Now, here is an example on how to read different things into a piece of text. What I read into this is that III was supposed to be built, but somewhere along the line, specs changed/minds changed.
> it even says in your quote that it started as the Tempest III!!
On paper, yes. It doesn't say III was actually built. "Hey, Syd, now we've built the Tempest V, I, II, VI, let's finally make a III." "Ok, but I have this idea where we remove the wing center section to make it lighter. Let's take this III drawing we just started on, put some lightened wings on it, we can still use the Griffon we had planned for III, raise the cockpit a bit... hey, let's call it Fury".
>"she was originally the Tempest III yes?"
Yes, on paper. I don't parse this text into meaning that mk.III was built.
>she was then Re-designated as a Hawker Fury Prototype
It looks like we can agree it is a Fury. It looks like we can agree on its origin back to something called a mk.III. It looks like we have to agree to disagree on where a Mk.III stops and a Fury begins...
I'm not a historian, I tend to stick with the sources I've grown to trust, like good old Air International. I don't have Jane's from the actual years, it is not mentioned in my -45 edition, so I tend to fall into the trap of believing what the sources I trust say, and in this case they say III wasn't built, it's a paper plane that grew up to be a Fury in different shapes with different enginges...
NEXT QUIZ! Please!!