Favorite WWII Prototypes that never made it?

It could still do 420 knots, according to German Wikipedia (Vikipedia?).

A Spitfire that could do 482 mph??? Why does anybody still believe anything but the most elementary facts that Wikipedia posts? The best info I get from Wikipedia is when I click on the tab at the top that says “talk.” Then you get the behind-the-scenes arguments by all the people who actually know what they’re talking about but don’t have the time, knowledge or desire to go through the Wikipedia posting and editing process.

All that Wikipedia wants is “a citation.” Whether the citation is right or wrong doesn’t seem to matter. If it’s in print somewhere, it’s correct. If you say, “But I was there, I saw exactly what happened that day, I talked to the test pilot, in fact he was my father,” Wikipedia will respond, “but do you have a citation?”

Wikipedia is the single largest myth-propagating facility on the planet, since every subsidiary site simply copies whatever they have posted, myths and all. I can’t tell you how much aviation buehlchit I’ve found on Wikipedia while doing research for the aviation-history articles I write.

But do I have a citation? Actually, no.

There are photographs of DP845 – the Griffon-engined develoment Mk IV – plus a side pic and 3-view drawing of the six-cannon installation on page 137 of Shacklady’s Spitfire book.

The drawing shows a high-altitude wing with pointed tips though – unlike the model.

DP845 went on to become the prototype Mk XII.

Further photos of the model in oldironside’s post shows the underside of the wing – with huge hinges for the slotted flaps – here.

Ken

I reckon the canon breach fairings would have been good for at least 5 knots worth of drag each.

It could still do 420 knots, according to German Wikipedia (Vikipedia?). However, I just discovered that the info there was taken from an English language site and translated. Link here.

http://www.spitfire-mk9.com/spitfire_variants.html

I reckon the canon breach fairings would have been good for at least 5 knots worth of drag each.

That just looks – wrong.

It does look a bit like something a 14-year old would sketch, except without the auxiliary jet engines and a Boulton Paul power turret behind the pilot. 😮

That just looks – wrong.

Spitfire…

Mark IV.

A Rolls Royce Griffon and no fewer than six 20mm cannon, intended to enter squadron service in October 1941 (at least according to the German Wikipedia article).

I really like the MB-5 as well, which has been mentioned here a couple of times. However, even more so, I think the MB-3 to be among the most attractive fighter aircraft ever created. Certainly the most attractive to be prototyped but never reach production in my opinion.

Me too. It would have been interesting to see how it compared to its contemporaries.
For my real ‘I wish it had made it’ though I have to say Dornier Do 335. Before anyone points out that it did make it into production I agree but by the time hostilities ended only about 20 airframes had been completed and I don’t think any actually made it into service.

From stuff I’ve read at Kew, it’s clear that although the threat of high altitude invasion of British airspace by the Germans had receded, making the Welkin apparently redundant, it was still being considered as a possibility for use in the Far East.

Hence all those airframes held in MUs until 1946.

Hi
I can just visualize a welkin with tropical filters…and seac markings..
Now where is that model kit…:D
cheers
Jerry

From stuff I’ve read at Kew, it’s clear that although the threat of high altitude invasion of British airspace by the Germans had receded, making the Welkin apparently redundant, it was still being considered as a possibility for use in the Far East.

Hence all those airframes held in MUs until 1946.

Westland Welkin……..

Hi
personally I think it did make it, as after the prototype, it had a production run of about 70 aircraft.
cheers
jerry

Hi
gloster f9/37

http://www.edcoatescollection.com/ac6/Gloster%20F9_37.html

cheers
Jerry

Arguably, I would qualify the Natter is “making it”. A small number were ready for service when their base was overun in the final days before VE day.

http://www.militaryfactory.com/aircraft/detail.asp?aircraft_id=103

That intersting – that base is only a few miles away from here. I may go and take a look.

http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natter-Startstellen_Kirchheim/Teck

WW11 prototypes that didnt make it

The XP-47 H used Chryslers FIRST “HEMI” engine, I have a cutaway drawing of it and am told two engines are still in existence.

Natter

I don’t think this went onto production, did it? Natter at Chino 1998

Arguably, I would qualify the Natter is “making it”. A small number were ready for service when their base was overun in the final days before VE day.

http://www.militaryfactory.com/aircraft/detail.asp?aircraft_id=103

The Spruce Goose

Focke-Wulf 191.

Part of the Bomber B programme, hamstrung by the same engine problems as the Ju288, but with the added drawback of being totally electric. No hydraulics, hence the nickname the flying powerstation.

Gloster E5/34………….

But I thought it DID go into production. :rolleyes:
http://www.biltihobby.com/catalog/images/jam-005254_001.jpg

I’ve always been interested by the Gloster F.5/34 / Mitsi A6M comparison, is there any documented evidence that one was influenced by the other, or just a case of designers coming up with a similar looking design?

I really like the MB-5 as well, which has been mentioned here a couple of times. However, even more so, I think the MB-3 to be among the most attractive fighter aircraft ever created. Certainly the most attractive to be prototyped but never reach production in my opinion.

Gloster E5/34………….

But I thought it DID go into production. :rolleyes:

http://www.biltihobby.com/catalog/images/jam-005254_001.jpg