Love both aircraft, but personally prefer the Vixen. Even the DH 110s looked very sinister (especially in black). I guess canons could’ve have been fitted where the rocket packs where, either side of the nose wheel.
One thing though, could reheat have been fitted to derivations of the Sea Vixen? Its surprising how close the tail booms are to the jet efflux, would have thought afterburners could cause heat damage to the airframe in that area, and possibly the tail plane in some manouvres.
At least the Javs jet pipes exited in the extreme tail of the aircraft.

DeHavEng, is XP924 staying on the ground now? It looks lovely in its 899Sqn scheme.

Looking at the ‘boom’ layout of the tail of both the F-101 and the F-4, both of which are pretty close to the exhausts and both of which have reheat, I imagine this would not have been a problem that could not be dealt with. Indeed, in between the F-101’s design and prototype constructions, advances in materials meant that the tail could have been moved from the top of the fin to the bottom – it was placed at the top to keep it out of the efflux when the burners were lit. This could have been done but was not, on cost grounds to the regret of Voodoo crews who were caught out by the deep stall and flat spin… but that’s another story.

Sea Vixen vs Javelin? No contest IMO.

Don’t forget the Gyron was a totaly different engine from the Gyron Junior, which was used in Buccs.

The only aircraft it flew in was the mighty Bristol 188, the pilot of which was voted the most likely to eject from his aircraft!

See earlier post – Gyron Junior was a scaled down Gyron.

Apparently the name came from Power Jets and Frank Whittle, who wanted to call an engine ‘Gyrone’ before Rolls took over with their ‘river’ theme. DH appropriated the name but left the ‘e’ behind.

That reminds me, how is your P.1121 article coming along? I have been waiting with bated breath for some time now!:)

I was under the impression that the Olympus would have been the engine that powered the P.1121? I know that the Gyron was proposed for the P.1103 but by the time the 1121 entered construction the role had become more vague with the logic being that the Conway was the best low altitude operations, the Gyron the best for high and the Olympus the best middle of the road design.:confused:

BTW, I meant Tony Buttler’s book, sorry.

Both the Gyron and Olympus were tested in the P.1121 mock-up. The Gyron suffered from surging which could not be resolved, but the Olympus worked better apparently.

Bill Gunston’s ‘Secret Projects: Fighters’ (can’t remember the year) has some info on this and covers some of the projects that intended to use it, most notably the F.155T specification for a Mach 3 interceptor.

It was the first British engine cleared for use at Mach 2 I believe, but was too big to be practical. It was scaled down to 45% to create the Gyron Junior which was used in the Buccaneer S.1.

Quoting from Bill Gunston’s book on Rolls Royce, “In late 1944 an RM.17SM Merlin was run at Derby for fifteen minutes at 36lb boost on 150-pn fuel with water injection, recording an output of 2640hp”.

What was the maximum power output of an Allison v1750?

The need in 1940 wasn’t for a Griffon, it was for a Merlin with an anti g carburettor, and cannons, it is very possible that a Griffon Spit (or Hurri) would have been too cumbersome to take on the early (and more agile) 109.

The two reasons that the Merlin was the engine of ww2 were, 1, its power output and 2, its reliability, especially at high boost.

Can’t comment on the 2,640hp Merlin run, but the P-51H Mustang’s engine was a Rolls-Royce (i.e. not Packard) built Merlin with water injection which was rated at 2,250hp. Not sure Allisons have got close to this other than in ‘racing special’ trim but I stand to be corrected.

AFAIK the 109s in the Battle of France/BofB were not particularly more agile than Spits and Hurris, apart from possibly the former in roll, and the tactics were for high energy attacks with superior speed to escape after a single pass. The BEF’s Hurricanes would have benefited most IMO from Rotol/DH props, seat armour and self-sealing fuselage tanks, the lack of which made the Hurricane’s claim/loss ratio worse. A Malcolm hood probably wouldn’t have gone amiss either.

As I understand it the Allison’s turbo-supercharger was too bulky and heavy for a small-ish single seater but worked very well with it in larger aircraft where the bulk could be mitigated. All things being equal, a turbo-supercharger is going to be better than a geared supercharger because you don’t get mechanical losses and the boost automatically adjusts with altitude and air pressure. However, things are rarely equal in engineering.

A quote in a recent-ish Flypast (the one with the P-51A on the cover) said that an Allison engined ‘stang is around 20mph faster than a Merlin version ‘on the deck’ but much above that the Merlin takes over. The Merlin/Mustang combo seems to have been made in heaven – Merlins in P40s produced little difference to the Allison versions, though that may have more to do with the type of Merlin used and the airframe’s aerodynamics.

I think it would have taken more than Griffons to stop Germany overruning France in 1940. A modern fighter control system might have made more difference.

The FAA probaly latched on to multi role idea when the carriers started shrinking, due to limitations of carrier borne operations, ie only having room and equipment on a ship for a handfull of types.
There has always been the threat of merging the FAA into the RAF, since WWII, so this must of led to rivalery to any available defence budget and competition between the two forces, now of course it is merged aircraft wise.

See my earlier post – this was going on even when the RN was finally getting some of the most modern and capable carriers in the world, the Ark Royal and Illustrious class. They were intended to be equipped with Blackburn Skuas (dive bomber, patrol fighter, recon), Rocs (turret fighter, bomber) and Swordfish or Sharks (Torpedo bomber, bomber, artillery spotter and reconaissance). Lots of roles, but an inability to do most of them well. It was blind luck that the Swordfish was so successful as a torpedo bomber, partly due to its characteristics but also because in its most glorious moments (Taranto, Bismarck) it did not face any fighters.

The RN’s air arm was taken over in 1914, again in 1918, got control back in 1937 and the RAF took over most fixed-wing flying the 70s. Joint Force Harrier looks like history repeating, hopefully with some lessons learned.

Is F-35 the new P.1154?