What if Australia selected the Dauglas SBD Dauntless for local production?

[Volkodav]

I would like to kick off Australian local airframe and engine production earlier, i.e. the Hawker Demon and Kestrel.

Would the Kestrel / Peregrine be a good fit for the MB2?

As for the under carriage, why not stick with the spats initially at least, it still had more than adequate performance and it was simpler than retractable options.  By all means evolve the type and even go on to adopt later MB types, but get MB-2 production up and running, get it into service and making a difference.

[GTX_Admin]

The MB-2 only flew for the first time in August 1938 so I don't know if focussing upon it would have made any difference to things when one considers in the real world the first Australian built CA-1 Wirraway performed its maiden flight only a few months later in March 1939.

Maybe though you could do your Australian aircraft manufacturing starting a bit earlier with maybe the desire coming with the introduction of the Bristol Bulldog in 1930 followed by local production of the Hawker Demon in 1935.  Maybe the Demons are produced locally prior to the Wirraway.  If you want to lead onto the MB-2 one could perhaps have the Demons fitted with the Napier Dagger and thus looking a bit like the Hawker Hector:



Later on this is developed into something akin to the MB-2 with the more powerful Napier Dagger III coming off the same production line.

[Volkodav]

Well the Hector was one of the Army Cooperation versions of the Hart family, and the second batch of Demons acquired for the RAAF were specifically for the Army Cooperation role.

[jcf]

The Dagger ended up an orphaned turd, P & W or C-W engines would make much more sense
due to production numbers and commonality with numerous types which translates to massive
spares availability and greatly simplified logistics. The Dagger was also much more maintenance
intensive.

[apophenia]

As Jon said. Inspiration could come from the P&W Hornet-powered Persian Audax (to match the Persian Fury.

Or stay British and go with the Bristol Pegasus à la the Swedish Hart or Iraqi Audax. Alternatively, go with the smaller-diameter Bristol Mercury à la the Persian and Latvian Hinds. (The latter would work well if Australia also carried through on its initial interest in the Blenheim.)

[Volkodav]

Just had a thought. 

The plan was to cut their teeth on a simple type, i.e. the Wirraway before producing a more advanced type such as a fighter, so, why not have Australia produce the Mustang concurrently with North American?

It was designed to be easy / easier to manufacture than similar types, it was specifically designed for the British, and it was introduced into service before the Boomerang had its first flight.

Australia could have done the same with the Mustang as they did with the NA-16 and acquire a licence to manufacture and modify the design.  There would have been a lag in introducing an Australian Mustang I but it conceivably production and entry into service could have tracked fairly closely to what was achieved with the Boomerang.

[GTX_Admin]

My suggestion of the Dagger was only to give people a scenario for the MB-2 being used as was suggested earlier.

[Volkodav]

My suggestion of the Dagger was only to give people a scenario for the MB-2 being used as was suggested earlier.

That's the idea, brain storming.  You can sure tell the difference between the engineers who've had training and / or experience in continuous improvement, creative problem solving and lateral thinking, and those who aren't.  I get into similar circular discussions at work where people shut things down because blinkers and silos prevent them from understanding that what we are doing is brainstorming before applying the various caveats and restrictions, we are looking to develop the ideal state, based on what is needed / desired, vs what is possible.

[jcf]

My suggestion of the Dagger was only to give people a scenario for the MB-2 being used as was suggested earlier.

Yeah, which is why the mention of a re-engined MB-2.

[jcf]

That's the idea, brain storming.  You can sure tell the difference between the engineers who've had training and / or experience in continuous improvement, creative problem solving and lateral thinking, and those who aren't.  I get into similar circular discussions at work where people shut things down because blinkers and silos prevent them from understanding that what we are doing is brainstorming before applying the various caveats and restrictions, we are looking to develop the ideal state, based on what is needed / desired, vs what is possible.

Self-righteous much Paulie? 

[Volkodav]

Yep, you should have heard the condescending lecture I just gave my kids about as least telling us when they made a mess.  It turns out lemonade spilt on a chair will soak through clothes and dressings and soften recent surgical sites on your back to the point that the wound opens when you stand up to find out why your back is feeling cold and sticky.

On the other stuff though, I tend to look at whiffs as being in different categories, there's the pure fantasy / scify with no reality at all, there's the fantasy / scify giving lip service to reality, there's the Alt universe stuff, the alt reality stuff and then last but not least the reality with very minor changes that may make no real difference to what follows.  I love the brain storming on here, the different ideas and takes on things, the knowledge on some of the most incredibly obscure stuff that comes out at times is amazing.  What shits me is when I'm loving the brain storming, sucking up all the info and views, then someone comes in and shuts the whole thing down.  I see enough of that in the workplace with the insecure aviation types getting all upset and upitty when people start talking about non aviation stuff that may provide useful insight for a problem, I come here to relax, not to see more of one of the low points of my job.

[raafif]

time to bump this thread.

The Wirraway served Australia well but at the time of its selection there was some dissent in some quarters believing a more combat capable design should have been adopted instead. 

Maybe if we went with US aircraft earlier, the Curtiss A-8 Shrike may have been procured ?

Just as well we got the Vultee Vengence as by all informed opinion it was the best option for the times.

[elmayerle]

Considering the Curtiss A-8, first batch with Curtiss Conqueror engines and second batch with early Allison V1710's?  IIRC, the first flight test of the V1710 was 1934 or 1935.