FMA IA 58 Pucara vs Westland Whirlwind F1

Discussion in 'Polls' started by Colin1, May 6, 2009.

?

Which is the better fighter/fighter-bomber... Pucara vs Whirlwind

  1. FMA IA 58 Pucara'

    61.5%
  2. Westland Whirlwind F.1

    38.5%
  1. Colin1

    Colin1 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2009
    Messages:
    3,541
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Occupation:
    Engineer and overgrown schoolboy
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    #1 Colin1, May 6, 2009
    Last edited: May 12, 2009
    Following on from Matt308's thoughts in the Video Section (Westland Whirlwind), how do you think the two would stack up over a battlefield? Not to be taken too seriously

    FMA IA 58 Pucara :vs: Westland Whirlwind
    2 :Crew: 1
    46ft 9in (14.25m) :Length: 32ft 3in (9.83m)
    47ft 6in (14.5m) :Wingspan: 45ft (13.72m)
    17ft 7in (5.36m) :Height: 11ft 7in (3.53m)
    326.16sq ft (30.3sq m) :Wing area: 250sq ft (23sq m)
    8,862lbs (4,020kg) :Empty weight: 8,310lbs (3,770kg)
    11,684lbs (5,300Kgs) :Loaded weight: 10,356lbs (4,697kg)
    14,991lbs (6,800kg) :Max take-off weight: 11,410lbs (5,175kg)
    2 x Turbomeca Astazou VXIG turboprop 978hp (729KW) each :powerplant: 2 x Rolls-Royce Peregrine V12 885hp (660KW) each

    310mph (500Km/h) :Max Speed: 360mph (560Km/h)
    2,305 miles (3,710Km) :Range: 900 miles (1,300Km)
    31,800ft (10,000m) :Service ceiling: 30,315ft (9,240m)
    3,543ft/min (1080m/min) :Rate of climb: 3,000ft/min (914.4m/min)
    45.92lb/sq ft (224Kg/sq m) :Wing loading: 41lb/sq ft (204Kg/sq m)
    0.13hp/lb (0.21KW/Kg) :power/mass: 0.17hp/lb (0.28KW/Kg)
    2 x HS.804 20mm with 270rpg; 4 x 7.62mm FM M2-20 with 900rpg; 3,300lbs of gun pods, bombs, rockets, mines or torpedoes :Armament: 4 x Hispano 20mm with 60rpg; 1,000lbs of bombs either 4 x 250lb (115Kg) or 2 x 500lb (230Kg)
     

    Attached Files:

  2. Colin1

    Colin1 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2009
    Messages:
    3,541
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Occupation:
    Engineer and overgrown schoolboy
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    Moderators
    how do I turn this thread into a poll - and then move it to the Poll section? :)
     
  3. CharlesBronson

    CharlesBronson Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2005
    Messages:
    3,822
    Likes Received:
    66
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Metalurgic Technician
    Location:
    Cordoba - Argentina
    Hmmm...quite even, at low altitube probably the Whirlwind, above 4000 meters probably the Pucara.
     
  4. Matt308

    Matt308 Glock Perfection
    Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2005
    Messages:
    20,140
    Likes Received:
    54
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Occupation:
    Engineer
    Location:
    Washington State
    Colin, I fixed it to be a poll for you. This should be interesting.

    My personal take after having seen video of the Pucara is that it is extremely underpowered for a fighter role. But then again, that was the Achilles heel of the Whirlwind too. While CB notes that the Pucara might have better performance at high altitudes, I can only think that comes in handy for combat range. Surely the turboprop engines in the Pucara are MUCH more maintenance friendly and likely account for a MUCH better sortie rate.

    I have to also believe that the amount of ordnance carried by the Pucara makes it much more lethal for ground attack.

    But I would give low-to-mid level air-to-air to the Whirlwind with performance margins and concentrated 20mm cannon as armament.

    So overall... Pucara'.
     
  5. Colin1

    Colin1 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2009
    Messages:
    3,541
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Occupation:
    Engineer and overgrown schoolboy
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    The Pucara can clearly be called upon to haul a much bigger payload to the battlefield but notwithstanding this, I too think it is underpowered; the lesser payload of the Whirlwind is nonetheless a decent payload if you consider the combination of 2 x 500lb bombs and 4 x 20mm cannons.
    For me, the key advantage is the Whirlwind's ability to fight its way off the battlefield; caught on its way in (with a full payload) the Pucara looks too much of a sitting duck to me.
    If the two met over the battlefield, the Pucara would be unable to mix it up with the Whirlwind.

    So for me, the Whirlwind but not by much
     
  6. vikingBerserker

    vikingBerserker Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2009
    Messages:
    24,093
    Likes Received:
    657
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Korporate Kontrolleur
    Location:
    South Carolina
    Isn't the Whirlwind more of a fighter and the Pucara more of a ground attack?
     
  7. Matt308

    Matt308 Glock Perfection
    Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2005
    Messages:
    20,140
    Likes Received:
    54
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Occupation:
    Engineer
    Location:
    Washington State
    Originally yes. But the inadequacies of the Whirlwind powerplants resulted in it being much more suited for ground attack. And this is the major role it served in WWII.
     
  8. CharlesBronson

    CharlesBronson Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2005
    Messages:
    3,822
    Likes Received:
    66
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Metalurgic Technician
    Location:
    Cordoba - Argentina
    Incidentally the only confirmed kill of the entire IA-58 career was a Westland. :idea:
     
  9. vikingBerserker

    vikingBerserker Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2009
    Messages:
    24,093
    Likes Received:
    657
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Korporate Kontrolleur
    Location:
    South Carolina
    I think I have to go with the Pucara on this one.
     
  10. Matt308

    Matt308 Glock Perfection
    Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2005
    Messages:
    20,140
    Likes Received:
    54
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Occupation:
    Engineer
    Location:
    Washington State
    ...helicopter
     
  11. Graeme

    Graeme Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2007
    Messages:
    2,729
    Likes Received:
    170
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    Good to know Colin! :)



    Should that be 1,080 metres per minute? I'm surrounded by the imperial 3,543 ft/min. figure...

    [​IMG]

    The 360 mph for the Whirlwind drops to 316 mph with two 500 pounders at 27,500 ft. Worse as you get lower, 278 mph at 15,000ft.

    Do you know if the Whirlibomber recieved additional armour for the ground attack role? I keep seeing that the Pucara's armoured floor plating can absorb 7.62 mm rounds from 150 metres.

    Do you also happen to know the Whirlwind's single engine climb rate and ceiling?
     
  12. Colin1

    Colin1 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2009
    Messages:
    3,541
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Occupation:
    Engineer and overgrown schoolboy
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    Hi Graeme
    you'd be surprised... :)


    re the facts and figures, some of them were in different formats to the figure for the other aircraft so I did some hasty conversions. The figure I found for the Pucara climb rate was 18ft/sec although I may have misread it. I'll look more carefully when I get home tonight, I'm in a bit of a hurry at the mo
     
  13. Colin1

    Colin1 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2009
    Messages:
    3,541
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Occupation:
    Engineer and overgrown schoolboy
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    Ohhhhhh the Pucara's edged out in front
    this is getting waaaay too tense :)
     
  14. Graeme

    Graeme Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2007
    Messages:
    2,729
    Likes Received:
    170
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    :)

    Then it must be time for a sales pitch.

    So, if you vote Pucara, this is what you’ll be getting…

    (Actually it was originally to be called Delfin-Dolphin)

    “Modern”
    Martin Baker Zero/Zero ejection seats
    “Sophisticated” American avionics
    Exceptional ground clearance for external stores
    Rugged low pressure tyres for all terrain (except very soft sand and snow)
    Tough “ring spring” system, similar to Ju-88.
    Tyre pressures are only 45 lb/sq/in
    Self sealing fuel tanks
    Gun magazines can be replaced in twenty minutes
    Dual flight controls in rear seat which is 25 cm higher
    Steerable nose wheel up to 33 deg in either direction
    Capable of T/O in 80 metres with RATO
    Armoured wind screen and cockpit floor
    Windscreen wiper!
    Windscreen de-icing
    Aerobatic. “Outstanding manoeuvrability”
    “Exceptional low level manoeuvrability” as seen at Farnborough and Le Bourget
    Leading edge pneumatic pulsating de-icer boots
    Air braking system via fine pitch propeller selection.
    G limits; +6, -3
    Booster fuel pumps allow inverted flight for up to 30 seconds
    “Good” single engine performance including 6,000m ceiling
    Low maintenance and running costs.
    Only US$1.2 (1977)

    Interesting to note that when the RAF captured and flight tested the Pucaras from the Falklands the performance figures they achieved matched “Jane’s All the World’s Aircraft”, exactly. So the boys at FMA don’t lie!
     
  15. vikingBerserker

    vikingBerserker Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2009
    Messages:
    24,093
    Likes Received:
    657
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Korporate Kontrolleur
    Location:
    South Carolina
    The Pucara was the only Argentinean aircraft I'd ever heard of, but I have to admit I am pretty impressed to learn there was a lot more then just then plane to it. Anybody ever hear about the SAIA 90 with the help of Dornier?

    FMA SAIA 90 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
     
  16. Graeme

    Graeme Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2007
    Messages:
    2,729
    Likes Received:
    170
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    Hi Colin. This is from your other thread. I like your concept. The concept is interesting, “WW II vs. Modern”, as you say a sort of generational "David and Goliath", but I wouldn’t pick a 1930’s design to compete against the Pucara, especially as the Whirlwind was never intended for ground attack. If the criteria requires a dedicated WWII ground attack aircraft, then I’d be looking towards the technology available at the end of that conflict.

    In the blink of an eye, I'd change camps to Beech. The Beech XA-38 Grizzly appears on paper to be a much worthier opponent to the Pucara...

    [​IMG]

    Clocked at 376.5 mph. Beech acquired a P-51B to pace it, which was “left behind“ in high-speed trials. (This was at 32,000 lbs and WEP without stores).

    Normal power climb, 2170 ft/min.
    Max. power climb, 3,100 ft/min.
    Best single engine climb, 450 ft/min

    Absolute ceiling, 27,600.
    Single engine ceiling 14,500 ft.

    With 825 gallons of 115/145 octane, range was 1,616 miles at 31,895 lb at 4,800ft in clean configuration.

    Even at 16 tons it “was very manoeuvrable …and handles well in making sideslips, skids, loops, half rolls on top of loops and slow rolls.”

    With a 75 mm cannon (20 rounds), Type N-6 reflector sight, six 0.50 in Mgs (500 rounds each) and capable of carrying 4,000 lb on four underwing pylons, little wonder it has been called “WW II’s most powerful attack plane.”

    However the Russians would argue for that title…

    The Ultimate <i>Shturmovik</i>: Sukhoi's Long-Ranging Su-8
     
  17. Colin1

    Colin1 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2009
    Messages:
    3,541
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Occupation:
    Engineer and overgrown schoolboy
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    True enough Graeme
    but the original basis of the thread was Matt's observation of some in-flight similarities between the two types, which is why I ventured the poll; given the 4 or 5 aeronautical generations that exist between the two I think it's interesting that the Pucara does not seem to be a decisively better aircraft than the Whirlwind.
    Regarding Whirlwind roles, again true but the type turned out to be a very potent ground attack type ie hard-hitting, twin-engined (redundancy), highly manoeuverable and with the engines putting out their best at those low altitudes.
    Recall the original role for the Typhoon, after the initial disappointment with its altitude performance it too became a formidable fighter-bomber.
     
  18. CharlesBronson

    CharlesBronson Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2005
    Messages:
    3,822
    Likes Received:
    66
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Metalurgic Technician
    Location:
    Cordoba - Argentina
    Well, the Pucara was designed to destroy non-armored and light armored vehicle,troops armed with rifles, hand grenades and heavy machineguns, also to strafe and sunk light ships and boat in rivers ( kind of the Mekong delta attacks by the uS air Force) no more of that, so you didnt need a lot of high tech devices. Just a gyro gunsight ( late rreplaced by a HUD) guns, rocket bombs and some armor.

    I think the comparative is even because with the exception of turboprops and some light materials to make the fuselage the rest is pretty much ww2 technology.
     

    Attached Files:

    • 1.jpg
      1.jpg
      File size:
      68.9 KB
      Views:
      12
Loading...

Share This Page