Groundhog Thread Part Deux - P-39 Fantasy and Fetish - The Never Ending Story (Mods take no responsibility for head against wall injuries sustained) (5 Viewers)

special ed said:

Any shots of the aircraft color scheme for modellers?

Click to expand...

There are numerous on line, look up "UV-18 Twin Otter." The USAFA had one bird painted in a commemorative D-Day scheme

There better looking than the P39

Well, you say that now but wait until you remove the nose armor................

vikingBerserker said:

Well, you say that now but wait until you remove the nose armor................

Click to expand...

Simple, the nose wheel goes to the rear

There was a long discussion a while back about range, and the requirements for forming up etc on bomber escort. I found this here MUSTANG VARIANTS OF THE RAF AND RAAF - Mustang: Thoroughbred Stallion of the Air discussing how the Mustang I was used by the RAF, once across the coast they changed course every six minutes at 275MPH cruising speed.

27. If the desired target destruction and damage is to be secured with minimum casualties, then very careful training alone is not enough – it must be supplemented with the most careful planning. Requests for "hurry-up" or "flash" missions will have to be ignored and only those missions attempted in which there is time available for planning all details or complete "laying on" of the mission in which no details are slighted.

28. An experienced unit with all facilities available can "lay on" a mission in 1½ hrs including the briefing. They have more or less control over their target selection since their effort is unsupported and requires no coordination other than in a general way. Their targets are chosen by information contained in photographs, by information obtained from previous missions and by a general knowledge of the transportation system of a given locality.

29. Once a target is decided upon – for instance a certain area where there are several important rail lines and perhaps a canal – all the latest intelligence is made available. This includes flak maps, radar locations, locations of airfields, fighter strength and disposition, knowledge of other friendly simultaneous action, etc. The number of aircraft is set and those pilots alerted. Those pilots do not leave the post after being alerted nor are they allowed to drink – They are sent to bed early.

30. The points of entry into enemy territory by the various flights are carefully chosen with regard to the flak map, the air defense warning system, enemy fighters and target proximity and coverage. Separate zig-zag courses of approximately 6 min. length at 275 mph are planned so as to give the maximum coverage in the target area without the separate flights interfering with each other or crossing the path already covered by another fighter (in this case a flight is assumed to be the smallest unit – two abreast). Every element which will contribute to the surprise of each flight is taken into consideration. The distance to be covered by each flight in enemy territory is usually in the neighborhood of 90 miles for reach flight. The points of exit are chosen with regard to the exit points and the route home plotted on the overlay.

31. The course for the mission for any one flight consists of a number of legs of varying distances and directions. At the early morning briefing, the pilots are allowed to do most of the work in obtaining the data for his particular flight. One pilot will measure all the distances with another checking. Another pilot will obtain all the true tracks with proper checking. All the data is entered on a form 433-A and from the last minute meteorological report and the compass card of each airplane, the pilots work out their magnetic courses, true airspeeds and times. All times, airspeeds and directions will be the same from the base to the dispersal point (50-60 miles from the coast), but different for the individual flights over enemy territory and then the same again (usually) for the trip home from the rendezvous point. Gun cameras in the left landing light location take pictures of all action and verify claims.

Glider said:

There better looking than the P39

Click to expand...

Aww, c'mon man, how can you mouth such heresy?

FLYBOYJ
Thanks for these. Looking on line for more UV-18B @ USAFA. Curiosity makes me ask why they carry both USAF and civil registration?

Awfully quiet in here...

I could look up sources and bring back the Bell X-5 argument. Naah, I like the quiet and peace.

Turn for the better with the DH discussion.

I would be a poor leader and decision maker. I like the mossie and since they were being built in Canada, I would buy theirs. Shorter delivery route. After all, we did buy Avro Canada Ansons, built by Federal of Canada as AT-20 bombing trainers. Forty nine as I remember.

special ed said:

I could look up sources and bring back the Bell X-5 argument. Naah, I like the quiet and peace.

Click to expand...

The Yeager interview I watched yesterday, the General made mention of Bell's issues with test-pilots and how that gave the USAF an opening to control several X-programs from Bell.

special ed said:

FLYBOYJ
Thanks for these. Looking on line for more UV-18B @ USAFA. Curiosity makes me ask why they carry both USAF and civil registration?

Click to expand...

"464" and "465" carried N numbers since the time they were purchased by the USAF. "835" was operated by the US Army and was acquired in the late 1980s (I believe) and did not receive an N number when delivered. When I was on the program there was always talk of doing a conformity inspection on 835 and give it an N number. These aircraft would be considered "Public Use" and "may" be inspected by the FAA - never officially spoken but I think the USAF wanted that so a layer of oversight was built in as it was accepted these would always be contractor maintained.

OK. Since you want controversy, which is better looking, a P-39 or this:



Hint: It was used in the 1942 movie," Flying Tigers."

Personally, I think almost anything looks better than this thing, maybe even a PZL Zubr!

Zubr:
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/82/ce/94/82ce94aa6316b4fdc11053612a2116e9.jpg

Maybe even this:

Which looks like a deranged Irish Wolfhound mated with a spider monkey.

The XC-12's windscreen configuration seemed to be a popular design feature in the late 20's and early 30's, too.

GregP said:

OK. Since you want controversy, which is better looking, a P-39 or this:

View attachment 637704

Click to expand...

You must be joking that is a nascent Concorde, onwards and upwards.

GregP said:

OK. Since you want controversy, which is better looking, a P-39 or this:

View attachment 637704

Hint: It was used in the 1942 movie," Flying Tigers."

Personally, I think almost anything looks better than this thing, maybe even a PZL Zubr!

Zubr:
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/82/ce/94/82ce94aa6316b4fdc11053612a2116e9.jpg

Maybe even this: View attachment 637705

Which looks like a deranged Irish Wolfhound mated with at spider monkey.

Click to expand...

I love the Safety Plane. Why use riveted panels when you could use screws?
That might be the first plane I ever tried to research on Wiki. I had to know if it was real or not.

SaparotRob said:

I love the Safety Plane. Why use riveted panels when you could use screws?
That might be the first plane I ever tried to research on Wiki. I had to know if it was real or not.

Click to expand...

If you spot an aircraft in a movie you want to check out, head over to the Internet Movie Plane Database.
Chances are, you'll find it there.
The Internet Movie Plane Database

Thanks GrauGeist! I'll use the the site to check the "P-40's" used on the ground in The Flying Tigers. They were powered by V-8 engines and could taxi. Now to find out the truth of that.

Hope people don't mind if I throw in a quick P-39 related question here: did the P-400 variant have provision for bombs and/or drop tanks? And if so was the capability factory installed or was it more of a field modification?