I put the Griffon engined Hurricane in this category as it was put forward as a concept but not pursued due to the pending introduction of the Typhoon. The delays with the Saber and failure of the RR Vulture left the RAF using a Hurricane that really was unchanged from Sept 1940 to 1944. If the single stage griffon Hurricane was workable, and I don't know that it was., it would have been very useful in N Africa and the Far East in 42 to 44.
Most Useful Plane Not Produced
- Thread starter kitplane01
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Kevin J
Banned
No, because the Griffon Spitfire is superior and doesn't arrive until 1943, so your idea won't work.
Clayton Magnet
Staff Sergeant
- 903
- Feb 16, 2013
I don't think a Griffon Hurricane would have been worth the effort. It was already sort of an aerodynamic dead end, and probably wouldn't have been much faster than the Mk.II's already in service. It probably would have just been heavier, and with shorter range
Shortround6
Major General
Some members who are no longer with us claim that the Hurricane had some serious CG issues. All right as built but large modifications were going to require all kinds of trickery.
Mention was made of having to sweep the wings forward in order to keep the CG over the center of lift.
At some point you have to let an old design go and start over. Some designs had more "growth" than others. A lot of British firms didn't have enough engineers/draftsmen and the number of projects they could work on at the same time were severely limited.
In retrospect perhaps a Griffon Hurricane was a good idea, but it may have meant giving up the Typhoon (perhaps still a good idea)
Mention was made of having to sweep the wings forward in order to keep the CG over the center of lift.
At some point you have to let an old design go and start over. Some designs had more "growth" than others. A lot of British firms didn't have enough engineers/draftsmen and the number of projects they could work on at the same time were severely limited.
In retrospect perhaps a Griffon Hurricane was a good idea, but it may have meant giving up the Typhoon (perhaps still a good idea)
Admiral Beez
Major
How about a Griffon Typhoon?
Shortround6
Major General
When?
In 1939, early 40 the The Sabre was promising 2000hp or more. what was the Griffon promising at that point in time?
The Griffon went into service at over 1700hp In the Spitfire XII and the Firefly but what was RR promising when Hawker was drawing up the Typhoon/Tornado?
Reluctant Poster
Tech Sergeant
- 1,669
- Dec 6, 2006
And there was a Griffon Fury
Shortround6
Major General
Yes but by the time you get the Griffon 85 engine the Hurricane is long gone and any chance to to Hawker airframe with a Griffon 85 engine into combat in WW II would take a miracle.
Admiral Beez
Major
They should have done that from the start. Skip the Sabre, get working on the Griffon and Centaurus. Then we can get the Typhoon into FAA service.
The Sabre must have been recognized as high risk at the time?
swampyankee
Chief Master Sergeant
- 4,028
- Jun 25, 2013
I think the basic idea of using Napier should have been seen as high-risk. The company had one reasonably successful engine, the Lion, followed by a number of highly (overly?) complex engines of dubious reliability, with small production numbers. Then, after building poppet-valve, air-cooled engines, they propose a liquid-cooled, sleeve-valve engine of over twice the power of any engine they've even considered for production before. Nope, no risk there.
I agree but its only in hind sight, they should just have called everything a "Hurricane", The Hurricane, Typhoon Tempest and Fury/Sea Fury were all on the go at the same time and they were or had been using every engine possible to realistically imagine.
Maybe it was, but Rolls Royce were a better bet with the Vulture.
Admiral Beez
Major
The War Office should have told Napier to move the Sabre program to tank and MTB engines. RR and Bristol are then told to get moving on the Griffon and Centaurus.
Clayton Magnet
Staff Sergeant
- 903
- Feb 16, 2013
wasn't the Griffon Tempest the best of the bunch? or maybe I was thinking of the Sabre engined variant with leading edge radiators
Shortround6
Major General
When??????
The Sabre was a 2240 cu in engine that started at about 3700rpm (?) and using 7lbs of boost could just exceed 2000hp in low supercharger gear in 1939.
from Wiki"The first Sabre engines were ready for testing in January 1938, although they were limited to 1,350 hp (1,000 kW). By March, they were passing tests at 2,050 hp (1,500 kW) and by June 1940, when the Sabre passed the Air Ministry's 100-hour test, the first production versions were delivering 2,200 hp "
The Griffon was a 2240 cu in engine (yep, not a typo) that started (and stayed) at 2750rpm and needed 12lbs of boost to break 1700hp. It didn't enter production until 1942 and indeed it didn't even run until 1939. Granted development was put on hold for while but the Sabre looked a much more powerful engine in the first few years of the war.
The Griffon ended up using 25lbs of boost compared to the Sabre's limit of about 15lbs for most service engines. A few very late Sabres went to 20lbs boost.
This ability of the Griffons to use higher boost helped equalize the difference in RPM. But the Sabre always offered (but had trouble delivering) hundreds more HP.
RR caught up because of all the problems the Sabre had in the first few years of the war.
BTW you have things slightly backwards. the Air ministry didn't quite tell RR and Bristol what to do in such an authoritative manner. They might tell, or strongly suggest but both companies had ways of pushing back. Like making reports about lost production or problems with the AIr Ministry's course of action.
bristol Managed to fire Fedden, their chief engine designer of around 20 years in late 1941 which sure didn't help the progress of the Centaurus engine.
Yet the Griffon seems the more proven, less risky route.
Griffon development was put on hold while the Sabre struggled.
I'm not sure this is all hindsight. They chose the riskier route and it was a tortuous one.
Admiral Beez
Major
I'd have to think the Centaurus Tempest was the best. No one is racing Tempests and Furies today re-engined with Griffon.
Shortround6
Major General
Without knowing what kind of fuel was going to be available when the Sabre with it's 34.5% higher rpm (even at 3700rpm) and higher compression would seem to offer much more potential and the AIr Ministry had been listening to Fedden rave on about sleeve valves for nearly ten years. In 1939 Fedden's and Bristols own problems with mass produced sleeve valves was only starting.
The Griffon was safer, but without fuel allowing high boost it's potential was lower than the Sabre, Vulture or Centaurus. Once you have fuel that allows 18-20-25lbs of boost the Griffon becomes the obvious choice, but without that fuel?????
