PDA

View Full Version : Hurricanes = ?



Gumtree
09-07-2006, 12:57 AM
Please let me say from the start that this isn't whine, I just am seeking some clarification about history verse this game.

Now on to my observations. All I have read about the Hurricane 1 in books from both sides of the channel say much the same that the Hurricane 1 was not quite the match for the 109 or Spit but that its rugged ability to absorb damage and great manouverbility let it compete in 1939\40.

Now most of the sources state that these 3 planes where the best planes at the start of the war with the French Dewotine (I cant recall the model) also in the first class of fighter plane.

What I see in game is that the Emile is a magnificant plane, with handling not far from the Hurri 1 and speed to burn in level flight or in the vertical.

Unfortunately we don't have the mk1a Spit to compare so the point is mute.

But we do have the G-50 and I must say that in a strait fight the Italian machine appears to out turn and retain E better than the Hurri 1.

Whilst I no doubt that the Italian machinery was competitive why is it I find no references to this plane ranking alongside those mentioned above? Was the Fiat as good as in game or is the Hurricane 1 just not right?

Or is it something more sinister like national prejudice in reporting historical fact?

Please dont hijak this thread with the FW/me/Spit/p-? is porked I just want your opinions on why the hurri 1 performs so badly in this game? (In my opinion that is)

I have asked this question with an open mind and not with any particular bias, please answer in the same frame and try keep flames away as I really would like to know the general concensus.

Gumtree
09-07-2006, 12:57 AM
Please let me say from the start that this isn't whine, I just am seeking some clarification about history verse this game.

Now on to my observations. All I have read about the Hurricane 1 in books from both sides of the channel say much the same that the Hurricane 1 was not quite the match for the 109 or Spit but that its rugged ability to absorb damage and great manouverbility let it compete in 1939\40.

Now most of the sources state that these 3 planes where the best planes at the start of the war with the French Dewotine (I cant recall the model) also in the first class of fighter plane.

What I see in game is that the Emile is a magnificant plane, with handling not far from the Hurri 1 and speed to burn in level flight or in the vertical.

Unfortunately we don't have the mk1a Spit to compare so the point is mute.

But we do have the G-50 and I must say that in a strait fight the Italian machine appears to out turn and retain E better than the Hurri 1.

Whilst I no doubt that the Italian machinery was competitive why is it I find no references to this plane ranking alongside those mentioned above? Was the Fiat as good as in game or is the Hurricane 1 just not right?

Or is it something more sinister like national prejudice in reporting historical fact?

Please dont hijak this thread with the FW/me/Spit/p-? is porked I just want your opinions on why the hurri 1 performs so badly in this game? (In my opinion that is)

I have asked this question with an open mind and not with any particular bias, please answer in the same frame and try keep flames away as I really would like to know the general concensus.

Xiolablu3
09-07-2006, 01:37 AM
Also the B239 is a better fighter than the Hurricane Mk 1 in the game.

Not sure whether that is historical or not?

UKdedictaed2 has a Finland map, where is FInnish Hurricane Mk1's, Blenhiems and B239's vs the Russian I16's, Yak1's, i153, TB3 SBD.

For the Finns side, the B239 is a much better plane than the Hurricane. I think the Hurricane was overmodelled in the early versions of Forgtten Battles and its been toned down a lot, maybe a little too much.

The Hurri Mk1 certainly isnt a match for the Emil, although in the Battle Of Britain I think they had constant speed propellors with variable pitch, whereas the Finns had the bog standard Mk1's? Hmm I am not sure to be honest, but I am hoping that the Hurricane in SOW BOB is a little more competetive, otherwise its going to be shot down in huge numbers - something which didnt happen over Britain in 1940 - it held its own quite well.

stathem
09-07-2006, 01:49 AM
I think your Hurri Mk1 is also down on power wrt to BoB version - isn't it modelled with pre-1940 87 Octane fuel also?

Whilst even the basic E-4 is post-BoB spec (prop pitch control, armament). A Barbarossa-spec Emil. Maybe try it against a Bertha(?) or Dora. Oh we haven't got those.

Not sure about when the G-50 entered service or what spec it is.

Effectively with the Hurri 1 you're comparing a true 1938/39 plane with late 1940/early-41 marks of opposition - no wonder it struggles.

Tooz_69GIAP
09-07-2006, 02:30 AM
I beleive the performance of the Hurri Mk.I has been remarked upon before, and the answer to it's seeming lack in performance is that the Hurricane modelled in game is not the Hurricane Mk.I that flew for the RAF in 1939/40, but is the first production versions which were not as powerful, or as refined as those given to the RAF before the outbreak of war.

The Hurri Mk.I was exported to countries such as Finland, I think Belgium(?), Germany, and probably a few other European countries.

I think it stands to reason that the not quite so great versions of a leading fighter aircraft design would be exported and the improved design retained for use of the domestic military forces.

I would suspect that SoW:BoB Hurri Mk.Is will probably be a little better in performance than the Mk.Is in FB. But we will just have to wait and see.

carguy_
09-07-2006, 02:31 AM
Dunno about the Hurric`n but the 109E4 isn`t exactly the representative of what Germans had been flying in those days.

Gumtree
09-07-2006, 02:58 AM
Ah thanks folks I didnt think about it being the earlier than the war Hurri I assumed it was the BoB Hurri opps .Thx for sorting that out http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

JG53Frankyboy
09-07-2006, 04:02 AM
yes, propably the ingame Hurricane Mk.I is not programmed after RAF summer 1940 specs.

as this game was in the beginning more easternfront sided, ist more porpably after finnish or rumanian datas, dont know.

actually i cant remember seeing a test of the ingame Hurri I and some RAF specs here in the forum...........
so i cant say if it is realy so worth in comparison.


Hurricanes and G.50 should have met first in combat over Northern Africa in december 40/january 41.
the G.50 that took part at BoB never met enemy fighters AFAIK.

269GA-Veltro
09-07-2006, 04:13 AM
G-50 is a strange machine....btw, look at the Finnish war. G-50 fought very well there.

Enforcer572005
09-07-2006, 06:57 AM
I think the Finnish war is not really an accurate indicator of most planes performance, since those guys kicked A with anything they flew. They were probably the best pilots of WW2. Look at the Buffalos....that was one of the lousiest fighters that ever put daylight under anyone, yet they managed to find whatever strengths it had and use it (it was equipped differently to-not as heavy).

The G-50 was pretty underpowered and I dont think it was very highly regarded by its pilots-but as always, the final outcome will be decided by the pilot. In the "Battle over Britian" cmpn that came out rt after FB was released (by the great extreme one) I actually mangaged to do pretty well against 109Es, as long as I kept pos G on that lousy fuel system. It was the gunners, as always, that caused most of my AC losses.

My fav Hurri is the VVS Mk2 field mod with the 2 cannon and 2 fifties.

PBNA-Boosher
09-07-2006, 07:46 AM
The buffalo wasn't that terrible of a plane, once maintenance workers figured out its kinks. The leaking oil was stopped, and it's bad reputation came mostly from the Pacific, but in Europe it was kicking much @$$. The F2A-1 was the version the Finns used. It was much lighter, less armored, and more maneuverable than the versions that the US used in the Pacific, the F2A-2 and F2A-3. When delivered to Finland, the US also cheated them out of the MG's, optics, and other things they would need in the planes, so the Finns put them in themselves.

I very much second the fact that against comparable fighters I can pretty much hold my own with a team-mate in the Hurri. Drag and bag works extremely well. The bomber gunners aren't too much of a problem either if you attack from an angle you can't be shot at. I will admit though, they do make some incredible shots, those gunners. Not once, twice, but SIX times in a row I approached from 3 or 9 O'Clock on a lone Heinkel set to rookie, and with the first MG burst he PK'd me. I repeat, SIX times!

Enforcer572005
09-07-2006, 08:47 AM
Ha! yeah Boosh...those gunners are all androids like commander Data. Bullet spread is non existant-if they hit you with one rd, they hit with all ten. I get clobbered by those guys at max range like that all the time; the biggest bug in the sim methinks.

Yeah, the Bufs were different in Finland, for sure. THey didnt have the heavy radio either. Plus those poor low time Marines at Midway taking on the best pilots in the pacific flying Zekes...it was pre-ordained.

The Bufs used by the US and RAF were pretty lousy though. I wonder what would have happened if they field modded them like the Finns did.
Brewster was a lousy company to. The Corsairs they made were so lousy they used them only for training and shut the line after a few hundred.

I once knew a guy who actually worked At Brewster before the war in engineering. He told me that the management was a nightmare and knew nothing about airplanes, and he went to Curtiss shortly after the war started. I thought his observations were interesting in light of history.

Enforcer572005
09-07-2006, 08:48 AM
Ha! yeah Boosh...those gunners are all androids like commander Data. Bullet spread is non existant-if they hit you with one rd, they hit with all ten. I get clobbered by those guys at max range like that all the time; the biggest bug in the sim methinks.

Yeah, the Bufs were different in Finland, for sure. THey didnt have the heavy radio either. Plus those poor low time Marines at Midway taking on the best pilots in the pacific flying Zekes...it was pre-ordained.

The Bufs used by the US and RAF were pretty lousy though. I wonder what would have happened if they field modded them like the Finns did.
Brewster was a lousy company to. The Corsairs they made were so lousy they used them only for training and shut the line after a few hundred.

I once knew a guy who actually worked At Brewster before the war in engineering. He told me that the management was a nightmare and knew nothing about airplanes, and he went to Curtiss shortly after the war started. I thought his observations were interesting in light of history. even a good plane is lousy if there's bad quality control.

p1ngu666
09-07-2006, 09:12 AM
yeah, the brewster production seems tobe dire...

hurris are modeled to finnish/russians specs or whatever. *possibly* based on worn examples sent to russia, hurri production finished in 1944, belive it or not http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

they where used in burma till the end, i think

BSS_AIJO
09-07-2006, 09:32 AM
Hey,

the finnish buffalo's also had the best kill ratio anywhere in the war. The airframe with the highest number of kills made in it was also a finnish buffalo. But that said the pilots had a few things going for them over the greater numbers and better equiped enemy. They were probably some of the best air to air gunners in the world at the time. They were far better trained, had more evolved tactics better communications and were also far more motivated. In the end they were also more likely to be flying against really green noobish VVS guys who would have probably been more happy to fly home. So, much like in the pacific the buffalos fate was pre-ordained. I have wanted to see on-line how the finnish buffalo does against the a6m's. I think that would be an initeresting fight. 8^) Also, I know some folks complain that the dora must be Uber because they had a 6 kill sortie on war-clouds. I have done it a few times on SpitV109's from a buffalo against hurris', p39 and p40m's. In the end the big difference was working well with the folks I flew out with. Also being pretty good at conserving ammo helps. One time I landed and still had 100 or so rounds on the counters.

BSS_AIJO

Xiolablu3
09-07-2006, 09:33 AM
I think they were used for ground attack after 1942 werent they?

Pierre Clostermann talks about escorting some really slow ground attack Hurricanes with rockets to a target and they were all destroyed or most of them? They were already slow, but with the added drag of the rockets and bombs, they were just sitting ducks.

It was the flak that got them this time tho I think.

He was in a Typhoon IIRC.

JG53Frankyboy
09-07-2006, 10:43 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Xiolablu3:
I think they were used for ground attack after 1942 werent they?

............ </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

that realy depends of the theater of operation.

over the occupied europe, the Hurricane Mk.II was sure outdated, lets say latest in mid 1941.....

but in the MTO and CBI , it still soldiered on as one of the prime dayfighters.

for example the first Spitfire V appeared over
Malta in March 42
NorthAfrica June 42
CBI september 43

in the CBI they had realy some tough fights with japanese Nakajima fighters - Ki-43 vs Hurri II is a classic !


but actually i thought this topic is about the Mk.I http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif
that was not used by the soviets btw http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif . they got only Mk.II.

p1ngu666
09-07-2006, 11:04 AM
there was hurris with 40mm cannon and 2x 303 for anti tank
that would be fun http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

erco415
09-07-2006, 11:22 AM
Not to hijack the thread, but the Buffalo was one of two planes that convinced me that FB was the game for me (the other is the P-39), so here goes. I remember reading somewhere (Squadron-Signal?) that the Dutch had a two to one ratio over the Japanese with their Buffalos. It was a pretty good plane that got worse with time. I also remember reading somewhere that Brewster got the shortend of the stick when it came to getting newer, more powerful engines.

Jaws2002
09-07-2006, 11:36 AM
I don't know how the G-50 compared against the Hurricane but I read somewhere an interview with a Finnish veteran and he said that the Hurricanes were the easiest targets (fighters) for them. He said something about them being sluggish and heavy and were easy pickings.

The Romanians preferred the IAR-80 over the Hurricanes as well.

faustnik
09-07-2006, 01:26 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by p1ngu666:
there was hurris with 40mm cannon and 2x 303 for anti tank
that would be fun http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Oh yeah! Hurri IID would be a fun tank buster. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif