Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
These were more than "jerry rigged." VF-17 completed a field mod where they were able to carry bombs on their Corsairs, this mod was actually adopted by naval engineers and Vought IIRC. In the book "Jolly Rogers" dedicates a chapter on this and how VF-17 completed strikes against Rabaul.
By Feb 1943, the P-47C was in prodution with C/L keel and provisions for C/L 205 gal Ferry Tank or 500 pound bomb.
True but read the fine print - the F4U-1 carried up to 360 gallons internally. If theatre commanders could over ride regs prohibiting unsealed internal fuel tanks, the F4U-1 had about the same combat radius as P-47D with 110 gal C/L tank... and about 3X P-39 with 120 gal internal and 60 or 75 gal c/l combat tank. By October 1943, the same F4U-1 w/75 gal c/l tank had the same range as the P-47D with 150 gal C/L tank. Later versions eliminated to 2x62 gal inboard wing tanks.
Have you seen some of those "field mods?" Point being that factory drop tank mounts were not available until nearly 1944.
I have seen images of them. Curiously, they performed as designed and reliably worked.
No provision for drop tanks in England until August.
You need to show me your method for the 3X P-39 radius.
Dismissed by the RAF because they specified construction of a 7850lb airplane when a 7000lb version would have performed much better. The Russians won the war with it (after reducing the weight by removing redundant or unneeded equipment).
You're comparing 1944 fighters to the B-36 which wasn't operational until 1948.
I have and many of them received some type of engineering approval. Unless you know what you're looking at it's really hard to use the term "jerry rigged." In the case of VF-17, not only standard bomb shackles were used but Blackburn had to get approval from a Marine Colonel before proceeding.
Provisions were made in production deliveries in February in P-47C-2 (IIRC for model). That said, it was delay in making fuel feed mods and the acquisition of combat tanks - not the 'provision for'.
No, I don't. You need to develop better research skills. Start with Pilot handbooks.
Laughing out Loud. Dismissed because deemed 'unsuitable' (RAF for 'we'll sacrifice a lot of pilots to Fw 190/Bf 109 with this turkey' - but Ok for Russkies to ket killed). Somehow the P-39 had very little to do with USSR killing 3-5 million German soldiers and airmen. What it did do, is save lives of some VVS pilots converting from I-16 and Yak-1. That said the LaaG 7 and Yak 3 were far superior.
I am not sure where this discussion is headed, and I am new here, so I am not totally into running jokes about P-39s.
The first thing land based USN F4U squadrons did when reaching their assigned bases was to remove the carrier equipment (tail hook and catapult shackles.)
Not wise to direct new members to the dark side of the forum.
No drop tanks for the P-47 until August.
Okay, one more time just for you. From the P-39N handbook, go to the Flight Operation Instruction Chart (Range Chart). The P-39 was designed to hold at least 120gal internal. Although fuel was reduced to 87gal on some models, an escort mission in Europe would require all 120gal. Add a 110gal drop tank which is what was available at 8thAF bases and was used on the P-39 in the Pacific. Total 230gal. Reduce that by 20gal allowance for takeoff and climb, 26gal for 20min combat at 25000' and 10 gal for a 20 minute landing reserve. Net gallons available for cruise is now 174gal. The P-39 burned 62 gallons per hour at 25000' so 174 divided by 62 = 2.8hrs. Cruising speed was 184mph IAS or 276mph TAS times the 2.8hrs = 773mi. Half that is the combat radius = 386mi. About the same as a 1943 P-47.
All you need to do is look at the Flight Operation Instruction Chart for either airplane.
I don't need to take your word for anything, I can read. The exact figures per the manual are above.
The Russians won the war with it. It shot down more axis planes than any other American fighter. Then there you go again veering off course with "USSR killing 3-5 million German soldiers." Where did that come from? And how were the Lagg 7 and Yak 3 far superior? Yak 3 was not in combat until summer 1944, Lagg 7 not in combat until Fall 1944. P-39N was already out of production by May 1943, a year earlier. Were the Lagg and Yak faster? Better climb? Higher ceiling? Longer range? Nope. How were they better?
Relevance?
Please get it through your cerebellum that there is no such thing!!!! When you fly a land based mission you plan to land with 30 minutes of fuel left in your tanks.
Fine, then use 15gal for the reserve for landing instead of 10. Five gallons less fuel works out to 4.8min less flying time or 22mi cruising range. It is a reserve, you can apply any amount you deem sufficient. The Navy specified a one hour reserve for landing but that was for carrier missions. The AAF could get by easily with 20min reserve since their airbase didn't move while they were gone.
And fine but again, no such thing!!!!
Yup...
