Aircraft Identification V

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

There were no such as a Tempest III, LA610 was supposed to be one, but plans changed during production.

From one of the links I posted before:
"The jump from Tempest Mark I to Tempest Mark V begs the question of what happened to Marks II, III, and IV. Mark II was a Centaurus-powered Tempest, and as will be explained in the next section, it did reach production. Marks III and IV were to be powered by different variants of the Rolls-Royce Griffon V-12 engine. One Mark III was actually built, though as will be described not as a Tempest, while the Mark IV was cancelled."

"The second prototype (LA610) actually began life as a prototype for the Griffon-powered Tempest Mark III, mentioned earlier. It was fitted with the new wing and raised cockpit, a Griffon 85, and a Rotol contra-rotating propeller. The contra-rotating propeller featured twin three-bladed propellers, and was implemented to allow optimum transfer of power from the big engine without requiring a propeller of extraordinary width.

It first flew on 27 November 1944, and was shortly thereafter given the name "Fury", following the Hawker biplane fighter of the same name of the 1930s. The navalized variant of the TLF logically became the "Sea Fury"."

TLF being Tempest Light Fighter, Camm's Improved Tempest program. Turned into P.1026.

Looks like we're talking past each other or something, and that what we believe about this project is based on what sources we read first or put more faith in...

What I read into all this is that Tempest III didn't happen. LA610 was supposed to be a III, but plans changed, and it was built to P.1026 specs and became Fury. I'll be hard to convince otherwise :)
 
dude it even says in your quote that it started as the Tempest III!! she was originally the Tempest III yes? she was then Re-designated as a Hawker Fury Prototype.........
 
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!! :)
 
Ok, a simple one:
 

Attachments

  • ar.jpg
    ar.jpg
    12.5 KB · Views: 144
but the rudder is so "square-ish", the Hawkers were much rounder. The Blackburns were squarer, a Firebrand, or rather a Firecrest, or a prototype that i haven't seen and can't find any pix of, ya-5.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back