1941: top 3 Allied fighters

[stona]

My basic point is that if the Hurricane was so much better than the Whirlwind, why was the Hurricane withdrawn over Europe in favour of the Typhoon before the Whirlwind?

Because the Whirlwind was NOT OPERATED AS A FIGHTER at the time you refer to. In this respect the comparison with the Hurricane fighter in 1941 is completely irrelevant. The people of Malta would be surprised to hear that it was no longer a front line fighter in 1941. At the end of the war the RAF still had 651 Hurricanes in the UK and a total of over 2,000 in all commands.
The Whirlwind was operated as a ground attack aircraft (later a fighter bomber) in situations where it was unlikely to meet enemy fighters and was in any case escorted by RAF fighters (Spitfire or Hurricane).

How can an aircraft that because of its limitations was not even operated as a fighter be on a list of top three fighters in 1941?

Cheers

Steve

 

[stona]

Oh, no, the FTH for the peregrine was not 13500 ft, but 15000 ft (for +6.75 psi boost).

There may be a confusion in terms. My figure (from Corduroy) matches the 'International Power Rating' on your chart. It depends on what was 'normal' rpm I suppose.

I just checked in 'Gunston' and he does say it was rated at 885 hp at 3,000rpm, 15'000ft on 87 grade fuel.

Cheers

Steve

 

[CORSNING]

Hi guys,
I looked over Vincenzo's list in Post#13 and narrowed it slightly. I don't think anyone here has any objections to the Spitfire Vb as being the No.1 choice. I am curious what this group thinks we should be concentrating on for No.2 and No.3 at this stage in the discussion?

Hurricane II
Yak-1
MiG-3
P-40D/E
F4F-3
Whirlwind I
IK-3

Think of it this way. We have been retained as a group to find the best three aircraft that are within our grasp to deal with the Japanese, Italians and Germans in 1941.

 

[Greyman]

A quick mash-up of a few graphs.

Sorry it's such a mess - if anyone is too confused by it let me know and I'll spend a bit more time on a new one.

Hurricane IIb - 7,397 lb
Tomahawk IIb - 7,270 lb
Whirlwind I - 10,720 lb

All figures are from A&AEE, except:
Dotted lines are my estimates of emergency boost. The Hurricane's using the Hurricane IIc RAE chart from WWII Aircraft Performance and the Whirlwind's by extrapolating the speed curve and the boost curve.


The Tomahawk seems particularly bad - and I could be accused of cherry-picking a bad test - but I chose it because Boscombe Down stated:

Performance tests were required on a standard Tomahawk II aircraft, which is the standard American Tomahawk fully modified to British requirements.

The chief features likely to effect performance were - all guns fitted, but no blast tubes round the wing guns; no flame dampers or air cleaners were fitted; a wireless mast was fitted forward of the fin.

 

[tomo pauk]

Thanks for the graph, no mess at all
Just a note - the US tests official data show 350+ mph at 15000 ft for the 'sharp-nosed' P-40s, along with P-40D.

 

[Glider]

Because the Whirlwind was NOT OPERATED AS A FIGHTER at the time you refer to. In this respect the comparison with the Hurricane fighter in 1941 is completely irrelevant. The people of Malta would be surprised to hear that it was no longer a front line fighter in 1941. At the end of the war the RAF still had 651 Hurricanes in the UK and a total of over 2,000 in all commands.
The Whirlwind was operated as a ground attack aircraft (later a fighter bomber) in situations where it was unlikely to meet enemy fighters and was in any case escorted by RAF fighters (Spitfire or Hurricane).

How can an aircraft that because of its limitations was not even operated as a fighter be on a list of top three fighters in 1941?

Cheers

Steve

In 1941 the Hurricane was being withdrawn as a fighter in Europe as it wasn't a match for the Me109. In the Middle East and Malta as soon as the Me109 arrived the Hurricane suffered huge losses. In the Far East they were totally outclassed by the IJAAF fighters. The RAF knew this as did the Pilots. To believe that the Hurricane was a match for the opposition from 1941 onwards flies in the face of all evidence.
From 1941 its role was as a GA aircraft as was the Whirlwind.
In Europe the Hurricane units were the first to convert to the Typhoon a statement you can easily check, the Whirlwind squadrons were amongst the last, something else you can easily check. So the question still stands, why if the Hurricane was so much better than the Whirlwind, did the Whirlwind squadrons be amongst the last to convert to the Typhoon?

To say that the Whirlwind operated in areas where it was unlikely to meet enemy fighters is also incorrect. They flew a normal variety of missions, convoy patrols certainly but also targeted enemy airbases attacks on ports, blockade runners, factories, bridges and bomber escort, as I said the normal mixture of missions. In three years of combat in two squadrons 24 were lost in combat, 7 missing in action and 5 written off with battle damage after crash landings. 36 losses to enemy action in three years of combat across two squadrons in the most hostile air combat area around. I suspect these figures had something to do with the RAF delaying the conversion of the Whirlwind to Typhoons.

In dogfights with the Me109f at low altitude the Whirlwind more than held its own, something a Hurricane would struggle to do.

 

[Edgar Brooks]

In 1941 the Hurricane was being withdrawn as a fighter in Europe as it wasn't a match for the Me109.

It was actually being withdrawn to be sent to the Middle East, because there were no Spitfires to spare for that theatre.

In the Middle East and Malta as soon as the Me109 arrived the Hurricane suffered huge losses.

It was still better than nothing, and desert filters could be fitted, unlike the Whirlwind.

In the Far East they were totally outclassed by the IJAAF fighters.

In 1941?

To believe that the Hurricane was a match for the opposition from 1941 onwards flies in the face of all evidence.
From 1941 its role was as a GA aircraft as was the Whirlwind.

Except of course those that were employed as night intruders (see Kuttelwascher); while the Hurricane could fly at night, the Whirlwind's high landing speed meant that it was deemed to be unsuitable.

In Europe the Hurricane units were the first to convert to the Typhoon a statement you can easily check, the Whirlwind squadrons were amongst the last, something else you can easily check. So the question still stands, why if the Hurricane was so much better than the Whirlwind, did the Whirlwind squadrons be amongst the last to convert to the Typhoon?

Out of 87 Hurricane II Squadrons, 10 converted onto the Typhoon, while 43 converted onto the Spitfire V, which seems to indicate that the Air Ministry were more interested in equipping as many Squadrons as possible with the best available fighter.
Perhaps you need reminding that, even though 263 Squadron converted straight onto the Typhoon, 137, in June 1943, converted onto the Hurricane IV, then to the Typhoon in January 1944, so somebody in the RAF/Air Ministry didn't share your view on the superiority of the Whirlwind over the Hurricane.

 

[Vincenzo]

Greyman tomahawk is not too light?

 

[Greyman]

Greyman tomahawk is not too light?

I'm no P-40 expert, but here's what the test had:

Tare weight: 5,630 lb
Weight light: 5,296 lb
Fixed military load: 334 lb
Service load: 963 lb
Fuel (84 gallons): 605 lb
Oil (8 gallons): 72 lb
Flying weight: 7,270 lb

84 gallons seems like wing tanks only.

 

[stona]

In 1941 the Hurricane was being withdrawn as a fighter in Europe as it wasn't a match for the Me109. In the Middle East and Malta as soon as the Me109 arrived the Hurricane suffered huge losses. In the Far East they were totally outclassed by the IJAAF fighters. The RAF knew this as did the Pilots. To believe that the Hurricane was a match for the opposition from 1941 onwards flies in the face of all evidence.
From 1941 its role was as a GA aircraft as was the Whirlwind.
In Europe the Hurricane units were the first to convert to the Typhoon a statement you can easily check, the Whirlwind squadrons were amongst the last, something else you can easily check. So the question still stands, why if the Hurricane was so much better than the Whirlwind, did the Whirlwind squadrons be amongst the last to convert to the Typhoon?

To say that the Whirlwind operated in areas where it was unlikely to meet enemy fighters is also incorrect. They flew a normal variety of missions, convoy patrols certainly but also targeted enemy airbases attacks on ports, blockade runners, factories, bridges and bomber escort, as I said the normal mixture of missions. In three years of combat in two squadrons 24 were lost in combat, 7 missing in action and 5 written off with battle damage after crash landings. 36 losses to enemy action in three years of combat across two squadrons in the most hostile air combat area around. I suspect these figures had something to do with the RAF delaying the conversion of the Whirlwind to Typhoons.

In dogfights with the Me109f at low altitude the Whirlwind more than held its own, something a Hurricane would struggle to do.

The Hurricane started to suffer losses when the Bf 109 F turned up on Sicily.

The Hurricane was not principally a ground attack aircraft in 1941 (the time in question in this thread) it was one of the RAF's two front line fighters.

As regards conversion from the Hurricane, Edgar has made the point above. Most Hurricane units were fighter units and converted to the best available fighter, the Spitfire when it became available.

The Whirlwind flew low level hit and run raids for much of its career, somewhat like the Bf 110s of Erpr.Gr. 210 in 1940. They certainly did try to avoid enemy fighters. When 10 Group prepared instructions for the Whirlwinds carrying out 'Mandolin' (later 'Rhubarb') operations, on which they were anyway heavily escorted by real fighter, the instructions said:

"...it is proposed to carry out raids by small numbers of fighter aircraft, operating in conditions which would allow cloud cover, against selected enemy aerodromes and other German military objectives within striking range of this Group....the main factor in this operation and in selecting targets is the safety of the fighters; thus particular attention must be paid to cloud cover, and the likelihood of the pilot locating the target on coming through the cloud without making himself vulnerable by prolonged search."

The RAF sought to exploit the good low level performance of the Whirlwind. They typically crossed the Channel at 'low level' or 'sea level' before climbing over the French coast to 8-10,000 ft altitudes at which they could compete. This does not make them a good fighter. Combats were regularly taking place above 20,000ft.

Later the Whirlwind did operate by night. It was safer under cover of darkness. The fact that it was able to operate in this way is a testament to those who flew it as it was not initially deemed suitable for night flying.

The last time Whirlwinds crossed the French coast, on 26th November 1943, eight of them were escorted by the Spitfires of 610 Squadron, they were invariably escorted in daylight. Incidentally all eight were damaged by flak on this occasion. Flak is far more deadly than fighter to ground attack aircraft.
Of the 22 operational losses to known causes (excluding 'failed to return') 17 were to flak and just 5 to fighters.

The Whirlwinds role in daylight strikes was perhaps slightly unfairly summed up by No.263 Squadron's own intelligence officer. Having attacked Brest-Guipvas airfield the escorting squadrons of the Ibsley Wing (three of Spitfires and two of Typhoons) successfully engaged the Luftwaffe, the officer wrote,

"Whirlie-bait caused successful combats for the wing."

There are very few instances when the Whirlwind engaged in combat with Luftwaffe fighter over its two and a half year service life, I don't have time now to trawl for them.

Beware of Wikipedia:

"The Whirlwind proved a match for German fighters at low level, as demonstrated on 6 August 1941, when four Whirlwinds on an anti-shipping strike were intercepted by a large formation of Messerschmitt Bf 109s, claiming three Bf 109s destroyed for no losses."

The four Whirlwinds were accompanied by thirteen Spitfires of 118 Squadron. Four not three Bf 109s were claimed, two by the Whirlwinds and two by the Spitfires. In fact the only loss was one Bf 109 of Erg/JG 2.
This may have been shot down by a Whirlwind flown by Flt.Sgt. Brackley who reported:

"...the first enemy aircraft broke across my nose but was gone before I could fire. As the second broke away, also across my nose, I fired a 2.5 second barrage and saw it go straight into the sea."

AIR 50/103/3 if you've got £3.30 to spare or fancy a trip to the National Archives. I know you know your way around

As in many aerial combats the victim was shot down, probably unaware of the aircraft (in this case Brackley's Whirlwind) which attacked him and whose nose he was crossing. This does not in any way demonstrate the superiority of the Whirlwind to the Bf 109, rather it illustrates an unfortunate and fatal manoeuvre by the Messerschmitt pilot.

Here's an excerpt from another report which gives an idea of what happened when Whirlwinds saw Luftwaffe fighters:

"From there he was about to deliver the projected attack on Lannion aerodrome when someone gave the warning: "ME. 109s: beat it." About 6 ME 109s were seen in all: 5 definitely F, and 1 definitely E. Three were at 1000 feet, and 2 were at sea level coming towards the Whirlwinds. They made as if to deliver an attack, but then refused combat, either because they saw the Spitfires or because the Whirlwinds were too fast for them: (A.S.I. at this point showed 310.). The pilots report that the fire from the ME 109s. took the form of a regular line of black puffs, very like a barrage. Possibly they were firing shells fitted with a time fuse. They followed the Whirlwinds about 50 miles out to sea."

(AIR 27/1551)

The Whirlwinds made use of their low level performance to escape, exactly as 10 Group intended. The presence of escorting Spitfires gave the Bf 109 pilots food for thought.

Cheers

Steve

 

[Glider]

It was actually being withdrawn to be sent to the Middle East, because there were no Spitfires to spare for that theatre.

It was still better than nothing, and desert filters could be fitted, unlike the Whirlwind.

Some were withdrawn to the Middle East some were converted to other types.

Except of course those that were employed as night intruders (see Kuttelwascher); while the Hurricane could fly at night, the Whirlwind's high landing speed meant that it was deemed to be unsuitable.

True but night intruders and also Hurricanes deployed as nightfighters were there because they couldn't live in the air by day. Something the Whirlwind did right to the end of its service.

Out of 87 Hurricane II Squadrons, 10 converted onto the Typhoon, while 43 converted onto the Spitfire V, which seems to indicate that the Air Ministry were more interested in equipping as many Squadrons as possible with the best available fighter.

Again True, but its interesting that they didn't convert the Whirlwind until the planes were more or less worn out. Had the Whirlwind been worse than the Hurricane they presumably would have been withdrawn first. Typhoons were used to escort Whirlwinds on some of the latter missions.

Perhaps you need reminding that, even though 263 Squadron converted straight onto the Typhoon, 137, in June 1943, converted onto the Hurricane IV, then to the Typhoon in January 1944, so somebody in the RAF/Air Ministry didn't share your view on the superiority of the Whirlwind over the Hurricane.

No I hadn't forgotten but the story is stranger than that and is drawn from the book 263 and 137 Squadrons the Whirlwind Years
137 were originally going to transfer directly to the Typhoon and started to prepare for this. The first they heard that this wasn't going to happen was the Station Equipment Officer came in and told the S/L that they were going to get Hurricanes, as he had the paperwork for the spares that were on route. The S/L went to 11 Group to see what was happening and was told that due to a shortage of Sabre engines no new Typhoon squadrons were going to be formed. As a result they were going to get the Vengeance which really depressed him, When he got back to Manton the official order came in confirming that they were getting the Hurricane.
During the last week of the month the remaining aircraft squadron were transferred to 263 squadron and we took possession of our new Hurricane IVs. Despite S/L Wrays best intentions, 137 became non-operational for three weeks. The Hurricanes although armed with 40mm cannon or eight rockets, were much slower than the Whirlwind and were not popular.

The problem wasn't that the Hurricane was better than the Whirlwind, its simply that the RAF ran out of Whirlwinds and at the time didn't have any Sabre engines.

 

[stona]

The problem wasn't that the Hurricane was better than the Whirlwind, its simply that the RAF ran out of Whirlwinds and at the time didn't have any Sabre engines.

But it was a better fighter. At the ground attack trials in 1941 it was also deemed a better ground attack aircraft than the Whirlwind. I feel sorry for the poor old Hurricane, because it came up short of the Spitfire and was incapable of the same development it is often under estimated.

You can see above that when the 'Whirlybombers' encountered the Luftwaffe, even at low level (1,000ft or less) not only did they not engage, they did not press home their attack on the aerodrome but turned and ran for home. They were saved by their high speed at low altitude (hence the nickname 'Crickey') or the escorting Spitfires or both.

Cheers

Steve

 

[Edgar Brooks]

The problem wasn't that the Hurricane was better than the Whirlwind, its simply that the RAF ran out of Whirlwinds and at the time didn't have any Sabre engines.

You really must get away from this "better than" obsession; both aircraft were considered "past it" by mid-1941:-

The fact that "only" 34 Whirlwinds were lost is entirely inconsequential; 34 airframes = 17 weeks of Westland production time, and in 17 weeks they could (and did) produce around 136 Spitfires/Seafires. Replacing 34 Whirlwinds requires 68 obsolete engines, which would cost 136 Merlins. Both airframes were basically redundant, but had to soldier on, due to the Typhoon problems; building extra Hurricanes was easier, and less expensive, in time and materials, than building the equivalent number of Whirlwinds.

 

[parsifal]

Just something to note in this hurricane and BF 109 argument. In the MTO, both sides tended to send to the TO, their second string fighters. The majority of LW fighters until well into 1941 were Me 109es and various Me 110s. There were relatively few Fs delivered to the TO.

Over malta, the F was supreme, but still didnt knock the RAF out or manage to enforce the blockade. The RAF and RN, despite using inferior types, was still able to maintain a situation of disputed air space. In that sense the LW and the RA were both defeated. they both failed in their stated mission.....not that the mission was attainable in the first place.

 

[pbehn]

If the Typhoon had come into service and been anything like a good serviceable aircraft then the Hurricane would have ended production very quickly. Surprising to see the Tornado still "getting the nod" for officials in April 41. A Typhoon/Tornado designed around the Griffon may have given us two complimentary front line fighters (with the Spitfire) upto 1945.

 

[tomo pauk]

The Typhoon with single-stage supercharged Griffon would be more comparable with Spitfire V (and Hellcat?), rather than with Fw 190. It would not come in action until 1943, by when the Sabre is a bit more reliable than in 1942.
With a 2-stage supercharged Griffon, it would be there with Fw 190 and Spitfire IX (and F4U?), but that need to wait until winter of 1943/44, when 1st such engines are available.


Now, the Tempest with a 2-stage Griffon, that would be some aircraft Albeit a late comer.

 

[drgondog]

i hope that some american fighters expert can reply
looking on Baugher description of E and F, the drop tank capability was not present in the first batch of F, but the empty weight of F is 384 lbs heavier of E, and the engine of F were -49/53 versus the -27/29 of E.
I'm sure that many air forces would have not trouble to use also the original P-38

I wouldn't qualify as an "American Expert" but

1st FG was fully equipped with P-38E's in late November 1941. It deployed from Selfridge Field to San Diego for defense of the Naval Base on December 8, 1941, According to America's 100K there were 69 Lightning's (P-38D/E's) in active operational service with AAF units on December 7.

The engine for the YP-38, P-38D/E was V-1710-27/29 with GE B-2 Turbo. The P-38D/E had exactly the same internal fuel capacity as the F/G/H. The first F was delivered March 1942 with maneuver flap.

External wing racks and fuel feed capability was introduced in the F along with the more powerful engines and maneuver flap.

I comparison with the Hurricane, P-40B/C/D/E, the P-39 and F4F - the P-38E was certainly more capable with respect to speed, range, climb, and firepower so I don't understand the reluctance to include a 'top fighter 1941'..

The first production Mustang Mark I's arrived in Britain in October 1941 although do not get out of RAE evaluation until March 1942. At that time there were more than 90 fully modified by RAE and ready to go to war.

 

[stona]

If the Typhoon had come into service and been anything like a good serviceable aircraft then the Hurricane would have ended production very quickly.

No doubt, and that is reflected in Fighter Command and Air Ministry thinking from 1940 onwards. The document Edgar posted (April '41) is really the culmination and assertion of what was already known, that there was little or no room for development of the Hurricane.

Cheers

Steve

 

[tomo pauk]

...
I comparison with the Hurricane, P-40B/C/D/E, the P-39 and F4F - the P-38E was certainly more capable with respect to speed, range, climb, and firepower so I don't understand the reluctance to include a 'top fighter 1941'..
...

+1 on this.

 

[Edgar Brooks]

Camm wanted to have a go at fitting the Griffon into the Hurricane, but the extra weight, up front, would have meant bringing the wings forward, raking the centre section's spars forward to match, so he was told to forget it, and concentrate on the Typhoon.
Malta had received around 300 Hurricanes in 1941, but, in early 1942, refused any more saying that only Spitfires were good enough to cope with the 109F. At the end of 1942, Park was demanding the Spitfire IX, because the Spitfire V was outclassed by the 109G.