PING: Waldo Pepper

[TacAN]

Hi Waldo

I'm only about an 1/8 of the way looking through all those magazines &
looking a every Hurricane pic I can find.

Specifically what should I see if one is fitted with RADAR.
Do they have the "pitch fork" type antenna or a radome of some sort??

Thanks
Graham

[Waldo.Pepper[_2_]]

Graham...

The antenna structure is described as follows.

The aerial system on BN288 (A standard MkIIC) comprised a Type 69
transmitting dipole taken from the Mosquito AI installation, which
needed moving inboard of the landing light to clear the guns, Defiant
Type 29 unipole arrays for the elevation elements and vertically
polarised azimuth dipoles taken from the night-fighter version of the
Fairey Fulmar.

So armed with that description here is a picture that I generated a
while ago and posted the other day, in case it helped jog a memory.

I so appreciate the effort Graham!

Waldo.




On Fri, 30 May 2008 02:35:43 GMT, "TacAN" > wrote:

>Hi Waldo
>
>I'm only about an 1/8 of the way looking through all those magazines &
>looking a every Hurricane pic I can find.
>
>Specifically what should I see if one is fitted with RADAR.
>Do they have the "pitch fork" type antenna or a radome of some sort??
>
>Thanks
>Graham
>

[Waldo.Pepper[_2_]]

[Netko]

On Fri, 30 May 2008 4:57:56 +0100, Waldo.Pepper wrote
(in message >):

> The antenna structure is described as follows.
>
> The aerial system on BN288 (A standard MkIIC) comprised a Type 69
> transmitting dipole taken from the Mosquito AI installation, which
> needed moving inboard of the landing light to clear the guns, Defiant
> Type 29 unipole arrays for the elevation elements and vertically
> polarised azimuth dipoles taken from the night-fighter version of the
> Fairey Fulmar.
>
> So armed with that description here is a picture that I generated a
> while ago and posted the other day, in case it helped jog a memory.

I'm intrigued by this thread and am interested to see what will
turn up, if only because I find it difficult to imagine how they
could squeeze in the equipment needed, not least the Indicator Unit
in the cockpit.

I'd never heard of radar-equipped Hurricanes before but have since
found a couple of references to them.

One source (Edward Shacklady's book on the Hurricane) says, almost
in passing, that they had a Mk V radar in an underwing 'container'
(autumn 1941, apparently). In other words, not the Mk VI you
referred to and not the arrangement you drew.

The other reference is an on-line account by a Beaufighter
navigator of a 176 Squadron action in which 3 of their Hurricanes
were shot down and a fourth damaged beyond repair. This mentions
that "To enable the Hurricanes to carry radar they were stripped of
their armour protection".

http://www.bbc.co.uk/ww2peopleswar/stories/94/a2740394.shtml

No pictures, of course.

--

[TacAN]

"Waldo.Pepper" > wrote in message
...
> Graham...
>
> The antenna structure is described as follows.
>
> The aerial system on BN288 (A standard MkIIC) comprised a Type 69
> transmitting dipole taken from the Mosquito AI installation, which
> needed moving inboard of the landing light to clear the guns, Defiant
> Type 29 unipole arrays for the elevation elements and vertically
> polarised azimuth dipoles taken from the night-fighter version of the
> Fairey Fulmar.
>
> So armed with that description here is a picture that I generated a
> while ago and posted the other day, in case it helped jog a memory.
>

Grateful if you could email me the drawing please - I can't see it on my
isp. Thanks

Were these particular Hurricanes painted black, by any chance??

> I so appreciate the effort Graham!


Waldo - my pleasure. Just hope I can find that elusive picture

>
> Waldo.
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, 30 May 2008 02:35:43 GMT, "TacAN" > wrote:
>
>>Hi Waldo
>>
>>I'm only about an 1/8 of the way looking through all those magazines &
>>looking a every Hurricane pic I can find.
>>
>>Specifically what should I see if one is fitted with RADAR.
>>Do they have the "pitch fork" type antenna or a radome of some sort??
>>
>>Thanks
>>Graham
>>
>

[Waldo.Pepper[_2_]]

On Fri, 30 May 2008 7:22:19 +0100, Netko >
wrote:

>if only because I find it difficult to imagine how they
>could squeeze in the equipment needed, not least the Indicator Unit
>in the cockpit.
>
>I'd never heard of radar-equipped Hurricanes before but have since
>found a couple of references to them.
>
>One source (Edward Shacklady's book on the Hurricane) says, almost
>in passing, that they had a Mk V radar in an underwing 'container'
>(autumn 1941, apparently). In other words, not the Mk VI you
>referred to and not the arrangement you drew.


In response to the above - -

Despite being a fine book, sadly the Shacklady book is (I am afraid to
say) definitively wrong on a couple of points that I shall attempt to
explain.

Other books have made the same error in thinking that some Hurricane's
had Mark V installed in modified drop tanks (like has already been
mentioned). It is easy to mix up Mark V and VI (easy in terms of a
typing transcription error I mean) But in reality the two sets differ
in some significant ways.

One Hurricane WAS test fitted with Mark VI (though NOT Mark V) with
the bulk of the gear housed in modified drop tanks. (Also one Typhoon
was also tested with Mark VI in modified drop tanks). These tests
proved this installation scheme a failure.

No drop tanks nor tropical filters were fitted on the Hurricanes
fitted with AI Mark VI. (Again presumably for performance reasons.)
Mark VI added (an estimated) 200lbs to the Hurricane. Presumably 176
Squadron on their own decided to remove the armour to partially
compensate for this additional weight. Considering that they were up
against lightweight Japanese planes who can blame them!?

Mark VI was specifically designed from the outset to be for fitting in
single seaters. (Unlike Mark V, which was fitted to some Beaufighters,
and some Mosquitos.)

Mark VI was installed, and saw service in these Hurricanes, as well as
the Defiant. (Again those books that make mention of Mark IV in
Defiant are wrong as well. Though the Defiant had mock ups of the Mark
IV sets produced for testing it was the Mark VI that was ultimately
installed. Again with the Pilot the crew member who viewed the
indicator tube, and operated the set.)

A pilot of 176 Squadron, who normally flew Beaufighters equipped with
Radar was lost flying one of these Mark VI equipped Hurricanes (it
seems) against Japanese Zeros. See this link for more on Pilot Officer
Pring.

http://www.maltap.com/anglo/site/index.php?page=news&type=view&id=104

The Mark VI was virtually automatic in operation, and had a single
indicator tube. In the Hurricane cockpit this was placed in the
position of the undercarriage indicator. With the undercarriage
indictor itself repositioned to where the clock would normally reside.
(The clock being eliminated altogether.)

Hope I got it all right. It is so easy to get such specific details
wrong.

Waldo.

[Waldo.Pepper[_2_]]

Done with my gratitude.

Waldo.

On Fri, 30 May 2008 08:09:25 GMT, "TacAN" > wrote:

>Grateful if you could email me the drawing please - I can't see it on my
>isp. Thanks

[Netko]

On Fri, 30 May 2008 9:55:17 +0100, Waldo.Pepper wrote
(in message >):

> A pilot of 176 Squadron, who normally flew Beaufighters equipped with
> Radar was lost flying one of these Mark VI equipped Hurricanes (it
> seems) against Japanese Zeros. See this link for more on Pilot Officer
> Pring.
>
> http://www.maltap.com/anglo/site/index.php?page=news&type=view&id=104

The action described in the link I gave is the one in which Flying
Officer (rather than Pilot Officer) Pring was killed (as was
another pilot).

> Hope I got it all right. It is so easy to get such specific details
> wrong.

It's all interesting stuff and I hope something turns up.

--


** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

[Bob Harrington]

Also no pictures, but "Fighter Squadrons of the RAF and their Aircraft" by
John Rawlings (rev. edition, 1976) mentions the fit as AI Mk.VI.

It gives example serials for Hurricane IIc :

HV709 L
HW341 O
HW435 N
KX359 Q
KX754 N

"So far as is known No. 176 Squadron used no squadron identity markings on
its aircraft."

Hope this was of some help,

Bob ^,,^

[Waldo.Pepper[_2_]]

I new the serial numbers and that Pring was lost in 709

The lack of Squadron identity part was new. Hopefully a picture will
turn up to further my/our knowledge.

Another book I shall have to seek out!

Thanks Bob.

On Sat, 31 May 2008 00:10:30 GMT, Bob Harrington
> wrote:

>
>Also no pictures, but "Fighter Squadrons of the RAF and their Aircraft" by
>John Rawlings (rev. edition, 1976) mentions the fit as AI Mk.VI.
>
>It gives example serials for Hurricane IIc :
>
>HV709 L
>HW341 O
>HW435 N
>KX359 Q
>KX754 N
>
>"So far as is known No. 176 Squadron used no squadron identity markings on
>its aircraft."
>
>Hope this was of some help,
>
>Bob ^,,^