Recent content by EKB

You are the only member to use the word "crap" in this discussion. At least one FW-190 (USAAF No. EB-104) was taken prisoner and brought to Wright Field. Obviously not factory fresh, but good enough to return 415 mph at 22,000 feet and 340 mph at sea level. The BMW-801D radial engine was...

Exactly. One serial did not define the whole series. There was a wide variety of results when Spitfires, Seafires and other fighters were performance checked with the same engine specs. What is average or normal depends on which data is used as a baseline.

I understand, but you have to accept that some airplanes were simply down on performance. For example Spitfire IX - JL165 on +25 psi boost and 2000 hp could not reach 390 mph going straight and level (Ref: A&AEE trials).

This overlooks other Wright Field trials that stated a P-40 lost just 600 feet of service ceiling from adding 271 lbs. (Re: P-40D - 40-362 and P-40E - 40-384 with V-1710-39 engines). It does not make sense that a P-40 in good condition would lose 7,200 feet of service ceiling from adding 887...

That doesn’t track because of a similar difference in drag with the Spitfire and Hurricane. The variation in ceiling was less than 1,000 feet, not 4,000 feet. Spitfire I - N3171 Merlin III auw 6,050 lb. h/s 354 mph s/c 34,700 ft. Hurricane I - L2026 Merlin III auw 6,316 lb. h/s 316 mph s/c...

Well I figured you might pick this low hanging fruit, but you have missed a few cherries: P-51A-1 No. 43-6007 also had a V-1710-81 engine, yet the service ceiling was 35,100 feet on 8,000 lb. Clearly, something was amiss with P-40N-5 No. 42-105241 at 8,300 lb. because the service ceiling was...

I should clarify that the survey of Coastal Command operations focused on merchant vessels not submarines, and economic warfare against the shipping routes of high grade iron ore going from Scandinavia to Germany. Aerial mine-laying could be done at night, with a much lower risk to aircraft...

Mosquito I - W4050, the first hand-built prototype, was a feather weight at 16,770 lbs. when tested at the A&AEE. At that time the service ceiling was 33,900 feet with Merlin 21 engines. No data about time to climb, up to specific heights. Apparently the climbing test of serial W4050 was not...

I was talking about engine performance vs. a given loaded weight. I'm not here to argue about shortcomings of using four vs. six guns on the P-40N. And besides, the P-51B went into battle with four guns. If you don't want to cherry pick, then show us some proof that a P-40F out-climbed a P-40N...

Studies done 25 years ago showed that Coastal Command got far better results for sinking ships by dropping mines into the sea. Direct attacks on ships had been more expensive and less productive.

Seafires tended to be slower than Spitfires with the same engine, but if loaded weight were adjusted there was no significant change in ceiling if going from a Merlin 50 to a standard Spit Five engine: Spitfire VC No. AA873 (Rolls Royce Merlin 45) auw 6,917 lbs. 36,400 ft (service ceiling)...

Type of wing guns has nothing to do with engine performance. You seem suspicious of any facts that run afoul of this ongoing Merlin XX what-if fantasy. No P-51s were built with the Packard Merlin XX because the P-40F did not exactly deliver thrills. Many, if not most, British made aircraft...

Specific airplanes that went through climbing trials with a similar take-off weight: P-39N No. 42-4400 (Allison V-1710-85) auw 7,274 lbs. 38,500 ft (service ceiling) P-40N No. 42-9987 (Allison V-1710-81) auw 7,413 lbs. 38,200 ft (service ceiling) Hurricane II No. Z3564 (Rolls Royce Merlin...

What is the serial number of that Mosquito? Your data does not agree with British government testing. For starters, I found only one Mosquito with Merlin 20 series engines that actually completed climbing trials at the A&AEE. And the report was dated from September 1943. At the lightest load...