Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Check out the quote below from this article.
"The complexity of the Spitfire's design translated into its production time. The Spitfire took 13,000 man-hours to produce,1 two-and-a-half times as long to make as a Hurricane. It took the Germans 4,000 man-hours to make the equivalent Messerschmitt Bf 109."
What do you think of these numbers? Accurate? not? I know most planes actually got cheaper during their run due to production efficiences being discovered; however, also, aircraft cost varies pretty closely with aircraft weight at a given technology level.
Please post anhything you find interesting or relevant concerning which aircraft were production time hogs, which ones were efficient, which ones were bargains and which were not.
The same issue arises with all aircraft built by different companies, whether its a Liberator or a Spitfire.I don't know how you have a single cost for a Spitfire, the cost of production dispersed around Southampton and produced in a single factory at Castle Bromwich must be enormous.
Spitfire production was dispersed so there wasn't a single factory to hit and destroy everything.The same issue arises with all aircraft built by different companies, whether its a Liberator or a Spitfire.
Spitfire it was supposed to be a stop gap until 2,000BHP fighters like the Typhoon took over.
Can you expand on this statement.
Between 1939 and 1941, 4241 Spitfires and 6709 Hurricanes were built scoring 1835 and 3059 confirmed victories respectively in the ETO, so roughly 2.3 /2.2 respectively of each fighter built for every victory claimed, so the Hurricane was over 50% more cost effective as it cost 2/3rd the price of a Spitfire. We'll skip 1942 onward in the ETO as the Hurricane was clearly outclassed by everything the Germans had.
Pretty much what Wuzak posted. The Tornado and Typhoon were scheduled to be the front line fighters based on 2000BHP engines Sabre and Vulture. Then those engines and aircraft hit various problems and Rolls Royce figured out how to boost the output of the Merlin with better fuels and two stage supercharger. The Vulture was first run in May 1937 the Sabre in Jan 1938 with prototypes ordered shortly after. Maybe stop gap is the wrong expression but the engines and planes to replace the Spitfire and Hurricane were ordered around when the Spitfire was getting into service, events changed the plans drastically, possibly for the better.Can you expand on this statement.
Pretty much what Wuzak posted. The Tornado and Typhoon were scheduled to be the front line fighters based on 2000BHP engines Sabre and Vulture. Then those engines and aircraft hit various problems and Rolls Royce figured out how to boost the output of the Merlin with better fuels and two stage supercharger. The Vulture was first run in May 1937 the Sabre in Jan 1938 with prototypes ordered shortly after. Maybe stop gap is the wrong expression but the engines and planes to replace the Spitfire and Hurricane were ordered around when the Spitfire was getting into service, events changed the plans drastically, possibly for the better.
There are many ways of measuring things, man hours is just one of them. In terms of keeping pilots alive the Spitfire was much more effective and pilots were worth more than planes. The Hurricane in service in 1939 had a twin blade wooden prop and fabric wings. It was what it was an easily built low tech monoplane which was there in numbers until better planes replaced it. Hawkers were an aircraft company which had factories and people to produce aircraft. Supermarine had orders for flying boats to complete in addition to making the Spitfire, it needed the involvement of their parent Vickers and the government to get it done. Since the UKs defence was at stake man hours and cost was a minor issue when the guns started firing.Between 1939 and 1941, 4241 Spitfires and 6709 Hurricanes were built scoring 1835 and 3059 confirmed victories respectively in the ETO, so roughly 2.3 /2.2 respectively of each fighter built for every victory claimed, so the Hurricane was over 50% more cost effective as it cost 2/3rd the price of a Spitfire. We'll skip 1942 onward in the ETO as the Hurricane was clearly outclassed by everything the Germans had.
I thought the aircraft were ordered in 1938 with two prototypes for each engine. Not my area of expertise but I suppose a formal order cant be placed until an engine is confirmed in size, weight and power with any preliminary work at the company (Hawkers) risk. Until formally ordered it would be the "Camm fighter" wouldn't it?There was no Tornado/Typhoon in 1937. It was known informally as the "Camm Fighter" around the Air Minsitry Spec #F18/37, the emergence of the eventual named aircraft Tornado/Typhoon was due to engine availability & mods required thereof- and NOT that there were intially two separate aircraft in the initial air ministry spec to be purchased from Hawker. It was as you describe "the problems" which created the two separate aircraft, perhaps I`m nitpicking here but its a reasonably important historical chicken/egg type detail.
I thought the aircraft were ordered in 1938 with two prototypes for each engine. Not my area of expertise but I suppose a formal order cant be placed until an engine is confirmed in size, weight and power with any preliminary work at the company (Hawkers) risk. Until formally ordered it would be the "Camm fighter" wouldn't it?
My only point with regards to the discussion was that replacements for the Merlin Hurricane and Spitfire were planned before the war, so the volume of production required wasn't certain. If 20,000 Spitfires were ordered in 1936 man hours per plane would have been less. The initial order for 310 aircraft hardly justifies any investment in mass production equipment.There is another thread where I discussed that in detail - it will derail this one to carry on here and repeat it all:
Chicken and Egg, fighter airframes and engines.
My only point with regards to the discussion was that replacements for the Merlin Hurricane and Spitfire were planned before the war, so the volume of production required wasn't certain. If 20,000 Spitfires were ordered in 1936 man hours per plane would have been less. The initial order for 310 aircraft hardly justifies any investment in mass production equipment.
Oh good, another pointless stat.
Maybe they should have just had the Hurricane and cut Spitfire production altogether.
When the Merlin 60 series was under development, would Lord Hives have enthusiastically suggested putting his new high altitude engine in the Hurricane.
Would someone at the MAP suggest that by fiddling with the accessories the new Griffon could be made to fit the Hurricane?
I think they'd have just been hanging on until the Typhoon got into service. And hoping that worked.