Dogfighter?

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

Thanks Shortround and GregP,
I couldn't remember any of that stuff. All I remembered was parts of the saying. But I did remember that it was not a very rugged machine compared to the Curtiss.
 
From Ray Wagner's American Combat Planes:

"French pilots found the Hawk H75-1 (export P-36As somewhat modified by customer) more manueverable than its adversaries (presumably at low level?) including The Spitfire(!) and Bf-109D." no mention of comparitive testing with a Hurricane, but I have to wonder why not with (AFAIK) more hurricanes in France than Spitfires.

"The Hawks were the most successful of the french fighters with 230 confirmed victories by June 1940, [when they were transferred to North Africa] He cites the Finns success as well with 190 victories for 24 loses."
 
Just checked on Nakajima Ki.27:
Power loading: 5.06 lbs/hp
Wing loading: 19.76 lbs/sq.ft.

I have read several articles that say it was THE most maneuverable single wing fighter to ever enter military service. I'm sure they're all meaning low speed.
 

Interesting to know how they came up with that assessment since there were no (nil, zero) Spitfires in France. Some certainly visited (day visits etc) during the Phoney War.
 
The Ki-27 performed well in the Philippines even though American made P-40s had a 75mph speed advantage. I cannot think of a better example to show the importance of proper tactics. If you have a large speed advantage then you should boom zoom as Claire Chennault taught his AVG pilots.
 
buffnut453 said:
Which is unlikely to be a formal, well-planned test activity. Probably more of an ad hoc "we thought ours was better than yours" deal which is impossible to prove.
Click to expand...
Yep, too bad. would have been interesting to see something official and more elaborate in detail.

I remember reading one of the old WWII juvenile war novels writtten in 1941: A yank in the RAF. It was almost contemporary to the BoB and made a big deal of the introduction of the Curtiss Hawk that was going to make a big difference in the battle. Pure propganda but I recall being puzzled. As a kid who thought he knew every allied fighter and most of those of the axis, what the heck is this thing pictured on the jacket with its radial engine and unfamilar name. For a long time (there was no internet!) I thought it was an author's invention. Then I read Walter Lord's Day of Infamy and saw a photo of one and was thrilled.
 
Last edited:
buffnut453 said:
Interesting to know how they came up with that assessment since there were no (nil, zero) Spitfires in France.
Click to expand...
There was one (F.01,) the first of three ordered by France, but the only one delivered, 18-7-39. As the 208th. production Spitfire, it should have had a 3-blade two-speed de Havilland prop, since it was fitted from the 78th., but it's difficult to be sure.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

S
How good dogfighter was the Mosquito?
6 7 8
Replies
145
Views
15K
ThomasP
T
Best twin engine dogfighter
7 8 9
Replies
176
Views
31K
OldSkeptic
O
  • Poll
Best dogfighter out of these 3...
Replies
9
Views
2K
tomo pauk
P-47D with Paddle blade propeler - was she a dogfighter?
Replies
17
Views
20K
Anonymous
A
S
What do you think of the bell p-39 was it a good dogfighter
3 4 5
Replies
91
Views
16K
Ivan1GFP
I
Menu
Log in
Register