Comments by "Simon Nonymous" (@Simon_Nonymous) on "Blackburn F.3; Didn’t Even Get Off the Ground" video.

  1. My thoughts exactly... but before we laugh too much, Ed's note about the Gladiator is a good reminder that even in the early 30s, biplanes were almost the rule, and so it was in Germany, Italy and Japan. By 1936/37 - stressed skin monoplanes are in Squadron service. What a fast moving time for technology.
    6
  2. I like its looks! It was so cutting edge yet so 20s - evaporative cooling, stressed metal skin fuselage, potentially a great engine, yet open cockpit, fixed landing gear, and using Vickers MGs. As Forgotten Weapons would say, a bit of a cludge. I like the Bf 109 type rudder, and also when you shows pics of the Westland competitor, it was funny to see what looks like a Lysander with an inline engine: I guess some plane makers build the same plane more or less, until it finds a niche :-)
    6
  3. and altitude sickness ;-)
    4
  4. A very good question; you can find on Wikipedia why the RAF went for eight MGs in the Hurricane and Spitfire. Essentially it was felt that when air to air combat might depend on split seconds bursts of fire, lots of lead in the air all at once was more important for causing damage than being able to fire for longer. So, as Vickers guns were replaced by the Browing, the focus was on high rates of fire from multiple guns. Right or wrong, it was not done on a whim.
    2
  5. A really good point. Despite what some commenters here might say, it wasn't that easy to go monoplane - the E.III wasn't so good due to its wing configuration, quite the opposite, it was using prewar wing warping technology, and was a bit of a bugger to fly. It did the damage with it's interrupted/synchronsied forward firing machine gun. Engine design had to advance to a point where the power could drag a plane along fast enough to reduce the lift needed to what could be provided by a monoplane; this I suppose was also linked to the ability to build airframes strong enough and light enough to take the power of the newer engines. But - yes I have always pondered this too, and such a shame that war took a massive part in driving technology so far and so fast.
    2
  6.  @JohnyG29  well said. I forgot the Bristol.
    1