Was the Sea Hurricane a superior naval fighter than the F4F?

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

AIUI, almost all TBF CVE operations involved the use of catapults. Swordfish were primarily used on CVEs that didn't have catapults.
Two things.

Firstly, with the exception of the Pretoria Castle largely used as a trials and training carrier, British built escort carriers and MAC ships weren't equipped with catapults.

Secondly, Swordfish were used by squadrons on RN US built escort carriers. Check out the histories of ships like Biter, Fencer, Striker amongst others between 1942 and 1944. But the Swordfish was incompatible with US catapults and their tail down launch methods, so couldn't use the catapults on these ships.

For that reason Swordfish were later equipped with RATOG (Rocket Assisted Take Off Gear) to aid their take off at high all up weights. This was especially so for the Mk.III with its large centimetric radome between its undercarriage legs which entered service from mid1944.
 

And in 1944/45 Shah was operating in the Bay of Bengal / Andaman Sea area just where you would expect a much greater number of days with zero / very low wind conditions due to that Inter Tropical Convergence Zone. So this shouldn't have been a surprise to any sailor.
 
To name a couple of other examples, low wind was a factor at Midway on June 4th, and at Casablanca in Nov 1942. It was also a factor during HARPOON (light wind from the west) and, as mentioned, at Salerno.
 
Last edited:
In the days of sail, transitting the Indian Ocean could only be accomplished during certain seasons.
True and at times the prevailing wind was too strong to go the other way. Winter winds across the lower ocean of Australia to the south
and west came predominantly from the west. Ships that were to go from the East (Melbourne for instance) would sail East under South America
and Africa to get to Western Australian ports because it was quicker and safer.
 
My l tuppence worth, but iirc winkle-brown said the hurricane was a poor aircraft for a naval fighter on account of it being difficult to land due to the propensity of the hurricane to float over the deck and bounce over the arrestor wires.

Regards

Butch
 
He also mentioned ditching characteristics and short range. But he felt the Hurricane was a better dogfighter than the Martlet. I tend to credit Brown as a good source, but many people are highly dismissive of him as being biased.
 
There's lots of FAA pilots who flew the SH1B/2C and they rated it highly for deck landing and I know that it had a very low carrier landing accident rate. In fact, one of Eric Brown's first assignments was to carrier rate the SH1B on escort carriers and it went really smoothly:




OTOH, new pilots in 806 NAS wrote off 4 Martlet IIs (F4F-4A) prior to PEDESTAL during a multicarrier training exercise, including 3 in landing accidents (Cull - 806 NAS). AFAIK, from all the sources I've consulted no SH1Bs were lost in training during the work up.

Mike Crossly (They gave me a Seafire) states:


Crossly states that he was trained on SH1Bs in the UK and then assigned to 801 NAS on HMS Eagle on Dec 28 1941 . He performed his first ever deck landing, in his SH1B (on HMS Eagle).
 
Last edited:
Thanks happy to be corrected
 
He described the Sea Fury as a 'first class naval aircraft', but I've never read anything in-depth.

Again, nothing in-depth with the Sea Hornet, but he was quick to mention how poorly the ailerons controlled at low speeds.

He seemed to really like the Sea Hawk as well. Writing that when the Royal Navy received it they '... received an altogether splendid machine, a beautiful piece of aesthetic and practical design which looked, and was, superbly airworthy.'
 
Last edited:
To quote the man himself,

"In my book the Sea Hornet ranks second to none for harmony of control, performance characteristics and, perhaps most important, in inspiring confidence in its pilot. For sheer exhilarating flying enjoyment, no aircraft has ever made a deeper impression on me".
 
Is there any British-made single-seat carrier fighter that Brown liked? Did he ever try the postwar Sea Fury?
To be fair, when discussing the Seafire in Wings of the Navy:


One thing that should be apparent is that the Sea Hurricane and Seafire were being compared to the best aircraft in the Luftwaffe's inventory. Brown dishes faint praise on the Sea Hurricane and praises the Seafire LIIC for it's exceptional climb rate, when both FAA fighters had two and three times the climb rate of his beloved F4F-4 in the same time frame!
 


The F4F was much tougher and could survive damage that would destroy either of them.
Both could be brought down by a single 7.92mm bullet to the nose or wing mounted radiators
 
One thing that should be apparent is that the Sea Hurricane and Seafire were being compared to the best aircraft in the Luftwaffe's inventory.
They never seem to mention Italian aircraft in these comparisons… a just as likely opponent in the MTO.

Sea Hurricane or Martlet vs. Re.2001 or earlier fighters like the Macchi C.200?
 
Last edited:

Users who are viewing this thread