8. The H-1 may very well have been the cleanest. I think your arguement about frontal area vrs HP isn't doing too well though. And you have a host of problems with weight.
I disagree. I think the added drag and weight is overcome by the added and potential rated power. I don't think weight growth would be much more severe than the Spit or Bf, indeed, the Mark I was nearly 800 lbs more than the K5054 and the Bf-109E was well over 1000 lbs more than the V-1.
I am not sure the long wing span goes with the 138 sq ft wing area in the specs. Dividing 31'9" into 138 would give you an average cord of about 4 1/3 ft. the wings sure don't look that narrow.
I can't add much here. It appears that the short wing has a MAC of 6'. If you extend the wings out at the same angle 3' each, perhaps the MAC reduces to 4.3 ft. I really don't know what the long wings look like other than some models.
What ever the real wing area the Gross weight of the H-1 is within a couple of hundred pounds of the Brewster 239 as is it's empty weight. Once you add in the guns,ammo, radios and other military fiddly bits the Brewster had a fuel capacity of about 660lbs, The max fuel load of 160 gallons could only be carried by leaving the wing guns and ammo behind.
That's worse than comparing the Spitfire to the Hurricane. The Mark I Hurricane was lighter than the Mark I Spitfire, but they were not in the same league in performance.
Again, the Brewster is not in the same aerodynamic league as the H-1. The F2A-1, at less weight and equal power was probably 70 mph slower at SL than the extended wing H-1. I'll talk about weight later.
THe Replica H-1 lifted off at about 105mph. I am afraid the wing loading and stall speeds of the H-1 might have been a bit much for the Army to swallow in the late 30s. increasing wing size to get lower wing loading increases structual weight and increases drag. There were several ohter modifications the H-1 might have nedded to become a passable fighter. None of which are going to do much for weight. And while weight doesn't do a lot to speed it sure does affect climb.
No objections here. I think the extended wing H-1 would have been the aircraft of choice. However climb rate would be difficult to estimate, not much data.
Here's my what-if, Howard Hughes, after his record setting low altitude run in 1935 is instructed by the AAC to develop a fighter version of the H-1 for 1937. Here is the configuration he delivered in 1937.
H-1 Racer with the following modifications
1) Extended wings
2) Slightly raised cockpit
3) P-40 level armament, two .30s, two .50s, wing mounted
4) P-40 level armor
5) 100 gal combat fuel, 50 extended range fuel, all fuselage mounted.
6) P&W 1830-45 rated at 1050 hp. is used. Fuselage is widened to accommodate larger engine.
7) Standard radio
Weight 4600 lbs empty, combat weight 5762 lbs, 6062 lb gross. This is roughly equivalent to the P-35/36 weight.
Performance. This is a bit difficult as the only verifiable airspeed is the 352 mph at SL for the H-1 at 1000 hp. However, there is some hocus pocus that can be done on a modified 1937 aircraft here. Extended wings offer a more difficult challenge. The SL speed of the P-47N with a 2 ft greater wing span than the M, was negligibly slower at SL (1 mph) than the M, with the same engine. The Ta152H with a wingspan 12' longer than the Ta-152C, was 18 mph slower, however, the Ta-152C seems to have had a much more powerful engine, 400 hp more. Not much help here. Induced drag is reduced by wing span as form drag increases.
H-1 SL airspeed at 1000 hp, tested 352 mph
Install P&W R-1830 (1000 hp), increasing form area by 1.95 sqft and weight by 200 lbs (?).
Airspeed 328 mph SL (weight impact on airspeed negligible) (drag formulas)
Increase structural strength, add weapons, armor, add radio, avionics, negligible airspeed impact
Air speed 324 mph SL (P-51D comparisons). Weight 360 lbs
Modify canopy
Airspeed 319 mph SL (P-51B to D comparison)
Add extended wings
Airspeed 310 mph SL (guess) weight 500 lbs
1937
Hughes H-1 fighter
HP 1000 (R-1830)
Empty weight 4625 lb
Combat weight weight 5687
Gross weight 6200 lbs
Max A/S 310 mph at SL
Max A/S 348 mph at 17k ft.*
1939 US Fighter competition
Hughes H-1 Fighter
HP1200 (R-1830-76)
Empty weight 4725 lbs (engine weight (?))
Combat weight 5787 lbs
Gross weight 6200 lbs
Max A/S 333 mph at SL
Max A/S 374 mph at 22k ft.**
* Estimate based on F2A airspeed profile (for supercharger performance)
** Estimate based on F4F-3 (R-1830-76 engine) airspeed profile (for supercharger performance)
I think a militarized H-1 racer in 1939 could have been more than competitive with the Spitfire Mark I (empty weight 4810lbs, max speed 362 at 18,500 ft) and the Bf-109E (empty weight 4422lb, max speed 354 mph at 12,300 ft.). However, I have no information on climb, but with a wing area between the Spit and Bf, and good power to weight ratio, it should have been competitive.
I arrived at these numbers by using a black cauldron of bubbling goo, threw in a handful of drag equations, a pinch of spitfireperformance comparisons, stirred in a batch of eyeballing performance data, mumbling nonsensical words, throwing the whole batch onto my office floor and reading the remains. I am still cleaning up the mess.
However, I do believe that, in 1935-6, H-1 racer had no less potential than the Spitfire 5054 or the Bf-109V-1. Its performance advantage gave plenty of growth. The Spit seemed most mature at first flight.
I'll let the H-1 replica speak for itself.