Re: Soviet Hurricanes - where, when, ...?
 

Franek;
I didn't realise that the Yugoslavs had Yak 3s. I had read something about the trials but had assumed it was the Yak 9 that was involved.

Apparently it wasn't a Malcolm hood tried on the Hurricane, my apologies for saying that, but a field conversion. According to the new Mushroom publication on the Hurricane, anyway. Although the author has not quite understood the Sea Hurricane, and has included some nonsense about a mine-exploding ring, so perhaps more careful reading of the rest of the book is called for - it looks pretty good otherwise.

Re the Dutch: I wouldn't be surprised if a Brewster 439 was at least competitive with a tropicalised Hurricane IIb, if not better at lower altitudes. It is not that the Buffalo was a terrible design, just not good enough.

I must admit being interested by these statements about Finnish overclaiming. I was told that the Finns were exceptionally strict about granting confirmation, and even perfectly normal and understandable overclaiming just did not happen. Ah well, it was a Finn that told me that. Perhaps they weren't superhuman after all.

Re: Soviet Hurricanes - where, when, ...?
 

Graham
we Finns are and were normal human beings maybe somewhat stubborn. During the Winter War IMHO Finns claims were exceptionally accurate but during those big air combats over Gulf of Finland in 1942 overclaiming was rife. During same time over Carelia Finnish claims were more accurate ie c. 50% accuracy.
The claim accuracy of Finnish aces varied wildly. For example Puhakka, Sarvanto, Kinnunen and Tani seemed to have been careful claimers but for ex. Wind, Katajainen, Lehtovaara and Tervo were rather notarious overclaimers. And also Juutilainen's claim accuracy wasn't very good. It now seems that in reality his and Puhakka's number of kills are very near each other, around 30 to both. Luukkanen being also in reality 3rd highest scorer.

Re: Soviet Hurricanes - where, when, ...?
 

Juha: thanks for that. Just to clarify, I was not making any kind of gentle dig at your nation in particular, just my original informant. (As a long term Ferrari supporter, this year is Adopt A Finn Year. But please let's not divert this thread any more than it has already.)

Re: Soviet Hurricanes - where, when, ...?
 

Graham
They had both, but the comparison was made against Yak-3.
For me the booklet looks like a big dissapointment, although funny at times. What the other sources say about the canopy?

Re: Soviet Hurricanes - where, when, ...?
 

I was looking for the release of the next volume of "Dragons on Bird Wings" at Aviaeology. I saw there is a book coming out mid 2007 "Hawker Hurricanes in Soviet Skies" (ISBN 0-9780696-2-5). Does anyone know if this is going to be a history with answers or a Tech book?

Re: Soviet Hurricanes - where, when, ...?
 

hi, Nokose, who is the author of this book ?

Re: Soviet Hurricanes - where, when, ...?
 

Hi Marsyao, It didn't say and I didn't find anything more then the ISBN #. I was hopeful that some one here might have heard since reading this post.

Re: Soviet Hurricanes - where, when, ...?
 

For Graham Boak.
A footnote on thick wings and Hurricane modifications.

Several years ago I read about another thick wing that remained competitive throughout WW2.

In an article about the Seversky/Republic line of aircraft, it was reported that about 1932 IIRC a certain russian emigré named Gregor designed a wing for Seversky, that was supsequently used on all Seversky and Republic fighters down to the XP.72. The only modification was a sharpening of the leading edges, sometime around 1940.

Can such "sharpening" work? What would such new leading edges have done for the Hurricane (and Typhoon)?

Birgir Thorisson

Re: Soviet Hurricanes - where, when, ...?
 

Hi,

I won't enter much in the subject, but only post a remark about comparative tests, I don't know how they were conducted in Yugoslavia but the French also tested the Yak-3s they had received from the USSR against the Spitfire IX, and the result was that, at 5,000 ft the Yak climbed faster, was faster in horizontal flight, mostly equal in horizontal maneuvering, but that it couldn't follow the turn if the Spit's pilot, with full power engaged, pulled a climbing turn as hard as he could, "hanging to the propeller at 120 kts/h"...

The picture seems to have been roughly the same at least up to 4000 m.

This mostly seems to correspond to the Yugoslav's test, but it may be remembered that if turning hability made a slower aircraft equivalent to a faster one, then an I-15 would be equal to a FW-190D...

Comparison tests were made by air forces with what they had, but if you look for an aircraft comparable to the Spitfire V, I think a Yak-1 or Yak-7 would be a better choice.

What must also be remembered is that Eastern Front condidtions, AFAIK, led mostly to tactical air combat at much lower level that in the West, and that aircraft suited to fighting at 8000 m are not necessarily good at 2000 m, and the other way around...

Regards,

Kolya.

Re: Soviet Hurricanes - where, when, ...?
 

I don't know exactly how thick the P-35/P-41/P-44/P-47 series wings were, assuming they were all related in this manner, but they were not as thick as the Hurricane. In case anyone is getting confused, when a wing is described as being "thick" it is not the absolute value of thickness that is being referred to but the thickness/chord ratio. An aircraft with an elliptical wing (such as the Seversky fighters) will tend to have a "thinner" wing because of the extension of the chord out towards the wingtips.

By sharpening of the leading edge, I presume this means thinning down the first quarter of the chord in order to present a less bluff appearance to the airflow. This would probably (you're stretching the limits of my knowledge here) result in less drag, but also less lift and possibly a sharper stall characteristic.