Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Marcel this is in my opinion a revisionist view, there was no thought in American planning about saving any Japanese lives, only American ones.
And every American live that was saved by dropping them makes the bomb worth it in my opinion.
I know i already posted this same thing a month or two ago, but has this been figured out yet?
P-40??Personally, I think its a tie for first (for fighters anyways).. the Bf/Me 109 and the P-40 WarHawk.
As much tempted to jump on the A-bomb discussion ...
P-40??
It is your favourite aircraft but I wonder why exactly it would be the best aircraft of WW2 ...
Kris
As much tempted to jump on the A-bomb discussion ...
P-40??
It is your favourite aircraft but I wonder why exactly it would be the best aircraft of WW2 ...
Kris
Fortunately for those in P40s, the Avro Anson was on the same side.
Fortunately for those in P40s, the Avro Anson was on the same side.
trainer.. funny..
thats my opinion anyways. I'm sorry if you don't agree.
The P-40 was a great fighter and probably one of the most under rated fighters of WW2. With that said, many of the places where it saw success were to tactics and pilot skill. If you want to ride on its mission accomplishments, you might have somewhat of an argument, but looking at its technical aspects, it was obsolete as a front line air to air fighter by 1942-43.
Excellent? Compared to what?the P-40 is my favorite for sure.. but has little to do with my statement.
it was USAAF's primary fighter in North Africa, CBI, and PTO. where it
achieved an excellent kill ratio in all three theaters.
iI always hear that statement but I wonder what the truth is behind it. Most fights that I have read about are low and medium altitude. Only the B-17 and escort fighters flew at high altitude.Northern Europe
was mostly High alltitude where the P-40 was not at its best.
Take away those hundreds of operational P-40s and for sure it is true what you say. But if it wasn't for the P-40 another fighter would have been produced, probably the P-38 or P-39. Or maybe P-43. I don't see why the P-40 was better than any of them, let alone better than the Spitfire or Bf 109.f it wasn't for the P-40 in the first 3 years of the war, it would have been a much more LW dominated skys.
New Zealand? NEW ZEALAND????China would have been
lost, and most likely Burma and parts of India. New Zeland (air
anyways), would have been lost too.
Reminds me of the Spitfire first combat with the Zeros. They had all the advantages you mentioned but got a bloody nose from them.it was proven that the P-40 could outgun, outdive, outrun, out roll, and outturn (mind you, only at higher air speeds turns) the infamouse "zero".
It seems most 1939-1941 fighters could outturn the 109. But all of them got beaten by the Bf 109. It's speed and power which matter.the P-40 also had the durabillity and armour advantage. It could definatly outturn/outroll/ the 109.. its debatable whether or not it could outgun it.
I think the first scientific report on structural durability of allied and German fighters still has to be written. All American fighters were considered stronger and more durable than a Spitfire or Bf 109 but I have some serious doubts about that. I wonder what the truth is behind it. (I can accept it for the carier aircraft though.)I think between the 6 50cals and the 109's cannon twin 12.7's it was a pretty even match. durability and pilot protection was on par with the P-40 with later variants of the 109.
It's not a matter of studying ONE aircraft, it's a matter of studying other aircraft to understand your aircraft.after studying the P-40 for 25+ years, I'm begining to understand it a little better.
I suppose today the AWACs and Herculese are the same type of plane but kids dont dream about flying a hercules.
My son did, but eyesight let him down
North Eastern/Russian front. sorry should have been more specific.Excellent? Compared to what?
iI always hear that statement but I wonder what the truth is behind it. Most fights that I have read about are low and medium altitude. Only the B-17 and escort fighters flew at high altitude.
the hump. read "God is my co-pilot"Take away those hundreds of operational P-40s and for sure it is true what you say. But if it wasn't for the P-40 another fighter would have been produced, probably the P-38 or P-39. Or maybe P-43. I don't see why the P-40 was better than any of them, let alone better than the Spitfire or Bf 109.
New Zealand? NEW ZEALAND????
And how would vast countries like China be lost because of no P-40s. You aren't really saying that the P-40 decided over the fate of China right?
becouse brit pilots at the time chose to fight the zero's game. "zoom boom" was consideredReminds me of the Spitfire first combat with the Zeros. They had all the advantages you mentioned but got a bloody nose from them.
think: North Africa. the P-40's main advasary was Bf 109F/G's. they got a shalacking. yes IIt seems most 1939-1941 fighters could outturn the 109. But all of them got beaten by the Bf 109. It's speed and power which matter.
I think the first scientific report on structural durability of allied and German fighters still has to be written. All American fighters were considered stronger and more durable than a Spitfire or Bf 109 but I have some serious doubts about that. I wonder what the truth is behind it. (I can accept it for the carier aircraft though.)
actually best from 1940-43 1/2. and the question was BEST, not BETTER. the P-40It's not a matter of studying ONE aircraft, it's a matter of studying other aircraft to understand your aircraft.
I can understand if you would say the P-40 was the best the US had in 1941-1942 - though I prefer the P-39 - but to say it is better than any other fighter aircraft??
Would you be so kind to give some data on the P-40 compared to some other fighters?
Kris
Flyboy
I agree with your point about the C-47 the unsung work horses are just as vital as the combat planes approximately 12,000 ansons were built and many were still flying when the combat planes were scrapped, similarly over 11,000 wellingtons were made, many more than the lancaster.
I suppose today the AWACs and Herculese are the same type of plane but kids dont dream about flying a hercules.