Hi all, a question - Were the Hurricanes used for CAM work simply a bog-standard Hurri off the production line, or did they have any role-specific modifications, like deletion of the landing gear (as they had nowhere to land) or extra fuel? If not, should there have been? To my mind, removing the landing gear would give either less weight (better performance) or more space to store fuel (better chance of making it back to the convoy after shooting down the pesky Condor) or even ammo.
Thanks Che. Hmm... looks like they just stuck a catapult attachment point on the bottom, and off they went. Anybody else know anything?
Hmm, probably should have been done, but making another variant would have disprupted production and caused headaches in the design department - it would have thrown off all of the centre of gravity calculations for a start and putting fuel or ammo in there would have affected flying characteristics, especially as the load would lessen with travel (fuel) or combat (ammo). Even just leaving out the undercart and covering the wheel wells (which would have reduced drag because then the normally partially-open sections would have been covered) would have required replacing the weight of the wheels/ legs/ hydraulics with an inert mass or removing an equivalent weight from behind the CofG...
So basically it would be more trouble that it was worth, especially at that stage of the war. Apparently (I asked this on tgplanes also) CAM Hurricanes were generally slightly used ones rotated out of front-line service
Bare in mind that the CAM concept as a whole was basically a stop gap solution. The idea was to get the system working a quick as possible with a little effort as possible. Also some times they launched close enough to land somewhere. I believe a number of Hurricanes ended up in Irish service due to this.
Well, if I had to choose between ditching in the ocean or landing in Ireland, I'm fairly certain that I'd choose the latter.
