Why did the RAF put so many resources into the Hurricane?

Admiral Beez · Oct 25, 2019

syscom3 said:
The Spitfire was a far better machine. So why expend scare resources in building the Hurricane? Especially in 1940?

I don't think a lot of resources were expended in the Hurricane. Certainly, beyond moving to an all metal wing there were no material or other resources invested in updating the Hurricane. IMO, the factories continued making the Hurricanes as quickly as possible because they had the tooling and supply chain set up, but once things calmed down the Hurricane was disco'd and the plants moved to other aircraft.

fubar57 · Oct 25, 2019

but once things calmed down the Hurricane was disco'd and the plants moved to other aircraft

The last Hurricane was made in July 1944 (PZ865)

stona · Oct 26, 2019

fubar57 said:
The last Hurricane was made in July 1944 (PZ865)

Almost. Hawker itself was building them at Kingston and Langley until mid 1944 (Contract No.62305/39/C, Parts 13-19). This was a last batch of 1,357 aircraft all delivered by 24th May 1944, except PZ865, 'The Last of the Many', which was purchased off contract by Hawker Aircraft Ltd. and never delivered to the RAF.

fubar57 · Oct 26, 2019

10-4 Got that info here... Heritage - Hawker Hurricane | BAE Systems | International

Admiral Beez · Oct 31, 2019

fubar57 said:
The last Hurricane was made in July 1944 (PZ865)

Continuing production into 1944 of a design from the mid-1930s without any notable updates suggests few resources were put into the Hurricane. Compare this to the Spitfire where those produced in 1944 were significantly different from those of 1938, a true example of investment of resources.

Admiral Beez · Nov 7, 2019

My favourite Hurricane armament..... twin 40mm Vickers S!

That's 24-30 rounds coming to tear apart any tank. I'd say a destroyer or smaller CL better watch out.

Shortround6 · Nov 7, 2019

Admiral Beez said:
My favourite Hurricane armament..... twin 40mm Vickers S!

That's 24-30 rounds coming to tear apart any tank. I'd say a destroyer or smaller CL better watch out.

Only in fantasy land.

around 110-115 rounds per barrel and all could be fired in about a minute.

Yet they still thought they needed 4.7 in guns and more importantly torpedoes for surface action.

There is a lot of difference between river boats and small coastal craft and even an old destroyer.

pbehn · Nov 7, 2019

Shortround6 said:
Only in fantasy land.
View attachment 559817
around 110-115 rounds per barrel and all could be fired in about a minute.

Yet they still thought they needed 4.7 in guns and more importantly torpedoes for surface action.

There is a lot of difference between river boats and small coastal craft and even an old destroyer.

When tearing your tank apart it is much easier when your Hurricane is fixed on the ground, flying at 250MPH introduces all sorts of variables that mean you don't hit any tanks at all. If you see video of a Mosquito or Beaufighter with 4 x 20mm cannon on a single axis attacking anything it is just a hail of shells, some hit something, most don't.

maxmwill · Nov 8, 2019

Schweik said:
My big (off opic) question is, is the F.5/34 connected in any way to the A6M?

View attachment 557714

Also if you put a Hercules in it, would have been a good substitute for a Hurricane?

The Vought V143 would have been a better fit for the A6M.They are both quite similar in the tail.

Similar, yes, but wholly different designs with two different designers, independent of each other. For a very long time, there was a controversy about whether or not the A6M was copied from the Vought 143. Very untrue.

Why did the RAF put so many resources into the Hurricane?

More options

Admiral Beez

Major

fubar57

General

stona

Major

fubar57

General

Admiral Beez

Major

Admiral Beez

Major

Shortround6

Major General

pbehn

Colonel

maxmwill

Airman 1st Class

Users who are viewing this thread

Similar threads