SARO SRA1 jet seaplane

RAE’s AA.Griffiths’ axial had been assigned to MetroVick and needed a purpose.

A.A.Griffith’s name doesn’t have an “s” on the end – apparently the common mis-spelling used to annoy him somewhat.

Roger Smith.

AB’s Specs File: “Jet Seaplane Fighter, “Jet Propelled Flying Boat Fighter” and “jet propelled, boat seaplane fighter”. but…”Why”?

UK/Indian Forces/ANZ were to lead SE Asia Command’s move from (today, Bangladesh) to push Japan out, which might take into 1947. US would island-hop up from Oz, aided by the Br.Pacific Fleet with most of our carriers, integrated with USN and well covered by Corsairs, Hellcats and such good things. RN in SEAsia would be exposed: it had lost PoW,Repulse to land-based aircraft, Hermes to carrier types. In 1944 it awaited Sea Hornet defenders, but knew it could not count on Firebrand fighter/distant Spearfish, Sturgeon strike schemes. Help was needed from something not deck/crane-based, which why it was an RAF OR. We would have practical difficulty holding and using forward bases for RAF Tiger Force, and close-up for Tactical Air up the coasts of Siam, Cochin-China; Indonesia would be nightmarish, even without Nipponese attention. How to gain Warning? Saro had acquired ex-Short Ch.Designer A.Gouge and had spare DO capacity(despite sloth on {its half of Gouge’s} Shetland); RAE’s AA.Griffiths’ axial had been assigned to MetroVick and needed a purpose.

Put that lot together and a bright spark came up with lagoons and lakes as ready bases. Support would come in by Sunderland/Catalina, as its feeble range required it to operate “behind the lines”. SR.A/1 was to be a “scout” in the Wild West sense, spooring ahead of Fleet and Force, strafing, dropping 2 bombs and skedalling. “Fighter” was a misnomer: rapid time-to-height, and pressurisation for operation upto 45,000ft. were to substitute for nippiness.

So, there was a certain logic. Churchill was fond of “funnies”.

Cheers guys will amend the text, perhaps removing the word ‘only’ would cover it.

PaulC

But couldn’t that description also apply to the Convair Sea Dart?

It’s not (technically) a flying boat, being ski-bourne. I know, I know…

The description on the data sheet’s fine, as long as you add the missing word – “fighter”. 🙂

But couldn’t that description also apply to the Convair Sea Dart?

Roger Smith.

The statement on that data sheet that it’s “the world’s first and only jet flying boat” seems plain wrong (or at least half wrong) – I’ve just spent a week on Russia’s black sea coastline photographing Beriev’s A-42 and A-200 jet powered flying boats in action.

Richard.

The description on the data sheet’s fine, as long as you add the missing word – “fighter”. 🙂

The Americans also had a fyling boat that was supersonic but not armed, neither did it go into production but still it was significant as a research testbed, more info when I am not so drunk!!!!!!!!.

Regards,

John.

John
Indeed a bizarre aircraft that grabbed my imagination too.

PaulC

www.paulcouper.co.uk

The statement on that data sheet that it’s “the world’s first and only jet flying boat” seems plain wrong (or at least half wrong) – I’ve just spent a week on Russia’s black sea coastline photographing Beriev’s A-42 and A-200 jet powered flying boats in action.

Richard.

Might be interesting to note that one of it’s engines was removed and used to power Donald Campbell’s Bluebird. Read that off the sign at Solent Sky.

John

I knew Bluebird K7 used a Beryl, though not one that had been fitted to the SRA.1. Campbell got two engines for the boat when it was built in the early 1950s and set a number of records with it from 1955 to 1964, after which she was fitted with an Orpheus from a Gant. Campbell got a complete Gnat, plus an engine from the Air Ministry and parts of the aircraft, including the tail fin were fitted to the boat. It was in this configuration that she crashed in Jan 67, killing Campbell.

Hall of Aviation Southampton

Might be interesting to note that one of it’s engines was removed and used to power Donald Campbell’s Bluebird. Read that off the sign at Solent Sky.

John

Noted and changed but I don’t know how to change the thread title, my bag! 😮 .

Regards,

John.

Ask one of the Mods 😉

Noted and changed but I don’t know how to change the thread title, my bag! 😮 .

Regards,

John.

Flying boat, not seaplane IMHO. 🙂

“Wings on my Sleeve” must have been re-published as I’ve had my copy for years. Highly recommended for anybody that’s never read it before.

Thanks for all the info guys!!, IMHO it ranks highly in ‘what’s the point?’ hall of fame, it looks and sounds good on paper and by all accounts it did very well at what it was meant to do but when you step back and reallity bites you must ask yourself ‘why?’.

I sometimes think that this form of aviation is the best becouse without it you would not have pioneers that push boundries and make it all possible.

One day I shall have to see it in the flesh as judging by the size and condition she is in she will absolutely blow my socks off!!!!!.

Kindest Regards,

John.

Eric ‘Winkle’ Brown has an account of test flying (and crashing) one in ‘Wings on my Sleeve’, just out – and a very fine read it is too.

There’s some great footage of it in action on the www.Britishpathe.com website. I want one. 😀

John
Indeed a bizarre aircraft that grabbed my imagination too.

PaulC

www.paulcouper.co.uk

Thanks BIGVERN I will have to find my way down there one day and have a look.

John.

And even at Solent Sky!

http://www.spitfireonline.co.uk/

Thanks BIGVERN I will have to find my way down there one day and have a look.

John.