Hawk 75 vs Fokker X.XI

[space dodo]

Both were used in the finnish airforce and did really well against the USSR and both filled the same niche- fairly cheap rugged light fighters that could take of in bad conditions.

 

[Shortround6]

Not sure where the cheap part comes in.
For the Finns if might be that some of their Hawk 75s were ex-French and were given or sold to them cheap by they Germans?

 

[fastmongrel]

Not sure where the cheap part comes in.
For the Finns if might be that some of their Hawk 75s were ex-French and were given or sold to them cheap by they Germans?

Cheaper in relation to a retractable uc fighter. All the gear for retractable must have been expensive as it was precision engineering.

 

[Clayton Magnet]

Cheaper in relation to a retractable uc fighter. All the gear for retractable must have been expensive as it was precision engineering.

I think the Finns got captured ex French Hawks, which all had retractable gear. The fixed gear aircraft went to Asia and South America I believe

 

[CORSNING]

Everybody is right so far. Germany originally sold Finland 44 Hawk 75A-3s, I believe.
The following information is from "Finnish Aces of WWII" by Kari Stenman.
D.XXI Mercury powered 840ps, 11.11.39:
Alt...km/h / Time to height
SL.......355 /
1km...369 / 1'10"
2km...383 / 2'20"
3km...397 / 3'30"
4km...407 / 4'40"
5km...412 / 6'10"
6km...413 / 8'00"
4 x 7.7mm
D.XXI R-1535 powered 825ps, 17.5.41 (Hawk 75A-6 R-1830 powered 1,065ps, 6.7.41)
Alt.....km/h / Time to height
SL........342 / (400)
1km...351 / 1'45" (417 / 1'25")
2km...360 / 3'30" (424 / 2'45")
3km...354 / 5'25" (432 / 4'10")
4km...346 / 7'40" (426 / 5'50")
5km...335 / 10'30" (416 / 8'00")
6km...320 / 15'15" (407 / 11'00")
4 x 7.7mm (4 x 7.5mm)

Maneuverability:
Fokker D.XXI:
"FAF states that Fokker (D.XXI) was not turning as well as Soviet planes of the time (1939-
1940; I-15, I-153, I-16) in spite of low wing loading but could escape by diving, later diving
speed was found inadequate mostly because the drag caused by fixed landing gear."
Soviet turn times were ; I-15: 8-8.5 sec./1,000m., I-153: 13-13.5 sec./1,000m.,
I-16 type 24: 17-18 sec./1,000m., 16.5 sec./4,000m.
Hawk 75A-6 from French tests versus the Morane M.S.406:
"The Curtiss easily outturns the M.S.406 and gets into firing position on its tail (after being
jumped by the Morane). Its impossible for the M.S.406 to shake the Hawk 75 off its tail.
The Curtiss approaches from the rear; The Morane goes into a tight turn. The Curtiss follows
easily and gets into firing position.
The superior maneuverability of the Curtiss allows it to dictate the terms of battle. It can
stay and fight or it can safely break off combat at will."
Morane-Saunier 406; 16.0 sec./1,000 m., 15.0 sec./4,000 m.

From the above information I would say the Hawk 75A-3thru6 would have no trouble out-
turning the I-16 type 24, an aircraft that can outturn a fokker D.XXI.

 

[Juha3]

The FiAF used Hawk 75A-1s, -2s, -3s, -4s and -6s. It was well liked and better than D.XXI even if the Mercury XXIs climbed better. Hawk was a robust and maneuverable fighter which was very easy to fly and land. But during the later part of the war much too slow. P&W Fokker really had the performance of a fighter-trainer, but because of a lack of better planes it was used as a fighter and later as a fighter-recon plane.

 

[Timppa]

The FiAF used Hawk 75A-1s, -2s, -3s, -4s and -6s. It was well liked and better than D.XXI even if the Mercury XXIs climbed better. Hawk was a robust and maneuverable fighter which was very easy to fly and land. But during the later part of the war much too slow. P&W Fokker really had the performance of a fighter-trainer, but because of a lack of better planes it was used as a fighter and later as a fighter-recon plane.

Both were used in the finnish airforce and did really well against the USSR and both filled the same niche- fairly cheap rugged light fighters that could take of in bad conditions.

75A was much better, only behind the B-239.

 

[SaparotRob]

Go Buffalo!

 

[Thumpalumpacus]

Go Buffalo!

 

[CORSNING]

The FiAF used Hawk 75A-1s, -2s, -3s, -4s and -6s. It was well liked and better than D.XXI even if the Mercury XXIs climbed better.

The French Hawk 75A-1 @ 2,680 kg. (5,909 lb.)
Climbing ability: meters/sec. (fpm) / Time to height.
S.L......21.9 ( 4310 )
1km...18.8 ( 3700 ) / .82 minutes.
2km...15.7 ( 3090 ) / 1.78
3km...12.6 ( 2480 ) / 2.07
4km...9.45 ( 1860 ) / 4.48
5km...8.83 ( 1738 ) / 6.3
6km...7.05 ( 1378 ) / 8.4
7km...5.25 ( 1033 ) / 11.12
8km...3.5 ( 689 ) / 14.95
9km...1.7 ( 335 ) / 21.88

Hawk 75A-2
2,000m / 2.16 minutes.
4,000m / 4.68
6,000m / 8.35
8,000m / 14.62

Moral of the story is that the D.XXI could out climb the more heavily laden Hawks.
It should be noted that neither the Hawk 75A-1 or A-2 had pilot armor AFAIK.

 

[CORSNING]

Mildly semi-off topic but the Finnish B-239 numbers according to Kari Stenman look
like this:

S.L.......428
1km...436 / 1'27"
2km...448 / 2'30"
3km...443 / 4'12"
4km...461 / 5'35"
5km...480 / 7'10"
6km,,,469 / 9'15"

R-1820 (950ps)
1 x 7.7mm + 3 x 12.7 mm (best of the bunch in armament)
Turn time: 7 seconds to complete 180 degrees/1,000m., 15.8 sec./4,000m.

 

[Juha3]

Hello Corsning
the min 360 deg. turning time for FiAF B-239 (with pilot's backarmour and bigger tailwheel, mass 2450 kg) at 1500 m was 17.5 sec. Source: Jukka Raunio: "Brewsterin kaartokyky - mitattu ja laskettu" in Suomen Ilmailuhistoriallinen Lehti 4/2011.

 

[CORSNING]

Thank you for the information and reference Juha.
I will add this information to my chart of turn times.
Does the author list any other aircraft turn times?

 

[BiffF15]

View attachment 629149

Invasion of the Body Snatchers

 

[Juha3]

He only referred US tests with F2A-3, at 13,000 ft, time appr. 25 sec and at 27,000 ft appr. 53 sec, he does not give the exact weights, mentions only that weights varied between 2700 and 3000 kg. Engine was Wright R-1280-40.