Talk:Fairey Albacore

message: This article was automatically  assessed because at least one article was rated and this bot brought all the other ratings up to at least that level. BetacommandBot 10:18, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  WikiProject class rating

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Fairey Albacore. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081201155942/http://my-malta.com/interesting/barker/thomasbarker01.html to http://my-malta.com/interesting/barker/thomasbarker01.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:33, 27 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: This article does suggest that the Albacore was a failure in that "despite the intention" of replacing the Swordfish (which was a frontline torpedo-bomber at the time of the Albacore's introduction), the newer aircraft was "retired before it". The two biplanes are described as having been replaced by two monoplanes; the Barracuda and the Avenger.
But what the article does not really make entirely clear to me in the opening is whether or not the Swordfish was successfully replaced by the Albacore in the FAA as a frontline torpedo bomber with the fleet aircraft carriers, with the Albacore serving in that role while the Swordfish was relegated to secondary roles such as reconnaissance & A/S work operating from escort carriers. It would make sense that the existing frontline torpedo bombers in the FAA would be replaced ASAP by the faster and more versatile Barracuda as it became available, but were these purely Albacore squadrons by then, or did they still include Swordfish squadrons at that date? If the former case, then it would hardly be seen as a slight on the Albacore nor cause it to be adjudicated a failure. Meanwhile the almost STOL-like Swordfish could continue in auxiliary ops from CVEs until replaced by the highly versatile Avenger as enough of these became available (so as to make continued use of the veteran biplane a redundancy).
But is this what happened? I don't know from reading this article's opening paragraph. Can we clarify whether the Swordfish actually outlived the 'intended replacement' Albacore in its intended primary role of fleet torpedo-bomber or not? 2A00:23C7:3119:AD01:15:2911:E6E:65EC (talk) 22:36, 30 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: The Hayes factory producing the Albacore had to cease production order to convert the factory over to building Fireflys. Fairey had ceased production of the Swordfish prior to starting serial production of the Albacore, but Blackburn was contracted to continue production of the Swordfish after Fairey ceased production. Blackburn continued Swordfish production until 1944, and these aircraft were used in secondary roles, primarily for ASW work on Escort Aircraft Carriers. It is true that Albacores replaced the Swordfish on fleet aircraft carriers and continued in that role until 1943, long after the Swordfish was relegated to ASW duty. The Albacore was a superior aircraft to the Swordfish and would have been better suited, even to the ASW role, but it would have been to costly to build another factory just for the Albacore, when the Swordfish, although an inferior aircraft in almost every respect, was 'good enough' for the ASW role, and much cheaper to build. The Albacore, with it's constant speed prop, and much more powerful engine actually had somewhat better STOL characteristics than the Swordfish. I'll do some more research and propose some edits to the article in a few days.Damwiki1 (talk) 03:08, 1 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Swordfish replacement