Light fighters alternatives, 1935-1945 (9 Viewers)

[tomo pauk]

I see 7 distinct similarieties with a P-51A.

"Distinct similarities" do not equate to a"predecessor".

 

[special ed]

Just a quick look, I see five dissimilar features:
Non retractable tail skid
Auxiliary vertical fins
Landing gear too long
very poor rear view windows
and
the engine turns the wrong way - optional of course.

 

[topspeed]

"Distinct similarities" do not equate to a"predecessor".

Well does it look like an i-16 to you ?

 

[topspeed]

Just a quick look, I see five dissimilar features:
Non retractable tail skid
Auxiliary vertical fins
Landing gear too long
very poor rear view windows
and
the engine turns the wrong way - optional of course.

P-51A had no rear view.

What are those auxliary vertical fins for in your opinion ?

 

[special ed]

It has wings, an engine and a tail - Similar to the Wright Bros product.

 

[topspeed]

It has wings, an engine and a tail - Similar to the Wright Bros product.

Are you kidding me ?

This was very pretty aircraft:

SNCAO 200 - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[special ed]

Maybe pretty to the French...
The aux fins were most likely for a float plane fighter, which is what the original design was.

 

[Howard Gibson]

Italians lost 3 cruisers and 2 destroyers because the Italian air force would not talk to/cooperate with the Italian navy. Having to build 20,000 ton plus carriers because your armed forces won't cooperate with each other is a real problem. I do mean real, at times the US Navy and US Army were not cooperating well either.

The carrier based Fairey Fulmar was a fairly successful fighter because when the Italian Airforce did cooperate, they used open-cockpit, fixed landing gear biplanes. The Fulmar was a Bad Idea, but the Italians lacked the performance to take advantage of it.