perceived to be the need therefore for a fast fighter equipped with cannons rather than machine guns, the latter being thought less effective against armour. Hence the Defiant, Beaufighter and the Westland Whirlwind. The Air Staff at the AM did not foresee that bombers arriving over England in 1940 would be accompanied by a fighter escort operating from newly captured bases in France and the Low Countries. Many Air Staff also believed that aerial dog fighting was a thing of a bygone era when aircraft flew slowly enough for pilots to be able to hold their quarry in their gunsights for longer than two seconds.

 

So, it was thought, the RAF need was for a cannon-equipped bomber-destroyer, not a pure fighter so the development of the Whirlwind in particular was considered a priority. A meeting of the Air Council in July 1938 thought the Spitfire to be already obsolescent since its design could not incorporate the fitting of cannons in its slim wings. 
 

British industry was gearing up for war, with new aircraft factories being built, workers trained etc., but this urgency brought its own problems….what to do with the factories and workers whilst the bomber-destroyers were still in development, they couldn’t be left idle! So, “stop-gap” or “gap-filler” orders were placed for existing types, the Spitfire and Hurricane and also the Fairey Battle. By early 1939 consideration was being given to reducing Spitfire orders at Castle Bromwich in favour of heavy bombers, the Halifax or Stirling.

 

So stop-gap orders were considered for approximately 2000 aircraft, including Spitfires, but they “would not continue to have much value beyond 1940.”  Problems with the Whirlwind and its Peregrine engines and subsequent poor performance at altitude meant that it offered few advantages over the Spitfire and Hurricane, and Hawker’s own program with the cannon-armed Tornado and Typhoon was beset with engine problems, so the RAF was forced to soldier on through 1940 and 41 without a modern cannon-equipped fighter. The rest is history! 

[Kagemusha]

That's actually quite frightening, though very interesting piece of history, serendipity eh?

[mozart]

Frightening indeed Andy. I’m sure a Beaufighter or Whirlwind would have created havoc if they’d been able to get through the fighter top cover unscathed, but what were the chances of that happening regularly enough? 

[Uncarina]

Thanks for this perspective. I wonder what the Whirlwind would have been like with a pair of Merlins.

 

Cheers,  Tom

[MikeC]

It's easy for us to sit here and wonder at why such "wrong-headed" policies were followed at all, but of course hindsight is always 20/20, and the Douhet theory was still very influential.  It's a fascinating subject area.

 

20 hours ago, mozart said:

I thought I’d better gen up a bit on the Spitfire (in truth the Hurricane has always been my favourite!).

We'll make a true Spitfire fan of you yet Max

[mozart]

1 hour ago, MikeC said:

It's easy for us to sit here and wonder at why such "wrong-headed" policies were followed at all, but of course hindsight is always 20/20, and the Douhet theory was still very influential.  It's a fascinating subject area.

 

We'll make a true Spitfire fan of you yet Max

Agreed entirely about hindsight Mike but there is still evidence of muddled thinking with the AM specifications for fighters which then seem to conflict with some of the ideas about the shape of “modern” warfare…the impossibility of fighter v fighter in dogfights for example.

 

Spitfire fan?  Well I do love them, and probably will even more if I fly in one from Compton Abbas next year! 

[Dpgsbody55]

I've read of this too, with plans to replace the Spitfire being formulated before 1940.  Part of the issue was the huge difficulties encountered trying to produce a plane which was an entirely new technology.  In Britain, nothing quite like this had been built before.  So given the extremely slow build up to production and the increasing panic to build up numbers for a war that everyone knew was coming, it's not unreasonable that the idea to end production and concentrate resources on bomber destroyers like the Whirlwind and Beaufighter.  As others have stated, unescorted heavily armed bombers were still thought by many to be impervious to defensive fighters.

 

The other thing to consider is the history of fighter production right up to WW2.  Planes were ordered in small numbers then replaced by something newer.  You might get an improved "MkII" version of something, but it would be replaced by a newer design within a short space of time.  So the thinking was that the Spitfire and Hurricane would likely be replaced after 1941 by something better, and both would probably be phased out after MkII production.  The disadvantage here is that production stops when assembly lines are wound down and new tooling is installed and production restarted.  That's not tolerable in wartime.  That the Spitfire's life was extended was due not only to pressures of wartime production and the need to build in numbers, but also that the Spitfire proved to be so amenable to adaptation and improvement that it was as effective in it's role in 1945 as it was in 1940.  No other plane at that time was as successful in this regard, and I include the BF-109 in that regard.  That plane reached it's zenith with the F model and while the G series could be deadly, there were fewer and fewer pilots who could operate it as it was always designed to be flown by highly trained pilots.  As weight grew in the 109, it's operating parameters did not keep pace and most Luftwaffe pilots dreaded getting a plane on their tail that was as effective and easy to fly by most like the Spitfire and later the Merlin powered Mustangs.

 

 

Cheers,

Michael

[Christa]

Defence planners' crystal balls are notoriously cloudy.

[mozart]

22 minutes ago, Christa said:

Defence planners' crystal balls are notoriously cloudy.

Indeed Chris! Apparently it was the feedback from the pilots who were totally overawed by the Spit’s performance which helped persuade Air Staff that the aircraft was worth keeping as an investment for the future.

[Dpgsbody55]

18 hours ago, Christa said:

Defence planners' crystal balls are notoriously cloudy.

 

I'd say more like downright defective, but then almost all government, official and expert prognostications are too.  Studies have been done which compare these over time to actual results.  Their accuracy has been found to be no better than chance, ie, about two percent correct.  Most of us here are old enough to remember "expert forecasts" in the sixties about how life was going to be in the seventies. 

 

Put it this way. One of the most famous economists, J K Galbraith, was quoted as saying that the main benefit of economic forecasters is to make astrologers look good.  I say it was ever thus.

 

 

Cheers,

Michael

[MikeC]

2 hours ago, Dpgsbody55 said:

I'd say more like downright defective, but then almost all government, official and expert prognostications are too.  Studies have been done which compare these over time to actual results. 

As I said, it's 20/20 ...