Sat in my aquadome with my black cat things were grim in the late 1930s. My cunning plan to flood all areas with Hurricanes was only any use for defensive operations and Germany was advancing in tech quickly. For offensive operations the Hurricane was limited, we didn't even have anything suitable for recon. Then we received a proposal from de Havilland for a wooden light bomber/recon plane. This was manna from heaven, no time to waste, give it top priority and order lots of wood before war is declared, first production Mosquito was in service in September 1940 and it went on to fill all sorts of roles including high altitude interception, meaning Westlands time wasn't wasted on their Welkin idea.
No Spitfire?
- Thread starter tomo pauk
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Shortround6
Major General
You are correct, thank you.
True but as far as numbers go, at the fall of France the numbers were about the same at 250 each. The number of Spitfires was an issue of production, the number of Hurricanes was a political decision, they were exported before the war and the number lost in France depended on how many were sent there.
- Thread starter
- #144
Going with 2-engine fighters to replace the 1-engined fighters just halved the number of replacement fighters. How is that a good deal for the RAF and other Allies?
Shortround6
Major General
The Mosquito was not a day fighter, it was not stressed for really high G maneuvers even if it was stressed for more than most bombers.
And you have an early war engine problem. Introducing a Mosquito in Sept of 1940 means either Merlin X or Merlin XII engines, The Merlin XX is just starting to come on line. It is also limited to about 9lbs of boost in 1940? You are not getting 1942 Mosquitos a year and half early. They will still perform well, just not quite as good as the 1942 versions.
Ordering wood is a lot different than getting wood and a LOT different than ordering more aluminum.
And you have an early war engine problem. Introducing a Mosquito in Sept of 1940 means either Merlin X or Merlin XII engines, The Merlin XX is just starting to come on line. It is also limited to about 9lbs of boost in 1940? You are not getting 1942 Mosquitos a year and half early. They will still perform well, just not quite as good as the 1942 versions.
Ordering wood is a lot different than getting wood and a LOT different than ordering more aluminum.
- Thread starter
- #146
Starting from a FB Mosquito, we can probably get Mosquito's weight down by removing some fuel tanks (perhaps down to 250 imp gals from 500++; that alone reduces the weight by ~1800 lbs plus the weight of the tanks themselves), and also delete the Brownings and their ammo. Clip the wings. All of this should up the allowable G load, even if not at the level of the better 1-engined fighters. Problem with gun-armed Mosquitoes was that they were making between 350-360 mph, ie. not faster than Spitfires of 1938-42, even more worrisome when compared with German fighters of 1941 and on.
Indeed, what about speed with Merlin III or XII - 340 mph if we're lucky, ie. Bf 109E is a tad faster, Bf 110C is too close to comfort?
Then we have other tactical considerations of Mosquito being easy to spot due to it's size thus allowing to the enemy commander to put it's fighters in a favorable position. Big size = easier to hit = not good for 2-engined fighter pilots, their aircraft and their current mission. Climb and roll with Fw 190 or Bf 109 - I don't think so. Visibilty with wings and nacelles location vs. cockpit?
Making thousands and thousands less fighters is a major boon for Axis without making up in combat qualities for that huge deficit, this is probably the worst shortcoming of the idea, this is usually the worst thing whenever people suggest going with 2-engined fighters for ww2.
Every loss is as double as costly as the loss of an 1-engined fighter.
Indeed, what about speed with Merlin III or XII - 340 mph if we're lucky, ie. Bf 109E is a tad faster, Bf 110C is too close to comfort?
Then we have other tactical considerations of Mosquito being easy to spot due to it's size thus allowing to the enemy commander to put it's fighters in a favorable position. Big size = easier to hit = not good for 2-engined fighter pilots, their aircraft and their current mission. Climb and roll with Fw 190 or Bf 109 - I don't think so. Visibilty with wings and nacelles location vs. cockpit?
Making thousands and thousands less fighters is a major boon for Axis without making up in combat qualities for that huge deficit, this is probably the worst shortcoming of the idea, this is usually the worst thing whenever people suggest going with 2-engined fighters for ww2.
Every loss is as double as costly as the loss of an 1-engined fighter.
Maybe my post was badly worded. I was only discussing the Mosquito as a fighter in terms of replacing the time and effort spent on the Welkin by Westland which was definitely a waste of 154 Merlins. Lightened Spitfires with extended wings actually did the job in the end but we don't have Spitfires. Spec F 4 for a high altitude fighter was issued in 1940.
I wasn't suggesting use as a day fighter but as a high altitude interceptor which the Welkin was designed to be. My suggestion was the Mosquito be put into production without delay because there was no other plane that could possibly do it, with no Spitfires you have no PR Spitfires and you cant make a PR Hurricane. My devilish plans for a competitive fighter will come later. I wasn't suggesting the Mosquito be used as anything other than what it historically was. Without Spitfires you cant "lean into France" as Leigh Mallory did in 1941, but in my opinion that is no bad thing.
Glider
Captain
If my memory serves me right I believe the RAF converted a Mosquito to a single seat aircraft, just to see what would happen and saved over 1,500lbs in weight. I cannot remember wht the performance gains were but presumably would be significant.
oes anyone else have this memory or am I totally wrong?
oes anyone else have this memory or am I totally wrong?
wuzak
Captain
Yes, they did.
http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/mosquito/Mosquito-VI-tactical.pdf
See sections 26, 27 and 37.
Glider
Captain
Many thanks for this, my memory is better than I thought and some of the points were very interesting. In particular how effective the Typhoon was even when flown by an inexperienced pilot an the second one with the Merlin 25 engines being able to leave a Spit XII behind at low level.
Thanks again
Thanks again
P-39 Expert
Non-Expert
No P-39s for the BoB. No P-39s had been produced (except the prototypes) by August 1940.
Maybe strip some Douglas A-20s and no crew besides the pilot. Wiki says a night fighter version began service in Britain in early 1941, maybe a lightened version could have made it before the end of the BoB in November?
Just make the equivalent amount of Hurricanes instead if Spits and they would have been just fine.
Shortround6
Major General
Sarcasm over the head???
Top speed of the early version was about 305mph at 9650ft falling to 295 mph at 13,000ft. This is in bomber configuration with the single speed engines.
The DB-7s, Boston III, Havoc II, A-20A first flew in Aug of 1940 in San Diego California. First US A-20A flew September 16, 1940 but was not delivered to the US Army until Nov 30th.
Top speed of these R-2600 powered aircraft was 344-347mph at about 12,500ft. But they are too late for any conceivable use in the daylight portion of the BoB. They did join the earlier Havoc I as night fighters (of sorts) in the spring of 1941.
Early A-20s, actually EX French DB 7s were powered by 1000hp P & W R-1830 engines with single speed superchargers, British designated these as Boston Is, First ones arrive in Aug of 1940. Followed by later ex French contract DB7s powered by 1100 hp R-1830-S3C4-G engines (first introduced on the 131st DB-7) equipped with two-speed superchargers. These were known as Boston IIs at first, then to confuse everyone the planes were renamed Hovac I. Some of the early ones were re-engined in Britain with the later model R-1830 engines.
Top speed of the early version was about 305mph at 9650ft falling to 295 mph at 13,000ft. This is in bomber configuration with the single speed engines.
The DB-7s, Boston III, Havoc II, A-20A first flew in Aug of 1940 in San Diego California. First US A-20A flew September 16, 1940 but was not delivered to the US Army until Nov 30th.
Top speed of these R-2600 powered aircraft was 344-347mph at about 12,500ft. But they are too late for any conceivable use in the daylight portion of the BoB. They did join the earlier Havoc I as night fighters (of sorts) in the spring of 1941.
British still would have won, just lost more pilots and planes. Loss of pilots may have hurt them in future campaigns?
- Thread starter
- #153
Are we supposed to hate RAF and many other Allied pilots that much?
P-39 Expert
Non-Expert
I don't get it? We have no Spitfires, remember? Gotta use something.
If you use the equivalent man hours you get many more Hurricanes, the Hurricane in the hands of an experienced pilot was well up to the job of defence in 1940, the Spitfires great strength was keeping inexperienced pilots alive until such time they became experienced.
- Thread starter
- #156
No Spitfires, remember?? I've started this thread, so I certainly remember.
Gotta use something - yes, but that does not mean we make a Hurricane for every Spitfire we don't have.
Shortround6
Major General
Until the end of 1940 the losses would have been little different, in fact, as I have argued, with more Hurricanes you would have had fewer losses. If you take the argument to the absurd, if the RAF had 2,000 Hurricanes with pilots Germany wouldn't have even started the Battle of Britain, if they did they would have been bounced every time. At the other end of the scale Dowding was left with the absolute minimum he considered was needed to defend the UK, 500 Spitfires and Hurricanes, with circa 200 Hurricanes lost in France.
Shortround6
Major General
Basically the RAF had 31-33 Squadrons with Hurricanes in the BoB (some were nowhere near London and Channel) and 19 Squadrons of Spitfires (again some were nowhere near London and the Channel). You had a few other odds and sods types of "fighters" scattered about.
Calling it 31 squadrons of Hurricanes and 19 of Spitfires means that Hurricanes made up 62% of the force (not counting the odds and sods) so one would expect them to cause 60-62% of the German losses due to fighters if the Hurricane was equal to the Spitfire. If it is 33 squadrons then they should have done a bit better.
Most accounts (many of the online accounts are dubious and don't even compare the correct models of aircraft) say the Hurricane shot down about 55% of the German losses due to fighters? Losses of Hurricanes are slightly higher at 63.7% but that is really too close to call.
Please note that most accounts claim the Hurricane was a better gun platform, although the reasoning leaves one scratching their head a bit. Not saying it wasn't, just questioning the reason/s given in some of the accounts.
The 500 aircraft (Hurricanes and Spitfires) sounds a bit low although it could have been true at some point in 1940 (May or June?) or a number of the squadrons were under strength?
Calling it 31 squadrons of Hurricanes and 19 of Spitfires means that Hurricanes made up 62% of the force (not counting the odds and sods) so one would expect them to cause 60-62% of the German losses due to fighters if the Hurricane was equal to the Spitfire. If it is 33 squadrons then they should have done a bit better.
Most accounts (many of the online accounts are dubious and don't even compare the correct models of aircraft) say the Hurricane shot down about 55% of the German losses due to fighters? Losses of Hurricanes are slightly higher at 63.7% but that is really too close to call.
Please note that most accounts claim the Hurricane was a better gun platform, although the reasoning leaves one scratching their head a bit. Not saying it wasn't, just questioning the reason/s given in some of the accounts.
The 500 aircraft (Hurricanes and Spitfires) sounds a bit low although it could have been true at some point in 1940 (May or June?) or a number of the squadrons were under strength?
