Typhoon design re wing tanks

[RTHolmes]

occurred to me the other day that although the Tiffy has a much larger wing than the 190A8, it carries 560 rounds vs the 190s 780 rounds. CHog has a similar size wing to the Tiffy and carries 924 of the same rounds. of course the main reason is that the Tiffy has its tanks in the wing.

given the ability to carry more ammo, and the much lower polar moment of inertia (improving rollrate) of having the tanks in the fuselage, why was the Tiffy designed this way? how is the packaging so different between these 3 aircraft?

*scratches head*

[Greebo]

I guess one reason for putting tanks in the wings would be to prevent the pilot getting a petrol bath in the event of them getting hit. Also it allows the cockpit to be further forward in the fuselage, which turned out to be useful for the Typhoon's eventual role as a ground attack aircraft. I think one reason for the Typhoon having such a thick wing was worries about the recoil forces from the 20mm cannons wrecking the wing structure. Later these fears were proven largely unfounded.

The Typhoon's replacement was the Tempest which had a much thinner laminar flow wing. As there was not enough room in the wings for all the fuel, the main tank was put in the fuselage and the cockpit moved back. IIRC the Tempest had about 200 rpg. It also had a much better roll rate, alhough some of this was due to better designed ailerons.

[Baumer]

Well I can think of 2 things I believe impacted the desgin of the Typhoon. First it's important to remember when the design was started that the thicker airfoil was considered the norm. With the success of the Hurricane, Hawker stated very early working on the replacement and thinner airfoils were just being developed. They (thinner airfoils) were not really tested in combat when the design of the Typhoon started.

Second, having the fuel tanks in the wings allows for the center of gravity to be farther forward, which generally improves maneuverability. So it's a trade off I guess Hawker was willing to make, less ammo but better CG.

As a side note, the Corsair was originally designed with wing tanks, but as the design progressed they were removed. I'm sure removing them from the F4U-1C gave them plenty of empty space to fill with 20mm cannons and lots of ammo.

[Kazaa]

I guess one reason for putting tanks in the wings would be to prevent the pilot getting a petrol bath in the event of them getting hit.

Ouch...

[Bodhi]

As a side note, the Corsair was originally designed with wing tanks, but as the design progressed they were removed. I'm sure removing them from the F4U-1C gave them plenty of empty space to fill with 20mm cannons and lots of ammo.

The installation of leading edge fuel tanks did nothing to prevent the Corsair from carrying 20mm cannon in it's wings.  Their removal was purely over production issues and the availability to carry large quantities of fuel / ord on pylons.  The wing ammo slots were only affected by the removal of the structural supports for the .50 cal cans and gun doors, and replacement with structure to support the 20mm cans and cannons.  It's really not a big deal.