• Hi Guest! Forum rules have been updated. All users please read here.

British specification S.11/43 naval carrier-borne reconnaissance bomber aircraft

blackkite

Don't laugh, don't cry, don't even curse, but.....
Joined
May 31, 2007
Messages
7,680
Reaction score
3,187
Hi!
http://www.oocities.org/heartland/village/4082/brit/odd_air.htm

"Specification S.11/43 was for a naval reconnaissance aircraft. The specification called for the design and construction of a twin-engine reconnaissance aircraft for visual and photographic reconnaissance and shadowing, by day or night. The aircraft was to have a maximum all up weight of 24,000 lb. Height (stowed) 17 ft., 1ength 45 ft., Span (spread) 60 ft., Span (folded) 20 ft. Power wing folding was also required.The contract to produce the aircraft to this specification went to Short Bros for their S38 Sturgeon.
A contract was issued on 12/2/44 for 3 prototypes, with serials RK787, RK791 & RK794. The first Short SA.I Sturgeon I RK787 flew at Rochester Airport on 7/6/46. The second, RK791, flew from Sydenham on 18/5/48, A third, RK794, was modified to a Mk.2 with a new serial, VR363.
Other manufacturers in contention were Armstrong Whitworth with its Armstrong Whitworth A.W.54 and A.W 54A(jet aircraft), Westland with design studies utilising either H. I turbojet or Pratt and Whitney radial engines, and an unnumbered Supermarine project."

Tony-san's great book include Blackburn S.11/43 and Fairey S.11/43.

Sturgeon.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Short_Sturgeon
"Variants
Sturgeon S.1Carrier-borne strike aircraft, one completed at Shorts, Rochester before production moved to Belfast. Three prototypes were ordered but the third was completed as the TT.2 prototype. The production contract for 30 S.1s to build at Rochester was cancelled.
Sturgeon TT.2target tugs, two prototypes and 23 production aircraft ordered to be built at Belfast some later converted to the TT.3 standard.
Sturgeon TT.3 Revised target tug variant, five modified at Rochester from TT.2s.
S.B.3Prototype anti-submarine aircraft built in Belfast. Two prototypes ordered with the first flying on 12 August 1950 and then demonstrated at the 1950 Society of British Aerospace Companies' (SBAC) Farnborough Airshow; the second example was completed but never flown.
Jet Sturgeon Night fighter Drawings exist for a Sturgeon variant modified with two Rolls Royce AJ.40 turbofans in place of the Merlins and armed with four 20mm Hispano cannon. This was linked to the 1945 decision by the Assistant Chief of the Naval Staff (Air) to order the evaluation of a Sturgeon night fighter derivative with improved performance as a low-risk alternative to the development of the De Havilland Sea Hornet NF.21 under N.21/45. As the Sea Hornet NF.21 was successful, no detailed development followed.
Operators"

Flightglobal Sturgeon.
https://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1946/1946%20-%202080.html

Jet Sturgeon picture is here.
http://beyondthesprues.com/Forum/index.php?PHPSESSID=ftu9de3o40fp2shen3b9eabm85&topic=1428.0

SB.3 pictures.
http://www.airwar.ru/enc/sea/sb3.html
Prototype pictures.
https://forum.keypublishing.com/showthread.php?122135-Short-Sturgeon-First-and-second-Prototype
TT.2 picture. Nose shape is interesting.
https://elpoderdelasgalaxias.wordpress.com/2016/10/20/short-sturgeon-tt-2-swords-into-punching-balls/

TT.3 picture.
http://www.hyperscale.com/2009/reviews/books/sturgeonbookreviewsn_1.htm
 

Attachments

  • Short stUrgeon.jpg
    Short stUrgeon.jpg
    34.6 KB · Views: 549
  • Short Jet-Sturgeon Nightfighter Base Top.jpg
    Short Jet-Sturgeon Nightfighter Base Top.jpg
    26.6 KB · Views: 122
  • Short Jet-Sturgeon NF Side Base.jpg
    Short Jet-Sturgeon NF Side Base.jpg
    21.5 KB · Views: 113
  • AW54A.jpg
    AW54A.jpg
    15.7 KB · Views: 124
  • e0e26c1360ba98da2eb4c03ef0eb633b--shorts-google-search.jpg
    e0e26c1360ba98da2eb4c03ef0eb633b--shorts-google-search.jpg
    66.1 KB · Views: 132
  • Sturgeon_AdHoc_Rearcover_01_fs.jpg
    Sturgeon_AdHoc_Rearcover_01_fs.jpg
    71.4 KB · Views: 113
  • perhaps Sturgeon TT.3.jpg
    perhaps Sturgeon TT.3.jpg
    26.7 KB · Views: 471
  • short_sturgeon.gif
    short_sturgeon.gif
    27.1 KB · Views: 492
  • Sturgeon TT.2.jpg
    Sturgeon TT.2.jpg
    70.4 KB · Views: 492
  • Sturgeon second prototype.jpg
    Sturgeon second prototype.jpg
    109.8 KB · Views: 520

hesham

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
May 26, 2006
Messages
27,612
Reaction score
4,574
And from my dear Tony Buttler; British Secret Projects : Fighters & Bombers 1935-1950,

here is a Blackburn,Fairey and Westland S.11/43
 

Attachments

  • 1.png
    1.png
    65.5 KB · Views: 178
  • 2.png
    2.png
    123.8 KB · Views: 199
  • 3.png
    3.png
    91.2 KB · Views: 184

blackkite

Don't laugh, don't cry, don't even curse, but.....
Joined
May 31, 2007
Messages
7,680
Reaction score
3,187
Oh thanks a lot. Excellent!! :D
Fairey and Westland design had mixed engine.

I feel the name "Sturgeon" is come from SB.3 shape.
 

Attachments

  • Sturgeon-sea-life-161084_399_346.jpg
    Sturgeon-sea-life-161084_399_346.jpg
    52.3 KB · Views: 84

Schneiderman

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2012
Messages
1,490
Reaction score
591
I have never seen anything which would suggest that Supermarine considered a project for S.11/43, although if it was un-numbered then no serious design work would have been carried out. Supermarine's designers early thoughts were sketched as TD drawings and only allocated an official Type number if management decided to authorise preliminary design work.
 

DWG

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Feb 11, 2007
Messages
853
Reaction score
630
The Sturgeon name predates the SB3 by quite a while, IIRC, and fits with Shorts fish names for their carrier aircraft, c.f. Swordfish and Albacore, and with the alliterative S-names for Shorts aircraft in general.

And I'm the artist for the two Jet Sturgeon views in the first post, BTW. I'd completely forgotten about those.
 

blackkite

Don't laugh, don't cry, don't even curse, but.....
Joined
May 31, 2007
Messages
7,680
Reaction score
3,187
Many thanks gentlemen. :D
I feel this wonderful, amazing and great list need some update.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Air_Ministry_specifications
 

DWG

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Feb 11, 2007
Messages
853
Reaction score
630
It does, and I've considered doing it at times, but it's a fair amount of work. I did bash the wiki Sturgeon article into better shape a few years ago, mostly by adding in the historical context around the carriers.
 

Avimimus

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Dec 16, 2007
Messages
1,974
Reaction score
94
Let's all take a moment to appreciate how the jet assisted Fairey proposal has similarities to the Fulmer and the Battle... what a long live and persistent layout! (I suppose even the Gannet has some similarities - but it isn't so striking).
 

Schneiderman

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2012
Messages
1,490
Reaction score
591
DWG said:
It does, and I've considered doing it at times, but it's a fair amount of work.
I made an effort to add material to one aircraft page, all based on detailed reseach, only to have some clown delete and/or modify it back to the popular fiction view. So I won't be bothering to do that again :mad:
 

Schneiderman

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2012
Messages
1,490
Reaction score
591
Avimimus said:
Let's all take a moment to appreciate how the jet assisted Fairey proposal has similarities to the Fulmer and the Battle... what a long live and persistent layout! (I suppose even the Gannet has some similarities - but it isn't so striking).
Richard Fairey expended a lot of effort to portray the Air Ministry, RAF and FAA as conservative and responsible for holding the aircraft designers back. But in truth it was he who rarely allowed his designers much freedom while he was tightly focussed on maximising profit. Lobelle had a good eye for design but, as you say, ideas were frequently recycled too many times.
 

Grey Havoc

The path not taken.
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2009
Messages
13,849
Reaction score
3,724
Schneiderman said:
DWG said:
It does, and I've considered doing it at times, but it's a fair amount of work.
I made an effort to add material to one aircraft page, all based on detailed reseach, only to have some clown delete and/or modify it back to the popular fiction view. So I won't be bothering to do that again :mad:

I know the feeling.
 

PMN1

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2006
Messages
791
Reaction score
227
hesham said:
And from my dear Tony Buttler; British Secret Projects : Fighters & Bombers 1935-1950,

here is a Blackburn, S.11/43

Has anyone found any data on the Blackburn design since the book was first released?
 

Schneiderman

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2012
Messages
1,490
Reaction score
591
Tony is updating and splitting the book in two, the bomber part of the book is due for publication next year, maybe there will be more in that (the fighter part of the book has already been updated and is due out later this year)
 

PMN1

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2006
Messages
791
Reaction score
227
The wiki article on the Short Sturgeon does suggest maximum sizes and weights

Specification S.11/43 called for the design and construction of a twin-engine naval reconnaissance aircraft for visual and photographic reconnaissance and shadowing, by day or night, and also able to operate as a bomber. The specification included a maximum all-up weight of 24,000 lb, height (stowed) of 17 ft, length of 45 ft and a wingspan of 60 ft (spread) / 20 ft (folded). Powered wing-folding was also required.

What would be interesting to know would be the turret on the Blackburn design - retractable or remotely operated.
 

Similar threads

Top