Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Off Norway they were landing with 40kts of wind over the deck.
Beautiful picture.Here's one of my favorite pictures entitled "Moment of Truth". Not sure where I found it.
I've always liked the look of the Corsair in FAA colours. Here's Canada last (or second last) VC, awarded posthumously to Lt. Robert Hampton Gray.However, even in 1945, the F4U was an incredibly 'hot ship', but its often lost in discussions it was actually a pre war, as in pre 1939 war, fighter.
Yes, the Corsair was a handful, the 'Bent Winged Bastard' or 'Ensign Eliminator' depending on RN or USN usage, but it was head and shoulders ahead of its contemporaries.
Poor devils off Norway. All RAF Hurricanes and Gladaitors safely landed without arrestor hooks. Shown below shortly thereafter. Only to be lost due to HMS Glorious' shoddy command.Here's one of my favorite pictures entitled "Moment of Truth". Not sure where I found it.
Its interesting but I have never heard of the Sea Hurricane having a suspect undercarriage.
True, but you have 10 RAF pilots, none who had never made a carrier landing before. They went 10/10 landing Hurricanes without any modifications for naval use at all. No strengthened fuselage, no arrestor gear. no under carriage modifications nada. Brown seems overly critical of the Sea Hurricane, especially considering how well it performed both landing and taking off from carriers.
I think the Hurricane would of been one of the easier fighters to convert to folding wings as it already had pin joints holding the outer wing panels in place. I believe the reason this was not done was the usual , just not enough resources to devote to the project, and considering the FAA already had folding wing Martlets on order why bother?
Had Hawker incorporated folding wings, adjusted oleos and other mods into the Hurricane's structure then it would have been a better behaved deck operating aircraft.
Were there any mods that might have improved the rudder issues affecting pitch at low speeds?
Applied to the Hurricane? Don't think so. Counterweights within the control cable circuit might have eased the issue, but it would have taken some trial and error of course. Doesn't mean it couldn't have been done.
It just struck me as odd that the rudder would affect pitch and I was wondering how anyone might have analyzed and corrected it.
Not so much pitch change, more like sink rate. Side slipping requires a boot full of rudder, which would cause the nose to change attitude, in the Hurricane's case, shove it down, which increased the rate at which the aircraft descended. Obviously this makes it easier to see over that long nose, but it means the aircraft is now approaching faster (vertically, not horizontally, approach speed would be the same, 70 kts, but vertical speed would have increased) than it was before the boot load of rudder was put in. You don't want that when your stopping distance can only be counted on one hand.
i never considered the Marlet as a stopgap. Assuming timing and availability, I'm sure the FAA would gladly swap every Sea Hurricane, Seafire, Fulmar and Firefly for an equal number of folding Martlets.The Martlet and Hurricane were required because the FAA didn't have enough single-seat fighters of sufficient quality and it needed as many as it could get its hands on.
never considered the Marlet as a stopgap.
The timing thing covers quite a number of of years. Fulmar was ordered in mid 1938. The specification was several years older.Assuming timing and availability, I'm sure the FAA would gladly swap every Sea Hurricane, Seafire, Fulmar and Firefly for an equal number of folding Martlets.
I am very aware of the difference in landing on a carrier compared to your average airfield. The point is that the Hurricane has a more robust undercarriage and from the video's that I have seen little propensity to bounce. Clearly it did from the reports but it also went on to serve well in the role so the difficulty wasn't a deal breaker.No one's saying the Hurricane had suspect undercarriage. Surely you can appreciate the difference on landing between approach and roundout and stopping within mere metres, and stopping within hundreds of metres, with space for a nice rolling halt, and the unforeseen consequences that might have if the undercarriage was not designed for it. Energy management.
I am very aware of the difference in landing on a carrier compared to your average airfield. The point is that the Hurricane has a more robust undercarriage and from the video's that I have seen little propensity to bounce. Clearly it did from the reports but it also went on to serve well in the role so the difficulty wasn't a deal breaker.
I don't know, as clearly others know more about the Sea Hurricane than I, but if the problem had been significant then changes to the undercarriage would have been made. I wouldn't have thought that this involved major changes to the design.
In the admittedly few operational reports I have seen. I haven't seen any evidence that the Sea Hurricane was difficult to land and / or had a worse than average accident record than any other Naval fighter. That is all that I am saying.
The major problem seems to have been the range, performance, lack of wing folding and ammunition carried.
I posted this a few months ago on another thread concerning the Martlets from the French order. Just one of many contracts taken over.That maybe the case, Admiral, but it was. It was a great naval fighter, but it was bought to fill the gap in capability until the Firebrand was ready, bearing in mind that was originally built to be the high performance naval fighter ordered for the FAA in lieu of a decent carrier based single-seater after the Admiralty gained control of the FAA from the Air Ministry. The problem (for want of a better expression) with the Martlet was not its suitability for the task, but that by 1941/1942 it was no match for contemporary enemy land based fighters, like the Bf 109F or Fw 190, but the request for it came before these aircraft appeared and why not? Especially if all you have are Fulmars, Skuas and Sea Gladiators...
Of course the French examples on the Grumman production line were converted for British use and this was all done through the British/French Purchasing Commission, but someone in Britain requested them; they weren't just given to the navy, in case someone stipulates...