The Basket
Senior Master Sergeant
- 3,712
- Jun 27, 2007
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
I'm gonna say that Lundstoms opinion is one but others like Slick Goodlin and I'll paraphrase said training in most facets of flying were better in the Commonwealth Forces , Goodlin if your not familiar was trained in Canada and transferred to USN after Pearl becoming a Naval test pilot . I'm going to have to go to library to grab the bookMark, Based on your posts, I believe you will very much enjoy Lundstrom's book. In appendix 3 of the same book there are side views of Wildcats showing the various insignias in 1941-42. Those side views make it clear why the Wildcat had decent over the nose visibility compared to many other fighters. Of course you are correct that when the attacker has wings level in a full deflection run, extraordinary visibility over the nose is not necessary, except in an overhead run. However, depending on the speed of the target, in a high side, flat side and low side run, that wings level attitude can only occur for a split second as the attacker must be in a bank in order to maintain lead. Also, and I am not quoting exactly. Lundstrom said something like the USN, of all the air forces except for the IJN, (in a limited way) that spent an extensive amount of time teaching full deflection gunnery. He also stated that some individual pilots in the other air forces taught themselves to be effective full deflection shooters. I have read, in evaluations of the FW190 and P47, if memory serves, that those AC did not have sufficient over the nose visibility for good full deflection shooting. I believe those mentions were on the Williams site.
I'm not talking about the Hurricane in 1940...I'm talking about the Hurricane in 1936.
The Spitfire and the 109 were both far more modern designs. Even Hawker called the design the monoplane Fury. Of course...the war came in 1940 just as the Hurricane was at its peak...if the war came in 1942 then the Hurricane would have already been used in ground attack. Hurricanes against Fw190s?
You can say that Camm made the right design at the right time.
The Hurricane was excellent in the narrow timeframe in which it was competent. It wasn't a loser...it was exactly what was needed.
The Hurricane was a stop gap Design.
The Spitfire was our best fighter and you put your best front row centre. The survival of the UK was going to be fought by 11 group. Not over Scotland.
A few thoughts on some of the proceeding posts.
3. the 20mm hispano: Few complaints seem to come from the Beaufighter squadrons either. The lack of stiffness in the initial Spitfire wing mountings were a problem. Turning the gun 90 degrees to lay on it's side to help bury the drum magazine in the wing didn't help either. The first Spitfires with 20mm guns also didn't have any .303 guns which meant that if ONE 20mm jammed the plane was basically unarmed. The Recoil of a single 20mm would slew the plane too much to keep on target.
It depends how you define stop gap I suppose.
If you mean 'we'll build this for now until our other design is ready' as you referred to with the Typhoon earlier, then it would be. But that was not the case. As I said F.18/37 had not been issued and the other designs did not exist.
It was simply a case of 'this is the very best we can build to meet the requirement, then when complete we will look at the next requirement'. If this is 'stop gap' then every military plane ever made is a stop gap.
Nope...the air ministry ordered the Hurricane ok.
I is saying Hawker designed the Hurricane to be a stop gap as it wasn't a new design but an evolution of an existing one.
All metal machines were certainly about so the use of wood and fabric meant that Hawker Hurricane was always a short termer.
It wasn't the air ministry or fashion or even my good self which made the Hurricane an obsolete fighter. But the good old Bf 109. And aint that the truth.
Keep in mind that there was a lot more to be done than attending to the powerplant. Additionally at the squadron level, line mechanics rarely tore into engines, at least under normal circumstances, from what I was told. That was left to an "intermediate" maintenance" organization (a dedicated engine shop).2. Standardizing of types: while a competent mechanic can figure out what to do with a strange engine based on principles, working on a familiar engine goes faster. The mechanic sometimes knows what size wrench or socket he needs for a particular nut or bolt before hand and in some cases even knows what length extension may be needed or if a special tool is needed to begin with. trying to service planes for several flights per day may make this speed of service important. Even if it just changing spark plugs every few days on each airplane. Or checking valve lash every so many hours. Squadron mechanics often exceeded the expectations of the higher command but here wasn't much sense in making things harder than they needed to be.
I'm typing on my phone.
Which means typos and the spell thingy brings up strange words.
Poor grammer is the price for progress.
All metal machines were certainly about so the use of wood and fabric meant that Hawker Hurricane was always a short termer.
It wasn't the air ministry or fashion or even my good self which made the Hurricane an obsolete fighter. But the good old Bf 109. And aint that the truth.
Keep in mind that there was a lot more to be done than attending to the powerplant. Additionally at the squadron level, line mechanics rarely tore into engines, at least under normal circumstances, from what I was told. That was left to an "intermediate" maintenance" organization (a dedicated engine shop).
Yep - usually things that were "bolted" on the engine were "R&Rd" at the squadron level. Tearing into them were usally done at a specialized shop.there may be quite a bit that was done at squadron level without tearing into the the engine. As mentioned, spark plug changes and valve checks. Replacement of accessories, such as generators, pumps of various types, starters as I am sure you are more aware of than I am.
agree...Special tools may be little more than an open ended wrench that has been cut off and had a piece of rod welded to it so as to get into a hard to reach area to keep a nut or bolt from turning while the force is applied from the other side.
Agree as well - working the basckshop can be a bit boaring but many times the conditions are a lot better.A rapidly expanding air force also has to supply trained men for those "intermediate maintenance" organizations
All very true - and even in today's worls that's done in all armed servicesYou are quite right about there being more than just engines. Even without getting into the actual airframe there are instruments (dealt with at squadron level by replacement ?), hydraulic and electrical systems, landing gear and brakes and of course the flying controls. These, of course will vary more from plane to plane ( Fairey Battle to Spitfire to Whitley) than the engine but in a peace time expansion PLAN standardization might not have been a bad thing.