Battle of Bi-Planes

[Shortround6]

A few Gloster Gauntlets were. I have no idea if they had a few Furies kicking around.

Wiki says yes :"Ex-RAF Furies were also used by the South African Air Force against the Italian forces in East Africa in 1941 and despite their obsolescence, destroyed two Caproni bombers as well as strafing many airfields, destroying fighters and bombers on the ground."

But seeing as how both the Gauntlets and Furies were replaced by the Gladiator it is a little hard to see them as among the best of the WW II Biplanes.

 

[nuuumannn]

"Bi-plane"? A morally ambiguous aircraft that bats for both sides. "Biplane", like monoplane or triplane. (Sorry, couldn't resist!)

 

[yulzari]

Some Malta Sea Gladiators were fitted with engines/propellors from Blenheims. @ position IIRC. Sea Gladiators had fittings to take two extra Brownings in the same blisters as the underwing ones to make it a x6 .303" armament.

 

[Schweik]

It's a toss up for me between Cr 42 and I-153. Both were still being used as late as 1943, clearly obsolescent by then but not necessarily getting slaughtered on every sortie. I'm not certain about the Gladiator but they may have also been still used in some convoy fights on carriers that late? I'm not sure.

The Finns noted that the I-153 was one of their most feared opponents. Against the Germans the Russians were using them mostly for ground attack, kind of in that HS-123 / OV-10, A-1 Skyraider type role of hypermaneuverable, long loitering, pin-point accurate small CAS and spotting plane. And I think they were pretty effective in that role, carrying rockets and fast-firing machine guns. Obviously quite dangerous to fly around German quality AAA in something that light, but they seemed to get a lot of value from them albeit at great cost, and due to their hypermaneuverability they at least had a chance of survival when bounced (if they saw the fighters coming). They could also be used to attack unescorted bombers of which there were a lot on the Russian front, and an I-153 was more than a match for a Stuka in a dogfight.

CR 42 is still showing up in some numbers in raids in the Med into 1943, also i think relegated to ground support, and of limited effectiveness but still able to kind of hold their own - they took disproportionate losses but not to the extent you might expect, in fact i would estimate they did no worse than say, the Bf 110 or a Hurricane Mk 1. (also still in use quite late) in that Theater. I think the 12.7mm heavy machine guns helped keep these in the game so to speak.

As mentioned before they were duking it out with Gladiators in Africa and the Middle East for much of 1941 with no clear dominant side, seemed like one day the Gladiators would have the best of it. Both Gladiators and Cr-42s could down enemy bombers at least some of the time.

So I guess I would rank them I-153, Cr 42 and then Gladiator. The I-153 probably had the biggest impact because the Russians made so damn many of them (3,000+ on top of the ~3,000 I-15 series), and they used them so aggressively. Many many dead Russian pilots paid the price but they also did some damage to the enemy.

I don't think the F3F was really in the mix (did they see any combat?), though as others mentioned there were some other mid-war biplanes which were still fighting in the Spanish Civil War, in Manchuria, and in the early years of WW2 proper. These included the afore mentioned Cr-32, He 51, I-15 and Gloster Gauntlet, also the Hawker Fury, Britsol Bulldog, and the rather elegant Czech Avia B-534.

If you include parasol winged planes you also have the Pzl P-11 / P-24 (surprisingly good and was the basis for the excellent IAR-80) and the Ikarus IK-2.

Only the I-153, Cr 42, and Gladiator Gladiator had the speed - roughly 250-280 mph, which allowed them to really compete in even early WW2. I think that is the main difference. Somewhat heavier armament and things like a little bit of pilot armor also helped. The Cr 32, B-534, P-11 and Gloster Gauntlet were kind of in a second tier at around 220 -250 mph. Most of the other interwar biplane fighters could barely make 200 mph and therefore couldn't even catch the slower bombers, which made them almost useless.

S

 

[GrauGeist]

The closest the Grumman F3F came to combat in WWII, were the ones destroyed on the ground by the Japanese at Pearl Harbor.

A close cousin to the F3F did see combat in the Spanish Civil War, the Canadian built Grumman FF "Goblin", where it didn't fare too well. One of it's only recorded victories, was against a Heinkel He59b (also a biplane).

 

[Schweik]

Wow neat, He 59 - never heard of it! And it's a float plane, I thought I knew all of those. Kind of a dinosaur, but perhaps something like a precursor to the He 115.

Heinkel He 59 - Wikipedia

 

[Schweik]

Somebody really, desperately needs to do an operational level wargame of the Air War part of the Spanish Civil War. They should also release all these odd planes for games like Il2.

 

[GrauGeist]

The He59b was replaced by the He115 but it did see some limited service against British shipping at the start of the war.

Once it was taken out of front line service, it served for a time as sea-rescue during the Battle of Britain - they were painted white with large red crosses replacing the black Balkan crosses. They rescued many downed pilots, both British and German but the British did not honor the "neutrality" of the sea-reacue aircraft because they suspected aircraft were being used for recon. So the He59b rescue aircraft were withdrawn and used for transport and training duties.

 

[Clayton Magnet]

It is interesting that the CR.42 almost matches the I-153 in speed despite the fixed gear and similar horsepower. A testament to the aerodynamics of the Fiat I suppose.

 

[Glider]

Some Malta Sea Gladiators were fitted with engines/propellors from Blenheims. @ position IIRC. Sea Gladiators had fittings to take two extra Brownings in the same blisters as the underwing ones to make it a x6 .303" armament.

I think you will find that only one was converted, test flown and then destroyed on the ground in a raid before it could go into action. Must have been heartbreaking for the team that did all the work

 

[Elmas]

Of course Hurricane was a superior fighter, but combats between CR 42 and Hurricanes over the skies of England were not the one-way thing that was depicted by British newspapers of the time, for obvious reasons of propaganda: read

of wich I have a signed copy by R.R. Standford Tuck, bought at Raf Museum Hendon in 1978, exactly forty years ago.

 

[Clayton Magnet]

combats between CR 42 and Hurricanes over the skies of England were not the one-way thing that was depicted by British newspapers of the time

Especially after the RAF pilots learned that they could out-turn their Luftwaffe opponents. A lesson that would have to be painfully "un-learned" when facing the CR.42. A similar scenario when RAF pilots first faced the Ki-27 and Ki-43 over Burma

 

[Elmas]

Especially after the RAF pilots learned that they could out-turn their Luftwaffe opponents. A lesson that would have to be painfully "un-learned" when facing the CR.42. A similar scenario when RAF pilots first faced the Ki-27 and Ki-43 over Burma

..and considering also that British Fighter Squadrons, thanks to Ground Control, had always an advantage of height and position.

 

[Timppa]

It is interesting that the CR.42 almost matches the I-153 in speed despite the fixed gear and similar horsepower. A testament to the aerodynamics of the Fiat I suppose.

They did not match.
Wikipedia gives the speed of the CR.42 as 440 km/h.

Swedish source for CR.42 is much more plausible 405 km/h. Gladiator II was about 400 km/h.
Håkans Flygsida - The Fiat CR.42 Falco in Sweden

For comparison, Finnish test of Fiat G.50 (monoplane, retractable landing gear, same engine) gave maximum speed of 430 km/h.

Enough to show that the Wikipedia speed for CR.42 is baloney.

I-153 was about 420 km/h with M-62 engine.
There were also I-153's with 1,100 hp M-63 engines.

 

[Shortround6]

For some of these planes you have to be careful about what altitudes you are comparing.
The Fiat A.74 R.C. 38 in the CR 42 gave 840hp at 3800 meters (12,500ft) without ram and used a constant speed prop. It may have given a bit more for short periods of time? it used a single speed supercharger.
The Mercury engine in the Gladiator gave 840hp at 4250 meters (14,000ft ) no ram and used a fixed pitch propeller (the ones that didn't could be counted on the fingers of one hand). it used a single speed supercharger.
The I-153 used, mostly, the M-62 engine with a two speed supercharger. This allowed for 1000hp for take-off/low level but in high gear it may have been good for 800hp at 4200 meters (13,800ft). no Ram. Propeller may have been adjustable or constant speed?

So all three have very similar power at about the same height.

Testing export examples or captured aircraft runs into the standard excuses/ reasons for sub par performance.

Interesting comment from "Italian Civil and Military Aircraft"
"Compared to the Gladiators (J 8) also in Swedish service, the Italian fighter was initially considered superior on most counts, but the rate of wear and service problems of the CR. 42 reversed this opinion."
Italian authored book, experience of a neutral country operating both planes. Take it for what you will.

Edit, my mistake, American authored book.

 

[CORSNING]

For what its worth, the following information for the Gloster
Gladiator Mk.II comes from Profile Publications 98, The
Gloster Gladiator by Francis K. Mason, 1966 and monografie
Lotnicze No.24, Gloster Gladiator by B. Belcarz & R.
Peczkovoski.
Performance for the Fiat C.R.42 comes from the tests
performed on aircraft number CA.446 in June/July 1938.
Performance for the Polikarpov I-153 comes from the
Chaika Manual 1940 with the Shvetsov M-62 engine.

GLOSTER GLADIATOR Mk.II
Altitude / Speed / Climb
Meters / Mph/ Fpm
S.L........215 /
1,000....221 / 2791 / 1220m. (climb rates are average from last altitude)
2,000....238 / 2697 / 2450m.
3,000....249
4,000....255 / 2400 / 4570m.
5,000....254
6,000....241 / 1714 / 6100m.
7,000....NG. / 938 / 7620m.

FIAT C.R. 42 Falco (fpm climb are averages from the last altitude.)
S.L.......215
1000....226 / 3018
2000....238 / 2590
3000....254 / 2812
4000....268 / 2556
5000....273 / 2289
6000....267 / 2289
7000....260 / 1555

Polikarpov I-153
S.L.......227 / 2854 (actual climb rate)
1000....242 / 3110
2000....250 / 3228
3000....250 / 2894
4000....266 / 2539
5000....275.3 / 2165
6000....270 / 1811
7000....262 / 1457
8000....251 / 1083

There is a whole lot more information like there turn times, power loading
service ceiling, range, engine power, combat weight....etc. I will gladly post
all this information one more time when I have found a home to put it on.

Turn times: Gladiator (Left/Right)): 10 / 11 360 degrees @ 90 meters.
C.R.42: 12 / 13 (estimated) @ 1000 meters.
I-153: 11.4 / 12.4 @ 1000 meters.

 

[yulzari]

I think you will find that only one was converted, test flown and then destroyed on the ground in a raid before it could go into action. Must have been heartbreaking for the team that did all the work

Certainly one on Malta had two extra guns mounted (above the centre section?) but Sea Gladiators were going to get the fittings to copy the under wing guns under the upper wing. An official change not a local modification.

 

[Schweik]

xx

 

[BiffF15]

Schweik,

I would PM the individual who gave you the dislike and ask him directly, while simultaneously deleting your above quoted post. PM me if you have a question as to why I'm recommending that.

Yes, there are individuals here who are older than both of us put together. That's okay and they are known to be a remarkable store of knowledge and in possession of an equally good perspective earned during all their years on walk about.

Cheers,
Biff