Jump to content

All the Hurricane questions you want to ask here


Recommended Posts

21 minutes ago, Carl V said:

2.            Here is the service history of 321. I got the UK portion from an Air Britain article, I believe by Phil Butler although I cannot be certain.                                                                                           

There was an article on the Hurricanes of 1 Squadron RCAF, including individual histories of serials 310-328, on pages 49-50 of Air Britain's Aeromilitaria 92/2, which I think is the Spring issue.  Sorry, didn't record the author.

Edited by Seahawk
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Dave Swindell said:

IFF rod aerial???

 

 

It's the pitot tube, for the airspeed indicator. The dark mark is it's shadow.

 

 

 

Chris

Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, dogsbody said:

It's the pitot tube, for the airspeed indicator. The dark mark is it's shadow.

Chris

I don't think so Chris, the pitot is in the standard position just behind the roundel, it's L shaped shadow is clearly visible.

The item questioned is just inboard and forward of the aileron/flap join line and is a rod or bar that projects down from the wing, again the shadow is clearly visible but not as long as the pitot shadow, ergo it's shorter than the pitot. It appears similar to an IFF rod aerial, but I would have expected it to be longer than the pitot rather than shorter as this appears.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Gents,

In looking through the images in the Vintage Wings article with regard to the dipole style antenna aft of the radiator, in the colourised image at beginning of article and Hurricane images 1, 2, 3, 8 and 10, the dipole is clearly visible as well as a small 'L' shaped attachment immediately forward of the tailwheel. IMHO, this is a re-positioning of the antenna mast and aerial wire from its usual position on the top of the fuselage & rudder as in the aforementioned images they are not in their usual Hurricane locations.

I'm also curious as to what the small rectangular widget is on the aft edge of the port lower wing adjacent to the inboard edge of the aileron and outboard edge of the flap - any thoughts?

 

Cheers

Dave

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just for clarity's sake, the question was under the port wing, at the outer flap position.

There's the pitot and shadow (circled) and a triangular fixture (arrow down), aside from the dipole under the fuselage (arrow up) behind the radiator.

 

y4mv1a89KWPOS2p6Y_kGYlTVDUa8ZKClUAXplegq

 

it may be a strengthening plate connected to the slip wing struts?

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, tango98 said:

Gents,

In looking through the images in the Vintage Wings article with regard to the dipole style antenna aft of the radiator, in the colourised image at beginning of article and Hurricane images 1, 2, 3, 8 and 10, the dipole is clearly visible as well as a small 'L' shaped attachment immediately forward of the tailwheel. IMHO, this is a re-positioning of the antenna mast and aerial wire from its usual position on the top of the fuselage & rudder as in the aforementioned images they are not in their usual Hurricane locations.

I'm also curious as to what the small rectangular widget is on the aft edge of the port lower wing adjacent to the inboard edge of the aileron and outboard edge of the flap - any thoughts?

 

Cheers

Dave

Hi Dave

There's no dipole antennas there - a dipole antenna is two aerials in line, joined end to end in the middle.

You are correct though, the standard wire aerial has been moved from the standard mast on top of fuselage - top of fin arrangement to between two masts on the lower fuselage, a relatively long one just aft of the radiator bath and a much shorter one just in front of the tailwheel. Not unlike the Defiant arrangement, but without the retractable mast. Early photos show the standard arrangement, later photo's the latter, presumably to eliminate the possibility of the upper wing taking out the radio aerial when it was jettisoned.

Regarding the small rectangular widget you're seeing, I'm pretty sure it isn't a rectangular widget on the wing surface, it's a rod or bar sticking down perpendicular to the wing surface. This rod or bar is bright white and looks to run aft and outboard. The shadow from this is dark black and runs spanwise from the front/bottom and is parallel to the shadow from the pitot.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dave,

Dipole = my bad choice of description. Other images I have of the a/c show nothing protruding antenna-wise beneath the port wing in that location; I’ll play with the image and see if more detail is available.

 

Cheers

Dave

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

Found this image at the Imperial War Museum, I like how clearly it shows the spitfire spinner.

 

Hurricane 32 Squadron, Biggin Hill, Imperial War Museum HU 54515

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/30/2020 at 1:08 PM, alt-92 said:

Just for clarity's sake, the question was under the port wing, at the outer flap position.

 

 

it may be a strengthening plate connected to the slip wing struts?

Thanks for posting the marked up image!

 

It’s a mystery for sure! I thought the slip wing Hurricane would have had a modified Center Section and fuselage, but that’s it. It appears the modifications were more extensive than that!

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

Merry Christmas everyone! Hope that Santa brings you all lots of Hurricane fun! Wishing everyone a happy and healthy 2021.

 

50758801577_4d95316a77_o.jpg

 

Edited by StevSmar
How appropriate to finish 2020 by not successfully inserting an image. 2021 is going to be a much better year!
  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/12/2020 at 02:46, StevSmar said:

Found this image at the Imperial War Museum, I like how clearly it shows the spitfire spinner.

 

Hurricane 32 Squadron, Biggin Hill, Imperial War Museum HU 54515

 

Also note the fabric wing,  I think is a another of the famous 32 Squadron images taken by the Fox Film unit in July 1940.   If so, it maybe able to work out the serial, as there were limited amount built like this.

1 hour ago, Work In Progress said:

That's the infamous factory-supplied general arrangement drawing that caused all the trouble, by being so at variance from what they actually built. Look at the doghouse aft of the canopy

note also the depth of the canopy.

I've posted this before,  but note the reference to the 1/8th scale GA drawings in the background article to A.L.Bentley Hurricane drawings

35568750533_bc6e7a6f46_b.jpg?fbclid=IwAR

 

 

Not meant as a dig @StevSmar, just adding to the story of the image.

cheers

T

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, Work In Progress said:That's the infamous factory-supplied general arrangement drawing that caused all the trouble, by being so at variance from what they actually built. Look at the doghouse aft of the canopy

Being accurate was not the point of this drawing IMO. I believe it’s purpose is purely to reference all the sub-assemblies that go into making this mark of Hurricane. The drawings it reference, for example the cockpit decking (doghouse), are more accurately drawn. Yet even those have some “artistic license”, drawing stretch- whereas actual dimensions are what are needed to make an aircraft.

 

I do love these drawings though, wish I had more...

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, dnl42 said:

Shouldn't there be a sixinchrool above the drawing?

Alas, I should have turned 50% of the rulers over to show metric- LOL. Or is that 90%....

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, StevSmar said:

Being accurate was not the point of this drawing IMO. I believe it’s purpose is purely to reference all the sub-assemblies that go into making this mark of Hurricane.

Correct, that was the original purpose when it was drawn. However, someone at Hawker-Siddeley gave it out far and wide in the 1960s without explaining that the shapes in it are wrong. Given that it looks superficially authoritative, the source, and the relative absence at the time of full-size Hurricanes people could easily visit and examine, it led a lot of people astray, including Revell with their  1/32 kit

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Work In Progress said:

...Given that it looks superficially authoritative, the source, and the relative absence at the time of full-size Hurricanes people could easily visit and examine, it led a lot of people astray, including Revell with their  1/32 kit...

Absolutely it would lead others astray, like it did to me when I obtained my first Hurricane side elevation.

 

I've always been intrigued by why they didn't make their side elevations more accurate, especially for simple changes like the cockpit decking (doghouse). From the drawings I have, Hawkers were incredibly "precise"- there are enough dimensions, but not one dimension more and I believe being so precise would take a lot of time to think through, so this leads me to conclude Hawkers were very careful. So why didn't they make their side elevations more accurate? My suspicion is that they knew the most important part of the side elevation drawing was the schedule of sub-assemblies, so "don't waste time drawing anything that doesn't need accuracy necessary to make parts"?

 

(I built a Revel MkIIC 1/32 kit... it looked like that when it was made it didn't take very much effort to lead Revel astray... I always thought the pilot looked like he was lifted from a "Planet of the apes" series...LOL. My first effort of re-scribing a whole wing)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly: get right the drawings that were needed to make the parts and to put them together.  Anything else was unimportant.  (OK, paint scheme and markings...)

 

The other cause of errors in General Arrangement drawings is being based on earlier variants or even project drawings, and not being corrected in all details.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Graham Boak said:

Exactly: get right the drawings that were needed to make the parts and to put them together.  Anything else was unimportant.  (OK, paint scheme and markings...)

 

 

Loft lines??

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

1. Does anybody know when or why the sky blue colour was used on hurricane undersides? 

 

I'm interested specifically in the Mk. II and would like to see if there are any dates or standards etc. I know this might not elicit a straight answer so...

 

2. The reason I ask... Is the scheme on 30 Squadron's Hurricane Mk. IIsspacer.png

These are in Sri Lanka after the unit moved from North Africa. To be this looks like a sky blue underside with dark earth and dark green top side and I expect they were re painted on the carrier.

 

I've got more photos but would need to scan them from the 30 Squadron's history 'flat out'. 

 

Most profiles, including the book, show these airrcaft in desert colours including azure blue, but every photo shows a lighter shade on the underside and a lower contrast on top.

spacer.png

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...