- Thread starter
- #41
Colin1
Senior Master Sergeant
I'll dig around
but you'll need to wait until I get home
IAR.80C vs D.520C
- Thread starter Colin1
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
but you'll need to wait until I get home
Tzaw1
Airman 1st Class
speed @ 5000 m: IAR 80C 485 km/h vs. 550 km/h D520
climbing at 5000 m: 7' vs. 6'41"
max. operational ceiling: 10 000 m vs. 10 250 m
range: 730 km vs. 890 km
max. range: 1330 km vs. 1540 km
Armament: 2×20 mm + 4×7,92 mm vs. 1×20 mm + 4×7,9 mm.
But... since January 1944!
If we will compare earlier versions of IAR 80, i.e. A and B, are then comparison will be on the advantage of D520. Only climbing will be better (IAR 80A) or slightly better (IAR 80B).
IAR 80A was operational only in February 1941, about one year after D520. In this time D520 would have new, better versions.
I know nothing about protecting of fuel tanks at both machines. About armour IAR 80's only so much, that it was worse than soviet planes.
Discussion about max speed IAR 80 here: WorldWar2.ro Forum -> IAR 80 max speed question...
climbing at 5000 m: 7' vs. 6'41"
max. operational ceiling: 10 000 m vs. 10 250 m
range: 730 km vs. 890 km
max. range: 1330 km vs. 1540 km
Armament: 2×20 mm + 4×7,92 mm vs. 1×20 mm + 4×7,9 mm.
But... since January 1944!
If we will compare earlier versions of IAR 80, i.e. A and B, are then comparison will be on the advantage of D520. Only climbing will be better (IAR 80A) or slightly better (IAR 80B).
IAR 80A was operational only in February 1941, about one year after D520. In this time D520 would have new, better versions.
I know nothing about protecting of fuel tanks at both machines. About armour IAR 80's only so much, that it was worse than soviet planes.
Discussion about max speed IAR 80 here: WorldWar2.ro Forum -> IAR 80 max speed question...
iar80
Considered one of the best fighters in 1939, a report of the Luftwaffe major that tested it in March 1941 said:
"Take off and landing are very good. It's 20–30 km/h slower than the Bf-109E. The climb to 5,000 meters is equivalent. In a dogfight, the turns are also equivalent, although the long nose reduces the visibility. In a dive it's outclassed by the Bf-109E, because it lacks an automated propeller pitch regulator. It's a fighter adequate to modern needs."
Considered one of the best fighters in 1939, a report of the Luftwaffe major that tested it in March 1941 said:
"Take off and landing are very good. It's 20–30 km/h slower than the Bf-109E. The climb to 5,000 meters is equivalent. In a dogfight, the turns are also equivalent, although the long nose reduces the visibility. In a dive it's outclassed by the Bf-109E, because it lacks an automated propeller pitch regulator. It's a fighter adequate to modern needs."
