Hawker Hurricane Mk. IIB vs. Grumman F4F-4 Wildcat

[Elvis]

Jerry Loper & HoHun,

I stand corrected on the speed of the Hurricane.
Thanks for the info.

--------------------------------------

HoHun,

Why did you bring up the Zero fighter plane in response to my post?

My post concerned the Hurri vs. Wildcat, as per the originating post in this thread.
I would think any airplane would be at a disadvantage dogfighting a Zero.

...hmmm, maybe I should've quoted the author.

Sorry for any confusion. I wasn't referring to Hurricane vs. Zero, I was referring to Hurricane Vs. Wildcat.




Elvis

[renrich]

PB, I was not casting aspersions on Commonwealth pilots. Obviously intelligence on all sides was probably equal on average although American pilots at that time were more likely to have mechanical experience such as driving a car or tractor because of cultural differences. However, by definition, a Navy or Marine pilot qualified for carrier operations has to have more training than a land based pilot. Also the USN was the only service on either side at that time that concentrated on teaching deflection shooting. The amount of time spent on gunnery instruction for USN pilots was probably well in excess of that type of training in other services. The "pin cushion" tactic is referred to on page 536 of Lundstrom's "The First Team and the Guadalcanal Campaign."

[HoHun]

Hi Elvis,

>Why did you bring up the Zero fighter plane in response to my post?

Sorry, misunderstanding on my part!

>My post concerned the Hurri vs. Wildcat, as per the originating post in this thread.

With regard to that comparison, I think you are absolutely right - the Hurricane would easily outturn the F4F.

The Hurricane is characterized by a a better power loading and a better wing loading, lower parasitic drag and - not to forget! - features a propeller of much larger diameter, which is more effective at producing thrust at low speeds.

I think the story quoted in post #76 in this thread (link below - hope it works this time) about Hurricanes out-turning Wildcats on a consistent basis is entirely credible:

http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/avi...html#post88018 (Hawker Hurricane Mk. IIB vs. Grumman F4F-4 Wildcat)

(Just in case you haven't read it yet :-)

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)

[JoeB]

Originally Posted by slaterat

A quick flip through Ospreys "Hurricane Aces 1941-45" would seem to indicate that the Hurri did far better than the stats posted above. Jack Storey and Frank Carey shot down 7 nates just by themselves in that time period.

If you take look at one of their few offensive actions such as the raid on the Japanese airbase at Magwe on March 23 1942, a force of 9 Blenheims and 10 Hurricanes destroyed 16 Sallys on the ground and 11 Oscars in the air, 9 by Hurricanes. This for the loss of 2 hurris and 2 blens.

The stats I gave are based on the losses recorded by both sides. Your examples give Hurricane claims. Likewise if we gave stats based on Japanese claims, the Hurricanes would look alot worse than the stats I posted. The accuracy of claiming was low in that theater and period. Using either side's claims gives a quite inaccurate picture.

The stats I gave include Burma up to the end of the Japanese conquest there in spring '42. Magwe was still an Allied base March 23 1942, was actually struck by the Japanese that day. Maybe you mean the Blenheim/Hurricane strike on Mingaladon March 21? but it didn't feature Hurricane aerial claims that big, most were strafing claims, of fighters, which were Type 97's (Nates). They apparently suffered no aerial losses to Hurricanes, but one was downed by a Blehheim. Besides that the Japanese recorded 2 a/c destroyed and 11 damaged all on the ground. Anyway, again, that period in Burma is included in the aerial combat exchange stats I gave.

The Japanese OOB fighter strength commited Dec 8 '41 to SEA theater was no bigger than Allied overall. Later on in many sub-theaters the Allies were outnumbered, but in part because the Japanese had destroyed more Allied fighters than vice versa. The claims and strength issues were related, again a familiar pattern in WWII. The enemy 'seemed to have an inexhaustible supply of fighters' in part because most kill credits didn't represent real enemy losses.

A couple of comparative OOB's in Burma:
Feb 3: 20 AVG P-40's, 11 Hurricanes, 4 Buffaloes; v 43 Type 97's
March 20: 8 P-40's, 25 Hurricanes; v 86 Type 97, 15 Type 1 (Oscar), 4 Type 2 (Tojo), though the other two AVG sdns in China were mainly facing the same Japanese units, for example sparring frequently with the Type 1's, of the 64th Sentai at Chiangmei in northern Thailand, counted as Burma front in that OOB.

In general, recorded losses were not provably 100% correct and complete either, on either side, but in general here we're comparing relative results. There's no reason to think Japanese records and accounts of their losses in combats with Hurricanes are consistently less accurate than accounts of combats with P-40's, F4F's, etc. All the stats I quoted are on an equivalent basis in that respect. The Hurricane's poor record in fighter combat v the Japanese in 1942, much poorer than the F4F's, is a fact; the reasons why are open to some interpretation.

Joe

[slaterat]

Joe

Thats right I got Magwe and Mingaladon mixed up. The raid stemmed from Magwe. The RAF Hurricane claims were for fighters in the air , not straffed on the ground.

In Francis K Masons book "The Hawker Hurricane", he gives the total number of Hurricanes deployed to Burma in that time period as 46. 10 survived leaving 36 lost to combat and other causes. As many as 20 were destroyed on the ground leaving only about 16 lost in air combat. Its a revision of an older book so it would probably be less accurate concerning RAF claims, but quite accurate on RAF losses and deployments.

Argueing about stats is pointless I suppose and reconciling claims is a very difficult task. The kills mentioned in Hurricane Aces 1941-45 are often quite detailed mentioning locations, wreckage, witnesses and verification of the downed pilots name and unit.

In any case the sampling in Burma early 1942 is very small. By March the JAAF still outnumbered the allies 3 to1 in fighters. In Jack Storey's first combat it was 25 Nates vs 6 Hurricanes [actually 4 as 2 got lost on the climb], he still downed 2 nates , confirmed by wreckage, using the superior power loading of the Hurricane to outmanouevre his opponents with climbing turns.

Joe could you give me the titles and publishers of your references as I am interested in this little known theatre of the war.

IMHO the 3 most underrated fighters of the war are the P 40 ,The Wildcat and the Hurricane. Overall I'd have to say the Hurricane is my favorite it made a larger contribution to the war. It fought from the beginning to the end, downing more ea than any other allied fighter, won the BoB and fought in every major theatre. Its advantages lay in its enormously strong airframe, the ability to absorb heavy punishment, ease of repair, reliability and manueovrabilty.

Vs the wildcat I'd say the Hurri I and the Wildcat are about equal
a Hurri mk II though, has has a clear performance advantage, is tougher, better armed and more manueovrable. The only adv to the Wildcat would be dive and roll rate perhaps.

Slaterat

[JoeB]

Originally Posted by slaterat

Joe
1. Thats right I got Magwe and Mingaladon mixed up. The raid stemmed from Magwe. The RAF Hurricane claims were for fighters in the air , not straffed on the ground.

2. Argueing about stats is pointless I suppose and reconciling claims is a very difficult task.
In any case the sampling in Burma early 1942 is very small.

3.could you give me the titles and publishers of your references as I am interested in this little known theatre of the war.

4. Vs the wildcat I'd say the Hurri I and the Wildcat are about equal

1. No problem on base names, but see references below, Bloody Shambles doesn't mention those aerial claims, but in any case the Japanese didn't record any aerial losses (except to the Blenheims), and the opponents were not Type 1's (which as you see from the OOB were rare in Burma in that period, the main opponent was the Type 97).

2. I don't think it's pointless if looking at the right stats. The stats I gave are for the Pacific War through the period covered by Bloody Shambles v 1 and 2, so including Malaya and Dutch East Indies for Hurricane v JAAF, and Ceylon for v JNAF. The scale of combat in the theater was small enough that correlating losses in each combat from both sides *is* generally possible; again I summarize only results where the losses in specific combats, I don't include Allied losses from combats where the Japanese losses aren't known, but that's only a few actually. The results were consistent, the Hurricanes shot down more than they lost in IIRC *one* combat, out of a few dozen combats with Japanese fighters in that period. There isn't enough variance in the result combat to combat to say that pure statistical noise caused it. It's one theater in one period of the plane's career that's true, but it's not actually a statistically insignificant sample mathematically speaking, for that opponent and period.

3. The most on point is "Bloody Shambles" by Shores et al, vols 1 and 2 (Grub Street is the publisher). For comparison to AVG P-40's "Flying Tigers" by Ford (some but not most also covered in Shambles), for comparison to USAAF P-40's in Philippines "Doomed at the Start" by Bartsch (covered in less detail in Shambles); for USN F4F's in 1942 "The First Team" and "The First Team in the Guadalcanal Campaign" by Lundstrom, for USMC F4F's "Guadalcanal" by Frank. All those examine individual combats using both sides' records.

4. On paper or in one on one dogfight practice maybe, but the record of the two types in combat v Japanese fighters in 1942 was quite different. F4F's fought Japanese Navy Zeroes at just about 1:1 real exchange ratio, in actually a fair variety circumstances, in 1942, they downed a handful of obsolescent Navy Type 96's without loss, they didn't meet the JAAF in 1942. The Hurricanes fought JNAF Zeroes and JAAF Type 1's at a ratio of ~1:5. The Zero result was in a few big combats, but the Type 1 result was a over a bunch of small ones and actually worse; ~1:1 v the obsolescent Type 97. The Hurricane and F4F samples are of same order of magnitude size counting by Allied losses (around 63 Hurricane losses to J fighters in the bottom up Hurricane sample I gave, ~100 F4F's lost to Zeroes in '42) samples are only much different size counting by Japanese fighter losses (16 to Hurricanes in the sample, also ~100 to F4F's).

Joe

[kool kitty89]

It should also be noted that .303 Brownings were not as powerful as .30 cal M2 Brownings. (although certainly better than Vickers K guns)

A slightly heavy round but much lower velocity (poorer trajectory and range and muzzel energy) and slightly lower ROF.

See: The WWII Fighter Gun Debate: Gun Tables


That said I'd take 12x .303 Brownings over 4x or even 6x .50 cal M2 guns when fighting the japanese. (with the exception of the N1K and maybe the Ki-84 or Ki-100)


The Hurricane IIB could out-turn, out-climb, and out run an F4F-4, but the Wildcat could dive and zoom climb better with greater weight realitive to drag. The Hurricane's wing acted as an airbrake in dives while the F4F (Marlet) was known to out dive (and zoom) early war Bf-109's. (the P-47 could do the same with late war 109's)

[Elvis]

FWIW,

Modern loading of the .303 British round is 180gr. bullet @ MV of 2400fps.
Modern loading of the .30-06 (.30M1) is 150 gr. bullet @ MV of 2700fps.
(Remington ammo - 1974 catalogue)

Quick calculation shows ME of .303 British to be 2302.7716 lbs.-ft.
.30M1 shows ME of 2428.7046 lbs.-ft.

------------------------------------------

Aviation-History.com shows Hurri IIB with a top speed of 320 mph @ 19,700 ft. (340 mph @ 21,000 ft.)
F4F-4 318 mph @ 19,400 (only altitude listed)

Hurri IIB operational weight of 8470 w/ 2x 500 lb. bombs.
F4F-4 max. T/O wt. is 7952 w/2x 100 lb. bombs.
Subtract the bombs and the F4F has a slightly higher t/o weight. This may be due to additional armour protection.

Range for Hurri IIB is 460 miles on internal fuel only (920 mi. w/ 2x 44 gal. aux. tanks)
F4F-4's range is 770 miles. No mention if internal only or if that includes external fuel stores, as well.

Hawker Hurricane - Great Britain
Grumman F4F Wildcat - USA



Elvis

[kool kitty89]

I thought the Merlin XX had only a single-stage 2-speed supercharger giving a critical altitude of only ~18,500 ft similar to the Packard Merlins used on the P-40F/L. Or was it just the Merlins used on the P-40 were lower altitude models?

Plus higher muzzle velocity of the .30-06 (note aircraft versions had a higher muzzle velocity: ~870 m/s compared to ~840-850 m/s for ground units) gave the round flatter trajectory resulting in better accuracy and longer effective range.

[renrich]

Kool Kitty, I believe that if you study the ballistics on the 50 BMG round versus the 303 British you will change your mind. The throw weight of the 6- 50s in the Wildcat was 9.54 pounds per second.The throw weight of four 30 cal US guns is 2.5 pounds per second. So 8 of those would be 5 pounds per second. Besides throw weight you have to take into account that the 50 BMG had a much longer effective range than the 30 cal plus the sectional density of the 50 BMG gave it substantially more penetration. One reason that the Thach Weave was so effective was that the Wildcat could start scoring hits on a Zeke before the Zeke had a good chance of replying with it's 30 cals or 20 mms. Even though the early Zeros had no armor or SS tanks the shelter supplied by the big radial engine was just as substantial on the Japanese AC as for the Americans. A 30 cal bullet hit on a radial engine would not have nearly as good a chance of damaging the engine as a 50 BMG slug would have. The lesser effectiveness of the 30 cal compared to the 50 BMG is the reason the US quit using the 30 cal early in the war on it's fighters. Even the SBD had cowl mounted 50s.

[Elvis]

kool kitty89,

NUTS, I forgot to include bullet drop in those figures.
When I get home, I'll fish that catalogue out again and post the drops.
How far out would you like them?
I think most factory listings go out to 400 yds.




Elvis

[kool kitty89]

renrich,

The Hurricane Mk.IIB carried 12x .303 guns, so the weight of fire would be roughly 7.5 lbs/s by those figures. (.303 figures vary slightly and those values seem high on both accounts) Except for the radial rngine, .303 rounds would shread a Zero, Oscar, Nate, or most other Japanese a/c. (except a few late-war a/c) With incendiary rounds it could easily set those fuel tanks alight, wich would subsequently drain and explode. (usualy) Aganst a N1K, or maybe a J2M, Ki-84, and maybe a Ki-61 or Ki-100 I'd want somthing heavier.

12x .303's have a better chance of hitting a target. As said the .30 M2 (M1919) and .50 M2 browning have better ballistics with higher muzzle velocity and muzzel power. The .50 has much more firepower than either RCMG and the higher sectional density results in better energy retention, in addition to penetration.

[Elvis]

MV for .30M1 and .50M2 are roughly the same, at around 2700-2800 fps.
Its the weight and size of the projectile that makes the difference here.
Approximately .200" and 600 grains.



Elvis

[renrich]

KK, I believe it is debatable that it is easier to hit with 12 303s than with 6 50s especially taking into consideration the AC. Was not the Hurricane with 12 303s optimized for ground attack mission. I can't imagine the Hurricane with those 4 extra guns and ammo being as agile as the 8 gun model. The other factor is that range estimation is so much easier with the 50 cals than with 30 cals because the trajectory is so much flatter. And one doesn't need as many hits with a 50 as one needs with a 30 for lethality. I know that all countries went to the 50 cals in place of 30 cals as the war went along.

[slaterat]

I just ordeed all three books in that series. Yes the third and concluding volume of the Bloody Shambles series ,"Air War for Burma" has been released. I cant wait to get my hands on these.

Francis K Mason describes the while RAF effort in S.E. Asia early 42 as "to little to late"
Hurricanes were wasted in piecemeal deployment against much larger Japanese forces.


Thanx Joe for the heads up on "Bloody Shambles" I owe ya one.

Slaterat