Author Topic: Supermarine Swift and Attacker  (Read 8816 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline PR19_Kit

  • Closeted Take That fan
  • What-IF SIG
  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 27763
  • Whiffing since the 70s
Re: Supermarine Swift and Attacker
« Reply #60 on: May 20, 2018, 01:23:52 pm »
The problem with leaving the belly tank off a Swift would have meant it would have been limited to operations inside its airfield's perimeter......

Goodness knows why, that ginormous fuselage should have held a super-tanker's worth of fuel!
Any aircraft can be improved by fitting longer wings, and/or a longer fuselage

...and I'm not a closeted 'Take That' fan, I'm a REAL fan! :)

Regards
Kit

Offline zenrat

  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 13269
  • Not on the rug, man!
Re: Supermarine Swift and Attacker
« Reply #61 on: May 21, 2018, 02:48:51 am »
The problem with leaving the belly tank off a Swift would have meant it would have been limited to operations inside its airfield's perimeter......

Goodness knows why, that ginormous fuselage should have held a super-tanker's worth of fuel!

Wing tip tanks (rather than my so well drawn missiles) would be a solution as would underwing drop tanks.
Or, just invent a much more efficient engine.
Fred

Let's make Victoria great again.

Another ill conceived, poorly thought out, crudely executed and badly painted piece of what-if modelling muppetry from zenrat industries.

https://www.wunderground.com/personal-weather-station/dashboard?ID=IMELBOUR261

Offline AS.12

  • Makes own decals
  • ***
  • Posts: 344
Re: Supermarine Swift and Attacker
« Reply #62 on: May 21, 2018, 05:13:41 am »
I have the following internal fuel capacities for the Swifts, in Imp gallons, per Pilot's Notes:

MarkFrontCentreRearWingsGunbayTotal
F.Mk.111398104150465
F.Mk.21129874176460
FR.Mk.511298104192506
F.Mk.711210435101196548

Plus another 220 gallons in the optional belly tank for all Marks.

I don't have the breakdown for the Hunter other than totals:

MarkTotal
F.Mk1/2337
F.Mk.4/5414
F.Mk.6390


So the Swift was actually quite well endowed with fuel, for a British day fighter.  Except for that afterburny thing.

_
« Last Edit: May 21, 2018, 05:19:42 am by AS.12 »

Offline The Wooksta!

  • Resident Soup Dragon
  • What-IF SIG
  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 6262
  • Would you risk it for a chocolate biscuit?
Re: Supermarine Swift and Attacker
« Reply #63 on: May 21, 2018, 05:47:52 am »
And a draggy fuselage that was a hangover from the bulky centrifugal engine used by the Attacker, one that was also double skinned and vastly over-engineered = heavy, as opposed to the Hunter which was intended for the slimmer Avon from the start.
"It's basically a cure... for not being an axe-wielding homicidal maniac... the potential market's enormous!"

"Now then, Butch Harry. Tell us about Fulham."

The Plan - a Blog
www.whatifmodelers.com/index.php/topic,34762.0.html

Offline PR19_Kit

  • Closeted Take That fan
  • What-IF SIG
  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 27763
  • Whiffing since the 70s
Re: Supermarine Swift and Attacker
« Reply #64 on: May 21, 2018, 02:20:03 pm »

So the Swift was actually quite well endowed with fuel, for a British day fighter.  Except for that afterburny thing.


Exactly, without which it could not take-off.
Any aircraft can be improved by fitting longer wings, and/or a longer fuselage

...and I'm not a closeted 'Take That' fan, I'm a REAL fan! :)

Regards
Kit

Offline Snowtrooper

  • Makes own decals
  • ***
  • Posts: 512
Re: Supermarine Swift and Attacker
« Reply #65 on: May 21, 2018, 04:29:00 pm »
And a draggy fuselage that was a hangover from the bulky centrifugal engine used by the Attacker, one that was also double skinned and vastly over-engineered = heavy, as opposed to the Hunter which was intended for the slimmer Avon from the start.
How much of that over-engineering was actually due to Supermarine toying with the idea of making a carrier aircraft that would belly-land on a rubber deck, and they just over-engineered every prototype just in case one was picked for the role...? ;D

Offline andrewj

  • Makes own decals
  • ***
  • Posts: 329
Re: Supermarine Swift and Attacker
« Reply #66 on: May 22, 2018, 12:02:49 am »

So the Swift was actually quite well endowed with fuel, for a British day fighter.  Except for that afterburny thing.


Exactly, without which it could not take-off.

The F1 and F2 managed to take off without afterburner.

Offline zenrat

  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 13269
  • Not on the rug, man!
Re: Supermarine Swift and Attacker
« Reply #67 on: May 22, 2018, 01:40:48 am »
I have the following internal fuel capacities for the Swifts, in Imp gallons, per Pilot's Notes:

MarkFrontCentreRearWingsGunbayTotal
F.Mk.111398104150465
F.Mk.21129874176460
FR.Mk.511298104192506
F.Mk.711210435101196548

Plus another 220 gallons in the optional belly tank for all Marks.

I don't have the breakdown for the Hunter other than totals:

MarkTotal
F.Mk1/2337
F.Mk.4/5414
F.Mk.6390


So the Swift was actually quite well endowed with fuel, for a British day fighter.  Except for that afterburny thing.

_

Longer wings = more fuel (and a happy Kit)

Fred

Let's make Victoria great again.

Another ill conceived, poorly thought out, crudely executed and badly painted piece of what-if modelling muppetry from zenrat industries.

https://www.wunderground.com/personal-weather-station/dashboard?ID=IMELBOUR261

Offline joncarrfarrelly

  • Bertie Bassett
  • What-IF SIG
  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 6746
  • Turn that Gila-copter down!
Re: Supermarine Swift and Attacker
« Reply #68 on: May 22, 2018, 10:42:40 am »
Take advantage of the bulky fuselage and install a
low bypass turbofan. Increase the size of the intakes
to accomodate increased air-flow, keep reheat, and
make other mods* needed to fill a dedicated low-level
ground attack role.

* including, of course, reduced span for better low-level ride.  :wacko: :thumbsup:

"Evil our grandsires were, our fathers worse;
And we, till now unmatched in ill,
Must leave successors more corrupted still."
Horace, 65BC - 8BC. Marsh translation.

Offline PR19_Kit

  • Closeted Take That fan
  • What-IF SIG
  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 27763
  • Whiffing since the 70s
Re: Supermarine Swift and Attacker
« Reply #69 on: May 22, 2018, 02:57:19 pm »

So the Swift was actually quite well endowed with fuel, for a British day fighter.  Except for that afterburny thing.


Exactly, without which it could not take-off.

The F1 and F2 managed to take off without afterburner.


Only just...........
Any aircraft can be improved by fitting longer wings, and/or a longer fuselage

...and I'm not a closeted 'Take That' fan, I'm a REAL fan! :)

Regards
Kit

Offline zenrat

  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 13269
  • Not on the rug, man!
Re: Supermarine Swift and Attacker
« Reply #70 on: May 23, 2018, 04:17:10 am »
Take advantage of the bulky fuselage and install a
low bypass turbofan. Increase the size of the intakes
to accomodate increased air-flow, keep reheat, and
make other mods* needed to fill a dedicated low-level
ground attack role.

* including, of course, reduced span for better low-level ride.  :wacko: :thumbsup:



Fit a Pegasus, complete with cold air nozzles which would be pointed down and back to generate lift on the take off run.
Fred

Let's make Victoria great again.

Another ill conceived, poorly thought out, crudely executed and badly painted piece of what-if modelling muppetry from zenrat industries.

https://www.wunderground.com/personal-weather-station/dashboard?ID=IMELBOUR261

Offline joncarrfarrelly

  • Bertie Bassett
  • What-IF SIG
  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 6746
  • Turn that Gila-copter down!
Re: Supermarine Swift and Attacker
« Reply #71 on: May 24, 2018, 11:35:34 am »
The engine is mounted so far back in the fuselage that a Pegasus mounting is
questionable.



Pegasus
Type: Twin-spool turbofan
Length: 137 in (3.480 m)
Diameter: 48 in (1.219 m)
Dry weight: 3,960 lb (1,796 kg)

Avon
Type: Turbojet
Length: 126 in (3,200 mm)
Diameter: 35.7 in (907 mm)
Dry weight: 2,890 lb (1,310 kg)

Perhaps a low-bypass version of the Avon?
"Evil our grandsires were, our fathers worse;
And we, till now unmatched in ill,
Must leave successors more corrupted still."
Horace, 65BC - 8BC. Marsh translation.

Offline PR19_Kit

  • Closeted Take That fan
  • What-IF SIG
  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 27763
  • Whiffing since the 70s
Re: Supermarine Swift and Attacker
« Reply #72 on: May 24, 2018, 03:15:09 pm »
This is WhiffWorld, just move it forward............  ;D ;D
Any aircraft can be improved by fitting longer wings, and/or a longer fuselage

...and I'm not a closeted 'Take That' fan, I'm a REAL fan! :)

Regards
Kit

Offline joncarrfarrelly

  • Bertie Bassett
  • What-IF SIG
  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 6746
  • Turn that Gila-copter down!
Re: Supermarine Swift and Attacker
« Reply #73 on: May 24, 2018, 03:22:50 pm »
This is WhiffWorld, just move it forward............  ;D ;D

 ;D ... and add some humongous elephant-ear intakes.
Sounds like a job for ericr.  :thumbsup:
"Evil our grandsires were, our fathers worse;
And we, till now unmatched in ill,
Must leave successors more corrupted still."
Horace, 65BC - 8BC. Marsh translation.