Was the Hurricane obsolete at the beginning of WWII ?

The Hurricane was actually beginning to become obsolete by the beginning of the war, and was definitely obsolete by the time the Soviets started recieving them.

Split from Best Soviet Bombers

 

I'd dispute that really, certainly it wasn't at the cutting edge of fighter design by 1940s standards, but the Hurricane was the equal if not superior of many front line fighters in other airforces. Compare it to the Ms.406, Curtiss P-36, the Fokker D.XXI, A5M "Claude", Maachi Mc200, PZL P.11, or the Polikarpov I-16 and the Hurricane really doesn't seem bad at all, against any of these it's faster and better armed, both crucial for a fighter. Really only the Bf109E, Bloch Mb152 and Dewoiting D.520 were in the same league as the Hurricane, if you consider those in service at the war's start.

Aside from that I do agree with you about their service on the Eastern front, as well as they did they really were obsolescent by the time they reached there!

 

Don't forget the Mitsubishi Zero, which was definitely a match for, if not superior to, the Hurricane.

 

...and didn't reach service units until December 1940 so doesn't count.

 

But when pitted against its only enemy among all these fighters, the Bf-109, it was actually inferior in firepower and top speed. That's why I called it obsolete.

 

The Hurricane flew and fought against the Mc200 and of course the Fiat G.50 as well, and in each case was faster and better armed.

I would say of the fighters in squadron service with any nation as the Germans crossed the Polish frontier, the Hurricane would certainly be in the top ten, I'd probably rate it firmly in the top five, so I really don't see how it can be said to be obsolete by the war's outset. Unlike the Spitfire or Bf109 though the basic design was at its limits by the introduction of the MkIIs late in 1940, and by Pearl Harbour I would struggle to even place it in the top ten at all.

The Bf109E did not outgun the Hurricane BTW, in terms of weight of fire the two were equal, with the Hurricane having a reputation as an outstanding gunnery platform, plus whilst the guns of the Hurricane MkI may have had their drawbacks they were generally quite good dogfighting weapons, the MG-FF of the Bf109E were by comparison according to most accounts quite poor dogfighting weapons, and after six seconds of fire they would be out of ammunition in any case.

 

Why not?

 

Because Roel said that the Hurricane was becoming obsolete at the start of the war, I was comparing the Hurricane to the other first line fighters at the start of the war (September 1939) which is a category the Zero was not in, infact the units that recieved it in December 1940 were not front line fighter squadrons as such but a service trials unit in China, it did not reach front line fighter squadrons proper till early 1941.

 

... When the Hurrican was definitely obsolete.

 

Actually, by this stage it was still a (kinda) viable fighter, but a very good ground-attack plane.

 

Of course, the Sea Hurricane and the MkIIC did a good job, but this plane was no longer the creme of the British fighter fleet, which it was at the Battle of Britain.

 

No, but then it was available in numbers!

Plus it was used increasingly for ground attack missions rather than as a dedicated fighter.

 

Francis K. Mason writes in his Hawker Hurricane Variant Briefing ( Wings of Fame Volume 2 ) that; "When the final analysis was compiled, it transpired that Hurricanes had, by a wide margin, destroyed more enemy aircraft in air combat during World War II than any other Allied fighter, and more than all other British aircraft combined"

Not bad for an obsolete fighter.

 

At the time of Fall Gelb, it wasn't the finest fighter in the British fleet, but the replacement was beginning to go into production.

It wasn't hopelessly outdated, though, like e.g. the Swordfish. More of a 'last years model'.

In the end, it doesn't as much depend on the aircraft as it does on the pilot, especially in this case. I certainly believe that any good pilot in a Hurricane could win over a poor or even mediocre pilot in a Bf 109

 

Spitfires against the ME109, Hurricanes against the bombers.

 

The Hurricane wasn't obsolete at the beginning of WWII, but it wasn't state of the art either. It was not even of complete metal stress-skinned construction (something which may have actually helped limit battle damage). It was more than good enough to go against German bombers of 1940 adn wasn't totally helpless against the Me-109. It was kept in production too long because of the great need and the ability of the Allies to gain control of the skies later in the war, which allowed the Hurricane to be used in it's bomber role.

 

I wasn't saying that the plane lost value, just that it was no longer anything very good when pitted against the latest enemy fighters. It could still be used in many other roles, such as bomber interceptor and ground attack aircraft. Compare it to the 38(t) tank; it was obsolete as a tank, in terms of armour and firepower, when Barbarossa started, but it still did marvellously well throughout the war as the Hetzer TD.

 

I agree.

 

The Hurricane prototype flew only a few months before the Spitfire prototype, but technologically it was half a generation older than the Spitfire and it can indeed be argued that it was obsolete by 1940, it was in any case outdatet. But, on the other side, how many fighters could outperform the Hurricane in 1940 ? And even though the Bf 109 was better in most respects, the Hurricane still had some advantages on the Bf 109 as a superiour turing-circle at low altitudes and it was much easier on the controls as well.

 

Yes, contrary to anything I've ever seen publically said, the Hurricane won the Battle of Britain and not the much more advanced but as yet hardly available Spitfire.