PDA

View Full Version : Typhoons & Tempests



GazzaMataz
04-14-2004, 05:49 AM
I dunno if this has been asked before cos I'm quite new here but will there ever be a flyable Typhoon or Tempest in the works?

These planes never seemed to get much notice... it's all Mustangs, Thunderbolts, Lightenings and Spitfires and them Russian thingies - Migs and so on http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Tickety boo...
Gazzamataz
http://www.gazzamataz.com

GazzaMataz
04-14-2004, 05:49 AM
I dunno if this has been asked before cos I'm quite new here but will there ever be a flyable Typhoon or Tempest in the works?

These planes never seemed to get much notice... it's all Mustangs, Thunderbolts, Lightenings and Spitfires and them Russian thingies - Migs and so on http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Tickety boo...
Gazzamataz
http://www.gazzamataz.com

hotspace
04-14-2004, 06:15 AM
Have a look here http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

http://www.il2db.com/

Hot Space

http://img11.photobucket.com/albums/v33/Hot_Space/222_1081552716_hs1sig.jpg

Nervous? Yes! First time? No, I've been nervous lots of times!!!

XyZspineZyX
04-14-2004, 11:09 AM
http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/11.gif

Yes, give me the Tempest and the Thyphoon.
The most macho plane of all the Tempest.

Sensei

http://users.skynet.be/sb314718/images/clock1.gif

GK.
04-14-2004, 11:34 AM
only 800 tempests were produced.

pinche_bolillo
04-14-2004, 11:54 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by GK.:
only 800 tempests were produced.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

well then thats 800x more than the Ki-84Ic and a little over half the number of K-4s that were produced. this game is full of planes that saw either limited production or no production but there were proto types. 800 units completed would over qualify it for this game.

GazzaMataz
04-14-2004, 12:04 PM
Hmmm only 800 eh? That does surprise me. I always thought that it was the mainstay RAF fighter bomber in the later half of WWII and responsible for destroying alot of Hitlers tanks with all those lovely rockets it carried.

I know that the Typhoon had alot of teathing problems which was where the Tempest evolved. Agh well perhaps Hot Space & Co will make us one http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif Might even try it meself when I learn how!

Tickety boo...
Gazzamataz
http://www.gazzamataz.com

deathhamster
04-14-2004, 12:14 PM
The typhoon was britains premier fighter bomber in the second half of ww2 a replacement for the hurricane. The tempest was a planned improvement of the typhoon with modifications such as 360 degree canopy improved engine etc

JR_Greenhorn
04-14-2004, 01:17 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by deathhamster:
The tempest was a planned improvement of the typhoon...<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/blink.gif
Planned, eh?

http://www.fargoairmuseum.org/F2G-1D.jpg

AWL_Spinner
04-14-2004, 01:22 PM
Sorry to digress but that's a lovely picture of a Mossie model there on that il2db link....

Ah, give me a Mosquito and my simming life would be complete.

Cheers, Spinner

http://www.alliedwingedlegion.com/members/signatures/spinner_sig.jpg

dahdah
04-14-2004, 01:56 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by deathhamster:
The typhoon was britains premier fighter bomber in the second half of ww2 a replacement for the hurricane. The tempest was a planned improvement of the typhoon with modifications such as 360 degree canopy improved engine etc<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The later Typhoons had a bubble canopy,

http://perso.wanadoo.fr/christophe.arribat/typhoon-canopy3.jpg
http://www.fleetairarmarchive.net/Aircraft/Typhoon_IB_440sqdn_MP149_RCAF_Aug1944_profile.gif
(from RCAF 440 Sqd)
and a sort of bubble canopy.http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

http://www.fleetairarmarchive.net/Aircraft/typhoon_PR-G_RAF_profile.jpg

KarayaEine
04-14-2004, 02:04 PM
The early 1B's had what was affectionately called 'the car door' canopy.

Later versions of the 1B were equipped with a bubble canopy.

Johann

Horrido!
"We need more ammo!"
http://www.imagestation.com/picture/sraid106/p5f881fba318d7f0779ac1d9df0ace079/f96e6284.jpg

"Achtung Kommandant, sind Sie Fl├┬Ąche auf Feuer"

dahdah
04-14-2004, 02:49 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by KarayaEine:
The early 1B's had what was affectionately called 'the car door' canopy.

Later versions of the 1B were equipped with a bubble canopy.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The early IBs had the canopy as in PR*G. The late IBs had the true bubble canopy. It was the IAs that had the 'rear vision' difficulties. Just for clarification.http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Hunde_3.JG51
04-14-2004, 08:52 PM
I thought it was the "bird cage" canopy on Ia's and early I'bs? Late Ib's had the bubble canopy first installed in '44.

And there were plenty of Typhoons and Tempests which saw action to be included in FB's.

http://www.brooksart.com/Icewarriors.jpg

Formerly Kyrule2
http://www.jg51.com/

VW-IceFire
04-14-2004, 10:48 PM
By the end of the war there were 7 full squadrons of Tempests in the Tactical Air Force which accounted for 240 enemy aircraft destroyed and a number of probables. Thats impressive for a fighter that was introduced into combat over Europe just after the D-Day landings.

Tempest is in the works by a great guy by the name of Alex Voicu. Typhoon is in the works by an equally great guy who goes by the name of Harti. The Typhoon is a Mark 1B Late (with the bubble canopy and 4 blade propeller) and the Tempest is a Mark V Series 2 (with the Mark V Hispano cannons instead of the Mark II).

I'm crossing my fingers very hard and hoping we get these birds in the game!

http://home.cogeco.ca/~cczerneda/sigs/tmv-sig1.jpg
RCAF 412 Falcon Squadron - "Swift to Avenge"

Hunde_3.JG51
04-14-2004, 11:48 PM
Icefire, is Harti doing a bubble canopy Typhoon (late Ib)? If so then it would be a '44 plane (I think bubble was tested in '43 and used in production in '44), and the Tempest is already a '44 plane. Would be better to have earlier Typhoon for '43 or maybe even '42. Not to sound ungrateful as I would be thrilled to have either, just a thought though.

Oh, and I think the term "coffin hood" was also used for early style canopy along with "car door" and "bird cage."

http://www.brooksart.com/Icewarriors.jpg

Formerly Kyrule2
http://www.jg51.com/

[This message was edited by Hunde_3.JG51 on Wed April 14 2004 at 11:38 PM.]

WUAF_Badsight
04-15-2004, 03:28 AM
http://img5.imageshack.us/img5/3084/Tempest.jpg

GazzaMataz
04-15-2004, 05:49 AM
That image looks soooooooooopper! What are these planes modeled in 3DS Max? I will look forward to when these planes arrive in the game.

They remind me of what one RAF pilot once said of the Hurricane: 'They looked more rugged than the spitfire and I couldn't wait to get in them'

Tickety boo...
Gazzamataz
http://www.gazzamataz.com

jeanba2
04-15-2004, 06:25 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Hunde_3.JG51:
I thought it was the "bird cage" canopy on Ia's and early I'bs? Late Ib's had the bubble canopy first installed in '44.

And there were plenty of Typhoons and Tempests which saw action to be included in FB's.

http://www.brooksart.com/Icewarriors.jpg

Formerly Kyrule2
http://www.jg51.com/<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You are right :
The tempest fought since 1944, but was mainly used for V1 hunting, until the threat was netralized.
As to the Typhoon, all of them in Normandy had bubble canopy, though of different variants, and they were either 4 or 3 bladed propellers

VW-IceFire
04-15-2004, 08:38 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Hunde_3.JG51:
Icefire, is Harti doing a bubble canopy Typhoon (late Ib)? If so then it would be a '44 plane (I think bubble was tested in '43 and used in production in '44), and the Tempest is already a '44 plane. Would be better to have earlier Typhoon for '43 or maybe even '42. Not to sound ungrateful as I would be thrilled to have either, just a thought though.

Oh, and I think the term "coffin hood" was also used for early style canopy along with "car door" and "bird cage."

http://www.brooksart.com/Icewarriors.jpg

Formerly Kyrule2
http://www.jg51.com/

[This message was edited by Hunde_3.JG51 on Wed April 14 2004 at 11:38 PM.]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

At this point (as far as I know) the reason for doing the Typhoon Mark IB Late is because the conversion of the Tempest cockpit to the Typhoon cockpit is fairly simple compaired to modeling the earlier car door style cockpit. I think if time allows even a Mark 1A with 12 brownings would be done but as it stands having the Mark 1B Late I think is crucial since this is the version that saw alot of combat in the post D-Day operations around Caen and elsewhere hunting convoys and tanks.

jeanba2, you are only partially correct. Tempests were used for V-1 Hunting initially. Infact this is where the aircraft did prove itself in the early and middle period of 1944. However, on D-Day the Tempest squadrons were prepared for something quite different. While other RAF squadrons were prepared for support of the D-Day landings the Tempests were kept in reserve for bomber interception incase the Luftwaffe was to launch a counter attack on the staging areas in England.

Once that threat failed to materialize the Tempests were then employed over the continent. By the end of 1944 Tempests were conducting armed reconnaisance all over the place (Eindhoven and Volkes were two such airfields where they were launched). The idea of armed recon was a sort of new thing for the RAF (although they did start to use it in 1941/42)...essentially Tempests would operate between low and medium altitudes (less than 20,000 feet) and hunt for trains, tanks, bombers, German recon aircraft, German bombers, and fighters. Particularly the Tempests were sent after Me 262's because the Tempest had the best possible low altitude speed thus the best chance of catching a Me 262.

So to say that it only chased V-1's is a bit of a misnomer. Perhaps I misinterpreted http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Nonetheless...Tempests in particular are all too often less regarded than the Spitfire, 109, or 190 because of the Typhoons early failures (almost all were corrected by late Typhoons or in the Tempest) but the reading I've done suggests that it was an extremely dangerous plane to the Luftwaffe. It was not without its vices either.

http://home.cogeco.ca/~cczerneda/sigs/tmv-sig1.jpg
RCAF 412 Falcon Squadron - "Swift to Avenge"

dahdah
04-15-2004, 09:30 AM
I think you misinterpreted, IceFire.http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif He did say until the threat was neutralized. In July 1944, Tempests were cleared for the use of 150PN fuel. This gave them a speed of 415mph at 500ft. This would make them the best a/c for V1 interceptions. 150 Wing was kept within ADGB and not transferred to 2cd TAF because of the V1 threat but flew missions such as below until the threat became reality.

Beaumont led his Tempests(10) on a sweep of the Normandy beachhead June 6. The Tempests had flown Ramrod and Ranger missions over France since early May.

Two books worth looking for are

The Typhoon and Tempest Story
Chris Thomas, Christopher Shores
ISBN 0-85368-878-8

The Hawker Typhoon and Tempest
Francis K Bacon
ISBN 0-94667-19-3

The Appendix list units and their bases(with dates and codes), losses, claims, serial numbers and fates, Wing formations(+ commanding officers)

IV|JG51Flatspin
04-15-2004, 09:46 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by GazzaMataz:
. . . and them Russian thingies - Migs and so on http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Uhh...just checked the box and it still has IL2 and a red star on it big as life. Had me worried there for a sec. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/52.gif

S!
Flame resistant since 1988
=Elite=Flatspin
The Wings of Freedom (http://www.elitepx.com)

LilHorse
04-15-2004, 09:56 AM
Just wanna say I love the Typhoon. Looks mean as hell ( they made the Tempest a little too "pretty" for my tastes) . Great ground pounder. Hope we get it.

VW-IceFire
04-15-2004, 10:02 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by dahdah:
I think you misinterpreted, IceFire.http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif He did say _until the threat was neutralized_. In July 1944, Tempests were cleared for the use of 150PN fuel. This gave them a speed of 415mph at 500ft. This would make them the best a/c for V1 interceptions. 150 Wing was kept within ADGB and not transferred to 2cd TAF because of the V1 threat but flew missions such as below until the threat became reality.

Beaumont led his Tempests(10) on a sweep of the Normandy beachhead June 6. The Tempests had flown _Ramrod_ and _Ranger_ missions over France since early May.

Two books worth looking for are

_The Typhoon and Tempest Story_
Chris Thomas, Christopher Shores
ISBN 0-85368-878-8

_The Hawker Typhoon and Tempest_
Francis K Bacon
ISBN 0-94667-19-3

The Appendix list units and their bases(with dates and codes), losses, claims, serial numbers and fates, Wing formations(+ commanding officers)<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Likely right on the misinterpretation. I wasn't sure but I thought I would set the record straight for anyone whos reading. Typhoon and Tempest were both designed as fighters....the Typhoon still was a fighter even in 1944 but it was obviously quite well suited to the ground attack role as well. Drop its bombs or launch its rockets and it was just as deadly as any FW190 or Bf 109 it faced.

I will indeed have to try and grab one or both of those books. I love these two planes and their role in history.

One way or another, having a full fighter lineup of the RAF in FB is a dream that I hope will come true. Spitfire V, IX, XIV, and 22 plus Typhoon and Tempest would be great...

http://home.cogeco.ca/~cczerneda/sigs/tmv-sig1.jpg
RCAF 412 Falcon Squadron - "Swift to Avenge"

dahdah
04-15-2004, 10:14 AM
Yes, cannot be too careful with some of the myths some people have.http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Did you mean the Spifire Mk 21? This was produced from late July 44. The Mk 22 production commenced March 45.

Hunde_3.JG51
04-15-2004, 12:11 PM
Icefire, I love the Typhoon and Tempest, maybe my second favorite plane(s) behind the 190. But I have to disagree about the Typhoon being seen as deadly as the BF-109 and FW-190 as a fighter, especially after dropping its ordinance with performance robbing racks installed. The Typhoon, particularly after the Dieppe attempt, was found to be inadequate as a fighter. It's roll was pretty slow, visibility was brutal with early style canopy, and climb was pretty bad. The controls were decent at high speed but not as good as the 190, and its performance at high altitude was said to be inferior, even to that of the FW-190. It was found to be very effective when bouncing planes and chasing raiders fleeing England because of its speed and firepower but other than that it was not very succesful as a fighter. As a fighter bomber it was very successful due to its ability to carry heavy loadouts, its high speed, its firepower/armament, it was good in a dive, and its airframe was extremely tough.

The Tempest was a different story and was an amazing aircraft. Reading a book I recently purchased it seems the Tempests did a real job on the FW-190F's that were trying to perform fighter/bomber missions and successfully engaged the escorts as well. At medium and low altitudes the Tempest was unmatched IMHO by ANY prop driven aircraft of WWII.

Like I said, I love both planes, just throwing out my thoughts from what I have read.

http://www.milartgl.com/images_2_b/b_typhoons_over_the_rhine.jpg

Oh yeah http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/59.gif!

http://www.brooksart.com/Icewarriors.jpg

Formerly Kyrule2
http://www.jg51.com/

Rebel_Yell_21
04-15-2004, 12:27 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Hunde_3.JG51:
At medium and low altitudes the Tempest was unmatched IMHO by ANY prop driven aircraft of WWII.Formerly Kyrule2
http://www.jg51.com/<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Agreed, the key being at low and medium altitude.

The Big Show, a book about Pierre Closterman (a disenfranchised Frenchman who flew with the RAF), who piloted Spitfires, and then Tempests provides some nice insight.

http://www.flyvintage.com/img/backdrops/p-51d_big_beautiful_doll/thumb.jpg

No601_Zulu
04-15-2004, 12:44 PM
The Typhoon/Tempest are my must Fly aircraft in IL2 FB AEP. Closely followed by the Mosquito and Beaufighter.

But I still want Bombs for Hurricane's and Spitfire's.........Please Oleg

VW-IceFire
04-15-2004, 07:04 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Hunde_3.JG51:
Icefire, I love the Typhoon and Tempest, maybe my second favorite plane(s) behind the 190. But I have to disagree about the Typhoon being seen as deadly as the BF-109 and FW-190 as a fighter, especially after dropping its ordinance with performance robbing racks installed. The Typhoon, particularly after the Dieppe attempt, was found to be inadequate as a fighter. It's roll was pretty slow, visibility was brutal with early style canopy, and climb was pretty bad. The controls were decent at high speed but not as good as the 190, and its performance at high altitude was said to be inferior, even to that of the FW-190. It was found to be very effective when bouncing planes and chasing raiders fleeing England because of its speed and firepower but other than that it was not very succesful as a fighter. As a fighter bomber it was very successful due to its ability to carry heavy loadouts, its high speed, its firepower/armament, it was good in a dive, and its airframe was extremely tough.

The Tempest was a different story and was an amazing aircraft. Reading a book I recently purchased it seems the Tempests did a real job on the FW-190F's that were trying to perform fighter/bomber missions and successfully engaged the escorts as well. At medium and low altitudes the Tempest was unmatched IMHO by ANY prop driven aircraft of WWII.

Like I said, I love both planes, just throwing out my thoughts from what I have read.

http://www.milartgl.com/images_2_b/b_typhoons_over_the_rhine.jpg

Oh yeah http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/59.gif!

http://www.brooksart.com/Icewarriors.jpg

Formerly Kyrule2
http://www.jg51.com/<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Yes yes...point well taken. The Typhoons roll rate was slow (similar to the Zero's) and its high altitude performance wasn't anything to write home about either. Infact it was nearly cancelled because of this...

Now assuming that they were using late model Typhoons with bubble canopys and zero length rocket launchers I'd say it would regain most of its fighter ability once the oridinance was dropped.

If a FW190 were flat out on the deck a Typhoon could certainly challenge it and potentially win. Thats essentially what I'm saying...it wasn't so incapable that it would be hapless prey. But you are certainly right...in fighter to fighter comparison the FW190 has the Typhoon in most regards.

I really need to buy some more books on these http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

http://home.cogeco.ca/~cczerneda/sigs/tmv-sig1.jpg
RCAF 412 Falcon Squadron - "Swift to Avenge"

Bull_dog_
04-15-2004, 07:32 PM
I think Typhoons plopped more than a couple of Fw's in the English Channel as they were speeding back to France. I don't think the Typhoon could out manuever a Fw but it was every bit as fast... probably faster at low altitude.

I'm american but my wishlist is :

Spitfire MkXIV
Spitfire Mk XXII
Tempest
Typhoon
Beaufighter
Mosquito FB Mk VI

Not necessarily in that order...how about a whirlwind wish and a spit mk I for good measure

Hunde_3.JG51
04-15-2004, 08:06 PM
I may have been wrong about the Typhoon being good in a dive, it was the Tempest.

"The problem with the Typhoon's wing section-with its thickness/chord ratio of 19.5% at the root, 12% at the tip, and its maximum thickness at 30% chord-was that although it performed well at al level speeds within the aircraft's flight envelope, it proved aerodynamically poor in a high speed dive, producing severe buffeting and aileron reversal tendencies. The Hawker team recognized this shortcoming at an early stage and in September 1940 began work on the design of an entirely new wing, semi-elliptical in plan form and with a vastly improved thickness/chord ratio." (Obviously they are speaking of the wing designed for the Tempest as is stated later on).

I'm not picking on the Typhoon, I still love it and I guarantee I will fly the Tempest/Typhoon more than any other allied plane if they become available.

http://www.brooksart.com/Icewarriors.jpg

Formerly Kyrule2
http://www.jg51.com/

VW-IceFire
04-15-2004, 09:26 PM
There was also the nasty habit of the tail breaking off. I think they narrowed the problem down to elevator flutter in a high speed dive causing excess vibration but it only happened on some planes and not others.

I think recommended dive speed limit was 500 mph. I don't think this was an issue whatsoever with the Tempest.

As for the Spitfire question...I thought it was a Mark 22...but I can't remember. Here's the thread: http://www.netwings.org/dcforum/DCForumID43/840.html

What was the difference? I can't actually remember.

I'm kinda more looking forward to having the Spitfire XIV for historical reasons (not to knock Biggs excellent model - any Spit is a good Spit)...but we haven't heard from Fievel since December.

http://home.cogeco.ca/~cczerneda/sigs/tmv-sig1.jpg
RCAF 412 Falcon Squadron - "Swift to Avenge"

Hunde_3.JG51
04-15-2004, 11:45 PM
Icefire, the problems with the tail must have been nasty, losing your tail section at high speed can't be good. Some sources say the 21 (I think that is the correct number) "fishplates" solved the problem, but other sources say that while it reduced the tendency it was never completely solved. As for the reason, again some sources say that it was never fully determined, but the best guess is exactly as you stated, elevator flutter and vibration. Luckily, this won't be modelled in FB http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif. Also, as you said some planes could dive to incredible speeds without so much as popping a rivet, while others lost their tails at relatively low diving speeds. Strange. One pic I wish I could post is of the Typhoon's engine housing, it looks extremely rugged and would offer some sort of protection I would imagine. Oh well, just hope we get to fly both planes, I have followed Alex's progress for what seems an eternity but I know he is on the case. Great to hear about Harti and the "Tiffy."

Cheers.

http://www.brooksart.com/Icewarriors.jpg

Formerly Kyrule2
http://www.jg51.com/