Spits and Mossies only?

[Hempy]

That 'overly thick wing' also made the Hurricane an excellent gun platform, and easily adaptable to cannons and it's 'tank busting' role later in the war. It wasn't so bad.

[megan]

Thanks for the pointer wonderboysteve, found a piece in an Ackroyd paper on Spitfire wing design.

After the unsatisfactory drag characteristics of the earlier Type 224 had become evident, Supermarine’s urgent need with the Spitfire design became drag reduction. As Shenstone’s comments imply, part of the problem was thought to lie in the thick aerofoil section used on that aircraft - 18% thickness-chord ratio at the root - and, as he says, “we wanted to improve on that”. Earlier experience with the S.6 and S.6B Schneider Trophy floatplanes using RAF 27 aerofoil sections of 10% thickness-chord ratio had been far happier. Consequently, Supermarine became inclined to ignore official advice that thickness-chord ratios of up to 20% showed no appreciable increases in drag. Cole is scathing on this advice but the situation deserves rather more explanation.

After the First World War it was realised that a major problem in wind tunnel testing lay in achieving Reynolds numbers more representative of those at full-scale in flight. In a move to deal with this problem, the NPL built a large Compressed Air Tunnel which came into operation in 1932. The results obtained from this facility provided the basis of the above advice on drag. Unfortunately, what was not realised at the time was that this tunnel possessed a high level of turbulence which obscured the actual drag decrease with reducing thickness-chord ratio.

Sydney Camm at Hawker followed the official advice in selecting relatively high thickness-chord ratios for the Hurricane (19% at the root to 12% at the tip) and Typhoon and later passed the scathing comment that he had been “conned by the aerodynamists [sic]” when he learned the truth

[typerated]

Megan,


There is a bit of a fuller account in "Sydney Camm and the Hurricane"
published by Airlife , written by John Fazard- It's a very good book BTW


Think wing and good gun platform - why would there be a correlation? A good gun platform would be more about stability and control sensitivity I'd have thought.


I think you would have to have rose tinted specs to suggest that the Hurricane was anything but outclassed and obsolete as a fighter from the start of the war. it's successes a testament to skilled pilots rather than it's capability as a useful mount. It was (just) good enough to do a job in 1940 - I think it's reputation has been enhanced by being on the winning side.


Putting cannons in them made them even slower - I also understand they had shocking loss rates while employed in A-G.

[Hempy]

Think wing and good gun platform - why would there be a correlation? A good gun platform would be more about stability and control sensitivity I'd have thought.

Every pilot who flew the Hurricane said it was an excellent gun platform, not least because of its rock-steady aircraft stability. In addition, the Hurricane's sturdy wings provided solid bracing for the guns which were mounted in twin batteries of four, closely grouped together in each wing, as close in to the fuselage as they could be placed to clear the propeller. Because of its thin wing, the Spitfire's armament of machine guns had to be spread out along the wing, with the outboard gun a third of the way in from the wingtip, then a group of two and then an inboard gun on each side. The wings would flex in turbulence or when pulling G and so the guns could be slightly out of line from their ground harmonisation when they were fired, making them less accurate especially over range. Although there is no difference in the armament between the Battle of Britain Hurricanes and Spitfires, the Hurricane was clearly the better gun platform.

Issue 6 - Battle of Britain: Spitfire or Hurricane - Aviation Classics Magazine

During and following the five-day El Alamein artillery barrage that commenced on the night of 23 October 1942, six squadrons of Hurricanes, including the 40 mm cannon-armed Hurricane Mk.IID version, claimed to have destroyed 39 tanks, 212 lorries and armoured troop-carriers, 26 bowsers, 42 guns, 200 various other vehicles and four small fuel and ammunition dumps, flying 842 sorties with the loss of 11 pilots. Whilst performing in a ground support role, Hurricanes based at RAF Castel Benito, Tripoli, knocked out six tanks, 13 armoured vehicles, 10 lorries, five half-tracks, a gun and trailer, and a wireless van on 10 March 1943, with no losses to themselves.

[At ease]

Megan says:

And it(P51) was the sole aircraft to perform the long range escort, both in Europe and the B-29 raids on Japan.

You are forgetting the P38 Lightning and various marks of the P47D Thunderbolt in Europe, and the P47N very long range version in the Pacific.

This later aircraft, designed for the B29 escort role in the Pacific, was able to operate from Saipan in the Marianas against the home islands before the P51 was operating in the same capacity from Iwo Jima.

It was the longest ranging single engined fighter of WW2.

[TorqueOfTheDevil]

You are forgetting the P38 Lightning and various marks of the P47D Thunderbolt in Europe, and the P47N very long range version in the Pacific.

This later aircraft, designed for the B29 escort role in the Pacific, was able to operate from Saipan in the Marianas against the home islands before the P51 was operating in the same capacity from Iwo Jima.

It was the longest ranging single engined fighter of WW2.

Neither the P-38 nor the P-47D had the range to escort the bombers anywhere in Europe (hence Megan's comment about 'long range escort'), and the P-47N, impressive though it was, appeared far too late to serve in the European war. The P-51B/C/D became available from the end of 1943, well over a year before the P-47N saw combat. As the P-51s entered service, the P-47s were steadily withdrawn from escort duty leaving the 56th FG as the sole 8th AF operator of the P-47.

[megan]

P47N very long range version in the Pacific.

This later aircraft, designed for the B29 escort role in the Pacific

I stand to be corrected, but my understanding is that while the 47N was intended for the B-29 escort role in the Pacific, it was a function for which it was rarely used. Predominately they engaged in attacking shipping, and ground targets, such as railways and airfields. The N's I believe were stationed on Ie Shima (Okinawa) and Iwo Jima, and D models in the Marianas. It's a bit difficult to pin down the N's history, the 318th Fighter Group ferried their N's from Oahu to Johnston Island, to Majuro, to Eniwetok, to Saipan, to Ie Shima. They mention carrying some attack mission on Truk during the ferry, and one mission to Marcus Island escorting bombers.