110C>109E?

[RAM]

Got to do some calculations, but I find it hard to belive that the 110 would outclimb the HurryI. In RL that is.
I recall seeing that the wingloading is lower than on a Mossie, however the Mossie has a lot more power than the BoB 110. How does Mossie turn against the later model?

Angus I may be completely off the mark here, but IIRC the real Hurricane Mk.I by the time of the BoB had a two speed propeller that wasn't very efficient, and at Dunkerke I think they were still flying with the two blade fixed pitch one, while the 110 shared the same rpm control as in the 109s which was both more pilot friendly and more efficient.

Relative powerloadings, then, may not be everything in this comparison.

[humble]

In a large scale early war "scrum" the 110 is going to be a dominant bird for some very simple reasons...

1) E retention
2) Fire power

Add in the fact that the opposition only had .303 rounds and survivability is also a big issue. Now in a 1 on 1 match up the spitty is dead if the 110 has the high ground. If the spit has the high ground he has control but has to deal with limited hitting power of his load out. If he tries for a true tracking shot he's risking a high probability of an overshoot. If he stays with fast passes he's risking a golden bb or FQ shot.

As for the 109E vs the 110 its a very close call. It really comes down to the 109's ability to actually finish the 110. The 110 will win on 1st shot while the 109 might not...so any reversal by the 110 closes out the 109...

[Angus]

Angus I may be completely off the mark here, but IIRC the real Hurricane Mk.I by the time of the BoB had a two speed propeller that wasn't very efficient, and at Dunkerke I think they were still flying with the two blade fixed pitch one, while the 110 shared the same rpm control as in the 109s which was both more pilot friendly and more efficient.

Relative powerloadings, then, may not be everything in this comparison.

AFAIK the CS refitting was more or less completed for both types early in the battle.
I have accounts of Hurricanes outclimbing Spitfires OTW to combat alt, but it may be due to formation strictness (silly) and the Hurry climbing at a lower speed than optimal to the spitty. Don't know....

[Mike Williams]

Ram & Angus:  Hawker tested Hurricane I L.1606 equipped with a Rotol constant speed propeller starting in January 1939.  Mason notes that Squadrons received Rotol CSP equipped Hurricanes in January 1940.  I’ve been researching this subject and it appears that most if not all of the units in 11 Group were converting to Rotol equipped Hurricanes by May 1940. That’s the hypothesis that I’m currently testing anyway.   For example see: 151 Squadron Operations Record Book, April 1940 & 151 Squadron Operations Record Book, May 1940



Units in France were receiving new replacement Hurricanes equipped with Rotol constant speed propellers in May 1940 during the Battle of France. Mason as well as Hough & Richards note manufacturers’ parties flew from England to France to convert the aircraft with Rotol CSPs.   Pilots’ accounts mention this as well, see: Paul Richey, 1 Sqdn., 15 May 1940 and Ian Gleed, 87 Sqdn., 19 May 1940 .   Gleed’s account is interesting because it can be seen that fixed pitched, 2 pitch variable and constant speed were all being used in France.  Mason also notes that as of 4 July 1940 only 36 Hurricanes with wooden props were remaining on strength.

Hurricane Mk I Performance

[humble]

I'm a bit curious....

looking at gonzo's performance chart the mk I appears very much in sync with the numbers for the "2 pitch metal airscrew" chart. with a peak that appears to be right on 17.5/320 with no wep shown. The actual HTC chart shows a top speed with wep of 325 at roughly 16k and a speed at 17.5 slighty over 320 by my guess.

what flavor of Mk I do we actually have??

[Brooke]

In the Battle of Britain scenario, I think that the 110C is a better plane than the 109E.  It has more time aloft, has much longer-lasting ammo load, is more sturdy, is faster above 18k, has more lethal guns, puts out a more-continuous stream of lead (less chance of enemy flying through your stream), has no convergence issues, and has 2 engines (in case you lose one, you still might be able to limp home).

I think the only disadvantages are that it's a bit slower from about 10k to 18k altitude than the 109E and it doesn't stallturn as well as the 109E.

Even so, the 109E isn't a bad plane against the Spit I and Hurri I (although a lot of people might be surprised that the Hurri I is as fast as the 109E above 23k alt).

(The 109F is vastly better than the 109E -- the above comparison doesn't apply to the 109F as well.)

[OOZ662]

what flavor of Mk I do we actually have??

Knowing how HTC used to model their aircraft/ammo waaaay back in the day, it's likely a mix of two variants.

[Delirium]

In the Battle of Britain scenario, I think that the 110C is a better plane than the 109E. 

It can be, provided you don't chain the 110s to defense via close escort. In a close escort situation, the 109E has a lot more options.

[Angus]

109 out accelerates the 110 very easily, as well as outclimbs/muscles. It can thereby afford a better mix.

[Brooke]

According to DoK's performance charts, the 109E-4 and the 110C-4b are very close in acceleration and the same in climb rate above 17k alt.   Given that they are close in acceleration while level, I would guess that the 110C accelerates faster than the 109E when the two are unloaded (i.e., 0-g push over into a dive) since the 110C would have a much larger induced drag.

[Angus]

Acceleration in level flight holds a tie with ROC AFAIK. Anyway, is there so litle info around about 110 performance/trials???

[Die Hard]

Acceleration in level flight holds a tie with ROC AFAIK.

Wing loading affects rate of climb, but not so much acceleration. That's why the Spitfire would out climb a 109 on the same power even if the Spit was slightly heavier. The 109 would typically be faster and accelerate better.

[Angus]

If you graph it, the initial acceleration of the better climber (given equal power) will be better.
(A.o.A. issue which means less induced drag)
However, the faster aircraft at max. will still have some ROC while the slower one doesn't. Obviously.