fubar57
General
Mk.IV could carry a 500lb bomb under each wing
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
So these pilots are testing a Spit V vs a Hap so they can figure out the strong points and weak points of both aircraft so hopefully they could keep themselves and their squadron mates from dying and you think they forgot to try the overboost when the Hap was whipping the Spit V from 0-20,000 feet?
Wouldn't there be a note somewhere,"Hap stomps Spit from 0-20,000, BUT if you use overboost Hap doesn't have a chance"
Seems that would be a relevant addition to the test. OR they used it and didn't mention it.
Zero had overboost available as well
Ah, that would be the politics involved. In 1939, when Britain went to war, the Commonwealth countries stepped up and sent their sailors, soldiers and pilots to help. By December 7th 1941 there was exactly one modern fighter in Australia, a single Hurricane I Trop, V7476. The British promised that the Hurricanes in Malaysia would keep the Japanese away from Australia. So when the Japanese bombed Darwin in 1942 there were no fighter defences available, not even Hurricanes. The Australians were rightly unamused, and Winston Churchill hastily promised to send them a wing of Spitfires. The resulting reformation of No1 Wing was actually two RAAF Spitfire squadrons from the UK plus 54Sq RAF, but because it was so associated with Winnie it was christened the "Churchill Wing" by the press. Ironically, upon hearing of the plan, the experienced pilots in all three squadrons transferred to other UK squadrons, meaning the majority of No1 Wing's pilots came straight from training units.…..But it is good question as to why Australia didn't get Hurricanes....
During the BoB, a pilot had to report if he used max boost. The fitters were then supposed to strip the engine and look for signs of wear. As the situation became more desperate and the trust in the Merlin grew, this was reduced to the fitter pulling out the oil filter and checked for white metal in the oil. By the time the P-40s were flying in the Desert the RAF was more relaxed, and whilst the pilot still had to report using WEP, the official procedure was now for the fitter to just check the Allison's oil filter, record it as "clean" on the Form 700, and that was it. The Allison was always considered very reliable in RAF service.I think we have a problem here in equating bearing failure to engine life or time between overhauls....
If you mean the cigar-shaped 44-gallon tanks, they were actually called ferry tanks as they were only intended for long-range deliveries, not combat use. Part of the reason the RAF did not intend them being jettisoned was they each had their own electric pump inside, making them rather expensive to manufacture.One of the things mentioned in "Hurricane & Spitfire Pilots at War" is that the wing mounted ferry tanks used by Hurricanes were not jettisonable…..
The air pressure and temperature drop as you gain height. For engine performance, the less dense air has less oxygen, which means you need to push more air into the engine (with a supercharger) to get the same level of horsepower as you did at sea level. If you have a relative air density of 1 at sea level, it has already dropped to 0.73 by the time you get to 10,000ft, and 0.53 by 20,000ft, meaning your engine that produced 1000hp at sea level is probably only going to generate 730hp at 10,000ft and 530hp at 20,000ft without supercharging.I know there's a serious difference when you're flying close to sea level or up at 35000 feet but how much difference is it between 10000 and 20000
Quoting posts regardless of a like or dislike situation, provides context.I'm well aware of all that, I'd appreciate since you and I clearly don't see eye to eye that you didn't quote my posts or respond to them.
This was recognised by the RAF who themselves described the Hurricane as obsolete
Not so. The late Ki-43 III was faster and considered a pretty good match for a Spitfire V Trop, but by the time they reached the frontline the RAF had Spitfire VIIIs and P-47s. Very few Ki-43 IIIs reached Burma, meaning the Japanese pilots were still using Ki-43 IIs in 1944, which were not considered superior to the Hurricane II by the RAF.….In all other criteria, speed, agility, climb, range take your pick, the Ki43 was in a different class.....
Whilst the Spitfires were moved forward to provide air-superiority ahead of the frontline, the Hurricanes were given the vital tasks of both anti-bomber defence and escort of the Dakota supply flights. The Commonwealth strategy in the Arakan was to stand and fight, using resupply from the air. Escorting the Dakotas was vital, and the Hurricanes did a very good job, losing only one Dakota to Japanese fighters. You can read more about the use of Hurricanes after the arrival of Spitfires here. Please note the New Zealander pilots mentioned did not have any qualms about dogfighting with the Ki-43, especially when they used tactics like the rolling dive attack followed by a climb away, Frank Carey's version of boom'n'zoom.…. This was recognised by the RAF who themselves described the Hurricane as obsolete and the only reason it was kept in service in the Far East was its ability as a particularly accurate bomber.....
Not so. The late Ki-43 III was faster and considered a pretty good match for a Spitfire V Trop, but by the time they reached the frontline the RAF had Spitfire VIIIs and P-47s. Very few Ki-43 IIIs reached Burma, meaning the Japanese pilots were still using Ki-43 IIs in 1944, which were not considered superior to the Hurricane II by the RAF.
Ah, that would be the politics involved. In 1939, when Britain went to war, the Commonwealth countries stepped up and sent their sailors, soldiers and pilots to help. By December 7th 1941 there was exactly one modern fighter in Australia, a single Hurricane I Trop, V7476. The British promised that the Hurricanes in Malaysia would keep the Japanese away from Australia. So when the Japanese bombed Darwin in 1942 there were no fighter defences available, not even Hurricanes. The Australians were rightly unamused, and Winston Churchill hastily promised to send them a wing of Spitfires. The resulting reformation of No1 Wing was actually two RAAF Spitfire squadrons from the UK plus 54Sq RAF, but because it was so associated with Winnie it was christened the "Churchill Wing" by the press. Ironically, upon hearing of the plan, the experienced pilots in all three squadrons transferred to other UK squadrons, meaning the majority of No1 Wing's pilots came straight from training units.
Despite Winnie's promises, the USAAF actually operated P-40s in Australia first, and were supplying a steady stream of P-40s before the Spitfires arrived. To make matters worse, the RAF diverted most of the original Spitfires promised to the Med in 1942, meaning Churchill's Wing arrived in Australia in August 1942 with only six Spitfires, and they were in a bad state after shipping. Replacement Spitfires didn't arrive until October 1942, giving the Aussies 71 operational Spitfires. Ever since, Australians have used the term "Churchill promise" to indicate a good deal gone bad.
Mad Dog
First, I must say that I am impressed with the effort and detail of your posts on this topic, there is a lot of information which is new to me and no doubt others.
However, we are going to have to agree to disagree on the main basis of your argument that the Hurricane was at least equal with the Ki43. There is no doubt that if the Hurricane of any version, got a good shot at the Ki43 then it was game over, but that aside, the Hurricane in my view only had two other advantages. It could dive faster and it didn't (practically speaking) tend to 'mush' or sink when pulling out of the dive.
In all other criteria, speed, agility, climb, range take your pick, the Ki43 was in a different class. This was recognised by the RAF who themselves described the Hurricane as obsolete and the only reason it was kept in service in the Far East was its ability as a particularly accurate bomber. It was very accurate because it could release its bombs at a lower altitude than any other aircraft because it didn't 'mush' when pulling out.
Tom Neil of Malta fame certainly did in his Spit XII. There is a hilarious description of the problem in "From The Cockpit: Spitfire". The Spits had two little hooks under the fuselage just aft of the slipper tank, the idea being that upon release, the hooks would catch the back end of the tank and flip it out away from hitting the Spitfire's tailwheel. Some Spitfire's never had problems, some seem to have almost continual problems caused by those hooks. Neil's XII was a bit of a lemon and the jettisoned tank would continually ram itself onto the hooks, as he put it "standing out rampant from the fuselage", and acting as a big airbrake! Not ideal when you consider the tactics for the Spitfire XII squadrons was to find a group of high-flying Jerries, slip in underneath them, and challenge them to come down to the level the Spit XII's Griffon engines worked best at.
So they were used the same way as the P-40 in the CBI which was the top scoring fighter in that theatre. So no problem. Against the Ki-43-I/II the Hurricane IIb Trop had higher level and dive speeds, heavier armament and better armour protection. Against a II-Kai onwards you really need a Spitfire. Monsoon time in India is May to October. Earliest available Vb Trop was Feb 42 in Malta, Summer 42 for Vc. Others all went to North Africa in 1942. Maybe if we hadn't given USSR 200 Vb's early 43 then India could have got them in time for their Monsoon season when little flying took place.The fact that Hurricane pilots only attacked from a position of advantage and continued diving away after the engagement, and were forbidden to dogfight JAAF aircraft only strengthens the argument as to it's obsolescence.