|
British Production Costs |
|
Item |
Man-Time Needed |
Cost |
|
Avro Lancaster (1941) |
51,000 Man Hours |
UNKNOWN |
|
Avro Lancaster (1945) |
20,000 Man Hours |
UNKNOWN |
|
Supermarine Spitfire |
15,200 Man Hours |
UNKNOWN |
|
Hawker Hurricane |
10,300 Man Hours |
UNKNOWN |
|
Whirlwind |
26,600 Man Hours |
UNKNOWN |
|
Tornado |
15,500 Man Hours |
UNKNOWN |
|
Fairey Battle |
24,000 Man Hours |
UNKNOWN |
|
Whitley |
52,000 Man Hours |
UNKNOWN |
|
Wellington |
38,000 Man Hours |
UNKNOWN |
|
Avro Manchester |
52,100 Man Hours |
UNKNOWN |
|
Halifax |
76,000 Man Hours |
UNKNOWN |
|
Stirling |
75,000 Man Hours |
UNKNOWN |
|
Sten Gun |
5 Man Hours |
UNKNOWN |
|
2 Pdr ATG |
2,682 Man Hours |
UNKNOWN |
|
6 Pdr ATG |
1,293 Man Hours |
UNKNOWN |
|
17 Pdr ATG |
2,726 Man Hours |
UNKNOWN |
|
25 Pdr Gun |
3,085 Man Hours |
UNKNOWN |
|
SMLE |
72 Man Hours |
UNKNOWN |
|
SMLE |
48 Man Hours |
UNKNOWN |
|
SMLE |
28 Man Hours |
UNKNOWN |
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
|
Times are from D.K. Brown's “From Nelson to Vanguard” |
|
|
Conversion Factors: |
|
|
Type |
Man-Time Needed |
|
BB |
46,000 Man Months (original) |
|
CV |
31,115 Man Months (original) |
|
Fiji |
15,017 Man Months (original) |
|
Dido |
8,214 Man Months (original) |
|
'M' Class DD |
4,991 Man Months (original) |
|
Hunt |
2,944 Man Months (original) |
|
Corvette |
922 Man Months (original) |
|
Submarine |
2700 Man Months (original) |
|
Mahan DD |
150,000 Man Days (original) |
|
Benson DD |
165,000 Man Days (original) |
|
Fletcher DD |
185,000 Man Days (original) |
|
River Class Escort |
350,000 to 400,000 Man Hours (original) |
|
Captain Class Escort |
600,000 to 700,000 Man Hours (original) |
|
Early US DE's |
1,000,000 Man Hours |
|
Late US DEs |
600,000 to 700,000 Man Hours (original) |
|
US Liberty Ship |
500,000 to 650,000 Man Hours (original) |
|
UK Empire Ship |
350,000 Man Hours |
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
In Submarine construction, it was said a US worker produced 3.8 tons a year, compared to 8.8 tons per year for a British worker.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
|
Effort in man hours |
||
|
Mark |
Design |
Jigging and Tooling |
|
Spitfire Mk I |
339,400 |
800,000 |
|
Spitfire Mk II |
9,267 |
UNKNOWN |
|
Spitfire Mk III |
91,120 |
75,000 |
|
Spitfire Mk V |
90,000 |
105,000 |
|
Spitfire Mk VI |
14,340 |
50,000 |
|
Spitfire Mk IX |
43,830 |
30,000 |
|
Spitfire Mk XII |
27,210 |
16,000 |
|
Spitfire Mk VII |
86,150 |
150,000 |
|
Spitfire Mk VIII |
24,970 |
250,000 |
|
Spitfire Mk XIV |
26,120 |
17,000 |
|
Spitfire Mk 21 |
168,500 |
UNKNOWN |
|
Spitfire PR XI |
12,415 |
UNKNOWN |
|
Seafire Mk I |
10,130 |
18,000 |
|
Seafire Mk II |
3,685 |
40,000 |
|
Seafire Mk III |
8,938 |
9,000 |
|
Seafire Mk XV |
9,150 |
UNKNOWN |
|
Seafire (Floats) |
22,260 |
35,000 |
|
Figures as of September 1943 for Supermarine works in Southampton. |
||
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
As early as January 1940 when the first wartime programme embodying the heavy bombers was settled, it was reckoned that ratios of weight to man-hours would, for the principal types, work out as follows:
|
|
Airframe structure weight (lbs) |
Average man-hours (thousands) |
lb. structure weight per 1,000 man-hours |
|
FIGHTERS |
|||
|
Spitfire |
2,055 |
15.2 |
135 |
|
Hurricane |
2,468 |
10.3 |
240 |
|
Whirlwind |
3,461 |
26.6 |
130 |
|
Tornado |
3,600 |
15.5 |
233 |
|
BOMBERS |
|||
|
Battle |
4,466 |
24 |
186 |
|
Whitley |
9,557 |
52 |
184 |
|
Wellington |
10,117 |
38 |
266 |
|
Manchester |
15,650 |
52.1 |
300 |
|
Halifax |
16,157 |
76 |
213 |
|
Stirling |
26,630 |
75 |
314 |
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
The British placed much greater emphasis on repair throughout the war than did the AAF, because they were governed by economic considerations to a far greater extent than was the United States. 'The Air Ministry and the Ministry of Aircraft Production held that it was worth while to repair a plane even if it would require per cent of the man-hours and materials needed to build a new one, because the 10 per cent saving was essential to prosecution of the British production effort. This policy was more feasible in the United Kingdom where the aircraft factories were little more than a stone's throw from the combat bases. (AAF in WWII vol 6)