- Thread starter
- #441
The Merlin 24 was in production in 1943, but I don't know the exact dates.
The Hurricane was in production until Aug 1944. There's no reason that an improved version wouldn't last even longer.
WW2 with no Spitfire - Hurricane being primary interceptor
- Thread starter RCAFson
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
The Merlin 24 was in production in 1943, but I don't know the exact dates.
The Hurricane was in production until Aug 1944. There's no reason that an improved version wouldn't last even longer.
This "improved Hurricane" you keep talking about would have been a lame duck which might have been used in quieter theatres or sent to the Russians. It would have been of no use to 2 TAF from 1944 on.
The Canadians also set up production of the Mosquito with speed/ease - simply means that the Canadians were efficient. 1,400 Hurricanes were buillt in Canada, starting late 1939, so at peak pace about 334 Hurricanes a year, so gosh wow. Interesting that the Hurricane was superseded at Canada car Foundry by the SB2C Helldiver...
Last edited:
One place is the article The "More Violent Hurricane" in Air Enthusiast/August 1972 pp. 91 - 98, exact page 97. Because no writer is given it's a product of the editors Green Swanborough.
Juha
- Thread starter
- #445
It's a bit strange that it only appears in obscure sources. I presume that it is referenced?
Obscure source??? Its an aviation magazine article, so no notes. But to say that Air Enthusiast/Air International is an obscure source is IMHO odd. Or Green and Swanborough.
Juha
- Thread starter
- #447
Yes, a 41 year old magazine, with no supporting references is a pretty obscure source - I'd don't even know where I would begin to look for it. Without references, we can't verify the accuracy of the claim. It is odd that it is not mentioned by Mason or Darling
Old yes, but obscure no. The Warbirds series in old Air Enthusiast/Air International was very good, some articles were excellent. Of course G S made errors and also we have learned much new during the passing 40 years, especially on LW.
Juha
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
Aozora; thanks for posting those pics! To beat an old horse to death, the wing assembly jig CLEARLY shows how the wings were assembled and how they are held into place, so this crap about "compound curves" and assembly difficulty can be finally be addressed with regards to aircraft assembly, and this includes the utter BS put out by many so-called 'expert" authors who never put their hands on a real aircraft!
The same principal on building wings is still used today.
The same principal on building wings is still used today.
Shortround6
Major General
Ans were you welded to the story of the F4U 
Just got a copy of The Typhoon Tempest Story (Thomas and Shores) - no mention of Camm expecting 466 mph for the Typhoon and it would be hard to find a better researched book on the Typhoon/Tornado/Tempest series. It may well be that Camm was expecting 466 mph for the Typhoon II aka Tempest I, in which case his expectations were met.
wuzak
Captain
Does it mention what speed he was expecting?
I have had the book some 20 years and I like it very much but as usual with Thomas and Shores it's more on operational use and not very much on technical side. I might have something more on the technical side of Typhoon development but I haven't now time to try to dig more info out.
Juha
Juha
- Thread starter
- #456
Volume production couldn't begin until the Packard Merlins came online and that didn't happen till early 1942. Production was terminated in March 43 so the bulk of Cdn HH production occurred in a one year period:
Toronto Aviation History - Authors - Canadian Hurricanes
Small numbers of Hurricane IVs were used in Italy into 1944 and in France after D-Day:
Given the nearly complete air superiority enjoyed by the Allies over France after D-day, the Hurricane IV would have been quite useful if needed, as it could still carry a formidable weapons load.
Last edited:
IIRC tried and failed before D-Day, too high losses to AAA being too slow and with all that armour sluggish.
And its noticable that neither the British nor the Canadians insisted on further production - the Canadians chose to replace the Hurricane with the SB2C Helldiver.
Small numbers is right because the Hurricane was not up to the job, particularly in 2 TAF territory; it was far too slow and far too vulnerable to flak and fighters, as the small number of operations flown by 2 TAF Hurricanes showed. Plus the Typhoon could carry a better weapons load and could still fight 190s and 109s once the weapons were dropped. Overall there was no good reason to bother with the Hurricane post D-Day.
- Thread starter
- #459
Canada didn't choose to replace it with the SB2C, since that aircraft never flew operationally with the RCAF, rather the USN contracted with CCF to build the SB2C in the CCF factory. No one has ever claimed that the Hurricane should have stayed in production without major mods to it's wing design and by the time the CCF plant stopped building Hurricanes, there was a good flow of aircraft from both the USA and UK that surpassed it in performance, although to be fair it was still being used as a front line aircraft in 1943/44 in Europe and until 1945 in the SEATO.
Again, you simply state the obvious - as though anyone disagrees that the Typhoon was a far superior aircraft. However, the Hurricane IV could have been used if needed especially as the Luftwaffe was no longer a factor and the HH IV was very well armoured against flak.
Last edited:
Expecting a new wing to be designed for the Hurricane is wishful thinking indeed; by 1940 Camm wasn't bothering with major redesign of the Hurricane because he had to concentrate on the Typhoon. Face some facts and understand that the Hurricane was well past its use-by date as a fighter by 1942, and the illusion that the Hurricane could somehow compete with 190s and 109Fs Gs is a waste of time.
I state the obvious because you seem to ignore the obvious when it suits. With such thinking it could also be claimed that the Fairey Battle could have been useful! Contrary to your opinion the Luftwaffe was still a factor and against ground targets the Hurricane IV proved to be vulnerable, partly because of all that armour, which was not heavy enough to provide much protection against 37mm Flak especially, and the weight of which made it just that much slower and easier to target. The only reason it was still in use in 2 TAF in 1943/44 was because of continuing problems with Typhoons.
