A navalized Supermarine design could emerge from a regular four- to five-year replacement rhythm beginning in 1918. Repeated generations would place a new fighter in service around 1937 instead of forcing the Admiralty into an emergency choice after regaining control of the Fleet Air Arm. The proposed lineage draws on the gull-wing Supermarine Type 224 and a C5 designation, but no surviving order proves the specific aircraft, so it remains a contingent design outcome. Once radar and fighters undermined the belief that bombers would always get through, the Air Ministry urgently concentrated Supermarine on Spitfire production and the Navy received the Fairey Fulmar instead. A retained procurement cycle could avoid that late emergency without guaranteeing an effortless technological lead. Better British aircraft would also invite foreign responses, and later wartime variants would still depend on industrial capacity and government decisions.
Notable Point · 1:25:12-1:29:42
A continuous cycle of carrier fighters
Continuous naval fighter procurement from 1918 could leave the Fleet Air Arm with a more capable late-1930s aircraft instead of an urgent, late catch-up.