Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Dowding, in his report, critisises the appointment of certain officers, and also admits that the real speed of a sample of six squadron hurricanes
at 18,000 feet, was actually a mere 304mph, with the Spitfire 340mph.
There were a lot of serious problems at the time with predicting engine power correctly at high altitude, as Britain didnt really haveThe speed tests were done at the Squadron level (54 and 157) and not at a proper, scientific establishment like the A&AEE. Even in reports from 'lesser' establishments like the AFDU they often caveat their speed figures with disclaimers such as 'these speeds are approximate / figures are based on check trials from this unit / official figures have not yet been released from Boscombe Down' etc.
Dowding's report also has the average speeds at 10,000 and 15,000 feet, and I find it noteworthy that these lower-altitude speeds agree well with official A&AEE numbers. The speeds at the 'optimum' 18,000 ft altitude are the problem, being little different than the 15,000 ft figures. It seems to me this might indicate a calculation / measurement error somewhere.
I'd say his criticism of a 335 mph Hurricane I speed is valid enough. Maybe a Hurricane II number crept in the Air Ministry publication he's referencing ...
Lines are quick sketches of A&AEE tests. Hurricane at 'overload' 6750 lb -- Spitfire at 6050 lb
Red dots are Dowding's '6-plane-average' Squadron tests. No weights given.
View attachment 676085
So I suspect the issue wasnt that the aircraft were just "no good", but that the predicted speeds were probably less and less
reliable as altitudes rose. Having said that, fit and finish was frequently terrible and RAE studies I have of several Spitfires
shows some quite marked under-performance, which was put down principally to very bad panel fits (the photos are
quite revealing).
Didnt the Air Ministry produce a history of the Battle of Britain that made no mention of Park or Dowding?This topic appears to have died, which is rather a shame. So I`ll leave some contentous documents here to restart deliberations.
After "leaving his post" Dowding wrote a lengthy report giving his views on the Battle of Britain, the report was classified until the war had ended,
but, even during the war, its obvious that his report was seen as too direct to even share outside of the Ministry, here Portal writes to Churchill
admitting that Dowding was right that many senior people had not recieved his report due to an "oversight", which, amazingly,
was a very organized mistake which only prevented his report from being seen by people outside of the Air Ministry.
How amazingly convenient.
Dowding, in his report, critisises the appointment of certain officers, and also admits that the real speed of a sample of six squadron hurricanes
at 18,000 feet, was actually a mere 304mph, with the Spitfire 340mph.
View attachment 675973
They did, I even have an original copy, which bought & read myself to make sure. To be fair it actually doesnt really mention many names at all, but I still think its utterly staggering that it didnt have Park or Dowding`s. Its actually quite lengthy too, much more than just a couple of pages of waffle and a photo of the queen or something.Didnt the Air Ministry produce a history of the Battle of Britain that made no mention of Park or Dowding?
Well I can understand not mentioning specific commanders as that may lead to a comparison of Park and Leigh Mallory or even Brand (10 group) and Leigh Mallory, but to not mention Dowding is "shenanigans" it was on Dowdings system that the whole battle was fought and won (or not lost).They did, I even have an original copy, which bought & read myself to make sure. To be fair it actually doesnt really mention many names at all, but I still think its utterly staggering that it didnt have Park or Dowding`s. Its actually quite lengthy too, much more than just a couple of pages of waffle and a photo of the queen or something.
I`ll maybe scan it, its quite long and I think how amazing it is that these men are not even in it, can only be appreciated if you see the original document. Its probably a good couple of thousand words.Well I can understand not mentioning specific commanders as that may lead to a comparison of Park and Leigh Mallory or even Brand (10 group) and Leigh Mallory, but to not mention Dowding is "shenanigans" it was on Dowdings system that the whole battle was fought and won (or not lost).