Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
The role of interceptor when first mooted in around 1935-6 was all about RoC and firepower. That was before Dowding system was devised. If the Spitfire had more endurance in terms of fuel and ammunition it would be of great advantage to Park and other commanders.That's why I assumed Bill meant best interceptor for the U.S.A.
We tended to make our planes a bit heavier than British planes of the same general variety. At least fighters, anyway. Not sure which was better overall, but the British Spits were always the cat's meow in performance, if a bit "delicate" by comparison.
It was a lot worse.Two 12.7mm machine guns isn't a whole lot worse than a lot of Soviet fighters at that time. One 12.7 and one 20mm or one 7.62 and one 20mm were pretty common
The A6M was more heavily armed than most Soviet fighters in 1942.
RAF Bomber Command begs to differ.I just think most of the Air Combat in 1941-1943 was in North Africa / the Med, Russia, the Pacific, and China. There were a few 'big shows' like Dieppe, and they did some daylight bombing and raids like at Eindhoven. Channel Dash. Various Fw 190 jabo raids and so on. But there was fighting over the ground / naval war in these other Theaters, which is a bit more consequential in this period.
RAF Bomber Command begs to differ.
Once you have the upper hand, you can be merciful.
Once you have the upper hand, you pursue victory. Mercy has nothing to do with it until you're rounding up prisoners.
When you have the upper hand, that's when you step on the gas.
I've always been skeptical of many of these tests, I'd like to see 5 in issue squadron aircraft flown and the average taken, just because one aircraft, and in some cases brand new ones at that test flown in perfect weather reaches a speed it doesn't mean the rest will, I feel many of these tests need to be taken with a grain of salt.Kind of makes one wonder how useful the XP-51F or G, or the P-51H would've been as an interceptor--since improving rate of climb was one of the biggest objectives of the lightweight Mustang program. But then again, it seems that the P-51D would've been quite useful in that role on light fuel and with 75" or 80" boost that happened later in the war.
That's been my argument from day one, with more fuel RoC becomes less important with the added benefit of better tactical flexibility.The role of interceptor when first mooted in around 1935-6 was all about RoC and firepower. That was before Dowding system was devised. If the Spitfire had more endurance in terms of fuel and ammunition it would be of great advantage to Park and other commanders.
The FC did not see the situation that way. A slower climb rate would have meant standing patrols, which were seen as wearing planes down too much and consuming too much fuel and tiring the pilots. The idea was that only when the attackers had been spotted would the start order be given. Only at the end of the BoB did fighter bombers and relative fast Ju 88 attacks force the FC to use standing patrols on a larger scale.That's been my argument from day one, with more fuel RoC becomes less important with the added benefit of better tactical flexibility.
Roll rate alone doesn't neccessarily make for a fighter with the agility of a Zero.I would note here that many later war fighters were agile - the Fw 190 was one of the fastest rolling fighters of the war, and the P-51 was not too far behind it. The Spitfire had the remarkable turn rate and the LF versions had excellent roll too. Most of the best Soviet fighters were also very good at roll (La 5, Yak 3) and pretty good at turning as well.
The P-40 had a poor horsepower to weight ratio. Therefore it suffered in climbs and acceleration. But most agree it could outturn anything the Germans were flying.Roll rate alone doesn't neccessarily make for a fighter with the agility of a Zero.
Look at the P-40. Superior roll rate to a lot of fighters, and yet NO ONE hails its agility as a fighter. Most just seem to harp on it being an overweight turd that couldn't fight its way out of a paper bag.
Sorry but I disagree, the British could see the bombers forming up before they crossed the channel, they also tracked them right across into British airspace before scrambling the fighters at the last minute because they didn't have the fuel to do otherwise resulting in them almost always climbing up from underneath, numerous BoB pilots have stated this, with another 30G tank behind the seat the fighters could have launched earlier and been at altitude before the bombers crossed the channel or had time to climb higher still to engage the top fighter cover, not just that with another 20 minutes of fuel the fighters could have been vectored to better positions to attack instead of straight up, lastly the extra fuel wouldn't inhibit the fighting qualities of the Spitfire because it would be gone before entering combat, just like any other fighter with aux or drop tanks. The only time a fighter has too much fuel on board is if it's on fire.If someone is going to bomb your city (or base, etc.) and you have limited warning time, the ROC is more important than fuel. If you can't get to the enemy, he will bomb his target. If you CAN get to your enemy, then getting there with more fuel is the best option, assuming enough ammunition to make a difference.
So, ROC doesn't take a back seat to more fuel unless you can get to altitude in time to stop the bombing attack. If you can't get there in time, all the fuel and / or ammo doesn't count, at least for that particular attack.
Roll rate alone doesn't neccessarily make for a fighter with the agility of a Zero.
Look at the P-40. Superior roll rate to a lot of fighters, and yet NO ONE hails its agility as a fighter. Most just seem to harp on it being an overweight turd that couldn't fight its way out of a paper bag.
The P40 is the most underrated fighter of the war, as stated in another thread, it was the willys Jeep of fighters.Right... except almost all of the pilots who actually flew it lol
The P-40 had a poor horsepower to weight ratio. Therefore it suffered in climbs and acceleration. But most agree it could outturn anything the Germans were flying.
The P40 is the most underrated fighter of the war, as stated in another thread, it was the willys Jeep of fighters.
The OK for 1940 supercharger but failed to improve supercharger over the next 3 years.single speed, single stage supercharger.
Correct.The P-40 had a poor horsepower to weight ratio.