Jump to content
This site uses cookies! Learn More

This site uses cookies!

You can find a list of those cookies here: mysite.com/cookies

By continuing to use this site, you agree to allow us to store cookies on your computer. :)

Geoffrey Sinclair

Members
  • Content Count

    37
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

28 Good

About Geoffrey Sinclair

  • Rank
    Newbie

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Planet Earth (Usually)

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I agree if the parts are available and the workshop is equipped it should not take a long time, if everything is accessible. No wheels slows movement down, unpacking from crates costs time and so on. The centre section would be fitted as per the photograph, so that assembly had to be ready to go as well, otherwise it is more time to fit the tanks and undercarriage etc. So far all photographs of partially assembled Hurricanes have the wing centre section attached to the fuselage. C&E = Carl and Elizabeth and the 4 part article on RCAF Hurricanes published by the Canadian Aviation Historical Society, the pre war photograph shows fuselages with engines but minus tails and outer wings, propped up on trestles since the radiator is in place. No idea about the undercarriage, or just the wheels, whether retracted or removed. Since the tyres were meant for grass fields and wore out quickly on the runways the RCAF was using, leading to a pre war shortage. I agree by end January 1942 at least some of the missing supplies had arrived, given we know some of the RCAF Hurricanes entered service, after the effort to obtain them I doubt the RCAF was interested in sending any spares straight back versus keeping them in stock for the 80 strong force expected to operate in Canada.
  2. Agreed it is the standard arrangement, but what happens if there are no wheels, tyres and tubes? As reported to be the case with the stored mark I. Would the airframe be further disassembled or rested on chocks or trestles? In the photographs replacing the outer wings, engine mount and fuselage fairings would be simple enough, but the wing centre section would be a lot more work. CCF shipped its airframes incomplete.
  3. No problems about the delayed reply, if I could only figure out how to see my private messages again I could be sure of what I said back then. I have not seen a copy of the updated versions of the book so I am not in a position to comment on them. I have found differences in the original versions and things like the production reports and RAF delivery logs, for example NF702 ad NF735. I have copies of official British Naval Aircraft Production reports for the RN from 1933 to early 1955 as a possible sanity check, with the caveat such reports can and do omit regular production aircraft for a number of reasons and I have only double checked/cross referenced 1935 to 1949. The delivery logs generally mention when an aircraft was transferred to the RN/FAA. Finally I wanted to mention the web site and its photographs.
  4. Changing the outer wings and front fuselage are simple enough, the wing centre section is in the photograph, connected to the fuselage and the undercarriage, to replace that you need to lift the fuselage off at least, maybe disconnect the main undercarriage and move it to the new wing centre section. However we know none of the stored mark I had wheels, brakes, tyres or tubes, so what they were resting on becomes an issue, perhaps chocks or trestles or they were more disassembled than the ones in the photograph.
  5. The letter with the list of Hurricanes in store is dated 31 January 1942 replying to one sent on the 21st and as of that time it was 60 for the RCAF with "a possibility ... may be reduced to 30, but I am awaiting written confirmation regarding this point". Thanks again Carl and Elizabeth. The 30 sent to Britain, AG serials, Taken on Charge or Arrival at Maintenance Unit dates, * means MU date, and where both an MU and ToC date are given they are the same. Feb-42 343* Mar-42 297*, 301*, 668, 670 Apr-42 303*, 320*, 321*, 324*, 329*, 333*, 334, 335*, 339, 340, 342, 344, 665, 666, 667, 671 May-42 292*, 322*, 328*, 331*, 336, 337, 338, 669 Others: 298 Russia Jun-42, which implies it is one of the earlier arrivals. The above arrival times are consistent with the AG672-684, and early AM serials, the ones needed to make the 100 mark I for Canada. The ones that were probably mostly on the assembly line when it shut down and remained partially assembled but moved aside/suspended so the Sea Hurricanes could be built. By the way, in the September Sea Hurricane assembly hall photograph, people are confident the airframes on the other side are mark I, how confident about Sea mark I, not standard mark I? Things like radiator fits were done to the stored mark I or at least radiators are not listed as needed to make them flyable. They key date above is AG343 at 13 MU on 25 February 1942, then comes 297 on 2 March (but just possibly May, the writing is hard to read). The aircraft had to be disassembled for shipping, so if the stored aircraft were assembled CCF could substitute new mark II parts for the relevant mark I easily enough during packing. If they were disassembled that actually might be harder depending on how much packing had been done and what parts were packed together, unpack mark I parts, substitute mark II, (re)pack for export sort of thing. 60 Hurricanes would take up a fair amount of room, admittedly removing the outer wing panels would save much space, so would they be stored in as complete a state as possible or would some work be done to reduce storage space requirements? If the decision was taken to reduce the RCAF allotment to 30 in late January and CCF were aware Britain would only accept mark II, there is just enough time to have one of the stored airframes upgraded and arrive at an MU in Britain on 25 February, we know from the 1941 exports it can take under a month from Canada to Britain, the arrival date of AG343 shows this again, but the upgrade process has to be along the lines of move mark II parts in and mark I out in hours not days of extra time versus just packing the existing airframe. The RAF etc. say all upgrade work was in Canada, logic says all the stored and partially built airframes could go through a standard process of upgrade at CCF before shipping. Air Britain is putting up a warning sign but that warning sign has its own problems by saying AG667-71 were IIB when it is definite they were mark I as built.
  6. So Air Britain considers all AG serials to AG344 to be mark I, mostly converted to mark II and AG665 to 684 all mark II. So yet another reference that has its own ideas. The 5 unreported serials, AG297 to 128 Sqn. RAF, SOC 31.5.45. Squadron was at Sierra Leone and reported using Hurricane I to January 1943, mark II from November 1942 to March 1943. AG297 was sent to the Middle East on 8 September 1942. AG303 to Russia 24.9.42 The Russians would not have accepted a mark I that late. AG337 to 2 Sqn. then 6 Sqn. Royal Indian Air Force, AG338 to 2 Sqn. Royal Indian Air Force, then 607/20 Sqn. RAF. AG337 shipped to India 28 August 1942, AG338 on 8 November 1942, while 607 squadron stopped using mark I in September 1941 and the Indian Air force says it operated mark II. http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/IAF/Units/Squadrons/2-Squadron.html http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/IAF/Units/Squadrons/6-Squadron.html AG342 to 28/20 Sqn. RAF 28 squadron reports only using mark II, IIB from December 1942 to April 1944, IIC March 1944 to October 1945, 20 squadron used IIB January to May 1943, IID March 1943 to September 1945, IV December 1944 to September 1945. So apart from AG297 the service usage says they were all mark II and it seems reasonable to assume AG297 was a mark II. The letter dated 10 December 1941 has Sea Hurricane status being 15 despatched, 9 ready for despatch, 26 complete except for generator couplings and some wheels while mark IIB were in production at a rate of 2 per day. I read that to mean all Sea Hurricane airframes were off the assembly line, with some but not all had been officially produced. The Taken on Charge dates would be after the official production dates, so there were probably more than 5 Sea Hurricanes officially produced in November. The conclusion is CCF mark I Hurricanes were all serials to AG671 less AG341. Air Britain declaring all the AG665 to 684 being mark II can be taken as evidence they were converted before leaving Canada, the import reports, RAF and Ministry of Aircraft Production reports also say no mark I imports after August 1941, but Air Britain reporting conversions, presumably from the individual aircraft cards, suggests some conversions were done in Britain. Given Carl and Elizabeth’s clear depth of information they seem the only obvious source to provide more evidence to firm up the conclusions.
  7. As far as I can tell we can drop the FAA aircraft for the moment as Sturtivant is reporting their version on arrival to the FAA, so after CCF and RAF work. Thanks for the Air Britain listings. The first obvious question is converted from what? The reason I mentioned the RCAF aircraft the 60 stored airframes were A wing and that is how they *should* have been sent to Britain unless CCF manufactured another up to 30 sets of B wings. So converted to IIB could mean from IIA. It is unlikely CCF was taking A wings from stored aircraft to fit to Sea Hurricanes and replacing them with B wings, start with the fact all Sea Hurricanes had their wings as of 10 December and how ready the aircraft in storage are reported. Air Britain reporting AG665-71 were mark IIB on arrival in Britain says at least some wing swaps had to occur, or maybe since they were operating mark I the RCAF kept some A wings as spares. I know the Taken on Charge dates need to be used with caution, but for AG673 (not 2) to AG684 they are basically linear, from 28 February to 12 March 1942, for AG665 to 672 they are, in order in 1942, 29 April, 2x30 April, 13 March, 6 March, 2 March, 30 April and 14 April. The later serials clearly arriving first. Does “unreported” mean there is no data against the serials or no mention of conversion? Our anchor points are the 60 stored airframes (59 built in July/August, 1 in October) which end in serial AG671 (excluding AG341/3), the inventory of Sea Hurricanes as of 10 December 1941 being 15 despatched, 9 ready for despatch, 26 complete except for generator couplings and some wheels, while mark IIB were in production at a rate of 2 per day, and being exported as rapidly as possible. The Sea Hurricane taken on Charge dates say 31 delivered by end December 1941. Official Hurricane production (all types) for November was 31 and then 70 in December. To add to the complexity the aircraft arriving in Britain in December 1941 were *not* AG672 to AG684, nor AM270 to 296, the next set of serials ordered, but from around AM297 onwards, this 40 or so airframe gap, along with the 60 stored, meets the requirement of 100 aircraft for 1 Operational Training Unit in Canada, as noted in other documents. Now to move into trying to make the pieces fit. Production is 31 in November plus around 20 aircraft built to 10 December that need to account for any Sea Hurricanes and 40+, say 50, other airframes being produced *if* production was in serial order, given the serials of the early mark II arrivals in Britain. Highly doubtful. Going the other way all Sea Hurricanes, by using slave equipment, could have been tested and officially produced by 10 December, again highly doubtful as that would mean mark II were just coming off the line and the first 7 needed to be in Britain in 3 weeks. We know CCF had Sea Hurricanes being assembled in September so it is highly likely all 50 Sea Hurricanes airframes came off the line before any other new airframes did, but the fact the Sea Hurricanes had to be in flyable condition says some at least were officially produced later than the first mark II which had an airframe only requirement for it to be counted. We can then turn to the possibility CCF had a number of partially built airframes moved off the production line while awaiting parts, in order to build the Sea Hurricane, maybe up to 40 partially built mark I airframes from AG672 onwards, given the would be the same version as the stored airframes, to complete the allotment for 1 OTU. Deduct them and deduct the 24 Sea Hurricanes despatched or ready to be despatched and it means around 26 mark II built in November to around 10 December of which 7 made it to Britain in December. I doubt we will find the exact numbers but the simplest conclusion is November to 10 December 1941 there are a mixture of Sea Hurricanes and mark II officially built, while a number of partially built airframes have been moved off the production line and will ultimately be delivered as mark II when the decision is taken to defer equipping 1 OTU. A point to consider is that until around August 1941 CCF was building airframes where almost all the parts were being made in Canada but which needed significant amounts of equipment to complete after arriving in Britain, then it was confronted with the need to make 150 complete aircraft, which required more parts from Britain and the line suddenly shut down for around 2 months. Now to add in the reports parts from the 24001-40 construction number block (AG665-84, then AM270-89) ended up in Sea Hurricanes. That at least fits with the idea a number of airframes from AG672 to around AM297 were available as either partially built or still to be built airframes. Jumping to assumption mode, production of around 60 a month drops to 11 in August 1941, so unless it was an unlikely planned shut down there would be a number of partially assembled airframes, all marked to be kept in Canada for the training system, in the assembly hall. They are moved into storage or are cannibalised and the Sea Hurricanes started, unless I am mistaken the requirement for 100 aircraft for the OTU included reserves, so the final 40 are not as high an immediate priority for the training system and certainly behind the Sea Hurricanes, so they or their parts are available for higher priority aircraft. In summary CCF was actually producing Hurricane mark I airframes for the RAF to mid 1941 and had received a change of direction to produce completed aircraft, 100 mark I for training, 50 Sea for the RN. This required more imports of airframe components and when those imports failed the line was forced to shut down, leaving the area with 59 near complete airframes in storage, around 40 or so partially assembled airframes that were moved off the line (or reworked/reallocated) to enable Sea Hurricane assembly. When the line reopened it completed a final mark I and the Sea Hurricanes while moving to mark II airframe production, including completing the partially assembled airframes as mark II. 30 of the mark I airframes in storage sent to Britain became mark II, either before or after leaving Canada, the conversion program for the other airframes suggest and RAF documents say before leaving Canada. Quite neat, though why CCF could not have started a mark II airframe assembly line in mid 1941 needs an explanation, lack of imported components is the simplest reason. One side point part of the confusion about which were IIB and IIC could easily be the fitting of IIC wings made in Britain during assembly and retaining the Canadian built IIB wings as spares.
  8. We know one of the 61 airframes AG287, AG292 to AG344 and AG665 to AG671 was not in storage, based on the list Carl and Elizabeth provided, either AG343 or 341, one of these needs to be dropped and since AG341 was as far as I can tell not delivered until 1943, I recommend AG341. Firstly to verify the airframes we are talking about, the ones put in storage in Canada but ultimately shipped to Britain, AG292, 7, 8, AG301, 3, AG320, 1, 2, 4, 8, 9, AG331, 33 to 40, AG342, 3, 4, AG665 to 71. Total 30. Mason lists AG298, AG301, AG320, 1, 4, 8, 9, AG333, 6, 9, AG343, 4, total 12 as converted to IIB and sent to Russia, Sturtivant lists AG292, AG332, 4, 5, AG340, AG666, 7, 9 all as IIB, with AG292, 340, AG666, 7 converted to IIC and AG334 maybe converted. Do these look correct? What are the Air Britain listings and what do they say? The delivery logs have AG666, 7 listed as IIC, AG671 converted from IIB to IIC, all the others IIB, no conversions mentioned from mark I. To RN AG292, AG334, 5, AG340, AG666, 7 The Mason report seems to come from a shipping list to Russia, which is missing AG303, note he is calling the AG serials mark X, that is US Merlin and many as A wing so being listed as a IIB on the shipping list would indicate a conversion from what he thinks they were produced as. The letter that talks about the stored airframes implies they are all A wing and the photographs of those in RCAF service indicate A wing, so we have a choice of conversions, from IA to IIA in Canada then to IIB in Britain or from IA to IIB in Canada or from IA to IIB in Britain. Any others?
  9. The latest summary using the information from Carl and Elizabeth. The RCAF1351-1410 serials list as listed above is correct, once you add in the 1 initially omitted. AG201 is the serial in the document matched to 1381, clearly a typo for AG301 and RCAF 1396 is paired with AG341 while AG343 is missing, given AG201/301 for the moment it is assumed AG341 in the list should be AG343, given the RAF documentation mentions AG343 in 1942 but AG341 does not officially arrive until 1943, and in fact is the absolute last entry in the final order contract card. Next in a letter dated 10 December 1941 from the (Canadian) Director General of Aircraft Production reported 15 Sea Hurricanes already despatched for the east. 9 Sea Hurricanes tested and ready at Fort William 26 Sea Hurricanes that were missing between them, 24 generator couplings, 11 pairs of wheels, 8 tail wheels (slave (CCF test) equipment can reduce this to 8 pairs and 6 tail wheels). The brakes, being magnesium alloy castings, and the wheels must come from England, generator couplings from Merlin 28 can be used. Some items of service equipment are also needed, "secret wireless device" etc. Fort William has 60 mark IA airframes (explicitly stated can only take Merlin III engines), complete less wheels, brakes, tyres and tubes but needing engines, propellers, instruments, and all other appendix A Serial 1160 Embodiment Loan Equipment. The deficient equipment will have to come from Fairey Battles, including a cut down two pitch propeller. The mark II in production emerge from the factory in a similar state to the stored mark I. "require from England, wheels, brakes, air compressors and drives and couplers for same, hydraulic pump drives and couplings, airscrews and instruments". It seems these items were on order from Britain. 7 Merlin 28 had arrived at Fort William by 10 December. End of information from letter. The PJ serial airframes, the ex RCF order ones, were stripped so as to be the same standard as mark II production. While the final JS serials had their radiators removed to be used in Mosquitoes. So my conclusion of when mark II production began, based on the RAF contract cards, is incorrect. While 30 of the stored airframes were converted to mark IIB before arrival in Britain by the looks of the RAF documents. The statement AG665 onwards were built as mark IIB needs to have the starting serials changed to AG341 (or 343) and then AG672 on. There is a good chance all CCF mark II were IIB, The BW serials order, CCF was notified on 18 April 1941 and it originally included 100 Sea Hurricanes but that was quickly changed to 50. Then 15 Sea Hurricanes to the RCAF in January 1942 as a loan, more followed after the Merchant Ship Fighter Scheme was stopped. Mark X, proposed mark number for Sea Hurricane with Merlin 29, not used. (as noted earlier the Dutch called their Hurricane mark X) Mark XI, proposed mark number for ex RAF order Hurricane I with Merlin 29, not used. Mark XII. The RCAF order were officially Mark IIB (Can) until they were renamed mark XII on 16 April 1943 while mark XIIA was used for the 8 gun wing, the Sea and mark I conversions. The plans for more advanced training in Canada using Hurricanes. As noted the idea was around in mid 1941, using 100 aircraft, the original aircraft were reallocated but in January 1942 the plan was still 102 Hurricanes for 1 OTU, however the RCAF insisted they be built after the RCAF order, to be equipped with Merlin 28 and at best semi-officially called mark IIB (Eng), in the end these airframes were sent to Britain,
  10. Transcribing lists where many of the "words" are almost the same is a really easy way to make unobserved typos. Been there, done that far too many times. Like in my reply, for 1369 read 1396, easy isn't it? So 1382 = AG301 and I presume 1396 = AG343, leaving AG341 as the missing serial. Which agrees with the contract cards and delivery logs and seems to make AG341 the 1 in the 1,451 production. RG = Record Group = Canadian Archives? Lovely reading room, glass wall with a superb view of the park leading down to the river. Now to try private messaging.
  11. Hello Carl and Elizabeth, my but the material you are providing is interesting. Firstly congratulations on 53 years of married life and being such an effective team. The list in your message is 59 aircraft and does not include AG301 and AG343, the number ties exactly with the 59 officially built in July and August 1941, however the list is missing RCAF serial 1382 while RCAF 1369 is paired with AG341 , the RAF serial which does not appear until 1943 in the documents I have, while there is nothing in them that mark AG301 and 343 as unusual. AG671 is number 487 in the list of CCF built Hurricane serials, removing the 426 mark I you are left with 61, given a total of 60 airframes in storage this does tie in with one of the AG291 to AG344 or AG665 to 671 not being produced in 1941. As noted the evidence I have points to AG341 being that airframe. Do you have a citation for the list, that is what RCAF/Archives file it came from? I have not tried to post an image so cannot help there, I assume you are trying to post the image from your computer rather than from a web site. Not sure what you mean by the Sea Hurricanes as they retained their RAF serials. Jon Leake is trying to put together a definitive book on the Hurricane, an update on the Mason works, if you are interested in that idea, the project has been some years in the making and sounds like it still has some time to go before publication. I am sure plenty of people reading your message would like to see the results of all that work. and I doubt a text only posting of that size would break the system but of course once it is public anyone can take a copy. PM is definitely Private Message, though as a newcomer I am unsure how the system quite works and of course if more than a few people want a copy it could become a problem. Exchanging email details may be a better way, so you have a direct connection to whoever receives a copy and can put in any terms and conditions you feel appropriate. By all means post the Kittyhawk material, probably by starting a new topic, I am sure someone can give you a guide on how and where to do that.
  12. First more on the RCAF P-40 order. Air Arsenal North America by Butler and Hagedorn report the P-40 from RAF order were replacements for the RCAF P-39 order, but do not mention what that order was. Looking at some of the files from the Canadian Archives, (Note the RCAF also had B-26 and Vultee Vengeance on order.) As of 26 August and 25 September 1941 there were 144 P-39 on order, with no definite schedule available before March 1942 and deliveries not expected before June 1942. As of 22 January 1942 the P-39 order is gone but there is an order of 60 Hurricanes, 7 received in week ending 17 January, 14 per week thereafter. Given the RCAF wanted 144 P-39, 72 P-40 would undoubtedly be considered not enough, hence the requests for Hurricanes, 60 (plus 30 Sea?) would give a fighter force of around the P-39 order numbers. Hurricane production schedules Q3/1941 800 RAF on order, 412 delivered to 30 June 1941 (147 Q1/41, 189 Q2/41), Forecast 150 in Q3 and again in Q4/41, 88 in Q1/42, order to be completed in February 1942. (The Q1/1942 production report has 400 RCAF and 1,050 RAF on order.) Note the expected output in the final 6 months of 1941 versus the 175 actually built. An estimate for Hurricane production, seems to be dated 31 May 1942 but the forecast starts in January 1942. There were 521 (517?) produced to December 1941 out of 1,450 on order. The January to December 1942 monthly forecast production is 78, 115, 77, 92, 67, 80, 80, 80, 80, 80, 80, 20 respectively, order completed December 1942. March 1942 forecast, 400 RCAF, 800 RAF on order, with 714 RAF built to 28 Feb 1942. Output then is estimated to be 70 RAF in March, 16 RAF, 84 RCAF in April then 80 per month to finish production in August. June 1942 forecast, production to 31 May had been 925 RAF, output to be 80 RCAF per month June to November, with the final 45 RAF in December. September 1942 forecast, production to 31 August had been 950 RAF, 73 RCAF, monthly production of 50 per month September 1942 to March 1943, then 77 in Q2/1943. Q2/1942 production 186, versus forecast of 260 Q3/1942 production 86, versus forecast of 240 Q1/1943 production 150, versus forecast of 163 The relevant dates have been given, RAF 5 in November 1941, 26 in December, and 19 in January 1942, RCAF 28 in December 1941, 21 in January 1942, 1 in April. As has been commented on the RAF officially received them first then passed them to the RCAF for operations. Look at the production schedules and how difficult it was to obtain accurate forecasts. I disagree it was poor production management, instead of inevitable delays and changing priorities. Think of the 1941 RAF situation, early in the year there was a great need for fighters on the assumption the Germans would try for a second Battle of Britain along with pressure in the Middle East. As of end June it was clear the RAF would have at least 6 months where its losses would be largely decided by the RAF, what operations it did, since the Germans were busy in the east, there would need to be aid to the USSR, which most people expected to collapse by the end of the year. The urgent need for fighters had decreased to an extent, though the USSR was sent nearly 700 Hurricanes in 1941, another 1,350 or so in 1942. With the reduction in urgency some Hurricanes could be retained in Canada, fitted with US engines, to allow more advanced training before personnel were sent to Britain, useful given the training limits in Britain. The US engines were of course delayed, but then so were the airframes. Then comes the late 1941 situation where there is a new Pacific front which needs fighters, the USSR is staying in the war and requires fighters, the US is not supplying promised fighters. The Japanese have proved much better than expected so modern fighters are required, things like operations Cross and Churn pick up fighters from Takoradi and move them to Singapore, HMS Indomitable acts as an aircraft ferry as well, and the aircraft that do arrive are usually lost within a short time. So the advanced training idea in Canada is abandoned, releasing the stored aircraft. How sure are you that exactly 50 Merlin III were imported for the Sea Hurricanes, I would have expected some extras given maintenance requirements. And agreed the one way Sea Hurricanes were unlikely to receive new engines. If you are going to use allocation dates to the USSR, particularly in 1942, remember convoy PQ17. No Hurricanes were officially exported to the USSR October to December 1942. And I must stress again I am working off the delivery logs, they are not meant as a detailed history, that requires the individual aircraft cards, possibly enough details of which are in the Air Britain Serials books, otherwise it is the RAF museum. I can only report what the first date is in the delivery log and as noted it is clear some are the pre war definition of Taken on Charge, that is out of the factory, and others are arrival at a Maintenance Unit in Britain. Given the dates when Hurricanes en route to the USSR are reported lost at sea versus their Russia dates it is best to assume the latter is allocation date. What happened to the CCF built Hurricanes after they arrived in Britain cannot I think be of much use in figuring out Canadian production order. AG680 Taken on Charge 9 March 1942, AM274 was Taken on Charge on 6 April 1942. Note there were only 7 imports of CCF Hurricanes in December 1941 and none in November. Where mentioned, Maintenance Unit, AM299 to AM355. 5MU AM305, 309, 312, 313, 316, 324, 339, 354, 355 13MU AM306, 315, 331, 333, 353, 20MU AM299, 300, 303, 332, 341, 346 To repeat myself, For an idea of average travel times the table is month, the first number is production for the month and the second is production yet to arrive in Britain, as of end of month Sep-40 1 / 1 Oct-40 7 / 7 Nov-40 13 / 15 Dec-40 15 / 21 Jan-41 35 / 40 Feb-41 46 / 63 Mar-41 66 / 69 Apr-41 58 / 73 (4 lost at sea removed) May-41 72 / 95 Jun-41 59 / 51 (4 lost at sea removed) Jul-41 14 / 8 Aug-41 0 / 0 That gives a good indication of the time between official roll out at CCF and official arrival in Britain, then comes delivery to the RAF. The 1941/42 period is complicated because everything so far indicates the first 100 officially mark II production was held in Canada, plus the Sea Hurricane production. Then the decision was taken to release the stored airframes, 70 to RAF, 30 to RCAF. While in 1943 we do not know when the ex RCAF Hurricanes were released, it looks like after the final RAF order aircraft started production and includes RCAF 5737 to 5775, some of which were definitely built after the last RAF order ones. So trying to determine the average travel times means looking at the 1941 production and assuming similar times in 1942 and 1943.
  13. Thanks very much Carl for a very informative contribution. The Kittyhawk I order was delivered as RCAF 1028 to 1099, so 72 aircraft, Taken on Strength dates were Oct-41 16, Nov-41 11, Dec-41 12, Jan-42 15, Feb-42 10, Mar-42 2, Apr-42 2, Nov-42 2, assuming the November 1942 are not typos for 1941, the 12 or so per month continued until February, giving 66 Kittyhawk. Also another 12 Kittyhawk IA, RCAF720-31 were Taken on Strength on 10 April 1942. So the RCAF was certainly right to be worried about supply but the deal, presumably with the British, was essentially continued until April. The mid 1942 date for the RACF Hurricane order is interesting, it actually began in June despite 100 RAF order aircraft still outstanding, sounds like the date mattered more than finishing the RAF orders. I wonder if the date was long planned assuming no 1941 delay, but the delay meant the decision was taken to switch before finishing all RAF orders. Any idea of the date when RCAF were allowed to take over the Hurricanes or at least the agreement date? Thanks for confirming they would be RCAF, not RAF on loan. Not sure how the ready to fly and fight would apply to the stored aircraft, I can only assume they were ready to go except for engines, so armament etc. fitted. Meantime the RCAF took its first 5 Sea Hurricanes on Strength on 9 December 1941, by which date the RAF had Taken on Charge another 6. There would be around another 40 airframes built by CCF since the line restarted in October 1941, including some of the above Sea Hurricanes, less any airframes already exported to Britain, which received 7 in December 1941. The 60 airframes in storage should have been mostly the 59 built in July/August, the document stating they were awaiting engines is actually important, as the only engines currently known as being supplied to Canada for RAF order Hurricanes are Merlin 28, making the airframes mark II, does the document indicate the mark of Merlin being supplied? So all 60 aircraft in storage were allocated an RCAF serial, and the document you have also gives the RAF serial as well , if this is correct please post the list, it will be of great use in figuring out what was going on, starting with what airframes were being stored. AG341 is of particular interest. I note AG287 – 342 and AG665 – 671 is 63 airframes, but we know the 4 airframes AG288-91 were shipped to Britain as mark I in mid 1941, but this serials list omits AG343 and AG344. AG671 is number 486 in the RAF serial number list, taking off the 426 mark I leaves 61 airframes, taking off AG341 leaves 60. Yes CCF were known to have had some Merlin III to test some mark I airframes, the 88 flights for 426 mark I is at best 1 in 5 of the airframes receiving 1 test flight each, more like 1 in 10 were tested. Agreed that with mark I production over CCF had no need for any Merlin III, presuming Britain shipped a quantity of Merlin III for the Sea Hurricanes. Agreed also the supply of Merlin III was proving a problem for places like Canada and Australia as the Battles were being flown so much. Also the supply of Battles was running out, with a total of 2,200 built over 1,300 were exported from Britain from April 1940 onwards, and others before that date, most exports done by end 1941, only another 15 would be shipped to Canada in 1942. The statement the airframes had to be erected rather contradicts the "ready to fly and flight" claim, it does fit with them being broken down to an extent to enable efficient storage, you would expect CCF to put them back together rather that freight them from Ontario to Nova Scotia for presumably RCAF units to do the work, but then CCF were under considerable pressure at the time. One point is the photographs of RCAF1351-80 show A wing armament as far as I am aware, and it would be remarkable if the wings in storage were not shipped along with the fuselages, so IIA in storage, with those exported reworked to IIB? So as of early December 1941 the RCAF says 60 airframes were in storage, at least partially disassembled, they do not mention around another 40 that had been built mostly in November, nor indicate if CCF had some partially assembled airframes over and above those on the assembly line. Look at the averages from the export list, 2 months is slow in terms produced to arrived in Britain, the US Army example then shows the sorts of delays between the British docks and the reception areas, in this case the Maintenance Unit. The trouble is the production pause, everyone agrees the number of Hurricanes in the September photograph is less than 1 months production at early/mid 1941 pace, so they could have been started in early September for example, we simply have no evidence, only that something was preventing any completed production of both mark I and II variants August to October 1941. Airframes on the line in mid September , assuming the photograph is of the entire assembly hall, should have all been assembled by around the end of the month. At some point CCF would have run out of storage space for partial airframes, more so if they wanted them under cover. I am not sure the dates of allocation after arrival in Britain can tell us much about CCF production order, the taken on charge etc. dates are best for that. After import the CCF Hurricanes would enter the general pool of Hurricane II. Actually unless there was another engine order around we do not know about the stored machines which were for the RAF, not RCAF, when stored, were waiting for Merlin 28, the 144 we know were on order, the Merlin 29 were committed to the RCAF order and the US could not use Merlin 28 with their shafts meant for British propellers, while the British could not use Merlin 29 with their shafts for US propellers. Part of the reason for the stronger mark II centre section was to carry external loads. Were any RACF Hurricanes fitted with wing racks? I have not seen any such photographs. In which case the converted Sea Hurricanes would be the equivalent of a mark II series i, while the mark XII would be the equivalent of a mark II series ii. Also as part of the conversion did the Sea Hurricanes stay as the sea version, with the relevant radio, arrester hook etc.? On the in service mark II to I conversion, I am told the RN radios were heavier than the RAF ones, and this hurt given the radio was aft of the cockpit. Keeping the forward fuselage extension would have helped. https://www.thunderbay.ca/en/city-hall/canadian-car-and-foundry-.aspx for a couple of CCF pictures that call into question how many Hurricane lines there could have been. https://www.google.com.au/search?=canadian+car+and+foundry+fort+william+ontario&tbm=isch&source=univ&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwi5w5CCz8PjAhXymeYKHWlrCJsQsAR6BAgJEAE&biw=1366&bih=695#imgrc=Bp_Vb9p4K8UjTM:&spf=1563629988703 If the second link does not work it came up when I went searching for CCF Hurricanes. Does anyone know what is the time out for a log in is? I find I am logging in to compose a reply, then having to log in a second time to post it.
  14. Z7051 is interesting, a significant delay, the question from AM274 is how much of that was in Britain. For BW836 we have a photograph dated 18 September of the assembly line but it gives no idea how close to completion any of the aircraft were, the Sea Hurricanes could have been waiting on engines from Britain at least. AM274 shows the delays within Britain. For an idea of average travel times the table is month, the first number is production for the month and the second is production yet to arrive in Britain, as of end of month Sep-40 1 / 1 Oct-40 7 / 7 Nov-40 13 / 15 Dec-40 15 / 21 Jan-41 35 / 40 Feb-41 46 / 63 Mar-41 66 / 69 Apr-41 58 / 73 (4 lost at sea removed) May-41 72 / 95 Jun-41 59 / 51 (4 lost at sea removed) Jul-41 14 / 8 Aug-41 0 / 0 So something over a month on average, with better times in summer. Agreed the training Hurricanes could be mark I, the next 100 airframes end around AM295 and at full production the order should have been filled by around end August 1941, but in fact took until late December numerically and early January after you take into account the Sea Hurricanes, it is unlikely any complete airframes were not counted as produced during the period. The idea CCF had the only open mark I line at end June is strictly correct, but it was only the last 8 still to be officially built, Glosters output in June 1941 was around 20 to 25% mark I, a matter of weeks difference. The Sea Hurricane order clearly had an elevated priority, if they were built in order they would have appeared in January 1942, not starting in November 1941. As to whether they took precedence over the 100 to be stored the numbers say not really, 59 airframes before the break, another 32 October/November versus 5 Sea Hurricanes Taken On Charge, 70 production in December versus 26 Sea Hurricanes Taken on Charge. By end December 1941 there were over 100 more mark II Hurricane airframes officially produced than had arrived in Britain even after deducting the ones used by the RCAF. Agreed the need to make changes should have slowed down the Sea Hurricane production versus mark I, it cannot explain such a big gap. The serial numbers of the first arrivals in Britain in December 1941 could indicate the storage plan was largely done, or alternatively at least some of the earlier official mark II were partially completed airframes awaiting final assembly or an engine or conversion from mark I. RCAF 1351-80 were Taken on Strength in December 1941 and January 1942, this period clearly overlaps the Sea Hurricane production, so the line was receiving mark I parts. As noted the Merlin III went out of production in May 1941, Merlin 28 production started in August 1941, shipments of Merlin 28 for the Hurricanes were arriving in numbers in January or certainly in February 1942. The placing into RCAF service of stored airframes earlier than April 1942 can be evidence the airframes were mark I, on the basis early arrival means less work was involved. At the same time it was an emergency situation and so far there seems no problems with attaching A wings and mark I forward fuselages to the stronger mark II wing centre section. As noted before for every reason for the stored airframes to be one mark a counter reason can be given for them being the other. For example it is logical to think the Hurricanes destined for the training system in Canada to be mark I given the Fairey Battles present, however the Merlin III engine had ended production but was still in demand for the Battles, Defiants, Hurricanes and Spitfires either still operational or making their way into the training system plus of course the Sea Hurricanes the Admiralty were receiving. Why set up more demand for the engine when the US was near and able to supply engines? For example the Anson mark IV airframes sent to Canada to use US engines, the Oxford mark V that did the same thing. The Merlin 28 and 29 orders for CCF built Hurricanes. To give an idea of the effort required to move all the stuff around. A convoy from the US to England in March 1944, 18 full and 24 part ship US Army cargoes (1,500 vehicles on wheels, 200 cased, 200 aircraft and gliders, 50,000 tons of supplies). The Army cargoes took eight days to discharge, 75 trains using 10,000 cars to clear, plus some road transport, these land movements also generated the need for 27 trains with 8,000 cars for things like inter depot movements and rail supplies.
  15. You certainly have more interest in who made the Hurricanes used by the RN, I used Sturtivant's list then looked at the delivery logs and was given a list of serials where MSFU is mentioned. Mark and Total I 53 I/Trop 48 Sea Ia 16 Sea Ib 281 Sea IIb 2 Sea IIc 107 IIA 3 IIB 26 IIB/Trop 4 IIC 76 IIC/Trop 14 IV 1 Total 631 I Airframe 398 II Airframe 232 Of these the actual versions for 3 mark I, 6 I/Trop and 7 Sea Ib are uncertain. Probable additions 22 mark I, 2 Sea IIc and 1 IIc, probable deletions 1 I/Trop, 2 Sea Ia, 5 Sea Ib and 3 Sea IIc. Another 87 mark I identified via Air Britain Serials, plus another 3 where the only mention is in the delivery logs. Sturtivant (therefore the above list) only includes BW841, BW855, BW856 from the CCF built Sea Hurricanes as 2 Sea Ia and 1 Ib.
×
×
  • Create New...