the lancaster kicks ass
Major General
- 19,937
- Dec 20, 2003
yeah they just had the 8 in the normal positions on the wings (in sets of 4) and then each wing had an extra two mounted further out..........
P-40 vs. Hurricane
- Thread starter DerAdlerIstGelandet
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Didn't the Hurricane have metal wings from the BoB onwards? I know the early ones had fabric wings and probably still a fabric body. Most of the damage would probably have been on the wings though.
Also saying Australia used the Hurricane is a stretch, they had one, which was a refugee from the fall of Singapore, and it was mainly used as a hack.
Essentially the Hurricane was a 'turn and burn' aircraft while the P40 was more of a 'boom and zoom' fighter. Not many aircraft could outdive the P40 until the P47 came along, though the FW190 was probably an equal on the axis side.
The germans rated the P40 as a more danerous opponent compared to the Hurricane, I'd say the same with the Japanese. The Hurricane would have to fight a turning fight with a Zero and would pretty much be deat meat in that battle since it didn't have the speed advantage over the Zero.
The P-40 could and did employ the Boom and Zoom tactic against the Zero, which didn't have the speed to keep up, nor the armour to survive. This tactic was developed by the AVG but was employed across the USAAF after suffering losses with engaging the Zero in a turning fight.
Also there were some P40 versions, which had a merlin engine so maintainence would be similar to hurricane in the engine dept. at least. I don't think the Allison 1710 was particularly troublesome though, the P40 didn't have the Turbo version like some others, though it would have been vastly better in performance if it did, especially at high altitude.
The British apparently wanted to replace their Hurricanes with P40s in North Africa. The P40s kill/loss ratio was superior to the Hurricane (then again the Brewster Buffalo has one of the most impressive K/L ratios of the war!) and if it was my butt on the line I'd go with the P40 being more survivable than a Hurricane, only just though, as the Hurricane also has a reputation as a very sturdy aircraft.
So in the end I'd go for the P40 having a slight edge on the Hurricane as far as facts and combat record go, as for personal opinion I have a soft spot for both aircraft, both of whom bore the brunt of the early war years for the allies and both of whom are largely unrecognised for their substantial contributions to holding back the axis invasions.
Here's a few links on both aircraft that make interesting reading if you haven't come across them before
http://www.chuckhawks.com/p-40_vs_zero.htm
http://www.chuckhawks.com/p40.htm
http://www.chuckhawks.com/hawker_hurricane.htm
also some more interesting articles on other aircraft on this site
http://www.chuckhawks.com/index3.naval_military_history.htm
Also saying Australia used the Hurricane is a stretch, they had one, which was a refugee from the fall of Singapore, and it was mainly used as a hack.
Essentially the Hurricane was a 'turn and burn' aircraft while the P40 was more of a 'boom and zoom' fighter. Not many aircraft could outdive the P40 until the P47 came along, though the FW190 was probably an equal on the axis side.
The germans rated the P40 as a more danerous opponent compared to the Hurricane, I'd say the same with the Japanese. The Hurricane would have to fight a turning fight with a Zero and would pretty much be deat meat in that battle since it didn't have the speed advantage over the Zero.
The P-40 could and did employ the Boom and Zoom tactic against the Zero, which didn't have the speed to keep up, nor the armour to survive. This tactic was developed by the AVG but was employed across the USAAF after suffering losses with engaging the Zero in a turning fight.
Also there were some P40 versions, which had a merlin engine so maintainence would be similar to hurricane in the engine dept. at least. I don't think the Allison 1710 was particularly troublesome though, the P40 didn't have the Turbo version like some others, though it would have been vastly better in performance if it did, especially at high altitude.
The British apparently wanted to replace their Hurricanes with P40s in North Africa. The P40s kill/loss ratio was superior to the Hurricane (then again the Brewster Buffalo has one of the most impressive K/L ratios of the war!) and if it was my butt on the line I'd go with the P40 being more survivable than a Hurricane, only just though, as the Hurricane also has a reputation as a very sturdy aircraft.
So in the end I'd go for the P40 having a slight edge on the Hurricane as far as facts and combat record go, as for personal opinion I have a soft spot for both aircraft, both of whom bore the brunt of the early war years for the allies and both of whom are largely unrecognised for their substantial contributions to holding back the axis invasions.
Here's a few links on both aircraft that make interesting reading if you haven't come across them before
http://www.chuckhawks.com/p-40_vs_zero.htm
http://www.chuckhawks.com/p40.htm
http://www.chuckhawks.com/hawker_hurricane.htm
also some more interesting articles on other aircraft on this site
http://www.chuckhawks.com/index3.naval_military_history.htm
Attachments
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
Nice Post, nice pics and welcome R988!
Agreed. Welcome R998.FLYBOYJ said:
evangilder
"Shooter"
Good post. Welcome aboard.
the lancaster kicks ass
Major General
- 19,937
- Dec 20, 2003
welcome R998, can i just ask what makes you say that the hurricane didn't have a speed or manouverability advantage over the Zero? above 275mph the zero had the manouverability of a 4 engined bomber! anything could turn inside her and the hurricance could maintain this speed it a dogfight if the pilot knew what he was doing, also the zero would fall apart with 4x20mm trained on them (some MK.IICs served out there i believe), why would the hurricane have to fight a turning fight with a zero?
- Thread starter
- #287
Nice post there. Welcome
the lancaster kicks ass said:
The hurricane and zero had similar top speeds, though I agree the hurricane was better at speed than the zero, it was only marginally faster. The hurricane probably wouldn't be able to dive at high speed due to its non metal construction and I have heard it was also not exactly an easily handler at high speeds (I am willing to be corrected on this) so either way it would be difficult to outrun a zero, and turning fights almost always end up at low speeds, unless of course the flyer is an excellent pilot but that is not very common.
Also in the ETO the hurricane was very much a turning fighter, and all the RAF pilots would have been used to that sort of engagement and when they came to the PTO they suffered heavy losses against the the Zeros. The pilots were not overly experienced and not well informed on how to tackle a zero and they were decimated. Even the Spitfire had a lot of trouble with it for a while. For pure combat record the Hurricane vs Zero is very much in favour of the Zero.
Interestingly the RAAF used both the P-40E and Spitfire Vb and tested them against each other and concluded they were both as good as each other. In fact aside from it's lack of high altitude performance the P-40 should really be compared in the company of the Spitfire and 109, and if they hadn't diverted all the turbos to bombers then it probably would have been quite good at altitude, same with the P-39.
Perhaps a more likely comparison for a Hurricane would be the F4F Wildcat, both are more evenly matched with the Hurricane appearing to have the advantage on paper but the Wildcat has the better combat record. I believe Eric Brown looked favourably on the Wildcat, or Martlett if you want, in comparisons with both. But that's probably for another thread.
Perhaps my final word on the Hurricane is that it was better as an interceptor/bomber destroyer/mutirole aircraft than a pure fighter.
the lancaster kicks ass
Major General
- 19,937
- Dec 20, 2003
we've had the F4F Vs. hurricane discussion, i don't really think a clear winner was decided but i think the hurricane may had edged it..........
- Thread starter
- #290
I doubt the all wood construction would keep it from diving any more than than anyother aircraft. The Mossie was made of wood it did not have any real disadvantages, infact it was superior to a lot of aircraft.
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
R988 - good stuff but Eric Brown?!? 
- Thread starter
- #292
Yes Brown is not the greatest source.
schwarzpanzer
Senior Airman
- 662
- Aug 8, 2005
Very interesting discussion.
The wood on the Mossie was specially made/selected and very well built DerAdler.
The Zero's was apparently very crap.
I don't have any info on the Kufurst's wood quality, what a pity.
The wood on the Mossie was specially made/selected and very well built DerAdler.
The Zero's was apparently very crap.
I don't have any info on the Kufurst's wood quality, what a pity.
The Mosiquito was a dismal failure in the Pacific / Indian regions for one little fault.
Due to high humidity the glues had the wee habit of de-laminating.
Rather embarassing in a low level attack one would think.
Didn't read the whole thread yet, but has anyone pointed out that the british in Africa were the first one to use the "Tiger Mouth" on their p-40's. The Flying Tigers asked permission and recieved it from the Squadron concerned to use it on their planes.
Due to high humidity the glues had the wee habit of de-laminating.
Rather embarassing in a low level attack one would think.
Didn't read the whole thread yet, but has anyone pointed out that the british in Africa were the first one to use the "Tiger Mouth" on their p-40's. The Flying Tigers asked permission and recieved it from the Squadron concerned to use it on their planes.
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
"One of the AVG saw an article on the British 112 squadron, RAF, serving in Africa. That RAF unit had added a sharkmouth to the nose of their US supplied P-40s, and the AVG decided to do the same. They also had a Disney designed "Flying Tiger" painted on each plane."k9kiwi said:The Mosiquito was a dismal failure in the Pacific / Indian regions for one little fault.
Due to high humidity the glues had the wee habit of de-laminating.
Rather embarassing in a low level attack one would think.
Didn't read the whole thread yet, but has anyone pointed out that the british in Africa were the first one to use the "Tiger Mouth" on their p-40's. The Flying Tigers asked permission and recieved it from the Squadron concerned to use it on their planes.
I don't think there was a need to ask permission, I think both units were rather busy at the time to worry about such formalities....
schwarzpanzer
Senior Airman
- 662
- Aug 8, 2005
The Moosies glue problem was later solved though.
The Brits actually nicked the idea from the Me110 Zerstorer units, so they were hardly in a position to give permission!
The Brits actually nicked the idea from the Me110 Zerstorer units, so they were hardly in a position to give permission!
Jabberwocky
Staff Sergeant
k9kiwi said:The Mosiquito was a dismal failure in the Pacific / Indian regions for one little fault.
Due to high humidity the glues had the wee habit of de-laminating.
Rather embarassing in a low level attack one would think.
Didn't read the whole thread yet, but has anyone pointed out that the british in Africa were the first one to use the "Tiger Mouth" on their p-40's. The Flying Tigers asked permission and recieved it from the Squadron concerned to use it on their planes.
The adhesive deteoriation of the Mossies in the Pacific is actually just a combination of caution during the wethering trials by the RAF, a rash of structural failures completely unrelated to the glue, stubborness at DeHaviland and a health dash of urban legend.
6 Mosquitos went to Burma in April 1943, right at the beginning of the wet season. Three of them underwent 3 months of weathering trials.
Despite fears of the casein glue would deterioriate, the glue actually proved quite all right in the weather, apart from some problems with the fuselage skin warping, which was traced back to maintence, not the glue so much.
The worst problems actually occured not because of any glue problems but because a defect had arisen in the construction of the wing, causing one of the main load bearing joints (Rib 12 about 6 feet from the wingtip) not to mate properly with the plywood skin. Between Jan and July 1944 the RAF in Europe lost about 16-20 Mosquitos to wing collapse, mostly later built FB VIs and NF XIIIs but also some other types. The cause was eventually traced to construction methods at the Hatfield and Leavesden factories.
The Mossie was actually highly sucessful in the CBI theatre and the Pacific as a fighter bomber and fighter-recon aircraft. After beginning operations in July, the first loss in theatre was a Mk II in early November after one failed to return from a PR soThis was one loss after about 120 sorties, a reasonably acceptable ratio.
The Mossie was so sucessful in the Far East that by January 1944 the Air Ministry decided to equip 22 bomber and strike squadrons with Mosquito FB VIs, replacing Beaufighters and Vengances. Hardly something they would do if they type couldn't operate in the Pacific. By July there were 4 FB squadrons and 2 recon squadrons with Mosquitos and more transitioning.
I have some amazing photos that were taken in Burma by Mosquitos flying at roof top level. There is even one of Japanese soliders caught having morning breakfast on the verandah of their quarters. Mosquitos would regularly fly 8-10 hour recce sorties with standard 50 gallon wing tanks and 2 90 gallon Hurricane drop tanks on the undersides. Late in the war (July 1945) the PR 34 made an apperance in theatre, capable of taking around 1400 gallons of fuel bestowing a phenomenal 3400 mile range.
Wildcat
Major
Any chance you could post those pic Jabber? I wouldn't mind seeing them.
FLYBOYJ said:
Not to be picky and I haven't gotten all the way to the end of the thread BUT B/C models of the P-40 had 4 .30 cals in the wings with two .50's mounted to fire through the propeller arc. The sync mech. significantly lowered the rate of fire of the nose guns. I don't have the round count for them. I would have liked to have seen a couple of squadrons of Tomahawks go screaming through a raid of He 111's during the BOB though. 8)
