FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
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.
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
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.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.
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.
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
Actaully that was an average and I believe most were built in 1943The 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.
CorrectWasnt it just the rear fuselage that was fabric covered over a welded tubular skeleton. I think Hurris had metal wings by the BoB
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.
Wasnt it just the rear fuselage that was fabric covered over a welded tubular skeleton. I think Hurris had metal wings by the BoB
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 fighterThe 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.
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.
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.
MainlyI 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.
The F4F-2 which was the very first model.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 !
True, see post above...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.
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.
Can you know for sure the Hurricane was easier to land than the Wildcat?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.
"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."
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 !
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.