Miles Fighters

Started by Old Paul, June 05, 2019, 11:44:17 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

Old Paul

Off the back of this - https://www.alternatehistory.com/forum/threads/miles-m-20-produced-at-cc-f-for-raf-faa-instead-of-hurricane.468720/ - discussion on the Alternate History forum, I was wondering what could be done with one of the Miles designs as a "Commonwealth" fighter? Easy to build with available materials and manpower and with reasonable performance. For production in Canada, Australia and India.

I know they came up with the M.20, but I had in mind something based on the Master, but with a single seat, 4-6 Brownings and perhaps a Taurus engine? (Not everyone's favourite, but not much bigger than the Mercury, although an extra 300 pounds) Maybe something like this...

jcf

There was the Kestrel powered M.24 Master Fighter.

http://www.airwar.ru/enc/other2/m24.html


Emergency single-seat fighter converted from M.9A Master Mk.I. Part of the rear cockpit
glazing and the rear seat were removed. Six 0.303 in (7.7 mm) machine guns were mounted
in the wings and a gunsight was installed. This conversion was applied to 23 aircraft, however
none were operationally used.

Old Paul

Oops...forgot about the M.24. So there's already the ability for a six gun armament.

I was thinking about a more powerful engine than the Kestrel or Mercury. Apart from the Taurus, there's also the Twin Wasp. A foot longer than a Mercury and about 285 pounds heavier, but slimmer. Would there be any way of advancing production at Lidcombe NSW?

Given that the Miles Kestrel first flew in 1937 and the Master in 1939, could Miles design a Commonwealth fighter in the same sort of time period and have them coming out of DAP/CAC, CCF and HAL in 1940?

The Wooksta!

Merlin power egg as applied to the M.20?

Wasn't the Twin Wasp fitted to the Master anyway?
"It's basically a cure -  for not being an axe-wielding homicidal maniac. The potential market's enormous!"

"Visit Scarfolk today!"
https://scarfolk.blogspot.com/

"She's died?!?  Then how's she meant to get the shopping home?"

The Plan:
www.whatifmodelers.com/index.php/topic

NARSES2

That "photo" has a dash of Corsair in it to my mind - nice one  :thumbsup:

With a different looking cockpit that M.24 would look very neat. Can see it in FAA service
Do not condemn the judgement of another because it differs from your own. You may both be wrong.

Old Wombat

#5
Quote from: NARSES2 on June 06, 2019, 06:30:35 AM
With a different looking cockpit that M.24 would look very neat. Can see it in FAA service

A Firefly cockpit/canopy might be the go;


Has a life outside of What-If & wishes it would stop interfering!

"The purpose of all War is Peace" - St. Augustine

veritas ad mortus veritas est

Old Paul

Quote from: The Wooksta! on June 06, 2019, 03:03:44 AM
Wasn't the Twin Wasp fitted to the Master anyway?
Twin Wasp Junior (R1535) according to Wiki, which sounds more likely. So an R1830 Twin Wasp would be an upgrade. With an extra 350+hp. :)

dogsbody

"What young man could possibly be bored
with a uniform to wear,
a fast aeroplane to fly,
and something to shoot at?"

jcf

Quote from: Old Paul on June 06, 2019, 11:10:08 AM
Quote from: The Wooksta! on June 06, 2019, 03:03:44 AM
Wasn't the Twin Wasp fitted to the Master anyway?
Twin Wasp Junior (R1535) according to Wiki, which sounds more likely. So an R1830 Twin Wasp would be an upgrade. With an extra 350+hp. :)


Twin Wasp SB4-G (R-1535) used on the Master
Weight: 1136 lbs.
Diameter: 44.13"
Length: 53.27"

R-1830-82 used on the Boomerang
Weight: 1465 lbs.
Diameter: 48.06"
Length: 60.28"

http://www.enginehistory.org/Piston/P&W/R-1535/TwinWaspJr.pdf

http://www.enginehistory.org/Piston/P&W/R-1830/R-1830Index.pdf

NARSES2

Quote from: Old Wombat on June 06, 2019, 07:36:34 AM
Quote from: NARSES2 on June 06, 2019, 06:30:35 AM
With a different looking cockpit that M.24 would look very neat. Can see it in FAA service

A Firefly cockpit/canopy might be the go;


Yup for something mid-War ? I was thinking of something like a Hurricane's to place it around 1940/41 ?
Do not condemn the judgement of another because it differs from your own. You may both be wrong.

Old Wombat

Quote from: NARSES2 on June 07, 2019, 06:00:46 AM
Quote from: Old Wombat on June 06, 2019, 07:36:34 AM
Quote from: NARSES2 on June 06, 2019, 06:30:35 AM
With a different looking cockpit that M.24 would look very neat. Can see it in FAA service

A Firefly cockpit/canopy might be the go;


Yup for something mid-War ? I was thinking of something like a Hurricane's to place it around 1940/41 ?

Why not go Spitfire glazing with a Malcolm hood, then? :unsure:

The Firefly may be late-war but the canopy certainly wasn't based on any new technology.
Has a life outside of What-If & wishes it would stop interfering!

"The purpose of all War is Peace" - St. Augustine

veritas ad mortus veritas est

Doug K

Quote from: dogsbody on June 06, 2019, 06:32:18 PM




Chris

I started scratch-building one of these over 30 years ago from that drawing, never finished it, it turned up recently...

jcf

I'd think that quick n' dirty production model would argue for use of the existing glazing.

NARSES2

Quote from: Old Wombat on June 07, 2019, 07:16:44 AM

Why not go Spitfire glazing with a Malcolm hood, then? :unsure:

The Firefly may be late-war but the canopy certainly wasn't based on any new technology.

I was simply thinking it might be easier to use more "traditional" glazing as an emergency fighter. A latter version, perhaps the naval one, might have one similar to the Firefly's ? You've certainly got me thinking of a navalised one  :thumbsup:
Do not condemn the judgement of another because it differs from your own. You may both be wrong.

NARSES2

Quote from: Doug K on June 07, 2019, 10:19:32 AM

I started scratch-building one of these over 30 years ago from that drawing, never finished it, it turned up recently...

I've built the resin M.20/4 and it's an attractive looking aircraft.
Do not condemn the judgement of another because it differs from your own. You may both be wrong.