Talk:Hawker Hurricane

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

MILHIST This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
AVIATION This article is within the scope of the Aviation WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
Aviation Portal
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.


Contents

[edit] Fuel Injection

I'm suprised the article doesnt mention the fact that early Merlins had no fuel injection. This is a major contributor to the Bf 109's superior performance at higher altitudes. (UTC)

Fuel injection has nothing to do with high altitude performance. Early Merlins had poorly designed superchargers. - Emt147 Burninate! 18:49, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

The fuel injection of the Bf109 did in fact give it an advantage over the spitfire&hurricane, although not particularly in altitude or speed.

When a Spitfire or Hurricane inverted (rolled onto its back), or performed any other negative-g manouver (for example diving without inverting), the fuel was thrown out of the engine by centrifugal force. This would cause the engine to stall, cutting the power and inevitably slowing the plane. The fuel injection of the Bf.109 pushed fuel into the engine at negative-g, allowing it a slight advantage and a method of "bunting" away from pursuing fighters.

This effect was also seen in P-51 Mustangs, although by flick-rolling (rapidly rolling onto their back) to throw fuel back into the engine and turning inside the 109 at the end of the dive the 109 could catch up. I've also heard similar things about later versions of the Spitfire being able to follow the manouver (IX -9 or possibly XIV -14). It was certainly a problem for the earlier marks of the spitfire and all variations of the hurricane. Audigex 15:54, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Centrifugal force has nothing to do with it, and in fact would keep the cylinders turning longer than if the engine were simply suddenly inverted. Gravity is what drained fuel from the engines when operating inverted; fuel injection has no such limitations. ericg ✈ 16:28, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Service in the RNZAF

The Hawker Hurricane did not serve in the RNZAF per se. A few RAF examples were operated by 488 Sqn in Singapore and Indonesia during the Japanese invasion, but were not hired or bought on charge by the RNZAF

[edit] Guns

Which halfwit did the specs box? 12x303s & 4x40mm? In 1 a/c? And N ref the std fit, 8xMG? Fix! Also, I'd note, the Mk.X, which had 12xMG (N std, & N cannon...) & Packard-Merlin, was built by Canadian Vickers @Montreal... Trekphiler 13:41, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Supercharger, not gas

The DB 601 had an automatic clutch for the supercharger, which robbed it of power at low altitudes. Early Merlin models did not have this feature, and thus had an advantage at low altitudes. It wasn't the gas. (November 2004 issue of Airpower, iirc. I'll go check.) Guapovia 13:42, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] caption

Am I right in assuming the picture is incorrectly captioned? it looks more like a Fleet Air Arm livery than RAF on that particular photo. Harryurz 13:01, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Damn right, the words royal Navy are clearly visible on the larger image and the caption to it is clear - Sea Hurricane!. Altered caption now. GraemeLeggett 14:32, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Poland

I understand that Poland had ordered some Hurricanes prior to the German invasion, but Poland fell before they could be delivered. I can't remember now where I read this, though it might have been "For Your Freedom And Ours: The Kosciuszko Squadron, Forgotten Heroes of World War 2" by Lynn Olson and Stanley Cloud. If this information can be verified anywhere, would it be worth mentioning on the page? I have a feeling that Romania ended up taking over that shipment. Brickie 12:51, 14 November 2006 (UTC)Brickie


The SS Lassell was sent to Poland in early September 1939 (the Poles called it "Black September") to deliver its cargo of 10 Hawker Hurricanes, seven Fairey Battles and a single Spitfire, that were part of an order placed by Poland. The ship also carried six thousand tons of bombs, 112 Browning machine guns and 2,750,000 rounds of ammunition. Two hundred Polish combat flyers (both instuctors and front line pilots) were sent to Constanza, Rumania in order to ferry the aircraft to Poland. Due to the change in fortunes of war when the Soviets attacked southern Poland on 17 September, the SS Lassell was hastily redirected on 17 September back to England. The next shipment of aircraft and supplies on the SS Clan Menzies and SS Robur VIII with later embarkation dates in September, were never sent. All Poland had of their order of Hawker Hurricanes was one aircraft that was already being tested (at Deblin). The remainder of the Hurricanes were taken over by the British with the majority of the Polish order eventually finding its way to Finland. Bzuk 14:04, 15 November 2006 (UTC)Bzuk - author of Janusz Zurakowski: Legend in the Skies. Janusz Żurakowski was one of the ferry pilots assigned to bring the Hurricanes home to Poland.

[edit] Both sides

The Hurricane must also be one of a very small group of aircraft that was simultaneously in service with both sides in the war. The only other one I can think of is the Finnish contingent of Blenheims. Finland and Romania both used Hurricanes, and the USSR had some on lend-lease (though unlikely they ever met each other in combat, I'd say). Again, if that is verifiable, is it worth mentioning? Brickie 12:51, 14 November 2006 (UTC)Brickie

AFAIK the finns only used some captured Hurricanes, maybe similar with the Romanians (if they ever used Hurricanes, never heard of this). --Denniss 13:02, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
Hawker supplied 12 Hurricane Mk.Is directly to Finland in 1940. Rumania ordered 50 Hurricanes from Hawker in 1939, although only 12 were delivered. Six more ex-Yugoslav Hurricanes were sold by the Germans to Rumania in 1941. Baclightning 02:26, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
I can think of a number of aircraft that were in service on both sides in the Second World War: the Curtiss Hawk used by the Vichy French and by the US and others, the Dewoitine D.520 was in use by German training units while the aircraft was employed by the Free French forces, the Morane Saulnier M.S. 406 was also used by the Germans at the same time that Switzerland, albeit a neutral country, operated the type. As to the types ever meeting in battle, there were clashes between Dewoitine D.520 units during Operation Torch in North Africa. The other obvious choice is the number of Allied aircraft that were clandestinely operated by the Luftwaffe's "KG200." During the World War II, some 40 Boeing B-17s were repaired by the Luftwaffe after crash-landing or being forced down and put back into the air in the service of the Reich. These were codenamed "Dornier Do 200," given German markings, and used for spy and reconnaissance missions by the Luftwaffe-most often used by the unit known as KG 200, hence a likely possibility as a source for the "Dornier Do 200" codename. Bzuk 13:26, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
Fair enough - I was thinking more along the lines of "officially in service" rather than captured types. Did the US still have Hawk 75s in service by the time of Operation Torch? Brickie 16:40, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

The Curtiss P-36A was not in front line USAAF service after 1941 and the only action that they saw would have been at Pearl Harbour on 7 December 1941 and at Clark Field in the Philippines. An export version of the Curtiss Hawk 75 that was considerably less refined (using fixed, spatted landing gear) was in service with Thailand. This Hawk 75 version fought in the French-Thai War (1940 - 1941). The war was fought between Thailand and Vichy France over areas of French Indochina (Vietnam) that had once belonged to Thailand. The Thai Hawks brought down at least two Morane Saulnier M.S. 406s. Did you read my comment about the Polish Hurricanes?Bzuk 21:47, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

it didnt get the credit it should have

The Finnish Air Force also used other Allied types during WW2, both ones acquired "legally" (Bristol Bulldog, Gloster Gauntlet & Gladiator, Blackburn Ripon, Fokker CV, CX & D21, Morane-Saulnier 406, Brewster Buffalo, Westland Lysander, Avro Anson) and ones either bought from German war-booty stocks (Curtiss Hawk) or captured from the enemy (I-15, I-153, I-16, SB-2, DB-3, Bell Airacobra, Curtiss Kittyhawk, etc., mostly only in very small numbers).--Death Bredon 21:55, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 5½ kills?

"Finland bought 12 Mk I Hurricanes at the end of the Winter War, but lost two during the transit flight. The aircraft did not have much success (only 5½ kills)." What is ½ a kill? Bennie13 16:22, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Most likely a shared kill, whereby a pilot in a Hurricane and a pilot in another aircraft were both shooting at something that went down. If it couldn't be determined who shot it down, both pilots would be credited ½ of a kill. The Dark 19:30, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Bader bing

Most of the references are to Douglas Bader's "Fight for the Sky". They specifically point to a 2004 reprint of the book, and are dated 2004. I'm not an expert on Wikipedia's reference standards, but shouldn't the reference be dated to the original publication date of the first edition? At the very least it should say something like "Originally published 1973, Nth edition 2004". I can understand identifying the specific publication, for the sake of disclosure, but someone might think it was a recent book. -Ashley Pomeroy 19:38, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Usually the latest or last edition is identified in a bibliographical reference. Bzuk 19:44,18 April 2007 (UTC).

[edit] The Luftwaffe in Finland

The article talks about "northern convoys" being threatened by Luftwaffe attacks from Finland. Though there were a number of Luftwaffe planes - mainly fighters and transports - in northern Finland during the later years of the war and a detachment of fighter-bombers (FW-190) and light dive bombers (Ju-87) in SW Finland in 1944, the primary threat to Allied northern convoys (which sailed to Murmansk) was from Luftwaffe maritime bomber units stationed in Norway. Allied convoys did not sail through the Baltic for obvious reasons!--Death Bredon 21:55, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Claims noted, but please can we have some data?

This has been recently added to the intro:

Although it is a little known (and seldom published) fact, the Hurricane was undoubtedly the most successful of all British fighters during WW2 in terms of the number of victories over enemy aircraft. Thorough analysis has revealed that the Hurricane destroyed more enemy aircraft in air combat (during WW2) than all other British aircraft combined and in fact more than any other single Allied fighter type as well (source : World Aircraft Information Files, File 144, by Aerospace/Brightstar Publishing).

If a source is to be quoted, apart from those in the bibliography, it would be helpful to the reader to provide more information, such as the publisher and the date published. Secondly If claims like this are to be made would it be possible to provide some data? It may well be true, and I'm not disputing that, but there does need to be something more solid presented for the general reader, who may not have facts and statistics at hand. How many aircraft did the Hurricane shoot down?Minorhistorian (talk) 11:59, 25 April 2008 (UTC)