All the Hurricane questions you want to ask here

[72modeler]

@Sydhuey,

What a wonderful story of another brave young Hurricane driver!  Either the Hurri was a lot more nimble than it is given  credit for, or those Ki-43 pilots weren't in the top of their training class! What great tribute models the ones mentioned by many of you as projects will be. Thanks so much for taking the time to post his story and photos. I wasn't aware the Mk IIb's were sent to the CBI, either, but then again, I ain't no @Troy Smith  Thanks again!

Mike

 

[Graham Boak]

The Hurricane wasn't as nimble as the Ki.43, but on the rare occasion sufficient warning was given, it could use superior altitude to use dive and zoom tactics and defeat them.  I once had a lecture on comparative aircraft performance by AVM Sir Neil Cameron, who used this as an example from his personal experience.   The Mk.IIb would outperform the Oscar at altitude, but most of the time that wasn't where the battle was, and the mountainous terrain meant that radar warning was usually too late for the Hurricanes to reach advantageous heights.  When the Spitfire was finally introduced its superior climb rate meant that the RAF was generally sitting waiting for the Japanese.  A complex tactical situation in four sentences....

 

The other key point to remember is that Hurricane pilots who weren't successful in fighting Oscars wouldn't be the ones who came home to talk about it.

[72modeler]

4 hours ago, Graham Boak said:

The Hurricane wasn't as nimble as the Ki.43, but on the rare occasion sufficient warning was given, it could use superior altitude to use dive and zoom tactics and defeat them.

Hard to tell from the excerpted March 5 combat report, but it doesn't sound like the Ki-43's were bounced from above during the engagements described. Wish Jack were around to detail his part. I would definitely agree that there were no Allied fighters during that time that could hope to outmaneuver a well-flown Ki-43 in a turning dogfight at low altitudes, as some unlucky P-38 pilots found out the hard way, but since it sounds like the action described took place at 20,000 feet plus, so much more suited to the Hurricane'strengths. Guessing the Mk IIb was lighter than the IIc, so might have had a better turn and roll rate? Regardless, Jack sounds like he  was one heckuva fighter pilot!

Mikel

[Graham Boak]

The Mk.IIc was definitely a bit heavy for fighter combat, which is why it tended to be kept for bomber intercept, intruder, FR and FB duties.  The Hispano was a particularly big and heavy cannon, if a very good one.  Hence the general reluctance to use 4xHispanos in Spitfires.  I believe nowadays we'd explain the handling deficiencies in terms of inertia coupling, with heavy weights outboard, but this wasn't understood at the time.  Hence the disastrous crashes of the He 162 with its heavy engine away from the roll axis of the aircraft.  Inexplicable at the time, but eventually the mathematics were worked out in the UK at the RAE, and in the US after the crash of the prototype F-100.  There are various accounts, and some photo evidence, of the outer Hispanos being removed from Mk.IIc Hurricanes, which must have produced a more acceptable performance and handling with more than enough firepower to destroy Oscars - but then so was eight 0.303.  The main problem is by this time no-one (outside of NE India) was interested in a better pure fighter Hurricane.  I think Merlin 45s, a bubble canopy and 2 Hispanos would have helped a lot - maybe clipping the wingtips to improve the role rate - but Spitfires would always have been a better bet.  The Mk.VIIIs were just overkill, but the Oscar remained a menace low down.

 

There were Hurricane pilots who reported out-turning an Oscar, but it wasn't something to rely on unless all else was ruled out.

 

[Sydhuey]

air combat is all about using your aircraft advantage against your enemy's disadvantage , every one knows Japanese aircraft are maneuverable but only at lower speeds , below 300 knts Japanese aircraft out maneuvered and out climbed all allied fighters but above 300 knts and right turns Japanese aircraft had weaknesses and couldn't keep up with any of the main allied fighters in a dive , above 300 knts Hurricanes and P-40's could turn better than Japanese fighters , the problem early in the war was the Allies got slow and dirty with Japanese aircraft and got badly beaten , when flown properly even early war fighters like the P-40 and Hurricane could more than hold their own with Japanese fighters (case in point June 44, 16 x RAAF P-40N took on 12 x Ki43 and  2 x B5N bombers and shot down 7 x Ki43's and both B5N's for the loss of 1 x P-40) 

[VincentDucassou]

Ok, My question regrding Hurricanes, What undersides did the No.303 squadron have? during their part in the battle of Britain, Ive searched everywhere but have come up short so far, ive seen others just use some sort of sky blue whence modeling, is that the most accurate paint for the undersides?

[Troy Smith]

49 minutes ago, VincentDucassou said:

What undersides did the No.303 squadron have? during their part in the battle of Britain, Ive searched everywhere but have come up short so far, ive seen others just use some sort of sky blue whence modeling, is that the most accurate paint for the undersides?

OK, I think you are asking about 303 Sq during the BoB,  when the majority of 303 Sq planes were built post June 1940.  They would have the undersides in Sky,  which became the standard underside colour in June 1940*

This has been called 'duck egg blue' 'duck egg green'  

Sky is a very pale yellow green.   It is NOT pale blue.

 

It is made by various companies.  I think from another thread you can get Revell, Tamiya Humbrol?

anyway,  here's two

Humbrol 90

Tamiya XF-21 (though this is a bit dark.)

 

I really really recommend you read this, as it will explain a great deal. 

https://boxartden.com/reference/gallery/index.php/Camouflage-Markings/Hawker-Hurricane

 

this page is the start of Sky introduction.

https://boxartden.com/reference/gallery/index.php/Camouflage-Markings/Hawker-Hurricane/Hawker-Hurricane-Camo-and-Marks_Page_12-960

as it is still the best primer, and gives you a timeline for what changes happened when. 

*when Sky was introduced, that meant a lot of planes to repaint, supplies of Sky were not always available, and mixes and substitutions occurred.  This has been endlessly debated, I can find you threads on this if you wish.   

But, factories should have switched by mid June, and they should have been supplied with Sky.   I have seen dates for Spitfires, not pinned down Hurricanes.   From memory nearly all the 303 Sq Hurricanes should have Sky undersides.   They did have at least one older L**** serial though that Frantisek flew.

 

I also recommend these on the Arma Hobby blog

http://armahobbynews.pl/en/blog/2018/10/27/hurricane-sergeant-frantisek-the-best-of-the-few/

http://armahobbynews.pl/en/blog/2020/10/07/hurricane-john-kentowski-kent-a-canadian-in-no-303-squadron/

 

And, if you want a 1/72 303 Sq Hurricane, get the Arma Hobby kit.   The current 72 Airfix is fabric winged, and AFAIK, 303 didn't have any of those.    

 

HTH

[Graham Boak]

9 hours ago, Sydhuey said:

air combat is all about using your aircraft advantage against your enemy's disadvantage , every one knows Japanese aircraft are maneuverable but only at lower speeds , below 300 knts Japanese aircraft out maneuvered and out climbed all allied fighters but above 300 knts and right turns Japanese aircraft had weaknesses and couldn't keep up with any of the main allied fighters in a dive , above 300 knts Hurricanes and P-40's could turn better than Japanese fighters , the problem early in the war was the Allies got slow and dirty with Japanese aircraft and got badly beaten , when flown properly even early war fighters like the P-40 and Hurricane could more than hold their own with Japanese fighters (case in point June 44, 16 x RAAF P-40N took on 12 x Ki43 and  2 x B5N bombers and shot down 7 x Ki43's and both B5N's for the loss of 1 x P-40) 

Yes, BUT.  But this kind of detail was not known, fully understood nor fully disseminated in the early years of the war with Japan.  But the P-40, which didn't enter combat until mid-1941,  was a  mid-war fighter not an early war one.  But the P-40N was the last version of this anyway.  But by 1944 the standard of training of the Japanese had plumetted dramatically, whereas that of Allied pilots had improved similarly.   But the tropicalised Hurricane would have been very hard pushed to achieve 300 kts anyway.  The variation of power with altitude was more important.  But an aircraft that can achieve over 300 kts at sea level may well not be able to achieve that at altitude.

 

The judgement of experienced fighter pilot Paul Richey, who was sent out by the Air Ministry to investigate the perceived inability of the RAF to achieve air superiority in the theatre, was that the Hurricane was outclassed.  His report was censored on the grounds that this could not be reported as it would affect pilot's morale.  Richey's response was that the pilots themselves knew this already. but he had already sent an intact copy back to the UK by unofficial channels.  The AM's response was to send Spitfires, initially late-production Mk.Vc but then a full re-equipment with the Mk.VIII.  The AM had already offered Spitfires the previous year, but this had been rejected by SEAC air command.  As Cameron pointed out, given the right conditions the Hurricane could indeed outperform the Oscar, but such conditions were not regularly available in the theatre, and under the usual conditions the JAAF fighter was top dog.

 

The eventual swing of superiority in the theatre was due to four main factors: Allied build-up exceeded that of Japan, the Allies introduced superior fighters, the introduction of better air warning radars and systems, and the improved training of Allied pilots linked to the decline of that on the Japanese side.  From the comfort of our armchairs, we can only wonder about the introduction into the theatre of a fully trained unit of Hayates, but such things did not exist and were more needed elsewhere.  The other factors would have remained unchanged.

 

For those interested in the key factors summarised above, I can recommend Norman Franks' trilogy: Hurricanes over the Arakan, Spitfires over the Arakan, and Spitfires over Imphal.  There are a number other worthy titles

[Sydhuey]

Agree Graham, I just did an abbreviated post , attitude and training were probably the two biggest factors in  A to A combat in WW2, acceptance of Axis capabilities by Allied commanders, improvement of training of allied pilots and decline on axis side. 

One of the most stupid attitudes of allied commanders was the attitude of superiority over the Japanese early in the war , Buffalo sufficient for any Japanese opposition over Singapore and RAAF Command ordering P-40 pilots over NG to mix it with Japanese aircraft over Port Moresby as hit and run technics not considered aggressive enough.

[Graham Boak]

I hadn't heard that about the RAAF command.  Horrifying.  I think that there are subtleties: given that the British fighters had been "proven" more manoeuvrable than Axis types, then there was a perhaps unconscious bias in the training.  I was interested to read that in North Africa the Hurricanes used "high energy" tactics against the CR.42, but this was still earlier on with prewar-trained pilots.

 

The Buffalo was not quite as poor as made out - even they could shoot down "Zeros" when placed in the correct position first.  The mishandling of fighters in this campaign gives a biased impression of respective capabilities.  Difficult to find any aspect of this campaign that wasn't mishandled, in truth.

[gingerbob]

3 minutes ago, Graham Boak said:

even they could shoot down "Zeros" when placed in the correct position first

 

Of course, so could a Wirraway, or for that matter any other aircraft with a gun!

 

There certainly is a tone of "superiority through willpower" that I was going to apply to the British, but when I think of it, it probably isn't at all peculiar to them.

[Graham Boak]

Well, somewhat more than a simple ambush on an unsuspecting opponent.  After all, there were Wirraways at Singapore but they weren't scrambled to intercept incoming raids.

[Sydhuey]

On 8/4/2021 at 4:45 PM, Graham Boak said:

I hadn't heard that about the RAAF command.  Horrifying.  I think that there are subtleties: given that the British fighters had been "proven" more manoeuvrable than Axis types, then there was a perhaps unconscious bias in the training.  I was interested to read that in North Africa the Hurricanes used "high energy" tactics against the CR.42, but this was still earlier on with prewar-trained pilots.

 

The Buffalo was not quite as poor as made out - even they could shoot down "Zeros" when placed in the correct position first.  The mishandling of fighters in this campaign gives a biased impression of respective capabilities.  Difficult to find any aspect of this campaign that wasn't mishandled, in truth.

 

yep RAAF senior Office attitude was abysmal early in the war.

"On 27 April 42, Jackson met with his pilots and revealed that some senior RAAF officers had expressed dissatisfaction with the way in which No. 75 Squadron was avoiding dogfighting with the Japanese Zeros. Jackson and his men had generally eschewed such tactics owing to the Zero's superiority to the Kittyhawk in close combat. The senior officers' comments had evidently stung him, as he declared to his pilots: "Tomorrow I'm going to show you how". According to journalist Osmar White, who saw him on the night of the 27th, Jackson's "hands and eyes were still and rock steady" but he appeared "weary in soul" and "too long in the shadows". White concluded: "He had done more than conquer fear—he had killed it". The next day, Jackson led No. 75 Squadron's five remaining airworthy Kittyhawks to intercept a force of Japanese bombers and their escort. He destroyed an enemy fighter before being shot down and killed".

 

Geoff Fisken scored 6 kills in Buffalo's over Singapore and said they were not as bad as made out to be , Hurricanes also performed well I think there were 8-10 Hurricane aces over Singapore, main problem was once again operational deployment by Senior Offices underestimating the Japanese, equipment and pilots sufficient for task if they were used properly. After combat experience most IIB's (particularly over Burma) had their outer 4 x .303's removed and 1x other from each side to allow hardpoints to be fitted and improve role rate  6 x .303's were more than sufficient against Japanese aircraft.

[Graham Boak]

I know about the removal of the outer guns, though it would be good to see some kind of official record of this.  The fighter-bombers had to remove one of the inner guns to fit the carrier or rather, they were never fitted on the production line.   Or perhaps at the MU?  I don't think that weapons were installed at the factory anyway.  However I haven't seen any comment that the fighter units did this.  I would expect them to have retained all eight but am otherwise inclined to agree with you.

 

In the UK the fighter-bombers retained 10 guns - it would be interesting to know if that was also true in SEAC.  After all they weren't there to dogfight the enemy and for attacking enemy troops/river boats the more firepower the better.  On the other hand, the tropical conditions and fit would certainly bias me to remove as much weight as possible.

[72modeler]

3 hours ago, Sydhuey said:

He destroyed an enemy fighter before being shot down and killed".

They should have sent the senior officers up instead so they could see what it was really like for those brave young men! Them and the idiots who planned the first Ploesti oil fields raid! 

Mike

 

[Chuck1945]

Back to Storey’s Hurricane IIB, Z5659, Arma shows desert camo (DE/MS/AB) with a Vokes filter but there is apparently some question about this since in another post here he is said to have described this Hurricane as DG/DE with perhaps what might have been Sky Blue undersides. The accompanying photo appears to be rather dark giving credence to the DG/DE color and there is what looks to me to be a hint of the filter. My question is if it was in fact finished in the TLS (with Sky Blue instead of Sky), would it not also have a Sky fuselage band, or if, as the filter would indicate, it was destined for desert use, wouldn’t it have been in desert colors? 
 

Admittedly I am not up to speed regarding how aircraft destined for overseas use were prepared, hence my questions.

[Graham Boak]

The Sky band and yellow leading edge was specifically for Fighter Command in the UK.

 

The tropical filter was not just the desert use but for general overseas duties (although not always seen in the Middle East - on Mk.Is anyway).  The advanced strips in India were pretty dusty in the summer, the campaigning season.  The filters were the regular fit in SEAC. 

 

Sky Blue was very light: I feel that this was more likely to be Azure Blue even with DG.DE tops.

 

There is evidence that at least some of the early Hurricanes came directly from the Middle East.  Not all ME Hurricanes were in Desert colours but it seems that some of these did end up in Burma. 

[Geoffrey Sinclair]

Hurricanes from Britain and the Middle East to the Far East in late 1941 and early 1942.

 

https://www.academia.edu/36770645/Hurricane_emergency_shipments_for_Singapore_Burma_Ceylon_and_the_NEI_Dec._1941-April_1942_illustrated_version.docx

[StevSmar]

On 8/12/2021 at 1:39 AM, Geoffrey Sinclair said:

Hurricanes from Britain and the Middle East to the Far East in late 1941 and early 1942.

That’s a great reference Geoffrey, I see you had a hand in it!!

[BillF67]

Beginners question. Just finishing Airfix Mk1 and, as per early instruction, drilled small hole in LH side under canopy. Fitted little doohickey into resulting hole. What is it? I haven’t spotted it on any of the (admittedly few) photos I’ve seen. I’m basing my model on the “Winged Popeye” of F/O L Stevens so should it even be there?

 

VMT

Bill

[Max Headroom]

You mean this?

 

https://1000aircraftphotos.com/Contributions/Swindelle/10718.htm

 

Not exactly sure what it is so calling @Troy Smith the Hurri guru 

 

Trevor

[BillF67]

2 minutes ago, Max Headroom said:

You mean this?

 

https://1000aircraftphotos.com/Contributions/Swindelle/10718.htm

 

Not exactly sure what it is so calling @Troy Smith the Hurri guru 

 

Trevor

That’s it!

[Troy Smith]

34 minutes ago, BillF67 said:

I’m basing my model on the “Winged Popeye” of F/O L Stevens so should it even be there?

No, it was only on very early Hurricanes, it was an instrument venturi IIRC..    @Graham Boak maybe able to give a better explanation for it's use,  but it's only really seen before 1939.

[BillF67]

OK, thanks. I think I can sort of say 2 blade prop, fit it, 3 blade prop don’t. I have a 3 blade so off it comes!

 

Appreciate the time and effort on this.

[dogsbody]

That is a venturi that supplied vacuum force to some cockpit instruments. After a vacuum pump was added to the engine, it was no longer needed.

 

https://www.cfinotebook.net/notebook/operation-of-aircraft-systems/gyroscopic-systems

 

 

 

 

 

Chris