when Aussie was forming squadrons in north Africa they took over some aircraft from the RAF,well used Hurricanes and other hawker makes. The order was in for US p40s,the p40s replaced the mixed bag of aircraft that the Aussies started out with,likely a way to get set up with the limited resources, i think the Aussie figured p40 parts would be more reliable to get from the USA then to hope for parts from England for Hurricanes,[regarding the Pacific theater also]so in that regard the p40 did replace some Hurricanes but mostly American mustangs replaced the p40s and spitfires replaced the Hurricanes,End result was more and more sqns to out gun the German aircraft. All interesting stuff
Fred, 26.03.2013 14:32
Much has been made about which was the best the fastest which could climb faster or turn tighter than other machines over the years. The hurricane was a mid 1930's era design and by 1940 it was becoming outclassed by other aircraft however and it is a big however; this aircraft shot down many more German aircraftduring the batlle of britain than its newer faster etc colleague the spitfire. It could therefore be said to have influenced the outcome of the war as if Britain had lost this battle and been forced to withdraw from the war Germany would have been free to fight on one front (eastern)America would not have become involved in the european war and the world we now live in would be very different. Also once relegated from 1st line fighter status the Hurricane was armed with cannon and became a very successful anti-tank weapon in the North African desert making a massive contribution to Montgomery's victory in 1943. A very significant, effective and successful aircraft by anyones standards.
george gauron, e-mail, 02.01.2013 07:51
Have hunted high & low as to when and which version had the so called oil deflector plate fitted to the front of the engine cowling immediately behind the propeller. Can someone advise. Thanks
paul, e-mail, 28.11.2012 03:38
Aussie did use the Hurricanes briefly in north africa, till they recived there p40s not all sqn but some
Paul, e-mail, 25.11.2012 18:32
Often i read that p40 replaced the hurricanes in North Africa ,more so new sqn were equipped with the p40 while the spitfire replaced the hurricane at the old squdrons , maybe this was because of the similar equipment ,parts, training, ect. i think i read the cock pits of the spitfire and hurricane are also similar. I checked out a long list of aircraft used by the African sqns and i don,t think i recall one that switched over from hurricanes to P40, The Australians only used P40 I wonder what happened to the remaining Hurricanes, sent to Yugoslavia or Greece??I will check it out
paul, e-mail, 14.11.2012 06:24
often climb rate for the hurricane mentions the mk11c. I read that this aircraft was 1800 lbs heaver then the mk1. some mk1 had only two speed wood propellor, newer mk11 had the constant speed prop and the extra 400 horse power. lots of armor and four big cannon, so climb was usually around 2700 fpm, mk 1 or two with the constsnt speed prop,, find it interesting p40 had the great high speed roll rate,could be trouble for the me109, as this was often there way out,Interesting
Ron Hyams, e-mail, 16.07.2012 05:12
Hi all: It`s performance complimented, and sometimes surpassed ,the "Spittee" however, at 84 yrs old I know that to see a spitfire on the ground ,or overhead,in film or doco, that I have just seen the most beautiful aircraft ever ,or likely . Even the start-up cough of the "Merlin is enough. Cheers. Ron H
Michel, e-mail, 18.06.2012 20:27
Hurricane's reserve fuel tank was just in front of the cockpit, so many pilots suffered severe burns. Zero was an even worse fire hazard.
Ian Cognito, 19.02.2012 04:43
Stan, while the Hurricane flew in Nov 1935, the P-36 flew in May, 1935. The re-engined P-40, with P-36 airframe flew in 1938. That makes it a '30s airplane too. A bit older, even.
Stan, e-mail, 18.02.2012 20:22
The Hurri was a 1930'2 design, the P-40 a 1940's design. The Hurri saved landing sites in U.K., for the USAAF.
Roger Plant, e-mail, 16.01.2012 18:46
The more you read about historic aircraft like the Hurricane the more confused you become. Critics cite poor climb, compare it to P36, P40, Wildcat and even the mighty Corsair, the Hrri is not that bad. Dive? the prototype was clocked at 560 mph with fabric wings and a fixed pitch prop, metal wings added 80 mph to dive speed, do the sums. This stacks up with experiences of pilots in Burma who could dive away from zero's and Oscar, the latter more than once shedding wings trying to follow the Hurri. One pilot of a Hurri was disappointed following a long dive which over-revved the engine and locked the controls solid to find that on recovery using the tail trim he was still only doing 320 mph and speed falling, until he watched the asi unwind a complete revolution and the Hurri return to more or less controlled flight. The mechanics worked this out to over 600 mph, but we'll never know. I did read that the Hurri has the record for the most axis aircraft shot down, more than the Spit or Mustang. It certainly fought for longer periods in any theatre than the others but can anyone confirm?
paul w---, e-mail, 22.10.2011 07:34
never really hear about how the p40 really would stack up against the hurricane, in africa when they changed over to p40 ,some pilots probebly tried it out in mock dog fights, i assume p40 could dive away maybe p40 could out manuver the hurricane at higher speed .?
Maurice Dyer, e-mail, 27.07.2011 17:59
Not as glamorous as its well known counter part; but it could out turn a BF109 at low level. Britains Working Class Hero.
paul w, e-mail, 05.05.2011 03:58
Often there are overstated, almost false statements about . say p40 or hurricane and others example Hurricane poor climb, well compared to a me109 yes , but it was respectable compared to other aircraft, though the climb angle was steep and speed was low, and p40 ,cant turn, sure not like a zero. but almost nothing could roll like a p40 at high speed and, this was the one of the most important advantages in new era dogfights. something the fw190 could use to evade the spitfire. and really its only advantage over the mk 9 spitfire, speed over mk 5 also
don burris, e-mail, 21.04.2011 04:59
i will and forever spell hurricane, G R E A T
don burris, e-mail, 21.04.2011 04:57
Ever see a mongoose take on a 15 ft cobra?? the mongoose is outgunned, but he doesnt know it. the cobra thinks hes gonna win, right up to the time the game, outclassed mongoose sinks its fangs into the cobras neck and gives a vicious jerk of his head! Fanatics and nazis couldnt lose, like the cobra, they did, and most germans still cant believe it. go brits!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
sunderajan, e-mail, 29.03.2011 01:55
In 1947, I had a few Fitter 2 E and A's retired from the I.A.F. working with working with me in Air India. They said that they just loved working on the hurricanes. The only trouble was that the pneumatic system for the Undercart retraction system and the brakes used to give a lot of trouble. I remembered this when in 1961 we had the same problem with the Fokker F-27 aircrafts.
Philip Williams, e-mail, 24.03.2011 12:44
In 11 Group RAF, which bore the brunt of the Battle of Britain, there were only 3 (I think) squadrons of Spitfires: most had Hurricanes. They were a more stable gun-platform than the faster and more aerodynamic Spitfire - ideal for tackling attacking bombers. THAT was the priority in the "Battle of Britain".
Mick Skinner, e-mail, 08.03.2011 17:05
I worked on both Hurricane and Spitfires at RAF Coltishall's Historic Aircraft Flight in 1966, we had 3 Spits and 2 Hurricanes all in great flying condition, each of these A/C have their good (and bad) points but both were fantastic fighters that did wonders for our war effort.I wonder where they are now. I would love to see them perform at the Reno Air Races along with the P51 Mustangs and Grumman Bearcats. The sound of a Merlin on full chat is awsome.
Chris Eden, e-mail, 14.02.2011 23:01
It was possibly the most iconic aircraft of ww2 more so than the spitfire because just as the battle of britain began only a few spits were made so the hurricane led the defence.
CliffS, e-mail, 15.12.2010 18:58
Thing to remember about the Hurricane was that, unlike the revolutionary stressed-skin construction of the Spit, it was a traditional design - virtually obsolescent in 1940. But the fabric-covered frames were easy to repair, and bullet holes did not destroy the integrity of the airframe. That thick wing might've been a big disadvantage speed-wise - but you could load it with heaps of ordnance. It became a hugely effective ground-attack type later in the war. Increases in power from uprated Merlins were used to increase the payload, rather than boost speed. So the Hurricane was doing the same speed in 1945 as she managed in 1940 - but with a heavier punch.
'Warspite', e-mail, 11.11.2010 17:03
The Hurricane's hey-day was in the Battle of Britain in 1940. It equipped approx two-thirds of the RAF fighter squadrons and knocked down approximately two-thirds of the Luftwaffe losses of all types, fighters and bombers. The Japanese Zero/Zeke had a totally different design ethic where pilot safety features such as self-sealing fuel tanks, pilot armour and bullet-proof windscreens were discarded in pursuit of pure performance. Provided the Zero got the drop on the Hurricane it was in with more than a chance. In an equal fight the Zero would have a performance edge but NOT a firepower edge. After six seconds of firing time the Zero loses its cannons, the Hurricane can continue firing all eight guns for around 17 or 18 seconds. If the Zero gets hit then it is in trouble, a flying napalm bomb. If the Hurricane gets hit then experience with the similarly armed Bf109 reveals the Hurricane could withstand the first burst and even a cannon shell or two. After that it is in trouble. You also have to remember that the Japanese benefitted from a pool of superb combat trained pilots but had not geared-up to war-time training programme. Essentially Japan's pilots were a finite resource, the Commonwelath's were not.
Freddie, e-mail, 17.10.2010 18:40
What is Mr Rudnicki's problem with the Hurribird? That it as designed in the 30's and can't catch an F16??
Before covering it in DoDo I would check real history (read a few books) and avoid Sky TV, Pearl Harbour (the movie) and anything by Stephen Ambrose.
jamie leslie murray, 21.07.2010 15:38
It was almost as good as the mighty spitfire
Pylon500, e-mail, 11.07.2010 14:30
I'm currently trying to do some design work on a scaled Hurricane and am surprised that I can't find the wing section details anywhere on the web? Anyone got any ideas on the root and tip sections? I know they are 19% and 12.2% respectfully, but no idea of the type, NACA, RAF?
hi, e-mail, 30.06.2010 13:39
d.jay, 11.06.2010 22:21
Some clear advantages the Hurricane had over the Zero was that it had pilot armour selfsealing fueltanks and a fire wall for the engine plus it was more strongly made, lots of Zeros and other Japanese aircraft would disintergreat or burst into flames when hit by only a few mg rounds.The P40 could out preform the Hurricane at low levels but hit a wall at about 15000ft due to its Alison engine where the Hurricane had a preformance edge whith is Merlin.
Ron, e-mail, 01.06.2010 21:09
I'd have to agree that the Hurricane hit it's peak in 1940. Certainly the Russians concurred. It was not given it's due because the Spitfire overshadowed it. One advantage it had was it's guns were in 2 concentrated batteries of 4, not spead out like on the Spit. This plus converging the fire cone instead of shotgun style like the early Spit. Thus it's task of tackling the Luftwaffe bombers while leaving the escort for the faster Spitfires made sense. In the Far East all Allied pilots fell victim to the Zero and Oscar unless they dove away. Few Allied pilots were quick to learn that, unfortunately. The Japanese couldn't follow most any Allied fighter whatever the dive speed, until they had the Tojo and Tony. True the Hurricane's early Merlin required a half-roll to dive but so did the A6M2 Zero.
paul w, 23.05.2010 08:34
hurricane had no clear advantage over the zero except some high speed control. which by other compares is slow. even the p40 had a significant advantage over the zero ,roll rate and speed. as a russian piolot said about the hurricane it was even slow in a dive, thick wing no speed, the zero lost out also, slow, poor high speed control, needed a bigger engine to boost climb as me109 or fw190 pilots knew dont turn with a hurricane just fly away.400 extra horse power in a hurricane gave it a 20 mile ahour speed increse where the same engine in a spit boosted speed close to 400mph
dave, e-mail, 05.04.2010 21:52
say what you like about the hurricane it did its job at the battle of britain,end of story.
dave, e-mail, 05.04.2010 21:49
say what you like about the hurricane it did its job at the battle of britain,end of story.
Don, e-mail, 10.12.2009 21:45
Can anyone explain why the Hurricane feature has been covered inches deep in Buffalo crap? Its good for the garden and presumably good for the buffalo but not very relevant in a discussion on the Hurricane.. Anyway, here are a few facts which might be of interest.
Buffalo service records in the RAF and Commonwealth air forces.
60 Sqn Issued July 41, withdrawn Oct 41. Replaced by Blenheims, then Hurricanes
67 Sqn Issued March 41, withdrawn Feb 42, Replaced by Hurricanes
71 (Eagle) Sqn Issued Oct 40, withdrawn Nov 40, replaced by Hurricanes. These were American pilots, remember.
146 Sqn issued March 42. Withdrawn April 42. Replaced by Hurricanes.
*243 Sqn Issued March 41, Withdrawn Feb 42, Replaced by Spifires
*453 RAAF Sqn Issued Aug 41. Withdrawn Feb 42, Replaced by Spitfires
488 RNZAF Sqn Issued Oct 41 Withdrawn Jan42. Replaced by Hurricanes
*In the second week of December 1941, these three squadrons in Singapore could muster 31 serviceable Buffalos between them. By early January six were left.
All in all, a not very distinguished record by a not very distinguished aeroplane.
And the terminal velocity was 575 mph? (Buffalo page) Do me a favour Id be surprised if it ever saw 450
Rod Rosate, e-mail, 07.09.2009 17:14
the fact is that the hurricane did no better than the buffalo in asia. the buff was inferior to the type 0 but primarily took a beating because of poor pilot training, failure to correct maintance problems,lack of early warning and complete failure of top level leadership. The hurricane was a nice airoplane but no better than the buff and in fact, the finns completely dominated the russian flown hurricane while flying there very successful buffalo varient.
Leo Rudnicki, e-mail, 12.07.2009 20:25
It's OK, I think I read the same report that mixed you up. Written in wartime, people had lapses. Churchill and the press were hard put to put a rosier outlook on the war at that stage and made a hero out of the 413 Catalina pilot who reported the sighting and Hurricanes who defended. Natural propaganda. However, they did not establish the radar sets on the Island, except for one at Trincomalee, and failed to properly alert defenses on time, because they were not aware of the Japanese aircraft's range capabilities, such as MacArthur's mistake in the Phillipines. The Hurricane and the men who flew it earned a place in history at the Battle of Britain. Ceylon was propaganda.
d.jay, 12.07.2009 18:44
My mistake I got 258 squadron and 261 squadron mix up.
Leo Rudnicki, e-mail, 12.07.2009 17:31
Pearl Harbor never fell. The naval force was detected by a 413 sqadron catalina. The air raid was detected by eye and unreported to 30 squadron, which took off under attack. 258 squadron scrambled in time and got up successfully, and 261 squadron wasn't there. Ceylon didn't fall because it was a raiding force to destroy naval forces and harbor installations, not an invasion force. I love Hurricanes. They shot down Vals but were not the equal of the Zero in fighter vs fighter combat. Where did you think 258 squadron was?
John Jordan, 12.07.2009 11:16
I have bean reading the debate between Leo rudniki and d.jay start to get out of hand, Leo mut be German or have had a relation killed by a Hurricane to be so negative towards this great plane ok so it was obsolite by 1942. I don't pretend to know every combat detail but I do know it saved the world in 1940 when nothing stood in the way of the nazis.
d.jay, 12.07.2009 07:58
Mr Rudniki must be getting his info of the history channel, 261 squadron went to india after the defence of Ceylon for the reinvaion of Burma, 20 Japanese aircraft were shotdown in the fist raid alone, The raiders were spotted by Catalina not radar. POINT IS CEYLON NOR INDIA FELL DEFENDED BY HURRICANES!
Leo Rudnicki, e-mail, 12.07.2009 00:51
258 Squadron RAF was based at the racecourse, 261 was in Burma. 30 squadron took off under attack. Tower staff fired off a flare to signal a scramble but forgot to leave the building first. Only Trincomalee had operational radar. 15 Hurricanes and 4 Fulmars were lost on the Colombo raid. 8 Hurricanes and 1 Fulmar were lost on the Trincomalee raid. Additional aircraft were lost as well. The Japanese losses for all activities were 17 aircraft. Post-war historical research.
d.jay, 11.07.2009 11:52
the Japaneses attacked Ceylon on the 5th and 8th of april 1942 and and lost 35 aircraft to the defences most of these were by Hurricanes of 30 and 261 squadron RAF yes naval losses were heavy and 15 defending aircraft were lost but Ceylon was never again attacked.
Leo Rudnicki, e-mail, 11.07.2009 04:30
Hurricanes defended Singapore. 48 of them. Singapore fell. Hurricanes replaced Buffaloes in Burma. Burma fell. A Royal Navy task force, Force H, defended Sri Lanka. Aircraft Carrier Hermes, heavy cruisers Cornwall and Dorsetshire and some lesser ships were sunk by air attacks, pretty one sided action. Then, Nagumo turned and ran. Force H also turned and ran, but without recording anything victorious. Hurricanes never had the speed to dive into and away from Japanese fighters in the Chennault style in which the humble P-40 was somewhat more successful.
d.jay, 11.07.2009 00:04
The Hurri stayed in production until 44 because it made a very good advanced trainer some thing Germany and Japan forgot to do so they sent porly trained pilots up to thier deaths after all thier experianced pilots had been killed. The pilots who had trained on the hurri then went on to late marks of Spits and Tempests to face Me109s and zeroes. The hurricane did stop Zeroes in Ceylon (Sri Lanka), they tried two raids and then gave up. in Burma it went up agains Ki43s not Zekes.
Ronald, e-mail, 21.06.2009 05:24
What I like best about the Hurricane is that it eventually led to the Tempest V. Again a worthy stablemate for contemporary Spitfires.
Ian, e-mail, 22.04.2009 13:22
I've read somewhere that Belgium had some Hurricanes during the nazi invasion armed with 4 x 0.5" machine guns. Can anyone verify this & if so would that armament have made it a more potent bomber destroyer in 1940. It did well in the Battle of Britain as it was a steady gun platform but with heavy calibre machine guns might it have been even more effective. We stuck to the .303 for far too long in aircraft.
leo rudnicki, e-mail, 04.04.2009 02:17
The problem with the Hurri was that it was just too nice to let it go. Sir Sidney didn't learn about thick wings until the Tiffie snapped tails off. Production contnued til '44 and it had to face Me 109G's and Zeroes. Hurri's couldn't stop Zekes in Burma and Hans Marseille and the Afrika Korp in Egypt. Not that Pat Pattle wouldn't have died in a Spitfire but you never know. Spitfire V's continued to roll out of the factory long after the FW's air dominance was a fact. Inertia was invented by an Englishman, wasn't it?
Stew, e-mail, 11.03.2009 02:11
The Hurricane out killed the Spitfire in the Battle of Britain. And while slower in level flight, and not able to match the 109 in climb or dive, the Hurricane could out turn it. While not the sexy airframe that the Spitfire was, in the hands of a competent pilot, still a match for the 109. One of my favorite fighter aircraft.
d.jay, 27.02.2009 22:58
Not a good fighter for air defence? Many a nazi pilot thought that and ended up in flames. Messerschmitt bf 109s often failed to destroy one on their first pass from a bounce and ended up being out turned by it and shot down.
*!?**!??...GRRR, e-mail, 02.12.2008 14:42
John Taverner, good job you weren't around in WWII, we'd have been defeated with your attitude. If you are not proud to be British (obviously not English) then I suggest you clear off out of the way.
John Taverner, e-mail, 30.11.2008 15:30
The thing to remember is that Britain has been a Third World Nation since 1892, and always short of money. With the shrinkage of the British empire (owned by the English, by the way), cheap and cheerful compromises have become the norm. The Hurricane was built using private finance before the government of the day were able to see the coming storm, and it was built using old fashioned techniques which reduced the performance (the usual story). Thankfully, it did the job much better than expected in the Battle of Britain. Remember too, that they were flown by very young pilots straight out of training.
Tom, e-mail, 23.10.2008 21:08
Great plane for ground targets its time, but not a good fighter for air defence. That's because of germans Messerschmitt bf 109.In my opinion it was lighter and a bit faster than hurricane. It could do a deadly turn and make hurricane's flight long rememberable :)
HARRY, e-mail, 27.03.2008 00:27
so who wrote this page about the Hawker Hurricane
EMBER, e-mail, 18.12.2007 03:17
NOT THE BEST AIRPLANE, BUT WORTHY OF SOMTHING ULTRAKILL. A LITTLE LACKING IN RANGE, SPEED, & POWER. BUT NONETHELESS WORTH SOMTHING GRAND.
If you want to send an email just replace '(@)' in the address with '@' !