The battle of Britain's unsung hero: The Hawker Hurricane.

[Saiyaman]

I guess there will always be two planes that will be identified with the Battle of Britain:

1. The Supermarine Spitfire
http://www.rjmitchell-spitfire.co.uk/battleofbritain/images/g_rowofspitfires.jpg

2. The Messerschmitt 109
http://www.woodlands-junior.kent.sch.uk/Homework/war/images/planes/Messerschmitt.jpg

But it would be unfair to overlook the unsung hero, the plane that actually shot down more enemy bombers during the Battle than the Spitfire did. The Hawker Hurricane.
http://www.aviation-history.com/hawker/hurricane-11a.jpg

Now the Hurricane wasn't the fastest or the most capable of Fighter aircraft employed by the Royal Air Force but it was none the less an important one. Because it was the first monoplane fighter that entered service with the RAF.

The Genesis of the Hurricane however lay with Biplane designs and its roots can actually be traced back to the Sopwith Camel.
http://www.ctie.monash.edu.au/hargrave/images/sopwith_camel_original_500.jpg
In the aftermath of the First World War which resulted in the bankruptcy of the Sopwith Aviation Company. Sopwith test pilot Harry Hawker and three others, including Thomas Sopwith, bought the assets of Sopwith and formed H.G. Hawker Engineering in 1920.

In the years that followed, Hawker (By now Hawker Aviation Ltd.) got a name for building outstanding biplane designs and one designer in particullar made a good carreer for himself while working for Hawker: Sydney Camm.
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_YhGsknrK8Io/RiylmvRXZ0I/AAAAAAAAAjw/8pc-IEb6AVA/s320/sydney_camm.JPG

Camm's designs stood apart from competitive designs such as the Bristol Bulldog by having very sleek lines and being really sturdy and easy to fly planes. The Dynasty started with the Hawker Tomtit trainer, which already displayed Camm's keen eye for detail, everything had to be RIGHT.


The Hawker-Camm biplanes became really succesful and every time Camm basically updated his primary design to meet different needs. Eventually it all cumulated in the Gracefull Hawker Hart light bomber.
http://www.ctie.monash.edu.au/hargrave/images/camm_hart_500.jpg
The Hart and its Fighter version the Fury were considered to be Camm's masterpieces: the sleekest planes around but times were changing.

Camm had already got wind that the motto of speed is second to Manoeuvrability which had made the Biplane such a beloved plane with the military was no longer true, with war looming it was becoming ever so apparent that the days of the Biplane were numbered and that his graceful Fury fighter would have no place in modern warfare.

As before though, Camm stayed true to his method of adapting a proven design rather than to start from the ground up, and as such the prototype for his first monoplane design bore a striking resemblance to the Hart series.
http://www.fleetairarmarchive.net/aircraft/Hurricane_K5053_First_Prototype_inflight.jpg

What also didn't change from the Hart series was the fact that the Hurricane was made with the tried and tested method of a wooden wing and a fuselage of steel tubing spanned with fabric, why change a winning team? Apparently the RAF's high command agreed with Camm's logic and ordered the aircraft to be put in production in 1936. And by the time the war broke out 500 aircraft had been built and delivered, supplying 18 squadrons.

In service, the Hurricane was adapted to war conditions, the retractable tailwheel of the prototype was prone to failure and abandoned in favor of a streamlined slat in which the now fixed tailwheel sat, the Rolls Royce Merlin egine was upgraded and armament suitably enlarged when it became clear that normal machine guns didn't really do that much damage.

During the Battle of Britain the Hurricane became the prime anti-bomber aircraft, the more agile Spitfire was used more to keep the Messerschmitts busy, in that role the Hurricane came into its prime, providing the pilots a good stable airframe that could survive big punishment and take the pilot home.

Camm stayed busy, deciding to use the Hurricane design for an eventual successor, more powerful and completely built out of metal so it would be sturdier too. The resulting design had a very strong family resemblance to the Hurricane, if not in it's name.
http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/fileadmin/historyLearningSite/sidney2.gif
The Hawker Typhoon.

However when the Typhoon entered service, it was clear that as a fighter it was illsuited for the job, the big wing it inherited from the Hurricane didn't make it agile and the tailunit it also got from the Hurricane was a notorious weak point which was prone to breaking off. The RAF then decided to put the Typhoon in use as a strike aircraft and it was a masterstroke. The Typhoon became known as a tank slayer and its fat wings could easily support heavy ordenance consisting of heavy guns and rockets.

The RAF pilots of the Pacific theatre got the hint that their Hurricanes could also be used in that role and as such employed them as strike aircraft and they remained in that role until the end of the war.

The Typhoon however wasn't the only "son" of the Hurricane. The Hawker Henley for example was a twin seater target towing aircraft used in pilot's target training.
http://www.edcoatescollection.com/ac6/Hawker%20Henley.jpg
The Henley had the Hurricane's wings and main fuselage but differed in the two man cockpit. They were used from 1938 until 1942 with a respectable 200 built.

Then there was the sole Hawker Hotspur, which was a prototype built to meet the demand for a turret equiped fighter.
http://military.sakura.ne.jp/world/raf/hawker_hotspur.jpg
The Hotspur shared the main wing and fuselage of the Hurricane. but with the order going to the Boulton Paul defiant design, none more were built.

After the war the Hurricane was quickly withdrawn from service but Camm's designs kept on coming: the Sea Fury, the Sea Hawk, the Hunter, the Harrier all came from his hand. Before he died in 1966, he was planning the design of an aircraft to travel at Mach 4, or four times the speed of sound. It is humbling to imagine that his spectacular career in aircraft design started at a Windsor Model Aeroplane Club in 1912, where he built a glider capable of carrying a man just nine years after the first powered flight. Sydney Camm not only was witness to many developments in aviation, he also influenced the world of aviation significantly throughout his illustrious career

 

[voluptuary_manque]

A remarkable man with an amazing career. And, yes, the Hurricane saved more British civilians' lives than did the Spitfire. The Spitfire saved the Hurricanes.

 

[TE999]

A remarkable man with an amazing career. And, yes, the Hurricane saved more British civilians' lives than did the Spitfire. The Spitfire saved the Hurricanes.

More to the point, the British aircraft industry saved England by producing advanced prototypes of bombers and fighters in direct response to the German aircraft build-up.

The Brit government, which included the RAF and the Fleet Air Arm, had it's collective head in the sand and fighting the last war. They still had biplanes as front line aircraft.

 

[rgraham666]

The Hurricane was indeed a sweet aircraft. Not quite as good as the Emil or the Spit, true, but not to be underestimated.

The Typhoon and Tempest are among my favorite WWII planes. Really not something to be on the receiving end of if you were on the ground.

The Boulton-Paul Defiant makes me laugh. The turret was a nasty surprise for the Germans for about two days but the loss in performance due to the extra weight of a second crew member and the turret meant it was cold meat against any proper fighter.

I can't discuss WWII aircraft without thinking of IL2 these days. I sure wish it ran on a Mac.

 

[TE999]

The Boulton-Paul Defiant makes me laugh. The turret was a nasty surprise for the Germans for about two days but the loss in performance due to the extra weight of a second crew member and the turret meant it was cold meat against any proper fighter.

Not to mention the turret could only fire in an 180 degree arc and it had no forward firing guns. In a head-on attack it was defenseless, which the Germans speedily learned.

The Blackburn Roc was another turreted failure.

 

[Zeb_Carter]

As a kid I read the book about the Hawker Hurricane. The testimonials given by those pilots that survived praised the little wooden plane for saving their lives.

 

[amicus]

Excellent historical Thread, Saiyaman, thank you. I would offer that the term, "The Greatest Generation" is exemplified by the Battle of Britain, the men and the machines and the leadership and innovations employed through Radar and tactics. And also the British people...."There will always be a Britain", that may have been, "an England", but you get my meaning.

Thank You!

amicus

 

[Saiyaman]

More to the point, the British aircraft industry saved England by producing advanced prototypes of bombers and fighters in direct response to the German aircraft build-up.

The Brit government, which included the RAF and the Fleet Air Arm, had it's collective head in the sand and fighting the last war. They still had biplanes as front line aircraft.

And they weren't the only ones, the reasons why the Blitzkrieg was succesful for the Germans was of many of those countries they invaded stubbornly held onto obsolete military protocols.

Having Biplanes as frontline fighters in one example, the Gloster Gladiator and the Polikarpow I-15 were widely exported. Because of the militairy protocol dictating what a fighter aircraft should be like: Light and agile, because that's what gave WW1 fighters like the Fokker D-VII the edge here: they could outturn everything in the sky.
http://www.deroeck.co.uk/plane-pictures-ww2/Gloster-Gladiator-(9)-01.jpg
The Gloster Gladiator
http://ww2warbirds.net/ww2pics/ww2polii15-1.jpg
The Polikarpow I-15

But it wasn't just biplanes that ruled the roost, there were monoplanes around it was just that... Well see for yourselves and make your own judgement. I'll name a couple and some trivia about them.

http://pverp.home.xs4all.nl/~pverp/images/fokker_d-xxi_2.jpg
These are Fokker D-21 fighters of the Royal Dutch Army air force.
The D-21 was Fokker's first monoplane fighter, but sticking to protocol, it had a non-retractable undercarriage, and was made using the tried and tested method of steel tubing and linnen fabric. To its credit, while slower than the Messerschmitt 109, the D-21 was a dependable workhorse that could pack a serious punch but many of them never even got airborne. (More about that later...)

http://www.internetmodeler.com/2002/june/aviation/Cheek-Duckworth.jpg
This is a Brewster B-223 Buffalo.
With war looming, many companies saw money in offerring the rejects for sale for chips. The Buffalo was one such occasion, it was meant to replace the old US Navy carrier borne Biplanes but the design lost to the Grumman F2F Wildcat. But with war looming in Europe and with Air Forces desperate for new planes , Brewster aviation decided to not let those years in devellopment and priming the plant for production go to waste and offered the Buffalo to those needing air forces. But the Buffalo didn't have sufficiant armour, was too lightly armed and was too underpowered to pose a serious challenge against the Messerschmitt and the Japanese Zero. Many air force who bought the Buffalo found out in a painful way that there was a reason why the US navy rejected the plane in the first place.

http://www.iloveplanes.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/Bell-P-39Q-Airacobra-1.jpg
This is a Bell P-39 Airacobra.
Now when this plane first took to the skies it caused a sensation, it was armed with a 31 MM nose cannon and five additional 20 mm cannons, it had the engine behind the cockpit, driving the propeller through a long crankshaft that went underneath the pilot's seat. BUT NASA (Then known as NACA, National Advisory Committee on Aeronautics.) did a recomandation that sealed this sleek fighter's fate. Back in 1939 when reviewing the prototype of the Bell P-39, the plane had been given a turbo-supercharger to make the most of what the Allison V-1710 engine had. Believing that an improved version of that engine was in the latest stages of development, the high command of the Army Air Force was told that the Bell P-39 should NOT be fitted with a turbo-supercharger when in fact it would take four years before that improved version of the V-1710 became available. So because of that recommandation, the pilots who went to battle in the Bell P-39 found themselves flying an underpowered, severely restricted plane. It was when used as a strike aircraft that the Cobra found its niche and the Soviet Air force used them succesfully as flying artillery.


As I mentioned in the description of the Fokker D-21, if it could get airborne it could put up a good fight, many of them didn't and that's because of another obsolete military protocol.
http://www.hixonairfieldservices.co.uk/images/history/planes.jpg
These are Wellington Bombers on a British airfield. Back then, planes were meant to be flying artillery, ready to be deployed at a moment's notice, as such they were always parked neatly in a row and it was that way pretty much all over Europe. They found out in a painful manner that parking planes neatly in a row also made it possible for an enemy plane to destroy them in a strafing run, many airforce couldn't get airborne in the first place because of losing their planes on the ground.

It was a combination of knowing those obsolete protocols and tearing up the rule book that gave the Germans the edge here.

 

[TE999]

The planes of the Army Air Corps at Wheeler Field on O'ahu were lined up neatly and guarded to prevent possible sabotage. On December 7, 1941, strafing Zeroes took them all out. The Dutch, French, Polish and Belgian air forces were also caught and destroyed on the ground by German aircraft with virtually no resistance.

 

[Weird Harold]

The planes of the Army Air Corps at Wheeler Field on O'ahu were lined up neatly and guarded to prevent possible sabotage. On December 7, 1941, strafing Zeroes took them all out. The Dutch, French, Polish and Belgian air forces were also caught and destroyed on the ground by German aircraft with virtually no resistance.

Wheeler Field's destruction was especially tragic because the planes had been dispersed to prevent destruction by bombing or strafing and the commander had them consolidated because he was more worried about sabotage and didn'thave the mnpower to guard all the planes when dispersed.

IIRC, Clark Field in the Phillipines had their aircraft dispersed according to offical USAAF doctrine and were able to get almost a full squadron into the air against the Dec 7th attack there. The only air-to-air victory for one of the most maligned pre-war fighters came in defense of Clark Field, but I don't recall if it was the Brewster buffalo or the Boeing "peashooter" -- I want to say it was the Buffalo that downed a japanese bomber; the japanese bombers weren't nearly as advanced or dificult to kill as the Zero.

ETA: it was a Phillipine Army Boeing P-26 'Peashooter' that downed a Japanese Bomber defending Clark Field.

http://www.boeing.com/history/boeing/images/p-26_n.jpg

Twelve export versions, 11 for China and one for Spain, were built. One of a group of P-26s, turned over to the Philippine Army late in 1941, was among the first Allied fighters to down a Japanese airplane in World War II.

 

[rgraham666]

The Army Air Corps found out how poor the Airacobra was at Guadalcanal, and they were using an export version called the P400 which was even worse if possible. Again it came into its own in the ground support role.

The Airacobras served longer than any other plane at Cactus. Although not many were flying by that point.

 

[TE999]

Wheeler Field's destruction was especially tragic because the planes had been dispersed to prevent destruction by bombing or strafing and the commander had them consolidated because he was more worried about sabotage and didn'thave the mnpower to guard all the planes when dispersed.

IIRC, Clark Field in the Phillipines had their aircraft dispersed according to offical USAAF doctrine and were able to get almost a full squadron into the air against the Dec 7th attack there. The only air-to-air victory for one of the most maligned pre-war fighters came in defense of Clark Field, but I don't recall if it was the Brewster buffalo or the Boeing "peashooter" -- I want to say it was the Buffalo that downed a japanese bomber; the japanese bombers weren't nearly as advanced or dificult to kill as the Zero.

ETA: it was a Phillipine Army Boeing P-26 'Peashooter' that downed a Japanese Bomber defending Clark Field.

http://www.boeing.com/history/boeing/images/p-26_n.jpg

Five Curtiss P-36A Hawks were able to get airborne from Wheeler Field on December 7, 1941 and shot down two Mitsubishi A6M Zeros to a loss of one of their number. They, along with three P-40 Warhawks, were the only US planes off the ground that day. Many others were shot down on takeoff.

 

[Weird Harold]

http://www.internetmodeler.com/2002/june/aviation/Cheek-Duckworth.jpg
This is a Brewster B-223 Buffalo.

Actually, that picture is an F2A-2 US Navy Brewster Buffalo.

The B223 export version of the F2A-1 saw a good bit of service against Japanese army fighters and bombers despite being "de-navied" and having a weaker engine than the US version.

Later export of the F2A-2 and F2A-3 versions saw service in Finland against soviet opposition -- where they performed admirably with some of the highest kill ratios of any 1930's vintage fighter in service in 1940-41.

Post war sales to Brazil, Ecuador and other South American air forces saw the Brewster Buffalos in active service until 1954 and later.

Almost all of the late 1930s vintage fighters found a niche where they provided adequate, if not outstanding service.

 

[stephen55]

When I was a kid my family dentist was this amazingly gentle and soft-spoken man who always made me feel safe and secure, even when my teeth were being drilled and filled. It wasn't until med school and I met one of his sons that I learned that "Ol' Doc Jarvis" had flown Hawker "Rocket" Typhoons during the war.

My classmate and now long time friend told me of how his dad had earned a reputation as one of the more "damned near suicidal" Typhoon pilots who would close in on a target (any piece of armor, gun enplacement or locomotive) and wait until the last possible second before launching the rockets.

The RP-3 rocket was not very accurate unless the pilot was very good. The Typhoon could carry four 60 lb. rockets under each wing and if delivered successfully, the rockets were equivalent to one broadside from a destroyer. The average success rate against tanks was very low...except for those pilots who didn't mind flying through the debris from a very close release.

I remember asking my classmate why his dad was so fearless. He paused a moment and then told me that his dad's only (twin) brother had gone down while navigating a Lancaster during one of the first Canadian night raids on Germany. While his dad never talked about it, his aunt had told him that after the loss of his brother that his dad didn't seem to care anymore about his own life. In his letters home, he had often expressed the thought that his own survival was questionable and that in order to get the job done, he was more than willing to get the job done. In other words, what some might have taken as fearless heroism was really just the acceptance of fate.

The most dangerous men in the skies over Europe were the men who had nothing left to lose. God knows there were a lot of them.

 

[Handley_Page]

Camm sure knew what he was about. The Hunter was sweet to work on, looked good (still does) and (apparently) flew good.

Thanks for the reminders.

 

[Saiyaman]

Camm sure knew what he was about. The Hunter was sweet to work on, looked good (still does) and (apparently) flew good.

Thanks for the reminders.

Camm once said "a good plane should have three things going for it: 1. Good looks, 2. good performance and 3. Politics to back the making of it."

He said that of the ill-fated TRS-2
http://www.clubhyper.com/reference/images/TSR2%20003.jpg
The TSR-2 was meant to be the best interceptor that Britain could make, but after the only two were built, the goverment changed and further development of what should have been Camm's masterpiece was halted. It was only very recently revealed that one of the true reasons why the TSR-2 was stopped dead in its tracks was because of industrial espionage from the Mikoyan design bureau.

http://www.military-today.com/aircraft/mig_25_foxbat.jpg
The result of that espionage was the MiG 25 "Foxbat" which incorporated a lot of what was develloped for the TRS-2.

 

[Handley_Page]

Camm once said "a good plane should have three things going for it: 1. Good looks, 2. good performance and 3. Politics to back the making of it."

He said that of the ill-fated TRS-2
http://www.clubhyper.com/reference/images/TSR2%20003.jpg
The TSR-2 was meant to be the best interceptor that Britain could make, but after the only two were built, the government changed and further development of what should have been Camm's masterpiece was halted. It was only very recently revealed that one of the true reasons why the TSR-2 was stopped dead in its tracks was because of industrial espionage from the Mikoyan design bureau.

http://www.military-today.com/aircraft/mig_25_foxbat.jpg
The result of that espionage was the MiG 25 "Foxbat" which incorporated a lot of what was developed for the TRS-2.

You sure know how to push the button, mate.
Fifty years after its demise, the issue of TSR-2 can still raise a fair amount of choler in those of us who were in the RAF in the mid sixties. TSR-2 was never intended as an interceptor. It was a fast light bomber, capable of lobbing two nukes in the right place at Mach 2.

I'd be very interested to hear of your source whereby you claim "industrial espionage from the Mikoyan design bureau" caused the project to be terminated. As I understand it, the new (Labour) government was in danger of going bankrupt so it cancelled the project. Denis Healy (Financial wizard at the time) claimed 'Arold was responsible for the final decision.

I do know that the termination message was received at 11.45am and by teatime that day, 5000 skilled men were redundant.

 

[Saiyaman]

You sure know how to push the button, mate.
Fifty years after its demise, the issue of TSR-2 can still raise a fair amount of choler in those of us who were in the RAF in the mid sixties. TSR-2 was never intended as an interceptor. It was a fast light bomber, capable of lobbing two nukes in the right place at Mach 2.

I'd be very interested to hear of your source whereby you claim "industrial espionage from the Mikoyan design bureau" caused the project to be terminated. As I understand it, the new (Labour) government was in danger of going bankrupt so it cancelled the project. Denis Healy (Financial wizard at the time) claimed 'Arold was responsible for the final decision.

I do know that the termination message was received at 11.45am and by teatime that day, 5000 skilled men were redundant.

You're right, I had the wrong plane in mind, it was the CF105 program which was shut down because of that. The History Channel had a whole doccumentary about it.
http://www.airforce.forces.gc.ca/v2/equip/resrc/images/hst/l-g/arrow.jpg

Sorry my bad.

 

[Weird Harold]

You're right, I had the wrong plane in mind, it was the CF105 program which was shut down because of that. The History Channel had a whole doccumentary about it.

http://www.airforce.forces.gc.ca/v2/equip/resrc/images/hst/l-g/arrow.jpg

The Arrow and the TRS-2 were doomed more by US political and economic pressures -- and corrupt US manufacturers fudging performance and delivery cost estimates -- than by Soviet espionage. Granted the TRS-2's demise had the able assistance of internal British politics dragging it down, too; a factor that has killed or terminally delayed a good many new aircraft in addition to keeping a few aircraft in service far beyond their original designed lifespans.

 

[rgraham666]

Grrrr. I still loathe John Diefenbaker for killing the Arrow. Moron.

 

[Handley_Page]

I sincerely hope there is a special circle of Hell for politicians who cancel damned good planes.

 

[JackLuis]

Royal Air Force Bomber Command 60th Anniversary
Royal Air Force Bomber Command Famous Raids

For hard core Aviation fetishes.

http://www.raf.mod.uk/bombercommand/images/damb02.jpg

Dambusters!

 

[Handley_Page]

Raids ?
The raid on Amiens jail, or the Belefeld viaduct ?

 

[rgraham666]

They included the raids on Hamburg and Dresden, the ones that caused the firestorms. Brrrr.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Dear Reader

ROB's posts are like flies preserved in amber.