• There seems to be an uptick in Political comments in recent months. Those of us who are long time members of the site know that Political and Religious content has been banned for years. Nothing has changed. Please leave all political and religious comments out of the forums.

    If you recently joined the forums you were not presented with this restriction in the terms of service. This was due to a conversion error when we went from vBulletin to Xenforo. We have updated our terms of service to reflect these corrections.

    Please note any post refering to a politician will be considered political even if it is intended to be humor. Our experience is these topics have a way of dividing the forums and causing deep resentment among members. It is a poison to the community. We appreciate compliance with the rules.

    The Staff of SOH

  • Server side Maintenance is done. We still have an update to the forum software to run but that one will have to wait for a better time.

What the Hawker Typhoon was really like...

LOL I wouldn't take any historical info from War Thunder, yea the Typhoon was rubbish as a fighter, but more than made up for it in the ground attack mode, one of the very best in that role!
 
You are probably right . A better review would be here : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawker_Typhoon Still shows problems but in a better light of the facts. Still the Tempest was a much better solution. Later engine development and airframe improvements made the Typhoon better, it still is considered a failure in a lot of respects IMO. Snaking is also a feature not covered in CFS3 in respect to the Typhoon handling.
 
The Tempest was a much later, and much improved aeroplane, and certainly a very good fighter, but I still say the Typhoon, with all it's faults, including trying to kill it's pilot with engine fumes lol, did the ground attack role better than most aircraft in that class in that time period.
 
At least the Typhoon could carry tons of armament and was fast as a spotted ape ! I think the P-47 beat it in every way though and was way more rugged but for the time period it came out there was little to compare the Typhoon to. I think it pushed the boundaries as far as they could with it's design and that is why it took so long to get it "right",so to speak. The Tempest II was the pinnacle of single prop aircraft but the jets would soon make it a thing of the past. Regards,Scott
 
I’d recommend a book by a Typhoon pilot for a warts and all view of the Typhoon - Brotherhood of the Skies by David Ince. He flew Tiffies until the end of the war and describes in detail how useful, reliable and feared they were in service. It’s easy to point a finger at early difficulties - even the P-47 was a rubbish dogfighter until its pilots learned to fly it effectively in boom-and-zoom style instead of a turning fight.
 
Last edited:
Like i already said i think they were pushing the boundaries as far as they could and that is why there were teething troubles with the Typhoon. All aircraft have shortcomings or compromises and the Typhoon wasn't immune. It did find a perfect role as ground support and ground attack. German armor units feared them probably more than the IL-2. They could attack and then speed away. The sound of it's engine is one of the best piston engine sounds there is ! Just a opinion and that's all it is. Thanks for the plug on the book.Maybe then i'll learn more on this aircraft as i've always heard bad about it. Will look it up. Regards,Scott
 
Re Typhoons "The Day of the Typhoon"

sixstrings5859 said:
Like i already said i think they were pushing the boundaries as far as they could and that is why there were teething troubles with the Typhoon. All aircraft have shortcomings or compromises and the Typhoon wasn't immune. It did find a perfect role as ground support and ground attack. German armor units feared them probably more than the IL-2. They could attack and then speed away. The sound of it's engine is one of the best piston engine sounds there is ! Just a opinion and that's all it is. Thanks for the plug on the book.Maybe then i'll learn more on this aircraft as i've always heard bad about it. Will look it up. Regards,Scott
Click to expand...

For further great reading-try "The Day of the Typhoon" by John Golley, and published by Airlife Publishing Ltd. John Golley was a Typhoon pilot with the R.A.F. in Normandy, and it covers mainly tank-busting in that area covering the first six weeks after "D" day, both in the air and life on the ground. For those who like odd looking aircraft, try "Barracuda Pilot" by Dunstan Hadley, Fleet Air Arm pilot, with the R.N.-also published by Airlife, very enlightening!
 
Just one more observation: when the Luftwaffe were sending Fw190s on tip & run raids across the Channel before D-Day they were vulnerable to being caught at low level by faster aircraft, whether they had dropped their bombs or not. The standard tactic when bounced was full throttle and hope to get away home. Which British 400mph-capable (at low level) aircraft did they fear? That’s right...
 
The Typhoon was definitely a lousy aircraft. I'm quite sure the Germans hated it :biggrin-new: :biggrin-new: :biggrin-new:

Cheers,
Huub
 
Got enough interested to finally install the SJ Typhoon package in my ETO install. Never was too interested in ground attack till now. Will give it a try and see. Regards,Scott
 
For sure it was a difficult one to fly. Being a young boy of 18 years old facing a wall of flak in the seat of such a beast must have been one of the most frightening experience. And the losses speek for themselves, the fighter-bomber role has been one of the most dangerous task at any stage of the war and whatever the aircraft was (from Fairey Battle or Breguet 693 to the Il2 or Typhoon).
 
Installed the SJ Typhoon package in my ETO install and tested. WOW !! Really fast at low level and talk about firepower ! I see why they were feared so much now. Need much practice at ground attack but seems worthwhile.Thanks for the education on what a truly wonderful warplane the Typhoon really is. Will be ground pounding for a while now ! Cheers,Scott
 
Typoon the worst fighter?

sixstrings5859 said:
Some facts about the Hawker Typhoon. Sorry to burst any bubbles.... https://warfarehistorynetwork.com/daily/wwii/the-hawker-typhoon-1a-1b-worst-raf-fighters-in-wwii/
Click to expand...
The article starts with "The Hawker Typhoon 1A & 1B: Worst RAF Fighters in WWII?" - so the website is asking us to seriously consider that the Typhoon is worse than the Boulton-Paul Defiant or the Gloster Gladiator?

Read no further in the article folks and you'll be spared the editorial mistakes, spelling mistakes, grammatical errors, factual errors and plainly bizarre claims it contains.

sixstrings5859 - I hope you don't think I'm getting at you here, I'm definitely not, it is the warefarehistorynetwork website that I'm getting at! I see you've had fun with the Typhoon now anyway, good on you for having an open mind.

BTW: before anyone asks, no I don't dislike the Gladiator (nor the Defiant for that matter), I love them - a highlight of a summer here in England can be to go the Shuttleworth Collection air shows and see an original Gladiator airborne, so beautiful and what an interesting sound it makes!

Cheers,

SW
 
Really liking the Typhoon. Nothing from it's time period compares. Tried it out on one of my IL-2 '46 installs and it is great there also. A lot to love about this aircraft. Thanks for steering me in the right direction. Enjoy ground pounding now! Cheers,Scott
 
Very good video. Thanks for sharing. Seemed to be honest and liked the accounts from the actual pilots. Didn't know the tail problem persisted the entire production run.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top