'Far better than we thought'

摘要

Farly in 1938, the increasing cost of the Air Ministry's bomber programme was becoming a serious problem. To reduce expenditure, Air Marshal Wilfrid Freeman, the air member for research and development, suggested building less sophisticated bombers that did not use expensive alloys, and which could be produced by semi-skilled labourers in companies with no previous experience of aircraft production. The idea was for a simple aeroplane, with hand-held gun positions rather than turrets. It would carry 1,0001b of bombs and have a range of 1,500 miles. Alternative, cheaper construction techniques included steel tubes covered with plywood, which Armstrong Whitworth was developing, and all-wood construction, which de Havilland had used successfully with the likes of the DH88 Comet and DH91 Albatross. The Chief of the Air Staff, ACM Sir Cyril Newall, did not think it was worth developing a bomber that could only take a 1,0001b bomb load. He believed it had to carry at least 3,0001b of bombs. Nor was he happy with hand-held guns; the aircraft would have to have a tail turret. This rather undermined the idea of keeping it small and cheap, de Havilland proposed a twin-Rolls-Royce Merlin-engined bomber development of its Albatross, which, the company claimed, would have a bomb load of 4,000lb, a range of 1,500 miles and a top speed of 260mph. However, Freeman was more impressed with the composite steel-tube/plywood approach and gave the contract to Armstrong Whitworth. de Havilland's first attempt at a wooden bomber suffered the indignity of being rejected in favour of the ill-starred Albemarle.