WW2 with no Spitfire - Hurricane being primary interceptor

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


I agree 100% with this, I think it's fair to say that in the summer of 1940 the Hurricane proved itself more than capable of achieving what the RAF needed to in the BoB and by the same token the LW proved itself incapable of achieving what it set out to.

The Spitfire was not a vital key to winning, although winning would have been harder more costly without it.

After summer 1940 and after the confines of the BoB then RAF Fighter Command could have been in deep trouble if there was no Spit, the imagined replacements (Tornado/Typhoon) either failing or having some serious problems on in itial introduction.
 
It may have also been possible to iron out the teething troubles of the Dehaviland Whirlwind fighter?
It had considerable firepower, was fast and quite agile, and would have wreaked havoc on bomber formations.
 
vinnye said:
It may have also been possible to iron out the teething troubles of the Dehaviland Whirlwind fighter?
It had considerable firepower, was fast and quite agile, and would have wreaked havoc on bomber formations.
Click to expand...

A possibility definitely. It would be fast with the RR Merlins available for the Spitfire.
My mum was in the WAAF and I remember her commenting on the Whirlwind and its pilots...not sure which she took more notice of mind you

The Whirlwind? What does everyone think?
 
I believe that the Whirlwind was so small that using the merlin would probably not be possible.
I did have it pointed out by someone in another thread that adding a larger more powerful engine usually carries a lot of extra weight strengthening the frame etc. This also may change CofG.
Finally, the Whirlwind was of limited range (about 300 miles?), so a larger more thirsty engine may not be a good idea.
Still love the little beasty though!
 
Any takers on this: the Dagger installation looking like this? Though the doubling of exits would be needed, to cover upper and lower half of engine.
 
'The Spitfire was not a vital key to winning, although winning would have been harder more costly without it.'

True, the vital key was radar.
 
tomo pauk said:
Any takers on this: the Dagger installation looking like this? Though the doubling of exits would be needed, to cover upper and lower half of engine.
Click to expand...

You would need two exits.

Also, notice that the air is being guided outside to inside the vee, and exiting from between the vee (the de Havilland Twelve was an inverted V-12). The Dagger doesn't have that space there.
 
I believe that the Whirlwind was so small that using the merlin would probably not be possible.
Click to expand...

The issues with the Whirlwind were not just regarding the engine, and RR rectified the Peregrine's faults relatively swiftly. Here's text from Rolls-Royce The pursuit of excellence by Alec Harvey Bailey andf Michael Evans;

"While it lacked in high altitude performance it proved to be a formidable FGA aircraft when the Peregrines were rated at 880 hp on 100 octane fuel. Contrary to popular view the Peregrine was not unreliable. Its two main problems were rapidly tackled. Main engine failures were overcome by deleting the joint washers and using jointing compound, while bowstring failures of end cylinder holding down studs were cured by reducing anti-vibration collar clearances. Some of the stories of unreliability spring from difficulty in managing the operation of the radiator shutters during taxying, take-off and initial climb. Westland had linked the radiator shutter operation with that of the aircraft flaps, so that there were times when the pilot had to use flaps to keep the radiator shutters open when flaps were not needed in flight. In early operations a number of engines were overheated because the system was not fully understood, and evidence of this is in the pilot's notes which were extensively amended."
 
In my opinion the RAF could have muddled through without the Spitfire.

However...without the Hurricane...up that creek without a paddle. The importance. ..historic important. ..the Hurricane out weights the Spitfire.

Often said the Spitfire stopped some funky stuff from appearing. I wonder what aircraft would have appeared if the Spit didnt appear.
 
The Basket said:
In my opinion the RAF could have muddled through without the Spitfire.
Click to expand...

Really?


The Basket said:
However...without the Hurricane...up that creek without a paddle. The importance. ..historic important. ..the Hurricane out weights the Spitfire.
Click to expand...

Really?

I think the key to its "importance" was that they were simply able to build more in time for the BoB.


The Basket said:
Often said the Spitfire stopped some funky stuff from appearing. I wonder what aircraft would have appeared if the Spit didnt appear.
Click to expand...

Like what?

As far as I can tell the Spitfire birthing pains was a large reason why the MAP were reluctant to get Supermarine to develop new aircraft - like the Type 324/327. Other than that, I can't see where/how the Spitfire stopped anything.
 
The importance ..historic important ..the Hurricane out weighs the Spitfire.
Click to expand...

Can't say I agree. More than 22,700 Spitfires were built and used by far more countries in a greater variety of roles and theatres of operation than Hurricanes; that's a lot of not as historically important aeroplanes doing lots of things that Hurricanes either did do but not as well or didn't do at all.
 

Ok...here we go...no Spitfire means Whirlwind, MB2, F5/34, M20 and such and such.
 
Of which only the Whirlwind was really a viable fighter.



All you have to do is get the Dagger to work (or replace with Merlin?) fix the vertical stabilizer/rudder and fit retracting landing gear. and then??





Does anybody find it's performance just a little too good?
Almost as fast as a P-36 with 100-200 less HP?

The streamlining looks just a bit off too. Partially exposed wheels are fine for wheels up landings (Just like the Fairey Battle) but make the P-36 landing gear look positively modern.



Lets look at one of the claims for this one "Armed with the same eight .303 Browning machine guns as the Hawker Hurricane, the M.20 prototype was faster than the Hurricane and slower than the Spitfire types then in production,"

True but it needed the Merlin XX to do it. Give the Hurricane the Merlin XX and it was 10mph faster than the Miles. Climb was well behind the Hurricane, about a minute longer to 20,000ft if the Hurricane was carrying 12 guns, Now we get into retracts for the Miles and other modifications? If it won't beat a Hurricane using the same engine it is no replacement for a Spitfire.
 
The Basket said:
Ok...here we go...no Spitfire means Whirlwind, MB2, F5/34, M20 and such and such.
Click to expand...

Not sure how Spitfire production related to Whirlwind production. If anything the Typhoon carrying 4 x 20mm killed the Whirlwind.

As for the others - really? Designs to an even older specification than the Spitfire's? And the M20, proposed as an emergency stop-gap to bolster fighter numbers?
 
Squadron Leader Edward 'Jack' Charles, commanding No 611 Squadron, chalks up the Biggin Hill Sector's 1,000th enemy aircraft, following a successful sweep over Normandy on 15 May 1943. That afternoon, Charles shot down two FW190s, while the CO of No 341 Squadron, Commandant Rene Mouchotte, destroyed another. As it was not clear which of the two pilots had secured the 1,000th kill, the honours – and sweepstake of £300 – were shared between them.
 
wuzak said:
Not sure how Spitfire production related to Whirlwind production. If anything the Typhoon carrying 4 x 20mm killed the Whirlwind.
Click to expand...

I believe the Beaufighter killed off the the Whirlwind. Bristol was promising 360mph and the British were doing a LOT of production planning based on estimates and drawing board sketches. By the time they found out some planes could not deliver what was promised it was too late to reverse the decision/s. It might have been part of that thick wing doesn't have high drag thing that caught the Hurricane and Typhoon.
I am NOT saying that Bristol was lying or being dishonest but that a lot (all) British manufacturers got bad information from the central research establishment as did the RAF officers in charge of evaluating designs.

The Beaufighter did a lot of good work but high speed it was not.

The Decision to "kill" the Whirlwind was pretty much made in 1939 and only the fact that so much "stuff" (parts, assemblies) were already made (or earmarked) and ready to be completed and would only be thrown away swayed the decision to allow 114 or so to be completed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

S
Spitfire with proper meredith effect
2 3
Replies
41
Views
4K
Shortround6
S
Tropical performance of Hurricane and Spitfire
Replies
18
Views
2K
EwenS
E
SMGs in ww2 with much smaller cartridges?
2 3
Replies
53
Views
3K
Admiral Beez
A
S
Spitfire vs. Dora mass battle
2
Replies
33
Views
3K
Snautzer01
German WW2 seaplane bases
Replies
1
Views
610
Dimlee
Menu
Log in
Register