Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc Montgomery
describing the Typhoon..as being not a very good, or useful aircraft.
|
This kind of criticism relates to the early Typhoon with the thick wing, which was a failure in its intended role as a replacement for the Hurricane. The redesigned Typhoon with the laminar wing was a far superior aircraft, and was renamed the Tempest.
All things considered the Typhoon would have to be rated well down the list of WWII fighters. Despite its huge power advantage it was outclassed by the FW190 at altitude, whereas the Spitfire reclaimed superiority by simply upgrading the engine. Certainly the Typhoon was an extremely capable ground attack aircraft, but WWII is littered with examples of fighters relegated to ground attack roles after failing to mix it at altitude, and most of them performed creditably. To my mind the mark of a great fighter aircraft is its ability to perform in a variety of roles, plus its development potential with improved power plants. On that basis the Typhoon rates well below fighters like the Spitfire, P51, P40, Hurricane, Me 109, FW 190, etc. Not to mention the Zero, which was unequalled for the first half of WWII, and may have remained so if the Japanese had access to a more powerful engine. Fortunately the Typhoon never had to face it.