GregP
Major
You can talk about Boomerangs with Merlins as long as you leave nose armor out of it.
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
but but the boomerang had 1250 lb of nose armourYou can talk about Boomerangs with Merlins as long as you leave nose armor out of it.
Standard late 1942 P-39N compared with a contemporary FW190A-6. Pretty competitive. Plus P-39 was more maneuverable and had longer endurance.
But the nose armor was in front of the gearbox.How many fighters had remote gearboxes? In almost every other case the gearbox was protected from the rear by that big chunk of armor we usually refer to as an engine...
hi!
Late42 would be a 190A4 or even still an A3 (if we talking operationnal aircraft).. A4 and A6 performance were about the same.
what do you mean by more maneuvrable?...cause you're talking here about the plane that had the best rollrate of WII, so maneuvrability being a generic term, if we don't put some definition into it, itmay mean something different to different people. Please explain your idea of maneuvrability. Better turn rate.
Also, could you confirm the following:
P39N Standard (operationnal)GrossWeight : 8200Lbs That included a drop tank. Normal gross was 7650lbs, less 200lbs with reduced fuel in later models.
War emergency pressure for the 1710-85 :58Hg Sounds about right.
Thanks.
Why did it fail? I mean on paper it's a world beater. Didn't exactly fail. Half the top Soviet aces flew the P-39 and loved it. Faster than a P-40, better climb than a P-51, able to go toe to toe with the FW-190A-6. And yet, the USAAF chose to go a different way. The British discovered a host of problems with theirs and dumped them on the Russians, or gave them back to the US. The host of problems (compass etc.) were problems with any brand new airplane and were all quickly solved on AAF planes. Biggest problem was excessive weight which the British specified during construction. A 7850lb P-400 wouldn't meet the contract performance specs drawn up when expected gross weight was 5500lbs. Also they no longer needed them since the BoB was over and there would be no German invasion. And this was a cash contract not under lend-lease so they didn't want to pay for them. Only one US pilot made ace in them and that was in the Pacific. Two P-39 equipped fighter groups sent to Europe were re-equipped with Spitfire Vs before deploying to North Africa. The actual planes didn't go, just the pilots. The planes were sent to the west coast. the P-39 Groups that did go to NA were badly mauled and had to be relegated to coastal and convoy patrol. P-39 units flying ground attack missions needed air cover provided by P-40s. Those P-39s were flying ground attack because they had the cannon. No contemporary P-40 was as fast or climbed as fast as a P-39. The Russians loved them, but if you had the choice between an I-16 or a Guaranteed Lacquered Coffin and a P-39 what would you choose? They also had Yaks and Laggs. The fact that half the top Soviet aces and lots of 20+ victory aces flew the P-39 speaks for itself, especially since they received less than 5000 P-39s. Over 30000 Yaks were produced.
True, but photos and pilot's manuals show that some P-39s had radios mounted above the engine.In detailed cutaways, the radio compartment is just aft of the oil reservoir and ahead of the tail-plane, the access door being on the port side and the full width of the fuselage.
While not being all that large, it was packed full of equipment. Also, the antenna lead to the aerial ran through an access port just above the compartment door.
You cannot continue to post this, it just isnt true, and you have been told why it isnt true. What is the point of this groundhog style of debate? You give your statements a rest for a while then bring them back.The host of problems (compass etc.) were problems with any brand new airplane and were all quickly solved on AAF planes. Biggest problem was excessive weight which the British specified during construction. A 7850lb P-400 wouldn't meet the contract performance specs drawn up when expected gross weight was 5500lbs. Also they no longer needed them since the BoB was over and there would be no German invasion. And this was a cash contract not under lend-lease so they didn't want to pay for them.
But the nose armor was in front of the gearbox.
And this was a cash contract not under lend-lease so they didn't want to pay for them.
This was one of his first assertions when he first joined, it is impossible to post anything new or that hasnt been posted before, it is impossible to use a forum search because there are thousands of posts discussing the P-39. When used by the British it was almost permanently grounded for modifications, only four were ever ready for combat and they did two missions, five were lost in accidents and I believe 2 pilots killed. In foreign hands the P-39 and Mustang MkI were contemporaries starting in service around May 1942.The gearbox was protected from behind by the engine, engine armour, pilot armour, and the contents of the nose gun bay. It didn't need armour behind.
As for the "Brits didn't want to pay" bleat, thats just entirely bogus. Once again, I challenge P-39 Ex-Spurt to provide one shred of evidence for this assertion.
The Mustang Mk I was in service until the end of the war with the RAF and they would have taken more. Altitude performance restricted what it could be used for, but there were still plenty of uses for it. The P-39s the British got should be described as pre production models, they just werent sorted at all, the Mustang Mk Is had some small issues when introduced, nothing like the problems with the P-39.Given that May, 1942 time, how did the Mustang MkI compare to the P-39? Obviously more favorably but was it in anyway close?
Agree - that area was specifically designed to hold the radios - it's what went in there that was subject to change.Here's a good diagram showing the compartment area.
Over time, the equipment combinations would change, of course - the compartment, however, would remain the same.
View attachment 624081
Biggest problem was excessive weight which the British specified during construction. A 7850lb P-400 wouldn't meet the contract performance specs drawn up when expected gross weight was 5500lbs.
Also the Mustang Mk I with the Allison was EXTREMELY fast at low altitude, drgondog can give you hard data but I believe they could knock down over 400MPH under 5,000 ft, faster than either the P-51B or D.Given that May, 1942 time, how did the Mustang MkI compare to the P-39? Obviously more favorably but was it in anyway close?