Only really in training services, there weren't any Biplanes in combat service by wars end, or even by the introduction of the Tempest. @@lordgarion514
The Napier Sabre was initially unreliable and was improved before the Tempest. It was bigger, faster and more heavily armed than a Spitfire but not as maneuverable.
Well, 2000hp in an H block configuration is a mechanical nightmare to think about, and the fact that Napier got it to work in the first place is kind of a miracle of engineering worthy of its own video. Part of the reason why they eventually transferred over to the Bristol Centaurus in the Mk2 as the more common engine choice is ironically because of the Sabres issues, as the Centaurus offered effectively same performance in a much more convenient and conventional package, though wasn't available till late war. Ironically enough by the end of the war the Spitfire had the same armament layout as the Tempest, quad 20mm Hispanos. The tempest however had more ammo per gun, and had more advanced versions of the guns.
@@briancollins9087 The 2k HP number was in reference to the Napair Sabre models of the Tempest (which produced around 2.1k Horse Power). The Mk5 were the more produced and common version during WW2, while the Mk2s with the Bristol Centaurus which did deliver 2.5k and 3k HP were made in smaller numbers and more common in the post war era. . .and the Centarusus that did deliver 2.5k and 3k HP were post war engines, as the Mk2 Tempest used the MK4 Centaurus initially, not the Mk 7 or later.
@@5MinuteGuidesToAircraft Pierre Closterman who flew tempests refers to the 3000bhp in his book about flying the tempest. Some Sabres made 3500bhp. Hell of an engine!
@@5MinuteGuidesToAircraft In regards to the American given, and the natural resources of the country. It was a war, and GB had no problem rationing food to the citizens. It seems idiotic that that same government, during a world war, would order a plane, but not make sure that company got the metals and such needed to actually build it themselves. It's literally the exact same amount of metal being used either way. And companies should absolutely not be scrounging around trying to find what they need in a time of war. The government absolutely had information on how much of what it had, AND where it came from. We didn't let that happen here in America. When things were ordered, the company always started making it because the government made sure things got where they needed to be. That went up a notch after our manufacturing outpaced our metal production.😄 What was needed most, got made first. Considering how dire and close the fight for Britain was, they should have been micromanaging resource distribution from that time on
@@lordgarion514 If your meaning the resources used to construct the troublesome Napier Sabre. . .the Napier Sabre was a miracle of engineering, and Napier had at that time a good track record of building immensely powerful engines, if unorthodox. Yes, Britain did waste resources on some useless projects, such as the A-20 Havocs with giant spotlights in the nose, but we have the benefit of hindsight and history, they did not. Yes they could've spent resources better, but they were also in a all or nothing gambit against Germany, so any and every advantage or project, no matter how ludicrous, was worth at least experimenting/diverting resources to. Hell, you should look up Project Habakuk, when the British want to make something 'weird', they put the American definition of weird to shame. The production shortages Napier encountered building the Sabre was not because they didn't know what they were doing, but because they were building a damn miracle of engineering that comprised of 24 cylinders in a non-standard H block engine design producing 2000 horse power. A few errors and hiccups were expected, as such an engine is obscenely complicated, part of why the Tempest moved more towards the Bristol Centaurus radial, since it was the same performance but in a much more conventional radial arrangement.
The Tempest MkV was probably the finest low-medium altitude fighter fighter in WW2.
A British classic..end of an era really..jets were already being built..still a helluva plane.
And biplanes were still in active service, iirc.
Indeed it is, still impressive to think that the Sea Fury is flying, and is effectively just a Navalized Tempest Mk2
Only really in training services, there weren't any Biplanes in combat service by wars end, or even by the introduction of the Tempest. @@lordgarion514
The Napier Sabre was initially unreliable and was improved before the Tempest. It was bigger, faster and more heavily armed than a Spitfire but not as maneuverable.
Well, 2000hp in an H block configuration is a mechanical nightmare to think about, and the fact that Napier got it to work in the first place is kind of a miracle of engineering worthy of its own video. Part of the reason why they eventually transferred over to the Bristol Centaurus in the Mk2 as the more common engine choice is ironically because of the Sabres issues, as the Centaurus offered effectively same performance in a much more convenient and conventional package, though wasn't available till late war.
Ironically enough by the end of the war the Spitfire had the same armament layout as the Tempest, quad 20mm Hispanos. The tempest however had more ammo per gun, and had more advanced versions of the guns.
2,000 HP your not even in the right ball park some of them where over 3,000 hp in use in WW2@@5MinuteGuidesToAircraft
@@briancollins9087 The 2k HP number was in reference to the Napair Sabre models of the Tempest (which produced around 2.1k Horse Power). The Mk5 were the more produced and common version during WW2, while the Mk2s with the Bristol Centaurus which did deliver 2.5k and 3k HP were made in smaller numbers and more common in the post war era. . .and the Centarusus that did deliver 2.5k and 3k HP were post war engines, as the Mk2 Tempest used the MK4 Centaurus initially, not the Mk 7 or later.
@@5MinuteGuidesToAircraft Pierre Closterman who flew tempests refers to the 3000bhp in his book about flying the tempest. Some Sabres made 3500bhp. Hell of an engine!
You would think the government would be controlling who got what, and when.
In what regard?
@@5MinuteGuidesToAircraft
In regards to the American given, and the natural resources of the country.
It was a war, and GB had no problem rationing food to the citizens.
It seems idiotic that that same government, during a world war, would order a plane, but not make sure that company got the metals and such needed to actually build it themselves.
It's literally the exact same amount of metal being used either way.
And companies should absolutely not be scrounging around trying to find what they need in a time of war. The government absolutely had information on how much of what it had, AND where it came from.
We didn't let that happen here in America. When things were ordered, the company always started making it because the government made sure things got where they needed to be.
That went up a notch after our manufacturing outpaced our metal production.😄
What was needed most, got made first.
Considering how dire and close the fight for Britain was, they should have been micromanaging resource distribution from that time on
@@lordgarion514 If your meaning the resources used to construct the troublesome Napier Sabre. . .the Napier Sabre was a miracle of engineering, and Napier had at that time a good track record of building immensely powerful engines, if unorthodox.
Yes, Britain did waste resources on some useless projects, such as the A-20 Havocs with giant spotlights in the nose, but we have the benefit of hindsight and history, they did not.
Yes they could've spent resources better, but they were also in a all or nothing gambit against Germany, so any and every advantage or project, no matter how ludicrous, was worth at least experimenting/diverting resources to. Hell, you should look up Project Habakuk, when the British want to make something 'weird', they put the American definition of weird to shame.
The production shortages Napier encountered building the Sabre was not because they didn't know what they were doing, but because they were building a damn miracle of engineering that comprised of 24 cylinders in a non-standard H block engine design producing 2000 horse power. A few errors and hiccups were expected, as such an engine is obscenely complicated, part of why the Tempest moved more towards the Bristol Centaurus radial, since it was the same performance but in a much more conventional radial arrangement.