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

[Wild_Bill_Kelso]

Hurricane wings are readily removable.

The lifts on the Courageous class are at either end of the hangar, and are I believe equal to the width of the hangar, at least at the lift well, so there’s no pole in the way.

I'll take your word for it, though it looks like two of them are 'between poles' ... I can imagine turning / rotating the plane to get around the poles but it looks a bit tricky.

 

[Admiral Beez]

I'll take your word for it, though it looks like two of them are 'between poles' ... I can imagine turning / rotating the plane to get around the poles but it looks a bit tricky.

Oh, I didn’t mean to suggest they’d pop off the wings to get around the hangar. That bird is undergoing in-depth maintenance so wings are removed to make space. There are two lifts, perhaps one doesn’t have the pole. Here’s the other one, looks like the poles are less troublesome here.

THE FLEET AIR ARM ON BOARD THE BRITISH CARRIER HMS ARGUS. 15, 16, AND 17 AUGUST 1943, ON BOARD HMS ARGUS OFF LAMLASH. CELEBRATING HER SILVER JUBILEE, 25 YEARS CONTINUOUS SERVICE, THE ARGUS IS NOW BEING USED TO TRAIN FLEET AIR ARM PILOTS ON THE ART OF

Silhouette of planes going up by lift to the flight deck from inside the hangar on board HMS ARGUS.

www.iwm.org.uk

Looks tricky to place it just right.

 

[Wild_Bill_Kelso]

I was referring to these two.

It's such an interesting image, you can almost smell the oil and the petrol ...

 

[EwenS]

Oh, I didn’t mean to suggest they’d pop off the wings to get around the hangar. That bird is undergoing in-depth maintenance so wings are removed to make space. There are two lifts, perhaps one doesn’t have the pole. Here’s the other one, looks like the poles are less troublesome here.

THE FLEET AIR ARM ON BOARD THE BRITISH CARRIER HMS ARGUS. 15, 16, AND 17 AUGUST 1943, ON BOARD HMS ARGUS OFF LAMLASH. CELEBRATING HER SILVER JUBILEE, 25 YEARS CONTINUOUS SERVICE, THE ARGUS IS NOW BEING USED TO TRAIN FLEET AIR ARM PILOTS ON THE ART OF

Silhouette of planes going up by lift to the flight deck from inside the hangar on board HMS ARGUS.

www.iwm.org.uk

Looks tricky to place it just right.

View attachment 708638

As built Argus had two lifts, but according to Friedman the after lift was fixed in place in 1918. Hobbs lists her with a single lift in 1939, 30ft long & 36ft wide. That was at the forward end of the hangar.

There is something odd about her hangar dimensions. Hobbs gives it as 350x68ft in 1939. But looking at those photos of the hangar with Sea Hurricanes (span 40ft) then 48ft seems more likely. Probably explains why the aircraft were being loaded on the lift at an angle.

 

[EwenS]

During ferry operations Hurricanes were often carried on carriers partially disassembled to maximise numbers that could be carried. For example in early 1942 Indomitable made two trips ferrying about 48 Hurricanes each time as well as about half her normal air-group. They were reassembled and flown off in batches.

AIUI the outer wing sections would be removed.

 

[GreenKnight121]

This is what I've collected over the years:

COURAGEOUS/GLORIOUS: Flight Deck - 576ft x 92ft (175.6m x 28.0m) (Glorious aft ramp 60' longer)
Hangars - Upper & Lower -550ft x 50ft x 16ft
Elevators: Two 46-by-48-foot

FURIOUS: Flight Deck – 576ft x 92ft
Hangars - Upper 520ft x 50ft x 15ft; Lower 550ft x 35ft between funnel runs & 50ft forward x 15ft.
Elevators - Two 47ft x 46ft; fwd 12,500lb, aft 14,000ft

ARGUS: Hangar - 350ft x 48ft x 20ft
forward lift measured 30 by 36 feet (9.1 m × 11.0 m) and the rear 60 by 18 feet (18.3 m × 5.5 m).

EAGLE: Hangar: - 400ft x 44-66ft x 20ft 6in (aft of the forward elevatoe and beside the island structure, the hangar width restricts to 33 feet (10.1 m). Aft, the hangar is 13.4 m wide and 20.1 m in the central part.)
Elevators - forward elevator “T”-shaped 46ft by 47ft; aft elevator 46ft by 33ft

HERMES – Hangar: 400ft x 50ft x 16ft (fore 47' x 37.3' aft 44' x 37.3', length between elevators 293').
Elevators: both “T”-shaped 36’ x 36’ 6”

 

[cammerjeff]

I was referring to these two.

View attachment 708643

It's such an interesting image, you can almost smell the oil and the petrol ...

I wonder if the posts are removable? When I was working for a small airline in the mid 1980's, we rented hangar space from a FBO that had a hangar with 3 large Fabric roll up doors with 2 center posts, you would roll the door up, then remove the center posts by pulling down a spring loaded pin mounted on the upper end of the post. You did this by pulling on a cable attached to the pin. The lower section had 2 pins that fit into sockets in the hangar floor. The aluminum posts were 18' to 20' tall. And it took 2 of us to remove/replace them safely. I will try and find a picture that explains it better.
Not saying this is how they worked in that hangar deck, put it is possible. They would only remove them for the time it took to move the A/C in or out.

 

[cammerjeff]

I found a video here showing a more modern version with automated retracting posts, we had to man handle the posts on the hangar that as built in the 1960's.



Just a thought on the posts.

 

[WARSPITER]

The earlier US and British carriers came into being to accomodate biplanes - right up until the mid thirties for
most. That's basically why the aircraft used from 1939 - 42/43 were a bit lacking in many ways. The whole
carrier as a weapon thing was untried until WWII so for a lot of the time it was learn as you go.

 

[Wild_Bill_Kelso]

American carriers were flying biplanes too in the 1930s

 

[Greg Boeser]

Heck, Hornet was still operating SBCs and SBNs when the flag went up. Marine SBCs were still flying patrols from some island outposts well into 1942!

 

[yulzari]

Oh, I didn’t mean to suggest they’d pop off the wings to get around the hangar. That bird is undergoing in-depth maintenance so wings are removed to make space. There are two lifts, perhaps one doesn’t have the pole. Here’s the other one, looks like the poles are less troublesome here.

THE FLEET AIR ARM ON BOARD THE BRITISH CARRIER HMS ARGUS. 15, 16, AND 17 AUGUST 1943, ON BOARD HMS ARGUS OFF LAMLASH. CELEBRATING HER SILVER JUBILEE, 25 YEARS CONTINUOUS SERVICE, THE ARGUS IS NOW BEING USED TO TRAIN FLEET AIR ARM PILOTS ON THE ART OF

Silhouette of planes going up by lift to the flight deck from inside the hangar on board HMS ARGUS.

www.iwm.org.uk

Looks tricky to place it just right.

View attachment 708638

3 spots of paint on the lift surface. Job done.

 

[Greyman]

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".

I was going to point out that this quote is based on the Sea Hornet in the air, and only tells part of the picture. Brown (and many other naval aviators) would be quick to heap praise on a contemporary Seafire's performance vs. a Martlet, but in the overall picture he still rated the Martlet as a better carrier fighter.

So just because the Sea Hornet was nice in the air -- only tells part of the story (which I still believe is the case despite the following ...).

But! ... then I found another appraisal of his ...

She was a real flying fish, bred to the sea. Take-off was remarkable. There was no swing, and the view ahead was so excellent that the tail could be held firmly down throughout the entire run and give the perfect unstick. Landings were good, with a forward and downward view better than in the Mosquito -- although the batsman still disappeared from sight too soon under the engine -- and the Hornet's oleo undercarriage had much less bounce than the Mosquito's rubber-block type, which threatened some trouble.

There were some things to criticize, of course, but I had no doubt that the Hornet had set a standard for twin-engine naval aircraft which would be very hard to beat. Comparatively minor modifications would make her just about perfect. Robertson's trials in the Sea Fury proved that we had a winner in this machine as well.

 

[Clayton Magnet]

I've always liked US Navy test pilot Corky Meyer's recollection of flying a Seafire at a Navy Fighter Conference in 1943.

Without argument, the Spitfire/Seafire configuration was probably the most beautiful fighter ever to emerge from a drawing board. Its elliptical wing and long, slim fuselage were visually most delightful, and its flight characteristics equalled its aerodynamic beauty.

The Seafire had such delightful upright flying qualities that, knowing it had an inverted fuel and oil system, I decided to try inverted 'figure-8s'. They were as easy as pie, even when hanging by the complicated, but comfortable, British pilot restraint harness.
Spins were like a training aircraft, with instant recovery as soon as the controls were released. Even if I couldn't find the trim tab controls handily, which I couldn't, I didn't need them. The stability about all three axes of the aircraft was low enough to be a fighter pilots dream and high enough to fly hands-off in mildly turbulent air, it was a great combination, acrobatics were a pleasure, the aircraft responded right after the thought came to the pilots mind, seemingly without effort.

I was surprised to hear myself laughing as if I were crazy.

I have never enjoyed a flight in a fighter as much before or since, or felt so comfortable in an aeroplane at any flight attitude. It was clear to see how so few exhausted, hastily trained, Battle of Britain pilots were able to fight off Hitler's hordes for so long, and so successfully, with it.

The Lend-Lease Royal Navy Wildcats, Hellcats and Corsair fighters were only workhorses. The Seafire III was a dashing stallion!

 

[Wild_Bill_Kelso]

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?

Both were quite good against an MC.200 or G.50, probably equal to the Re.2001, but for sure the (land based) Hurricane suffered badly at the hands of the MC.202 and 205 which people tend to forget about. I'm not sure Martlets tangled with them or not.

 

[Wild_Bill_Kelso]

Good points. Had the fast T-lift carriers HMS Courageous and Glorious been available into 1941 the RN would have had two ships ideally made for a sizeable force of Sea Hurricanes. Granted, unfolded Hurricanes take up a lot of space. Here's HMS Argus below - her hangar was 48–68 feet (14.6–20.7 m) wide.

View attachment 708630

Maybe the Courageous class layout makes staggered stowage easier? Here's HMS Indomitable's 62 ft wide hangar with non-folding Seafires. I can't find any info online for the width of the hangar of the Courageous class.

View attachment 708631 .

Woah! New pic on here with the Seafires. Very cool! Incredible how many they can fit in there.

 

[planespotting]

You're all asking the wrong question...

 

[GregP]

Wildcat would eat a Hurricane for breakfast

The Luftwaffe thought so, too, in the Battle of Britain. They found out differently.

 

[Wild_Bill_Kelso]

Luftwaffe would have probably done better in the BoB if they somehow had Wildcats (which weren't available obviously) because one of their biggest problems with their fighters was their very limited range. Wildcat, depending on the variant, had more than twice the range of a Bf 109E...

 

[Shortround6]

Wildcat, depending on the variant, had more than twice the range of a Bf 109E..

while only holding about 40% more fuel (if they had protected tanks) in a bigger, heavier, higher drag airplane.
Stupid Germans.