Thank you.
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
...
Had there been P-40s in New Guinea instead of P-39s, nothing would have changed.
...
Just a head's up: there were P-40s in New Guinea and northern Australia, both USAAF and RAAF. They had been diverted when the Japanese attacked the Philippines.Had there been P-40s in New Guinea instead of P-39s, nothing would have changed.
Thank you.
Not enough of them, and they were based on an older design, the P-36.
Weren't there many more P-40s available than P-39s at the time?
Between January 1941 and December 1941, the USAAC took delivery of 131 P-40Bs, 193 P-40Cs and 22 P-40Ds.Weren't there many more P-40s available than P-39s at the time?
while developing P-47s and P-51s.
At the time, the Army had fighter contracts for the P-40, P-38 and P-39.Why did it take so long for the AAF to look at the Mustang?
Why did it take so long for the AAF to look at the Mustang?
They did get out, Chenault saw to that. His nemesises from Air Corps days saw to it that they they were debunked as "Buck Rogers stuff" and didn't get disseminated.Interesting that the tactics didn't get out from the AVG to the AAF and USN/USMC; they had to reinvent these tactics for themselves.
Maybe stateside, and for testing and training, but not where it counts; battle-ready in the theater of operations. It's a long way from official acceptance on the manufacturer's ramp to the first combat sortie.Lighting is available already in 1941.
"Big Army", who held the purse strings for USAAF, still tended to think of pursuit aviation as a battlefield tool, not a defensive or strategic asset.The USAAF planned for combat put to 15,000 ft. The rest of the world planned on 20,000 ft.
The turbocharged P-43 had capabilities well above 20,000 ft, yet AAF testing, http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/P-43/P-43_Official_Performance_Summary.jpg , tended to stop at 15,000 ft.
And the P40's controls were better balanced and easier to handle at higher speeds than the Japanese fighters. Something that doesn't show up on performance charts, but makes a big difference in combat.the P-40 was proven to best the A6M and KI-43 as long as it maintained it's speed in a fight (i.e.: force the enemy to fight on the P-40's terms).
True on the early warning system of observers, sometimes called coast watchers. They were usually people who lived in the area, farmers, etc. Hazardous as they were hunted by the Japanese.Some thoughts on that:
The P-39s did not have what the AVG did; an 'early warning system' of observers warning them of incoming attacks.
They often had 10 minutes or less to get in their planes and climb to 20,000 ft to intercept. Too often they were bounced on the vulnerable way up.
The USAAF planned for combat put to 15,000 ft. The rest of the world planned on 20,000 ft.
The turbocharged P-43 had capabilities well above 20,000 ft, yet AAF testing, http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/P-43/P-43_Official_Performance_Summary.jpg , tended to stop at 15,000 ft.
In December of 1941 the USAAF was in the process of replacing their too few P-35s and P-36s with P-40s, P-39s, and P-38s while developing P-47s and P-51s. 1942 was the year of gaining experience while building up forces.
All that was required of the P-39s and P-40s was to be good enough.
They were good enough.
Didn't some of the early Mustangs have four 20mm cannons? Were they belt-fed, and how many rounds did they carry?Just a wee note, by December 1941, all Mustang production was for the RAF. The Mustang was at that time ostensibly a 'British' aircraft, although two examples had gone to Wright Patterson for evaluation in July 1941. The USAAC/AAF had not shown any interest in it initially, but the Army ordered 150, simply designated P-51s (which became Mustang Ias and Mustang IIs) in July 1941 under Lend Lease for the RAF, but it wasn't until early/mid 1942 that the USAAF looked to the type, as an attack aircraft, not a fighter, for its own ranks.
At the time, the Army had fighter contracts for the P-40, P-38 and P-39.
With the Mustang being developed for Britain, the Army was not particularly involved until they evaluated it.
And to touch on an earlier comment about Curtiss production: Bell may have delivered more P-39s to the USAAF than Curtiss, but that's not taking into account that Curtiss (at the time) was delivering more P-40s to Britain than the U.S. (which is the reason the Mustang came into being).
Once Lend-Lease was approved as official policy, planes passed through US ownership enroute to allies. Prior to that, they were direct purchase export products and belonged to their purchasers. This happened in the middle of production of several types: Boston, Harvard, Maryland, Catalina, Hawk 75, Tomahawk, Airacobra, to name a few.Weren't P-40s going to Britain Lend Lease planes, officially accepted by the US? Certainly that holds true for the P-39s & P-63s, most of which ended up in the USSR.
True on the early warning system of observers, sometimes called coast watchers. They were usually people who lived in the area, farmers, etc. Hazardous as they were hunted by the Japanese.
Australian radar was just too far away to do much good. Radar was installed at Milne Bay in August and at Port Moresby in September, but from April until August/September they were blind for incoming raids. And those raids were coming from Lae less then 200 miles away. Either fly patrols with the two squadrons available or wait on the ground. Tough duty.
I've always maintained that the P-39 would have been much more effective much higher up had it weighed less, and the weight reduction could have been accomplished at forward bases.
In the icy steppes of Russia, plenty; in the steaming jungles of New Guinea, probably not so much.Gotta wonder what the P-39 would have done with the extra boost.
Let's pick the least capable P-40 and the least capable Zero, while picking the most capable P-39 and draw conclusions? Sorry - no.
Lighting is available already in 1941.