Most Overrated aircraft of WWII.....?

[Shortround6]

You might want to argue with this site. Hawker Hurricane in Combat

". Four Hurricane squadrons were sent to France soon after the start of the war, and another three were rushed across after the German attack in 1940. The Hurricane squadrons suffered huge losses during the fighting in France and the Low Countries. Seven Hurricane squadrons took part in the battle of France. They lost nearly 200 aircraft (72 destroyed, 120 damaged and abandoned during the final retreat from France), from a total force that had numbered 500 aircraft at the outbreak of the war. However, the Luftwaffe also suffered heavily during the fighting in France, and had not entirely recovered by the time of the battle of Britain. The Germans recorded losing 299 aircraft to RAF fighters (this will include some lost to Spitfires over Dunkirk and some to Gloster Gladiators, but most will have been lost to the Hurricane)."

I would note that for 7 squadrons to shoot down even 400 aircraft would be a kill rate of fantastic proportions in the time involved. This reckoning also does not count kills by the Defiant or Blenheim fighters during this period.

" More than half of all German aircraft lost during the battle were shot down by Hurricane pilots. The Hurricane was the most numerous British fighter during the battle."
The Spitfire is generally credited with shooting down a higher percentage of German aircraft per number of planes deployed (like per 100 in active squadrons) and even more importantly, lasting longer. New pilots, on average, lasted days longer in Spitfires than in Hurricanes before being shot down.
Because the Hurricane outnumbered the Spitfire by a fair margin during this time the total number of German aircraft shot down by the Hurricane does exceed that of the Spitfire.

Granted this is just one website but attempts to rehabilitate the Hurricane (or at least claim it was better than most accounts say) are going to need much more than vague estimates.

 

[Shortround6]

I have read that the Hurricane shot down 55% of all aircraft claimed by British fighters during WW II.
This seems a bit counter intuitive due to the numbers of enemy aircraft produced and when they produced them.
Not due to the performance of the Hurricane it self.

The Hurricane did do the majority of the fighting in the early years, especially overseas where the Spitfire was late in showing up. But the Italians never built more than about 3500 planes in any one year and their total production (1939-43) was less than even the Japanese managed in 1943 or 1944.
Germans built more planes in 1944 than they did in in 1940, 41 and 42. Granted a large number went to the Russian front.
Japanese production in 1944 was about 20% higher than the total production of 1939, 40, 41 and 42. A lot were destroyed on the ground, a lot were held back in th the homeland.
But the Numbers deployed in 1942 to areas contested by the British and the Commonwealth may have to be looked at to substantiate the Hurricane claims.

The book that says the Hurricane shot down 55% says 33% by Spitfires and 12% for all other British fighters combined.

Targets for the Later Spitfires, Typhoon/Tempests and so on must have been scarce.

 

[Kevin J]

Go and look at the 'air war over Britain' page on facebook and you'll see Hurricanes were shooting down Luftwaffe planes over Britain from the end of the BoB all the way through 1941, then there are the night intruder claims over France from 1942 thought to 1943, 50/60 just in the first three months of ops by two squadrons. So you should have about 200 at least. If there were 2700 claims in the BoB then 1620 of them would be by Hurricanes plus the 500 in the Battle of France and perhaps 150 at Dunkirk. That gives you 2470 without taking account of the other actions that Hurricanes took part in such as ADGB from November 1940 to December 1941 plus of course the Phoney War, any victories claimed when escorting Blenheim bombers, any victories claimed as fighter bombers after releasing their bombs which went on until 1942/43 when the Typhoon took over as a fighter bomber. Would doubling the figures sound unreasonable? That would get you to 5000, although there's probably dramatic over claiming as escorts. Remember the Messers in the BoB, they thought they'd destroyed RAF Fighter Command so they switched their attacks to London, big mistake. By the end of the BoB the Luftwaffe had not only shot down every Spitfire produced to that time but also ones that weren't completed until Spring 1941. Their Hurricane victories were a bit more accurate only being out by a 33% over claim.

If we include Malta as being in the ETO then that would add about another 500 victories to the Hurricane's total victories bringing us to around 3000 plus for the ETO. Add in the Western Desert claims and Greece? Italy: losses, 5272; in combat, 3269. We might be able squeeze another 3000 Hurricane claims out of here although this is stretching the definition of the ETO quite a bit.
If you equate RAF fighter production (40 thou) with that of the USN/USMC or about 30 thou fighters and 8500 to 9000 fighter claims then 10500 overall claims sounds reasonable. The Corsair only made about 25% of the claims, the Wildcat and the Hellcat made up the bulk of them. It wasn't their fastest fighter that claimed the most victories.

 

[Stig1207]

Malta is very much the MTO; any Italian losses you want to attribute to the Hurricanes' victories in the ETO would have to be ones that occurred during the BoF or BoB. Anyway, we're not doing a claims versus losses, that's a whole other kettle of fish. If's 6000 victory claims/ credits to Hurricanes in the ETO as reported from the British perspective we're discussing.

 

[Kevin J]

Malta is very much the MTO; any Italian losses you want to attribute to the Hurricanes' victories in the ETO would have to be ones that occurred during the BoF or BoB. Anyway, we're not doing a claims versus losses, that's a whole other kettle of fish. If's 6000 victory claims/ credits to Hurricanes in the ETO as reported from the British perspective we're discussing.

Certainly the claim of 6000 Hurricane victories in the ETO seems to be about double what I could come up with from the figures available, but given the number of British fighters produced and operated then 10500 World wide does seem to far off compared with the USN/USMC experience. There would have to be about 3000 in the Med and 3000 in Europe for the 6000 figure to be plausible. The Italians lost over 5000 aircraft of which over 3000 were from combat. Since over claiming is common and the Americans only fought Italian units for about 6 months rather than the British 36 months then most of the credit must go to the British which means the Hurricane. 3000 Hurricane victories in the Med for the Hurricane seems plausible to me.

 

[Stig1207]

I thought the 10500 were for FC alone, thus ETO? I am sure that the Hurricane is not going to get any where near the 6000 claims/ credits in the ETO; but from 1941 and on the Hurricane probably got more victories in other theatres than the ETO; whether that is going to bring it near the 6000 mark, I don't know, but I would tend to think it doubtful.

 

[Kevin J]

I thought the 10500 were for FC alone, thus ETO? I am sure that the Hurricane is not going to get any where near the 6000 claims/ credits in the ETO; but from 1941 and on the Hurricane probably got more victories in other theatres than the ETO; whether that is going to bring it near the 6000 mark, I don't know, but I would tend to think it doubtful.

The Hellcat reached close to that figure in two years of war and it certainly didn't have the performance of either the Lightning, Thunderbolt or Mustang. They were opposed by generally inferior Japanese equipment just as the Hurricane was opposed by generally inferior Italian equipment.

 

[Shortround6]

Around 14, 580 Hurricanes were built, however around 6000 of them were built from early/mid 1942 and Spitfires began to show up in Malta in March of 1942, although in small numbers.
Attributing large numbers of Italian losses to the Hurricanes gets tricky, perhaps the Hurricanes did shoot down large number of Italian aircraft but that rather ignores AA and the fact that by Nov 18th 1941 (start of operation Crusader) there are 5 squadrons flying Tomahawks with the Desert Air Force and Kittyhawks start to become operational in Jan 1942.

From wiki" In October 1941, the Western Desert Air Forces had 16 squadrons of aircraft (nine fighter, six medium bomber and one tactical reconnaissance" so Tomahawks made up around 50% of the fighters at this time. Only 4 squadrons in in early Oct? Please note that eventually 7 squadrons would use Tomahawks but they would include one RAAF squadron and 3 SAAF squadrons in addition to 3 RAF squadrons.

about 7 months earlier
"
On 19 April 1941, RAF No. 204 Group was created under the command of Air Commodore Raymond Collishaw and consisted of the following units:

• No. 73 Squadron (Hurricanes) at Tobruk
• No. 274 Squadron (Hurricanes) at Gerawla
• No. 14 Squadron (Blenheim IVs and Marauders) at Burg el Arab
• Detachment of No. 39 Squadron (Marylands) at Maaten Baggash
• Detachment of No. 24 Squadron (Marylands) at Fuka
• No. 45 Squadron (Blenheim IVs) at Fuka
• No. 55 Squadron (Blenheim IVs) at Zimla
• No. 6 Squadron (Hurricanes and Lysanders) at Tobruk"

I am not trying to discount the bravery and sacrifice of the men who fought in that theater but something seems to be off between the numbers of planes available for combat and the number of enemy planes being attributed to the Hurricane during this time period.

Please note there seems to an error in the aircraft for no 14 squadron as while the the squadron did operate Marauders they didn't get them until Aug of 1942.

 

[Kevin J]

Around 14, 580 Hurricanes were built, however around 6000 of them were built from early/mid 1942 and Spitfires began to show up in Malta in March of 1942, although in small numbers.
Attributing large numbers of Italian losses to the Hurricanes gets tricky, perhaps the Hurricanes did shoot down large number of Italian aircraft but that rather ignores AA and the fact that by Nov 18th 1941 (start of operation Crusader) there are 5 squadrons flying Tomahawks with the Desert Air Force and Kittyhawks start to become operational in Jan 1942.

From wiki" In October 1941, the Western Desert Air Forces had 16 squadrons of aircraft (nine fighter, six medium bomber and one tactical reconnaissance" so Tomahawks made up around 50% of the fighters at this time. Only 4 squadrons in in early Oct? Please note that eventually 7 squadrons would use Tomahawks but they would include one RAAF squadron and 3 SAAF squadrons in addition to 3 RAF squadrons.

about 7 months earlier
"
On 19 April 1941, RAF No. 204 Group was created under the command of Air Commodore Raymond Collishaw and consisted of the following units:

• No. 73 Squadron (Hurricanes) at Tobruk
• No. 274 Squadron (Hurricanes) at Gerawla
• No. 14 Squadron (Blenheim IVs and Marauders) at Burg el Arab
• Detachment of No. 39 Squadron (Marylands) at Maaten Baggash
• Detachment of No. 24 Squadron (Marylands) at Fuka
• No. 45 Squadron (Blenheim IVs) at Fuka
• No. 55 Squadron (Blenheim IVs) at Zimla
• No. 6 Squadron (Hurricanes and Lysanders) at Tobruk"

I am not trying to discount the bravery and sacrifice of the men who fought in that theater but something seems to be off between the numbers of planes available for combat and the number of enemy planes being attributed to the Hurricane during this time period.

Please note there seems to an error in the aircraft for no 14 squadron as while the the squadron did operate Marauders they didn't get them until Aug of 1942.

So as late as October 1942 there are still significant numbers of Hurricanes being operated. Remember the the Hurricane II in 1942 had 16 lbs boost so it has a comparable performance to the Italian Mc 202 Folgore between 7000 and 10000 feet. According to Eric Brown it could beat a Folgore in a dogfight, if the Italian pilot was stupid enough to engage. The Hurricane would certainly have been suitable as an escort for our tactical bombers even in 1942, but who knows how many over claims occurred? So Kittyhawks for air superiority and fighter bombing, Spitfires for air defence and top cover, Hurricanes for escort, ground attack and intruder duties, at least that's what I'm assuming. In 1941, eventually Tomahawks for air superiority and Hurricanes for every thing else. In the Med, about 500 victories over Malta, 129 FAA victories for Sea Hurricanes and then there was the action over Greece before it was overrun. If we assume the same level of victories over the Western Desert as over Malta then using your squadron breakdown then we should be looking at about another 750 Hurricane victories in the same time period as there were three not two (Malta) squadrons of Hurricanes in the Western desert. All we need to do is to figure out how to double the numbers. Certainly not Greece, the conflict there did not last very long. In the Far East, I've seen no overall figures for Hurricanes at all.

On 27 October 1942, the Western Desert Air Force (WDAF) was organised as shown below:[8]
Subordinated to General Headquarters RAF Middle East (GHQ RAF Middle East)

• No. 3 South African Air Force (SAAF) Bomber Wing
  • 12 Squadron SAAF (24 × Martin Marylands)
  • 21 Squadron SAAF (24 × Martin Baltimores I,II & III)
  • 24 Squadron SAAF (24 × Douglas Boston III)
• No. 232 Bomber Wing
  • No. 55 Squadron RAF (24 × Baltimores I,II & III)
  • No. 223 Squadron RAF (24 × Baltimores I,II & III)
  • 82nd Bombardment Squadron USAAF (12 × Mitchell B-25C)
  • 83rd Bombardment Squadron USAAF (12 × Mitchell B-25C)
  • 434th Bombardment Squadron USAAF (12 × Mitchell B-25C)
• No. 285 Reconnaissance Wing
  • No. 2 PRU Squadron RAF (Photo Reconnaissance) (Spitfire VB)
  • 40 Squadron SAAF (Tactical Reconnaissance) (18 × Hurricane I/II/A/B)
  • 60 Squadron SAAF (Photo Reconnaissance) (12 × Marylands)
  • No. 208 Squadron RAF (Tactical Reconnaissance) (18 × Hurricane IIA/B)
  • No. 1437 Flight RAF (Strategic Reconnaissance) (8 × Baltimores I/II/III)

Kittyhawks of No. 112 Squadron RAF prepare to take off in Tunisia.

• No. 211 Group
  • 7 Squadron SAAF (anti-tank) (16 × Hurricane IID)
  • No. 6 Squadron RAF (anti-tank) (16 × Hurricane IID)
  • 64th Fighter Squadron USAAF (25 × P-40F Warhawks)
  • 65th Fighter Squadron USAAF (25 × P-40F Warhawks)
  • No. 233 Wing
    • 2 Squadron SAAF (16 × Kittyhawks I, II & III)
    • 4 Squadron SAAF (16 × Kittyhawks I, II & III)
    • 5 Squadron SAAF (16 × Tomahawks)
    • No. 260 Squadron RAF (16 × Kittyhawks I & IIb)
  • No. 239 Wing
    • No. 3 Squadron RAAF (16 × Kittyhawk I/II/III)
    • No. 112 Squadron RAF (16 × Kittyhawk IA)
    • No. 250 Squadron RAF (16 × Kittyhawk IIA)
    • No. 450 Squadron RAAF (16 × Kittyhawk)
    • 66th Fighter Squadron USAAF (25 × P-40F Warhawks)
  • No. 244 Wing
    • No. 145 Squadron RAF (16 × Spitfires Vb)
    • No. 601 Squadron RAF (16 × Spitfires Vb)
    • No. 73 Squadron RAF (16 × Hurricane IIc)
    • No. 92 Squadron RAF (16 × Spitfires Vb/c)
• No. 212 Group
  • No. 243 Wing
    • 1 Squadron SAAF (16 × Hurricane IIc)
    • No. 33 Squadron RAF (16 × Hurricane IIc)
    • No. 213 Squadron RAF (16 × Hurricane IIc)
    • No. 238 Squadron RAF (16 × Hurricane IIc)
  • No. 7 Wing
    • No. 80 Squadron RAF (16 × Hurricane IIc)
    • No. 127 Squadron RAF (16 × Hurricane IIb)
    • No. 335 (Greek) Squadron RAF (16 × Hurricane IIb)
    • No. 274 Squadron RAF (16 × Hurricane IIb
  • Early in 1943 that squadron was renamed RAAF 462 (note Australian squadron) despite mainly British personnel.
  • The squadron was disbanded in June 1943 but a new Australian 462 squadron was formed late in 1943 with mainly Australian personnel.

 

[Stig1207]

The Hellcat reached close to that figure in two years of war and it certainly didn't have the performance of either the Lightning, Thunderbolt or Mustang. They were opposed by generally inferior Japanese equipment just as the Hurricane was opposed by generally inferior Italian equipment.

That's not a viable comparison,imo, there are other circumstances that also play a role.

I haven't seen any figures for total RAF and CW claims/ credits in the MTO or Far East on the net, so trying to deduce how many victories the Hurricane has, is, as SR says, 'tricky'.

 

[Kevin J]

That's not a viable comparison,imo, there are other circumstances that also play a role.

I haven't seen any figures for total RAF and CW claims/ credits in the MTO or Far East on the net, so trying to deduce how many victories the Hurricane has, is, as SR says, 'tricky'.

Agreed, its tricky, but in the Med we know how many Italian aircraft were lost overall (5272) and in combat (3269), so someone or something must have caused their loss and there's only a 1 in 7 chance that it was due to American action; a 6 to 1 chance that it was the Brits. Simply because it was the Brits who were fighting against the Italians in the Med 6 times longer than the Yanks. So using the wicked assumption that the Yanks played no part in this private Anglo-Italian war and fought only with the French and Germans, and that the Spitfire and P-40 were only ever destroying Luftwaffe planes, then we have 3269 victories for our Hurricanes and handful of Gladiators, and the 2000 others due to AAA or over claiming, maybe even Martin Maryland reconnaissance bombers. That would get us up to that 6000 Hurricane victories fighting our European enemies and probably why our RAF has never issued any overall figures because it would destroy the Spitfire myth.

 

[rochie]

[QUOTE="Kevin J, post: 1432218, That would get us up to that 6000 Hurricane victories fighting our European enemies and probably why our RAF has never issued any overall figures because it would destroy the Spitfire myth.[/QUOTE]
Wow, tin foil hat time

 

[fastmongrel]

Shhhh rochie he might find out that Snoopy never shot down the Red Baron and then the ghost of Trenchard will rise from the tomb.

 

[Kevin J]

Shhhh rochie he might find out that Snoopy never shot down the Red Baron and then the ghost of Trenchard will rise from the tomb.

Lets take the Australian experience of their air war in the Pacific, but just take September 1943 to July 1945. Spitfire victories, 16; Beaufort and Beaufighter victories, 21; Kitttyhawk victories, 24. Clearly, the Beaufort and Beaufighters are better fighters than the Spitfire and as for the obsolescent Kittyhawk, wow. Clearly, its the Spitfire that needs to go and the Aussies need more Beauforts and Beaufighters. LOL. Against the Spitfire VIII was its lack of range. In the ETO and MTO, the Hurricane IIb / IIc could carry two 45 gallon drop tanks, the Spitfire Vb / Vc, a 30 gallon combat slipper tank, or a 45 gallon slipper tank for patrol work. The Spitfires' 90 and 170 gallon tanks were for ferrying. There was a nasty little incident in 1941 when a Spitfire squadron was fitted with 90 gallon tanks for a patrol off the Dutch coast covering the rescue of down allied aircrew and a bunch of Me 110's made mincemeat out of them. So, you could do a lot more with the Hurricane II than you could with a Spitfire in 1941/42.

 

[rochie]

Lets take the Australian experience of their air war in the Pacific, but just take September 1943 to July 1945. Spitfire victories, 16; Beaufort and Beaufighter victories, 21; Kitttyhawk victories, 24. Clearly, the Beaufort and Beaufighters are better fighters than the Spitfire and as for the obsolescent Kittyhawk, wow. Clearly, its the Spitfire that needs to go and the Aussies need more Beauforts and Beaufighters. LOL. Against the Spitfire VIII was its lack of range. In the ETO and MTO, the Hurricane IIb / IIc could carry two 45 gallon drop tanks, the Spitfire Vb / Vc, a 30 gallon combat slipper tank, or a 45 gallon slipper tank for patrol work. The Spitfires' 90 and 170 gallon tanks were for ferrying. There was a nasty little incident in 1941 when a Spitfire squadron was fitted with 90 gallon tanks for a patrol off the Dutch coast covering the rescue of down allied aircrew and a bunch of Me 110's made mincemeat out of them. So, you could do a lot more with the Hurricane II than you could with a Spitfire in 1941/42.

Dude, i love the Hurricane as much as anyone and i too am sad that it is too often overlooked in history because of our nations love for the Spitfire but my post was aimed at your belief that the RAF is hiding the true records of the Spitfire and Hurricane so as not to dispel a myth about their combat records in a conflict that ended almost 75 years ago

 

[grampi]

I probably should have phrased that better...

My beef with the 51, has nothing to do with it's ability. It was an amazing aircraft. I consider it overrated because so many people forget there were so many other aircraft that contributed to winning the war. It's P-51 this, P-51 that.

You won't see that so much here, or on other forums with knowledgable people though.

A lot of fighters were over rated much in the same way as the P-51. To listen to some people talk about the 109, you'd think Germany won the war, and it was because of the 109...

 

[Kevin J]

Dude, i love the Hurricane as much as anyone and i too am sad that it is too often overlooked in history because of our nations love for the Spitfire but my post was aimed at your belief that the RAF is hiding the true records of the Spitfire and Hurricane so as not to dispel a myth about their combat records in a conflict that ended almost 75 years ago

The first casualty of war is the truth. What do you mean "the war ended 75 years ago", its still going on, every time we play football, its like a replay of events.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

A lot of fighters were over rated much in the same way as the P-51. To listen to some people talk about the 109, you'd think Germany won the war, and it was because of the 109...

I don't disagree with you. I think those that do that with other aircraft are few and far between though.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

The first casualty of war is the truth. What do you mean "the war ended 75 years ago", its still going on, every time we play football, its like a replay of events.

Only for the English...

Thats another topic for a different thread though.

 

[GrauGeist]

Lets take the Australian experience of their air war in the Pacific, but just take September 1943 to July 1945. Spitfire victories, 16; Beaufort and Beaufighter victories, 21; Kitttyhawk victories, 24...

What were the circumstances of the victories?
Were the Spitfire, Beaufort, Beaufighter and P-40 all operating in the same area?
What was the profile of the victories - all fighters, all bombers, all flying boats or a balanced blend of each?
What was the strength of each RAAF type at the time of interception (full squadron of each type versus proportionate Japanese elements)?

In otherwords, to just say the Beaufort was a better fighter than the Spitfire based on a number of victories gained in a general area during a particular time period is not really presenting accurate figures.