Snautzer01
Honourably banned
- 42,565
- Mar 26, 2007
Yes but it keeps pining for the fjords.
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Yes but it keeps pining for the fjords.The P-39 does have beautiful plumage though.
Use the N.Quite right, a hit assuming there is one will ruin your day. '
How good is your day if you are hit by 16 20mm shells?
Difference in the rate of fire of the 37mm and four 20mm Hispano guns.
The Hispano guns, being higher velocity, are easier to hit with.
P-39s could NOT do interceptions at high altitude either.
I am comparing the P-39M (nov 1942) to the Typhoon (Nov 1942) not seeing the Beast.
P-39M does 345mph at 2750ft using 57in of Map and 322mph using military power. Typhoon does 349.5 at 2000ft and 357.5 at 4,000ft. using 7lbs of boost.
So when did this cleaned up Typhoon actually enter combat?From the web site you quoted
August 1943.
Cleaning up.
The remaining cleaning up modifications are now on the production machine. (I think we can agree that this was the standard production version of the Typhoon for the war in Europe, post invasion)
These are(a) Exhaust shrouds.(b) Whip aerial(c) Sliding hood.
Tests at Gloster on a repaired aircraft with a whip aerial and sliding hood fitted have given the following level speeds corrected on the basis of A. & A.E.E. Res.170.
M.S. M.P.A 398 m.p.h. at 8,800ft F.S. M.P.A 417 m.p.h. at 20,500ft.
Note - I also notice that you don't disagree with my comments on the Payload carried by the Typhoon, its much better armour and general firepower.
I agree with you, but this just proves Bell could ballast the plane to stay in its CG envelope.I do know that, but you continue to try to use issues like this to justify most of your arguments. And again, if you take weight out of the nose by installing a lighter cannon you're making matters worse! If you want, I'll do a weight balance calculation with a 20 mm cannon and remove the gear box armor.
This tells me that the P-400 probably had ballast in the nose along with that (drumroll) gear box armor!
BTW - You "balance" on a see-saw, you "balance" on a tight rope, you get an airplane in "Center of Gravity Range" or C/G.
And ballast is sometimes necessary EXTRA weight needed to make the aircraft fly better if at all!! The same as leaving the GB armor installed!!!! Again, why do you think the Soviets did not remove this!!!I agree with you, but this just proves Bell could ballast the plane to stay in its CG envelope.
Interesting points FBJ. The number 1 customer goes to the manufacturer, is initially ignored, but later proves his point to such an extent that changes are made (moving the CG FORWARD) of version 2.0 of the Cobra. With all that Bell knew about the P-39 it's interesting to see what they initially got wrong on the P-63. It's almost as if they thought they were smarter than the user. And looking at Bell through that perspective might give one pause.
Cheers,
Biff
So after 5 years the operator is still telling the designer and constructor how to sort it out?And ballast is sometimes necessary EXTRA weight needed to make the aircraft fly better if at all!! The same as leaving the GB armor installed!!!! Again, why do you think the Soviets did not remove this!!!
Something posted earlier about the P-63...
In February 1944, the Soviet government sent a highly experienced test pilot, Andrey G. Kochetkov, and an aviation engineer, Fyodor P. Suprun, to the Bell factories to participate in the development of the first production variant, the P-63A. Initially ignored by Bell engineers, Kochetkov's expert testing of the machine's spin characteristics (which led to airframe buckling) eventually led to a significant Soviet role in the development. After flat spin recovery proved impossible, and upon Kochetkov's making a final recommendation that pilots should bail out upon entering such a spin, he received a commendation from the Irving Parachute Company. The Kingcobra's maximum aft CG was moved forward to facilitate recovery from spins.
Most significantly, Soviet input resulted in moving the main cannon forward, favorably changing the center of gravity, and increasing its ammo load from 30 to 58 rounds for the A-9 variant.
Gordon, Yefim. Soviet Air Power in World War 2. pp 450–451
Dean, Francis H. America's Hundred Thousand pp 410, 602
So after 5 years the operator is still telling the designer and constructor how to sort it out?
I didnt realise how much Monty Platypus humour was influenced by the P-39, until I saw this thread.Only a Groundhog Platypus would remove the armor.
That's odd, isn't Bell still to this day supplying aircraft to all four services?And this is one of the reasons why, IMO, Bell Aircraft ceased to be a major player in providing the US government with fighter aircraft in the post war years.