All the Hurricane questions you want to ask here

[StevSmar]

Wonder what marks of Hurricane were used on CAM ships? I've seen the images of Cannon armed hurricanes but wonder if Mk1's with cannon wings were used initially as CAM expendable fighters?

[Graham Boak]

The CAM ships carried Sea Hurricane Mk.IA, with eight Brownings. There are a lot of photos of CAM ship Hurricanes but none of them show cannon. I have seen a later BAE (HSA?) source which said that the A suffix meant catapult spools but no arrester gear, whereas the B suffix meant both spools and hook. This use would be entirely compatible with known deployment of the two variants, It also said the C suffix meant arrester gear but no catapult spools, for aircraft intended for the escort carriers. As far as I known, no SH Mk.Is ever ended up on the escorts, but this may be the origins of the confusion over the alternative description of the C wing.

The Mk.II Sea Hurricane switched to the same use of suffices as the RAF Hurricane Mk.II.

[StevSmar]

The CAM ships carried Sea Hurricane Mk.IA, with eight Brownings. There are a lot of photos of CAM ship Hurricanes but none of them show cannon. I have seen a later BAE (HSA?) source which said that the A suffix meant catapult spools but no arrester gear, whereas the B suffix meant both spools and hook. This use would be entirely compatible with known deployment of the two variants, It also said the C suffix meant arrester gear but no catapult spools, for aircraft intended for the escort carriers. As far as I known, no SH Mk.Is ever ended up on the escorts, but this may be the origins of the confusion over the alternative description of the C wing.

The Mk.II Sea Hurricane switched to the same use of suffices as the RAF Hurricane Mk.II.

Thanks Graham.

I've been looking for the image which shows a cannon armed Hurricane taking off from a ship with no covers on the ammunition access area. Something tells me it's from a CAM ship?

[Graham Boak]

I now the photo you mean, but I don't think that it was from a CAM ship. It's unlikely to be no covers - for aerodynamic reasons - but replacement parts still in primer.

[ReccePhreak]

Here's the Hurricane camera installation photos I have from my collection. Unfortunately all the shots I have are from a fair distance away. On the Facebook Hawker Hurricane Appreciation page it was discussed how the Tac R/PR camera installations were all done in the field and not in the factory, I assume this means there was a fair bit of variation in the install?

If that is true, that all Tac/R & PR camera installations were field mods, does that explain why all drawings & profiles that purport to show the underside camera fairings, disagree as to their size & shape? I have yet to find any really clear photos of any recce Hurricane camera fairings. I have the one from Airwaves, but I don't really trust that it is accurate.

That is the main thing that is keeping me from even starting on a recce Hurricane model.

Larry

[Graham Boak]

The underside camera fairings you mention are not regularly seen on FR Hurricanes, as opposed to PR ones. It's a safe bet (at least, "safe-ish") that the small sideways looking window low down aft of the trailing edge on FR aircraft is a factory fit, or at least design, as it does seem to be consistent. Presumably there is also a downward-facing window on such aircraft, as on FR Spitfires. However the under-fuselage fairing covering forward-looking cameras and (presumably) longer-lensed downward ones, do seem to have been done in maintenance units. "In the field" could perhaps be better phrased as "in theatre", as most of them seem to have been carried out in the Alexandria MU and so although non-factory are likely to have been consistent in themselves. They may have differed in shape due to different camera fit, but I'd still expect only a small number of shapes to be used.

However the records of the Alex MU do not seem to have been retained, so your best bet is simply to collect as many photos as you can, with as many interpretations ditto, and see whether you can find any obvious errors or links between what you see.

[ReccePhreak]

The underside camera fairings you mention are not regularly seen on FR Hurricanes, as opposed to PR ones. It's a safe bet (at least, "safe-ish") that the small sideways looking window low down aft of the trailing edge on FR aircraft is a factory fit, or at least design, as it does seem to be consistent. Presumably there is also a downward-facing window on such aircraft, as on FR Spitfires. However the under-fuselage fairing covering forward-looking cameras and (presumably) longer-lensed downward ones, do seem to have been done in maintenance units. "In the field" could perhaps be better phrased as "in theatre", as most of them seem to have been carried out in the Alexandria MU and so although non-factory are likely to have been consistent in themselves. They may have differed in shape due to different camera fit, but I'd still expect only a small number of shapes to be used.

However the records of the Alex MU do not seem to have been retained, so your best bet is simply to collect as many photos as you can, with as many interpretations ditto, and see whether you can find any obvious errors or links between what you see.

Thanks for the reply. As always, it seems that verification based on photos is so important. Too bad that recce Hurricanes don't seem to be a well photographed subject.

Larry

[StevSmar]

Although I agree with Graham Boak on the in theatre PR/TacR modifications, it does seem strange not to have any reference to Hawker drawings for these modifications. I've got a searchable copy of the parts manual so I'll have a look to see if any drawing numbers pop up as being PR or Tac/R related, off the top of my head I don't recall seeing any....

Another Hurricane mystery, and here was I thinking the list was getting shorter.

[StevSmar]

Is anyone else finding that the posts from November 2015 to end of February 2016 are missing?

[StevSmar]

The underside camera fairings you mention are not regularly seen on FR Hurricanes, as opposed to PR ones

What's the difference between FR and Tac/R?

[mhaselden]

FR is Fighter Reconnaissance - the aircraft carried a camera but also had guns installed.

TacR is Tactical Reconnaissance - typically low-level imaging of enemy fielded forces (as opposed to high-altitude Strategic Reconnaissance of infrastructure targets like airfields, ports, factories etc). TacR aircraft typically have cameras only with no guns.

HTH.

Cheers,
Mark

Edited September 8, 2016 by mhaselden

[JackG]

Is anyone else finding that the posts from November 2015 to end of February 2016 are missing?

I think it was just a quiet period, and no questions were posted for about three months? Note the first post of February, the poster feels they are 'resuscitating' the thread.

regards,

Jack

[tango98]

I have full-size drawings for the Hurricane camera installations but they're rather large.

I'll see what can be done to reduce them to a usable, scanner friendly size without compromising their legibility but it might take a while.

Cheers

Dave

[Graham Boak]

I don't think that there was any practical difference between FR and TacR, at least in RAF usage, and would expect both to have guns. There was some low-level PR, notably before the Bruneval raid and other early missions with pink(ish) Spitfires, but this was just described as PR, and was carried out with guns (Dicer missions) after the initial efforts.

[StevSmar]

I have full-size drawings for the Hurricane camera installations but they're rather large. I'll see what can be done to reduce them to a usable, scanner friendly size without compromising their legibility but it might take a while Dave

You're such a tease, if you send me the drawings I have a full size scanner at work I can run them through.

[PhantomBigStu]

I understand some Hurricane MK1's used the spitfire type propellors,

 

1. was it identical to the spitfire, hence I can just take a spitfire prop from a kit and pop it onto a hurricane 

2. Assuming the above can someone point me two some decals for a Hurricane that used a spitfire prop 

[Graham Boak]

Yes, but be careful here.  The propellers were the same on both types, but the spinners differed because the Hurricane's nose was smaller in diameter than the Spitfire's.  

 

DH propellers:

The Hurricane had a smaller diameter spinner, so it appears slightly longer and more pointed than the stubby equivalent on the Spitfire Mk.1.  No you can't cross-kit this one.  It appeared on Hurricanes before the Rotol, and was also seen on Sea Hurricane Mk.Is because its heavier weight counter-balanced the arrester gear.

Rotol propellers.  

1.  One Spitfire squadron was equipped with Rotol's magnesium propellers - I haven't seen a good-enough photo of this fit but the spinner looks similar to the DH spinner.   Maybe.  I don't think that these were fitted to Hurricanes.  No model available.

2.  The Rotol wooden blade propellers came with a rounded spinner sized for a Spitfire, and I'm sure that's the one you are thinking of.  The Hurricane experimental (civil) prototype used for trials had a new nose widened to match this (often missed).  It was decided that the Hurricane was in greater need of the benefits of a constant speed propeller, so the production examples went to Hurricanes first.  The majority of the Battle of Britain Hurricanes (P serials onwards?) had this installation.  The spinner is wider than the nose, to which an oil spill ring was attached.  Enough Rotol propellers were eventually available to be standard fit on the Spitfire Mk.II - this one you can put on a Hurricane.

3.  The final production Rotol spinner for the Hurricane (the shapely "bullet" one familiar from the Mk.II and later Hurricanes) did appear late in 1940 on late production Mk.Is.

[PhantomBigStu]

Thanks Graham, just remembered I have what I would assume is DH hurricane spinner and prop in the spares box, so I willl search for decals for such a machine, or fork out for a rotol prop

[Graham Boak]

Quickboost do the Hurricane version of the DH: I don't know of a good kit example but perhaps I missed one.  You could, for just a little more than an aftermarket part, buy the Airfix Spitfire Mk.I/II and get the spare Rotol spinner/prop from there.

[PhantomBigStu]

Didn't read closely enough, so the spitfire rotol is the same as the blunt hurricane one. Good do know, I will indeed be buying another MkII (or maybe another Va) boxing, so I don't need to search far for decals. Cheers 

[Troy Smith]

2 hours ago, PhantomBigStu said:

Didn't read closely enough, so the spitfire rotol is the same as the blunt hurricane one. Good do know, I will indeed be buying another MkII (or maybe another Va) boxing, so I don't need to search far for decals. Cheers 

Stu

 

you need to  read this, as it AFAIK the best guide I know of on the subject, and has comparison photos.

http://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/234980181-hawker-hurricane-propellers-and-spinners-a-modellers-guide

 

HTH

[PhantomBigStu]

Thanks Troy that looks very helpful indeed

 

only downside is it has killed a build I did recently, one of the pics clearly shows I misplaced a code letter

[PhantomBigStu]

Well interestingly just compared the spinner on the the new airfix mk1 with the spitfire mk1, both should be the same size if I've understood the guide, and they are not. Also comfirmed I have a Hurricane DH prop spare, are there decal sheets out there with suitable options?  

[Graham Boak]

It is certainly my understanding that the two (Spitfire Mk.II and Hurricane Mk.I) Rotol spinners were the same.  I made the Watts propeller version of the Hurricane, but if an alternative propeller came with that kit, it has been distributed somewhere in my stash/spares box and is now effectively lost for immediate study.  I have compared the Airfix Spitfire Rotol spinner with that of the 3D Spitfire spinner, and the Quickboost Hurricane Rotol, and all three appear to be the same size and shape.  

 

However, I've be surprised if Airfix provided the Rotol prop with their new kit, as the fabric-winged Hurricanes are more likely to have received the DH.  Check the shape of the propeller: the DH has thin roots compared with the wider Rotol blades.  I presume that you have the later BoB boxing: I don't have this to compare myself.

[PhantomBigStu]

my mistake I neglected to say I was comparing the dh spinners on both, they point the same yet the spitfire one is slighty larger, also just realised I neglected to say I was referring to the 1/72, 

Edited October 13, 2016 by PhantomBigStu