Groundhog Thread Part Deux - P-39 Fantasy and Fetish - The Never Ending Story (Mods take no responsibility for head against wall injuries sustained)

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

P-39 Expert said:
That's the problem, most bombs dropped from only 20000' by bombardiers flying medium bombers in formation didn't hit anything. Farmland, a lake, absolutely nothing of importance. You're taking one example of a bomb that happened to randomly hit a hospital when you have no idea what the bomber was actually aiming at. Formations of bombers had woeful hit rates and you think one fighter at 25000' will come anywhere near his target? Seriously?
Click to expand...

Can we please have a source for the statement that most bombs dropped from 20,000ft "didn't hit anything. Farmland, a lake, absolutely nothing of importance"?

Can you please provide a source for the doctrine or directives of ANY air force, anywhere, anytime which states that they should only intercept those enemy aircraft that have a chance of bombing something important?

Yet again, you are failing to even read any of the posts that other members are providing. Per A Andrew Arthy post 2104, the Me109 bombers didn't necessarily bomb from 25,000ft. The SOP for at least one Staffeln was to dive to 16,000ft and drop.

Again, you're ENTIRELY MISSING THE POINT....Fighter Command's responsibility was to DEFEND UK AIRSPACE FROM ENEMY AIRCRAFT. PERIOD. It doesn't matter if they came over in high-powered washing machines, the job of the Hurricanes and Spitfires was to intercept them. That's the purpose of gaining/maintaining air superiority.
 
buffnut453 said:
Can we please have a source for the statement that most bombs dropped from 20,000ft "didn't hit anything. Farmland, a lake, absolutely nothing of importance"?

Can you please provide a source for ANY air force which states that they should only intercept those enemy aircraft that have a chance of bombing something important?

Again, you're ENTIRELY MISSING THE POINT....Fighter Command's responsibility was to DEFEND UK AIRSPACE FROM ENEMY AIRCRAFT. PERIOD. It doesn't matter if they came over in high-powered washing machines, the job of the Hurricanes and Spitfires was to intercept them. That's the purpose of gaining/maintaining air superiority.
Click to expand...
The new argument from mince head is that a bomb may have hit a hospital and another may have killed 13 people but since they couldnt guarantee doing that, it can all be dismissed. I personally think it is a great bet that the Jabo raids on London hit London more often than Bomber command raids on Berlin hit Berlin in the same era.
 
I am reminded of another Texan who stated that the Germans could have easily have invaded GB. Their warships would easily crush the RN. The German fleet included pre WW1 warships that were no longer capable of battle. Nothing could persuade him otherwise.
 
buffnut453 said:
And yet you insist on trying to "educate" people about the P-39. If you're not willing to learn, why are you here? Or are you just interested in trolling?
Click to expand...
Having seen his posts on the P-39, most of his knowledge and education comes from this forum, once we have the weight of the IFF transponder and the gas stove cum cockpit heater it will all be complete.
 
P-39 Expert said:
Are you saying the additional weight came from structural strengthening sometime after production of the C model in time for the D model and P-400? According to your P-39C manual empty weight was 5016lbs. The P-400 weighed 5550lbs empty. That's a difference of 534lbs. 240lbs was the self sealing fuel tanks. The book "Cobra" shows "minor empty and useful load changes" in Jan '41 and "engine and fixed equipment weight increase" in June '41 with production beginning in July, but those changes only account for 165lbs. I don't know where the additional 129lbs came from. Maybe it WAS structural bracing.
Click to expand...

I think some of the weight was from bracing and/or thicker components.
The weight difference is greater than it seems. the P-39C empty weight included the radio, the empty weight of the P-39D-1 did not.
I found how much the radio in the P-39C weighed. 43.3 lbs
It was a different radio than used in the P-39D-1 or other US P-39s. This is the communications radio and not the IFF gear. The IFF gear was included in the 129lbs listed for the P-39D-1 but one website says the IFF gear weighed 45lbs.
The communications radio weighed 91lbs. Don't know if anything was shared.
Weights are for a complete radio set including the switch boxes in the cockpit.
The radio in the P-39D-1 was much longer ranged than the one in the P-39C, range is give as 130 miles at 10,000ft.
The one in the P-39C could receive ground transmissions at 30-45 miles, the ground station could hear the aircraft at 10-20 miles.

Some of the weight might have been in stronger landing gear and/or different tires. The P-39C went between 7100 and 7300lbs full load (nothing external) compared to the 8368lbs of a P-39D-1 with 75 gallon drop tank. The load factor was not at max gross weight but at a lower "combat weight", this is my term. Like P-36s were rated with 105 gallons of fuel in the tanks (tank behind pilot not filled). But the landing gear/tires still had to handle the heavier loads.
There are a few things that need changing as the weight of the plane goes up.
 
Shortround6 said:
I think some of the weight was from bracing and/or thicker components.
The weight difference is greater than it seems. the P-39C empty weight included the radio, the empty weight of the P-39D-1 did not.
Click to expand...

The radio is included in empty weight for the P-39C but not the P39D?
That would make the difference between empty weights, when to the same equipment level, even greater than it appears?
 
Not sure what gauge of wire was used for a typical USAAF transmitter, but they were high-powered output and should have required either 6 or 8-gauge stranded core supply wire from the battery to the transceiver assembly. When the radio transmitted, it would have had a booster motor that upped the transceiver's voltage/amps to transmit.
Just 20 feet of 8-gauge THHN wiring can weigh a few pounds and the motor assembly weighed about 12 pounds (at least the GE motors I worked with did) and the weight came from the iron core and copper windings in a cast aluminum housing.
 
GrauGeist said:
Not sure what gauge of wire was used for a typical USAAF transmitter, but they were high-powered output and should have required either 6 or 8-gauge stranded core supply wire from the battery to the transceiver assembly. When the radio transmitted, it would have had a booster motor that upped the transceiver's voltage/amps to transmit.
Just 20 feet of 8-gauge THHN wiring can weigh a few pounds and the motor assembly weighed about 12 pounds (at least the GE motors I worked with did) and the weight came from the iron core and copper windings in a cast aluminum housing.
Click to expand...
weight for the radios includes most parts but not wiring.
see.
800px-SCR-522_Data.png
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

Holtzauge
Paper comparing the flight performance of the P-40E Warhawk and the A6M2 Zero
Replies
8
Views
726
Ivan1GFP
I
CHen10
The poor performance of the 343 Kokutai against USAAF fighters
2 3 4
Replies
60
Views
6K
GrauGeist
GrauGeist
Marcel
617th squadron and the bunkers in Ijmuiden.
2
Replies
23
Views
662
DerAdlerIstGelandet
DerAdlerIstGelandet
M
P-39 Turbo - Here We Go Again
Replies
13
Views
2K
GregP
GregP
tomo pauk
P-39-style fighter by other people?
2 3
Replies
50
Views
2K
GrauGeist
GrauGeist
Back