All too true, unfortunately: while I enjoy reading Morgan Shacklady's "bible", and there is some interesting material, there is much better and more accurate information available elsewhere.
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
All too true, unfortunately: while I enjoy reading Morgan Shacklady's "bible", and there is some interesting material, there is much better and more accurate information available elsewhere.
fastmongrel
1st Sergeant
If fabric covered wings and controls cant survive 400mph + then how did the F4U Corsair manage with fabric covered wing outers and plywood and fabric elevators. Was it limited to 399mph
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
Fabric wings and control surfaces CAN survive speeds in excess of 400 mph, it's a matter of how long. Although fabric is easily repaired, sometimes weather conditions prohibited some larger repairs, especially when the temperature is below 70F or the humidity is above 70 - 80%. Fabric combat planes or fabric partially used on combat planes had become an obsolete concept by WW2 and its obvious in the post war years....
You know, a post in another thread just jogged my memory and prompted me to think about the Defiant single-seat proposals. I'm sure it's been posted elsewhere in this thread - it's getting so ridiculously long I cannae be arsed looking, but if the Hurricane was the only single-seat fighter at the time, the proposals that BP put forward would most likely have been put into production. Here's something from The Defiant File by Alec Brew;
"When the Battle of Britain began to rage, BP design staff began to consider a single-seat version of the Defiant with a variety of fixed forward firing armament. The prototype, K8310 was converted back into a single-seater, by 16th August 1940, with standard day-fighter camouflage. Flight tests indicated that with a Merlin XX version with a modified cut-down rear fuselage upper decking and 12 forward firing .303-in guns would have a top speed of around 364 mph at 23,500 ft, with an all-up weight of 7,150 lb. This version was given a new project number, P.94, and more radically-armed alternatives were also envisaged. In one, it would be equipped with 4 .303s and 4 20 mm cannon. the latter being able to be swivelled downward by the pilot in flight to an angle of 17 degrees. Ground strafing of invading German troops was high in everyone's thoughts. The P.94 could have been built on the P.82 [Defiant] production lines, such was the degree of commonality, so that it could quickly have been in production. In fact an even more basic single-seat conversion of the Defiant was considered with just 4 forward firing guns."
With better performance than the Hurricane, the P.94 would have been the best, most expedient alternative to the Spitfire in 1940, outside of an entirely new design.
"When the Battle of Britain began to rage, BP design staff began to consider a single-seat version of the Defiant with a variety of fixed forward firing armament. The prototype, K8310 was converted back into a single-seater, by 16th August 1940, with standard day-fighter camouflage. Flight tests indicated that with a Merlin XX version with a modified cut-down rear fuselage upper decking and 12 forward firing .303-in guns would have a top speed of around 364 mph at 23,500 ft, with an all-up weight of 7,150 lb. This version was given a new project number, P.94, and more radically-armed alternatives were also envisaged. In one, it would be equipped with 4 .303s and 4 20 mm cannon. the latter being able to be swivelled downward by the pilot in flight to an angle of 17 degrees. Ground strafing of invading German troops was high in everyone's thoughts. The P.94 could have been built on the P.82 [Defiant] production lines, such was the degree of commonality, so that it could quickly have been in production. In fact an even more basic single-seat conversion of the Defiant was considered with just 4 forward firing guns."
With better performance than the Hurricane, the P.94 would have been the best, most expedient alternative to the Spitfire in 1940, outside of an entirely new design.
The single seat Defiant was to be slower than SpitfireI/II, on more HP.
Not that a good alternative. With 4 fixed cannons, the performance would again be worse, as it was a case for all-cannon Hurricanes Spits. Plus, there are 4 LMGs to further hamper the performance. Then we add gun swiveling ability - further performance loss, due to space needed (= more drag) for the cannon receivers to swivel as well?
Not that a good alternative. With 4 fixed cannons, the performance would again be worse, as it was a case for all-cannon Hurricanes Spits. Plus, there are 4 LMGs to further hamper the performance. Then we add gun swiveling ability - further performance loss, due to space needed (= more drag) for the cannon receivers to swivel as well?
So plainly, that wouldn't have been an option to with, indeed if the Air Ministry had looked at it more seriously, they would've probably stuck to 8 x 0.303" MGs - which reduces the weight, and makes it a better, more competitive aircraft - pity the idea wasn't made in June rather than August.
- Thread starter
- #507
By early 1940 the speed versus power curve of the Hurricane was well established (also for other thick wing Hawker designs), and there's no way that Camm could claim 425mph with a Griffon II in a Hurricane with standard wings. This is why I was hoping for more info on Camm's proposal as report by Morgan and Shacklady from someone with access to the UK archives.
The Merlin 61 was 78 inches in length but the Griffon II probably weighed the same as (or more) than the Griffon IV:
http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/Aircraft_Engines_of_the_World_Rolls-Royce_Griffon.pdf
actually the Griffon weight is given in the proposal as 1813lb which is ~170lb more than the Merlin 60 series.
Last edited:
wuzak
Captain
Unless he was engaging in wishful thinking....
The Basket
Senior Master Sergeant
- 3,712
- Jun 27, 2007
Always liked a single seat Defiant but in the cold light of day it would be chuffing useless.
I would suspect a few emergency calls to Washington and buy anything that flies. Or a joint plan with the Frenchies. Merlin Dewoitine D.520 maybe?
I would suspect a few emergency calls to Washington and buy anything that flies. Or a joint plan with the Frenchies. Merlin Dewoitine D.520 maybe?
- Thread starter
- #510
Here's a drawing of a proposed Griffon Hurricane:
So, apparently, there were several alternate proposals for a Griffon Hurricane.
Attachments
parsifal
Colonel
you find some amazing stuff sometimes RCAFson
In fact Camm was told on 27 February 1941 that "the Hurricane with Griffon is not (considered) worthwhile" - the decision was not dependent on the Typhoon's existence - it was the knowledge that the Grifficane was too limited and required too many modifications for too little improvement.
Here's a drawing of a proposed Griffon Hurricane:
So, apparently, there were several alternate proposals for a Griffon Hurricane.
According to an unsourced website, otherwise there is concrete evidence of one proposal which entailed extensive modifications to develop a 370 mph fighter. Redesigning the Hurricane enough to reach 425 mph would have required more than just a tummy tuck and some botox.
That lower cowl in the drawing you provided looks P-40ish. I seem to recall that was the reason the P-40
had yaw stability top speed problems. I'd be surprised if it even made 370mph. I said before, put a big
enough engine and prop on a brick, and it'll fly.
If there wasn't a Spitfire, it was the best that could have been put into action at short notice. This is a what if after all, Tomo and you know that the P.94 was examined (but rejected) for production. Useless is a bit too derogatory and I suspect as a stop gap, as a single-seat Daffy was intended, since its performance was better than the Hurricane's and there was as much potential for improvement in the basic design as the Hurricane, if not more because of the nature of its construction, so how could it have been useless? If the Hurricane was the only frontline fighter in RAF service, then why would this not have been considered? Hindsight is a terrific thing and I suspect it is colouring judgement here. The P.94 was rejected by the Air Minsitry in September 1940 because improvements to the Spitfire and future fighters, such as the Tornado and Typhoon offered better performance.
The single-seat Defiant WAS considered, along with the Miles M.20 as stop-gaps in lieu of faltering Spitfire and Hurricane production, but since neither was threatened in 1940, the need for these aircraft wasn't there, not because of any deficiency in performance or capability.
Last edited:
- Thread starter
- #515
We have two sources, M&S stating a proposal for a 425mph Hurricane and Camm's proposed 370 mph Griffon Hurricane, so the website seems correct.
I would suggest the same source stating that Camm was expecting 466 mph for the Typhoon is also the same source used to state that Camm expected his "Grifficane" would get to 425 mph - I take it M&S have stated a source? Otherwise we have one concrete example, kindly provided by Neil Stirling, of a Camm proposal requiring extensive modifications to achieve 370 mph. The big difference is 370 mph is far more realistic and far more likely.
I agree with the first part, but the second part was in reply to my reply - in answer to a comment about the other armament options with the P.94. On the one hand, the Air Ministry OTL didn't need to worry too much about aircraft supply, so they could decline the single-seat option - plus it saves them the egg-on-face of why didn't we have something like this in the first place!!
However, if the offer (don't know when the Merlin XX would be available) was made earlier i.e. after the debacle over Holland - then the Air Ministry might have gone for it - in the expectation of production disruption due to LW target Spitfire Hurricane factories.
The Basket
Senior Master Sergeant
- 3,712
- Jun 27, 2007
I think a better premise is the Spitfire either didnt exist or was a dog. As soon as the Spitfire was up and running then giving the Hurricane any future as a front line fighter was bad planning.
But stop and think there...was the Spitfire superior to the 109E and F and the Fw 190 and the answer is no sir. Maybe on a par but never has a big old lead in 1940 or 1941. So plenty of scope for improvement. So there was certainly a scope for something else. Of course, that else turned out to be a more powerful Spitfire but what the hey.
A single seat Defiant may have had a use but dogfighting a Fw190 was certainly not one of them.
But stop and think there...was the Spitfire superior to the 109E and F and the Fw 190 and the answer is no sir. Maybe on a par but never has a big old lead in 1940 or 1941. So plenty of scope for improvement. So there was certainly a scope for something else. Of course, that else turned out to be a more powerful Spitfire but what the hey.
A single seat Defiant may have had a use but dogfighting a Fw190 was certainly not one of them.
- Thread starter
- #519
You can say this because you've searched the UK archives and you now abandon the use of secondary sources? As I stated we have three sources, two secondary and one primary that suggest at least two different Griffon Hurricane designs.
While the cooling system of the P-40 was not a refined one as in P-51 or Tempest I, maybe you could post the data that would prove it as a major hurdle for the P-40 to reach better speeds than historically.
Expecting a plane to be fast, while having single-stage engine, 50% more fuel than Spit/109/Hurri/Yaks, heavy numerous armament, wing area 1/3 greater than Yaks or 109 etc. is asking too much, and really does no justice to the design.
In other words, stick the Yaks/109s with 35% greater wing, double the armament, add 50% more fuel, retain M-105/DB-601A/N and then see how fast maneuverable you will be.
I'd like to ask two things - 1st, please quote whole post, 2nd, please don't imply that I've said things I didn't (eg. 'useless' for single seat Daffy). I know it's a what-if, we do have some rules-of-the-thumb to help us out.
We could use a little bit of more information about the P.94:
- with what engine it was tested,
- what armament it was carrying
- how fast it was when tested
Then we can conclude whether it's performance was better than Hurricane's on same engine.
In the meantime, we can use the P-40F as a reality check (Shortround6, all rights reserved): 365 mph (here). Defiant was longer, with more wing area span than P-40 (= more weight drag), and neither wing nor cooling system do not hint 'low drag here'.
