Battle of Britain Hurricane or Wildcat

[FLYBOYJ]

It was my understanding that another advantage of the Hurricane was ease of repair...

It was possible to repair them more quickly and keep them in the air, for the fight. Also it took less skilled repairmen.

For the most part yes, if you're talking patching holes in fabric. If you have to start repairing any of the tube structure of the fuselage, that could be difficult in the field.

 

[Glider]

Depends where and when production would be fully engaged to support this hypothetical effort. After Pearl Harbor and after the first batch of F4F-3As were delivered, up to 1943, 1169 examples of the F4F-4 were built, that averages 390 units per year, as a comparison there were about 500 Hurricanes built from when production started in October 1937 through September 1939.

The figures here are accurate but if I may say misleading. 500 Hurricanes were built in this period but we were at peace although rearming. To build 390 ish F4F-4 a year when at war isn't that impressive.

We seem to be bringing the F4F-3 development cycle forward by around 6 months, do that with the Hurricane and we are looking at the Hurricane IIA/B. Personally my choice would be the Hurricane for the extra performance but if I could bribe my ground crew to fit 4 or 6 x 0.5 into the gun bay then life would be sweet.

 

[parsifal]

T hank you for the voice from on high , however it sounds like a good plan to me harrassing aircraft that are low on fuel , as for beyond the capabilities of tha RAF it was beyond the capabilities for the whole war

I didnt intend to come across "mightier than thou", but the points I am making are well founded. Lots of people espouse the brilliance of Dowding without understanding what that brilliance entailed. It was his ability not to overextend the RAF during the battle, and remain focussed on the task at hand. That meant exercising the utmost discipline in the execution of the battle plan. Even so it was hard not to succumb to the temptation of trying to run down the LW over france.

The RAF did attempt this in early 1941, and generally came off worse for wear. After Barbarossa, they met with greater success, such that there was a general pullout of German air assets from the coastal zones by late 42, and henceforward the LW concentrated on Reich defence. This did not occur as a result of US action. The US was responsible for the destruction of the LW in late 43 and '44, but through 1942 and the first half of '43 there were just a handful of US fighter (and bomber) formations in western europe. The forcing of the germans onto the defensive in western europe did not come cheaply, or freely, and was the result almpost in its entirety, of RAF tactical actions...something often discounted and unnappreciated in amny circles.

 

[timmo]

Did we still have fabric in '40? How one forgets!

.5s? Oh, yes - then my one hit would have had better effect!!

= Tim

PS - isn't it just amazing, the wealth of information out there??

 

[FLYBOYJ]

The figures here are accurate but if I may say misleading. 500 Hurricanes were built in this period but we were at peace although rearming. To build 390 ish F4F-4 a year when at war isn't that impressive.

Actaully that was an average and I believe most were built in 1943

 

[fastmongrel]

Wasnt it just the rear fuselage that was fabric covered over a welded tubular skeleton. I think Hurris had metal wings by the BoB

 

[pinsog]

I dont see how it could be a bad thing to have a squadron of Wildcats sweep in behind a German raid, waiting at high altitude for all the 109's heading back toward the French coast, low on fuel, low or out of ammunition, low fuel light blinking ominously on the instrument panel. How would you like to be that poor 109 pilot? The Wildcats wouldnt have had to pursue them all the way to the French coast, or for that matter even shoot them down, just forcing them to make 1 or 2 turns and they wont make it home. They could even jump them before the 109's made it to the English Channel, or perhaps right at the beach. I think they would have had a field day. If the Germans had to start sending flights of 109's to cover the escape of the escorts, that is more 109's they wouldnt have had for escorts in the first place, kind of a viscious circle.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Wasnt it just the rear fuselage that was fabric covered over a welded tubular skeleton. I think Hurris had metal wings by the BoB

Correct

I dont see how it could be a bad thing to have a squadron of Wildcats sweep in behind a German raid, waiting at high altitude for all the 109's heading back toward the French coast, low on fuel, low or out of ammunition, low fuel light blinking ominously on the instrument panel. How would you like to be that poor 109 pilot? The Wildcats wouldnt have had to pursue them all the way to the French coast, or for that matter even shoot them down, just forcing them to make 1 or 2 turns and they wont make it home. They could even jump them before the 109's made it to the English Channel, or perhaps right at the beach. I think they would have had a field day. If the Germans had to start sending flights of 109's to cover the escape of the escorts, that is more 109's they wouldnt have had for escorts in the first place, kind of a viscious circle.

I think the greatest advantage the Wildcat would of had over the hurricane was endurance that could had been used in a number of operational advantages. Wildcats took on Me 190Es and I think the Wildcat would had put up a good fight aganst the -109E if faced in large scale combat and flown with proper tactics.

 

[Jerry W. Loper]

Wasnt it just the rear fuselage that was fabric covered over a welded tubular skeleton. I think Hurris had metal wings by the BoB

I think I read somewhere that at the time of the Battle of Britain, Hurricane squadrons were equipped with metal-winged planes, but there were some fabric wing planes in reserve, so that when losses were really acute, some fabric wing fighters were issued to squadrons as replacements.

 

[pbfoot]

The RAF did attempt this in early 1941, and generally came off worse for wear. After Barbarossa, they met with greater success, such that there was a general pullout of German air assets from the coastal zones by late 42, and henceforward the LW concentrated on Reich defence. This did not occur as a result of US action. The US was responsible for the destruction of the LW in late 43 and '44, but through 1942 and the first half of '43 there were just a handful of US fighter (and bomber) formations in western europe. The forcing of the germans onto the defensive in western europe did not come cheaply, or freely, and was the result almpost in its entirety, of RAF tactical actions...something often discounted and unnappreciated in amny circles.

Maybe if they had a fighter with longer legs they wouldn't always be fighting from the disadvantage , where the LW knew the endurance and meted out the response accordingly. Remember that it was Portal of the RAF that said the long range fighter was impractable and would cease to be a fighter

 

[Cromwell]

Correct I think the greatest advantage the Wildcat would of had over the hurricane was endurance that could had been used in a number of operational advantages. Wildcats took on Me 190Es and I think the Wildcat would had put up a good fight against the -109E if faced in large scale combat and flown with proper tactics.

The very odd thing about the Wildcat is that in Navy testing it was quite significantly out-performed by, yes you guessed it, the Buffalo !

Which is why the Navy Marines purchased lots of Brewsters as you know, and which were no match for the 109 allegedly, well certainly not the Zero.

So what happened between testing and real combat ? Where did it all go wrong ? Its a puzzle to me.

 

[Cromwell]

I think I read somewhere that at the time of the Battle of Britain, Hurricane squadrons were equipped with metal-winged planes, but there were some fabric wing planes in reserve, so that when losses were really acute, some fabric wing fighters were issued to squadrons as replacements.

I was digging through some of my old Aeroplane mags, and came across a special on the Hurricane from October 2007 (see also www.aeroplanemonthly.com for back issues - you might still be able to get a copy, I am not sure).

It mentions that covering the wings with Metal (LA or light alloy) increased diving speed by 80mph over fabric.

Apparently, the metal wing although the same geometry was actually internally very different. Later when the cannons were added, torsion boxes replaced the diagonal bracing to make room for the bigger guns.

See also the Universal Wing that could mount 40mm cannon, 60lb rockets, 250 or 500lb bombs - also frag bomb containers, smoke curtain devices and ferry or drop tanks !

So, although the shape remained the same or similar the wing inside was very different from early production / prototype to late production (the prototype also had external struts for the tail but these were canned before production).

Note. I think you will find part of the German 'problem' in the BoB was that they had based their combat tactics on meeting earlier model Hurris in France

The Hurricanes they crossed swords with over the Channel and England had

- Merlin XX with 2 speed charger at 1,260HP

- 3 blade variable Rotol props allowing diving speeds of 460 mph plus

- Metal wings (mostly) in production from about July 39 on wards

and NON-flammable Glycol Water mix coolant which made them less easy to 'flame'

So, they were a much tougher proposition - Plus which we had the home advantage in some ways, and many of the squadron leaders were by now more experienced and even battle experienced if they had lived long enough.

 

[Colin1]

I don't see how it could be a bad thing to have a squadron of Wildcats sweep in behind a German raid, waiting at high altitude for all the 109s heading back toward the French coast, low on fuel, low or out of ammunition, low fuel light blinking ominously on the instrument panel.

They could even jump them before the 109s made it to the English Channel, or perhaps right at the beach. I think they would have had a field day.

If the Germans had to start sending flights of 109s to cover the escape of the escorts, that is more 109s they wouldn't have had for escorts in the first place, kind of a vicious circle.

Mainly
because the F4F wasn't that much faster than the Hurricane, the Bf109E would have enjoyed a close to 30mph speed differential over it; it would need a couple of conditions in its favour in order to make it happen and remember, by this stage of the mission the Bf109 would have a reduced fuel and combat load to haul.

A gaggle of Bf109s streaking out of area at ground level would be difficult for a squadron of F4Fs at high altitude to deal with, even if they were vectored onto them in time.

I'm not entirely sure I understand you but any staffel providing this cover would not be pulled from the day's escort roster. If the Luftwaffe were to be pressed in this manner, staffeln who would previously have had a rest day would likely be flying CAP for the returning mission aircraft. At a guess.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

The very odd thing about the Wildcat is that in Navy testing it was quite significantly out-performed by, yes you guessed it, the Buffalo !

The F4F-2 which was the very first model.

Which is why the Navy Marines purchased lots of Brewsters as you know, and which were no match for the 109 allegedly, well certainly not the Zero.

True, see post above...

So what happened between testing and real combat ? Where did it all go wrong ? Its a puzzle to me.

"The original Grumman F4F-1 design was a biplane, which proved inferior to rival designs, necessitating a complete redesign as a monoplane named the F4F-2. This design was still not competitive with the Brewster F2A Buffalo which won initial US Navy orders, but when the F4F-3 development was fitted with a more powerful version of the engine, a Pratt Whitney Twin Wasp R-1830-76, featuring a two-stage supercharger, it showed its true potential"

"On 26 March 1945, in a last action, FM-2's from 882 Squadron Lieut Comdr. GAM Flood, RNVR) off Searcher, escorting a flight of Avengers along the coast of Norway, was attacked by a flight of eight III Gruppe JG 5 Me-109Gs. The Wildcats (now called "Wildcat" instead of "Martlet" as the FAA adopts the USN names for carrier aircraft) shot down four of the Me-109Gs at a cost of one Wildcat damaged. A fifth 109 was claimed as damaged."

 

[Cromwell]

Wildcat is is! Compared to the Hurricane I the F4F-3 had a better high-altitude performance due to her two-speed supercharger and her armament was vastly more powerful.

Well it is still partly a time-line issue (as others have commented on already for sure).

Later IIC Hurricanes had 4 x 20mm Cannon - if only they had been around in the BoB - or even the 12 gun variant.

Also, later Hurricanes had 2 Stage Merlins too, so again that sort of cancels out your point in all honesty (maybe not happy to be challenged on this one if you can show me a different story).

Undercarriage - Hurricane was much easier and safer to land for novice pilots like we had during the BoB

So, when it comes to the 'Landing Accidents War' then the Hurricane wins I think versus the Wildcat's anachronistic hand-cranked narrow-scooter undercarriage.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Well it is still partly a time-line issue (as others have commented on already for sure).

Later IIC Hurricanes had 4 x 20mm Cannon - if only they had been around in the BoB - or even the 12 gun variant.

Also, later Hurricanes had 2 Stage Merlins too, so again that sort of cancels out your point in all honesty.

Undercarriage - Hurricane was much easier and safer to land for novice pilots like we had during the BoB

So, when it comes to the 'Landing Accidents War' then the Hurricane wins I think versus the Wildcat's anachronistic hand-cranked narrow-scooter undercarriage.

Can you know for sure the Hurricane was easier to land than the Wildcat?

Until you could show some accurate data to substantiate that claim, I don't think you have much of an argument. Rich L could probably come up with some non combat mishap data that would probably show the Wildcat with a similar attrition rate as the Hurricane.

 

[Cromwell]

"On 26 March 1945, in a last action, FM-2's from 882 Squadron Lieut Comdr. GAM Flood, RNVR) off Searcher, escorting a flight of Avengers along the coast of Norway, was attacked by a flight of eight III Gruppe JG 5 Me-109Gs. The Wildcats (now called "Wildcat" instead of "Martlet" as the FAA adopts the USN names for carrier aircraft) shot down four of the Me-109Gs at a cost of one Wildcat damaged. A fifth 109 was claimed as damaged."

It was quite some action for sure (with Brit pilots when we more often think of USN or Marine Corp).

Don't get me wrong, I am quite a fan of the Pugnacious little fighter and I think it is one of WW2's unsung heroes actually. In fact even the Japanese were not in a hurry to go head to head with a set of 4 or 6 Fifties.

Fantasy : Wildcat with 2 x 20mm cannon and 2x 50 Cal - and a modernized, electrically cranked or hydraulic wider track cart.

Malcolm hood with lowered rear deck for better all-round vis.

Maybe more powerful or smoother engine, and some unecessary weight pruned off - now that would have been one pocket rocket for sure ! mmmmmm tasty.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Fantasy : Wildcat with 2 x 20mm cannon and 2x 50 Cal - and a modernized, electrically cranked or hydraulic wider track cart.

Maybe better more powerful engine too - now that would have been one pocket rocket for sure !

 

[pinsog]

COLIN1

THe Wildcat could outdive the 109 or the Hurricane, a Wildcat plunging down from medium or high altitude would have NO problem overtaking a 109 in level flight. Plus, a 109 that is low on fuel would not really be in a position to operate at full power to outrun, or enough fuel to begin a turning fight with an aircraft that has twice the range of the 109 to begin with. I believe it would have been a slaughter. Also, I would tell the Wildcat pilots to ignore the bombers and concentrate on the 109s since, being low on fuel, they would be the most vulnerable.

 

[Cromwell]

Can you know for sure the Hurricane was easier to land than the Wildcat?

Until you could show some accurate data to substantiate that claim, I don't think you have much of an argument. Rich L could probably come up with some non combat mishap data that would probably show the Wildcat with a similar attrition rate as the Hurricane.

OK, fair comment - I deserve that. Data ? yes please do by all means.

I found this at Grumman F4F Wildcat - carrier-borne fighter-bomber

" Francis W Peak, 10881fwp(@)gmmail.com, 25.04.2008

My first operational aircraft was the "Wildcat" in 1944 at Green Cove Springs, Florida. I graduated from Pensacola in June '44. My most vivid remembrance of the "Wildcat" was the Landing gear which had to be retracted by a hand crank on the right side of the cockpit, hold on tight because many wrists were injured by letting it freefall. But what a fun airplane to fly,the narrow landing gear made landing tricky.Thanks for the memories FWP "

Read this from Wikipedia about the Hellcat as an advance from the Wildcat in terms of the Cart :-

" Instead of the Wildcat's narrow-track undercarriage retracting into the fuselage requiring awkward hand-cranking by the pilot, the Hellcat had hydraulically-actuated undercarriage struts set wider and retracting backward, twisting through 90° into the wings,[12] exactly as the Chance Vought F4U Corsair's landing gear did. "