The MB3 prototype first flew end August 1942 and crashed September 1942 – an engine failure forced an emergency landing and in attempting it, the pilot Captain Baker was killed. The aircraft was written off but rather than fly the remaining two?? prototypes and the design was changed to the MB4 and MB5 loosing a lot of time. Tempest V prototype with a Typhoon style Sabre IIA engine flew September 1942 Tempest I prototype with a Sabre IV engine flew February 1943 Tempest II prototype with a Centaurus engine flew June 1943. Not much flying of the MB3 had been achieved before the crash so not much data was available though it was around 20mph slower than the Tempest V but had a heavier armament (6 x 20mm cannon with 200 round each) and a quicker turn around time (I think this was still the case???) If the crash hadn’t occurred, or development of the remaining prototypes continued, would the construction methods of the Martin Baker aircraft, its heavier armament and quicker turn around time have given it an edge over the Hawker aircraft and would there have been production capacity to make the MB3?
I reckon the poloitics that killed off every Martyn Baker fighter proposal would still kill them unless thay had been a long long way superior to the Hawker aircraft.
Probably but it does raise an interesting possibility - if the Martin Baker series of aircraft had been built in place of the Tempest series, then would Hawker have had the production facilities to make one of my 'could have been' favourite - the Hawker High Speed bomber P1005 (B11/41). There were two problems, the Sabre engines and lack of production space and it looks as though it was lack of production spece that killed it off rather than the engine problem. This is why I asked about the MB methods of construction and production facilities.
