Most effective planes of the early war years

plan_D · Jun 10, 2005

The Spitfire first flew in March 1936, it wasn't much older than the D.520.

FLYBOYJ · Jun 11, 2005

It wasn't French (thank god)

marseille jr · Jun 11, 2005

too few too late!! it was designed in 1936 how much time did they need!!

Premier vol: 2/10/1938; Production: 3/12/39; Livraison: 1/02/1940

translated : first flight at 2nd october 1938, production started in december 1939, first deliveries in february 1940. (First drawings were made in 1937 btw.)

On espérait l'équiper d'un moteur de 1300cv..

They hoped to equip it with a 1300HP engine ... but that never happened (910 was all it got)

Il abbatit néanmoins près de 150 avions ennemis pour une perte de 85

It knocked out almost 150 ennemy planes for the loss of 85 of their own (against the much more experienced germans)

seuls 36 étaient en service le 10 mai 1940, un nombre tout à fait insuffisant pour faire face à la toute puissante Luftwaffe

Only 36 were in service on 10 may 1940, absolutely not enough to face the powerful luftwaffe on equal terms.

Dans les opérations militaires et la courte période qui vit la France et l'Allemagne s'affronter dans les airs, le D-520 se révéla supérieur au Messerschmitt Bf 109-E3 pour ce qui est de la manoeuvrabilité, mais inférieur quant à la vitesse maximale

in the short period France and Germany contended in the air, the D520 revealed itself to be superior in terms of manoeuvrability to the BF 109 E-3, but inferior in terms of top speed.

Amen

delcyros · Jun 11, 2005

I must admit, that the D-520 is a beauty.
But this thread goes for the most effective plane of the erly stage of war and even a record of 150 kills is not that impressive, compared to the Bf-109 or Hurricane. Keep also in mind that almost all single engined fighter planes have a positive loss to kill relation (including the polish P-11 fighter).

DerAdlerIstGelandet · Jun 11, 2005

The development of the D.520 started in 1936. So in the time that the British developed the Spitfire and the Germans developed the Bf-109 the French could not speed up there progress on the D.520.

I am sorry if I am being biased here I think the D.520 was an underated aircraft as you stated and she did well for the time she was in service but I just dont like French planes.

Design of the Dewoitine 520 started in November 1936 at the private design firm led by Emile Dewoitine. Trying to address problems in earlier designs, he created a fighter using only the latest techniques and engines. The new design was to be able to reach 520 km/h, and became known as the "520". Only months later the firm was conglomorated into one of a number of design-and-manufacturing pools, in this case SNCAM. Still known as the D.520, work on the design continued at the new company.

The first prototype D.520 flew on October 2, 1938, powered by the new 890 hp (660 kW) Hispano-Suiza 12Y-21 liquid-cooled engine. The plane managed to reach only 480 km/h in flight tests, much slower than expected. Most of the problem seemed to come from greater than expected drag from the underwing radiators, so these were merged into a single radiator under the fuselage. After minor damage in a landing accident the engine was upgraded to a newer -29 and included exhaust ejectors for added thrust, along with an adjustable prop. These changes were enough to allow the plane to reach its design speed.
http://www.brainyencyclopedia.com/encyclopedia/d/de/dewoitine_d_520.html

With the War looming in 1939, you would have thought the French would have ordered more aircraft then they did....

Flight tests went fairly well, and a contract for 200 production machines to be powered by the newer -31 engine (later replaced by the -45) was issued in March of 1939. A contract for an additional 600 planes was issued in June, but this was reduced to 510 in July.
http://www.brainyencyclopedia.com/encyclopedia/d/de/dewoitine_d_520.html

And a bit too late.....

With the outbreak of war in September 1939 a new contract brought the total to 1280, with the production rate to be 200 machines per month from May 1940 onward. The Aeronavale then ordered 120 for their own use. Another Armée de Air order in April 1940 brought the total to 2250, and increased quotas to 350 a month.
http://www.brainyencyclopedia.com/encyclopedia/d/de/dewoitine_d_520.html

Sorry guys but the French here botched this one up again, they have a habit of it.

lesofprimus · Jun 11, 2005

Yea, that and the manufacture of French Surrender Flags...

DerAdlerIstGelandet · Jun 11, 2005

Very true. They are now making 2 models of French Army knives to issue out to there troops.

cheddar cheese · Jun 11, 2005

Stars and Stripes pacifier

DerAdlerIstGelandet · Jun 11, 2005

Yeah I thought those were funny.

Chocks away! · Jun 11, 2005

I still think the Dewoitine is in the best of the bunch. Think of the number in service and how many they shot down. They saw some action my friends!

DerAdlerIstGelandet · Jun 11, 2005

The D.520 was deffinatly underated but as for the early war years I still have to go with the Bf-109E and the Hurricane. In all actually both of these aircraft would send the French flying for safety over a period of time. The D.520 was the solution for the French who took to long to develop the aircraft. It was still a fine aircraft though, dont take me wrong.

marseille jr · Jun 11, 2005

I still think the Dewoitine is in the best of the bunch

Exactly. Not the best, but among the best. Most pilots only had flown about 5 hours in the aircraft and still managed to hold their own against numeriorically superior germans with months/years of experience in their emils. If the D520 wasn't on par with the Emil, this couldn't have happened unless all french pilots were Marseilles and Nowotnys... which obviously wasn't the case.

But consider this. Against the Emil it had its manoeuvrability and range to make up for the speed and engine rating shortcomings, but against the spitfire ... it definetely lost it's manoeuvrability advantage. I think this might perhaps be a reason why that the spit can be hailed as best dogfighter in the early stage of the war, despite my penchant for the BF 109. What do you guys think of this deduction?

Design of the Dewoitine 520 started in November 1936 at the private design firm led by Emile Dewoitine

Mmmmm. I read on different french sites development started in january 1937. I'd guess that french sites will be more accurate as it's a french plane.

Sorry guys but the French here botched this one up again, they have a habit of it

Yes. Not that a whole lot D520's would have changed the outcome though.

But this thread goes for the most effective plane of the erly stage of war and even a record of 150 kills is not that impressive, compared to the Bf-109 or Hurricane

Only 36 were in service on 10 may 1940. You can't expect that pilots who barely knew the plane would rack up 1000's of aerial victories with so few planes.

the lancaster kicks ass · Jun 11, 2005

marseille jr said:
Quote:
Design of the Dewoitine 520 started in November 1936 at the private design firm led by Emile Dewoitine

Mmmmm. I read on different french sites development started in january 1937. I'd guess that french sites will be more accurate as it's a french plane.

there is an element of truth in this however do not just go by this, always look for several sources when getting data, are sites in english always right about english planes?? no.........

DerAdlerIstGelandet · Jun 11, 2005

Well you know every site I hae been to says 1936 development started. Maybe they are wrong, will I ever know, problaby not because I was not on the design team of the aircraft, but I go with the common rule here.

I agree with what you say though about being among the best but not the best.

marseille jr · Jun 12, 2005

Well you know every site I hae been to says 1936 development started. Maybe they are wrong, will I ever know, problaby not because I was not on the design team of the aircraft, but I go with the common rule here.

D520 dont la conception avait débuté en 1937
http://henry.chez.tiscali.fr/nn/D520.html

Un projet modifié, désigné D.520 en référence à la vitesse exigée, est soumis en janvier 1937
http://caea.free.fr/fr/coll/d520.html

Both French sites state it was 1937. I regret we will never know the exact truth, but I'm inclined to 1937 here.

In trials on 4/21/40 with a captured Bf 109E3, the Bf109 was 20 mph faster due to the higher power of its engine, but the D.520 had superior maneuverability and handling.
http://members.aol.com/bogdanovaslava/Bulgarian_D520.html

plan_D · Jun 13, 2005

What's the point in all this. Everyone has agreed the D.520 was under-rated and that it's 'among the best'. It's hardly an effective plane of the early war years.

The mention of the kill ratio, the FAF got a 26:1 kill:loss ratio with Brewster Buffaloes. Does that make the Buffalo a good plane? I think not.

The French would have been better with Hawk-75s than D.520s. The Bf-109 was the most effective early war fighter. The Hurricane up to Dunkirk didn't have much to say in the matter, it shone through during the Battle of Britain.

And 200 machines per month! My god, that's a disgrace. Britain was throwing out 1000 Spitfires and Hurricanes a WEEK during the height of production in the Battle of Britain.

marseille jr · Jun 13, 2005

The Bf-109 was the most effective early war fighter

Mmmm the Emil couldn't really outperform the spit (except with negative G manoeuvers but that was quickly solved) while the spit could easily outturn the BF 109. I don't think the Emil's pair of twin slow firing cannons would completely make up for this. The germans were just lucky to have battle hardened veterens and well proven tactics to account for so many british planes.

Still I have to agree with you to some extent. Personnally I've always considered the spit and the Bf 109 each others equal (until 1943). They were along with the D520 the best planes of 1937-1940 (omitting the first reisen versions).

plan_D · Jun 13, 2005

First off, this thread clearly stated "...up to Dunkirk..." the Spitfire did not serve in France, it served to protect the evacuation at Dunkirk only.

Secondly, effective doesn't mean technical ability. The Spitfire had no effect on the Battle of France because it wasn't there! I don't think you understand the term effective.

Effective ~ Adjective;

1. a) Having an intended or expected effect
b) Producing a strong impression or response

Up to Dunkirk the Spitfire did not have the oppurtunity to create a strong impression. The Bf-109, however, did have the oppurtunity and created the largest impression of any fighter in the early war years.

There's no real need for a discussion on the technical ability of either aircraft as the Spitfire Vs. 109 debate has been raging for many a decade.

The Spitfire and Bf-109 were both superior creations to the D.520. The Hawk-75 was better than the D.520 as well, this plane would have put much better service in as it out-performed the Spitfire Mk.I in everything but speed.

Smokey · Jun 13, 2005

I don't understand why some find the stereotype of french soldiers running away funny.
Are you saying that if you were in a war you would stand and fight? 99% of soldiers would literally shit themselves, scream and run away or surrender when there was'nt an officer around to shoot them for desertion.

Oh, and not surpisingly it has been proven that only 1 or 2 % of soldiers shoot to kill in combat, they are too sickened to murder someone.

plan_D · Jun 13, 2005

99% of soldiers would run away? Do you want to provide evidence to back up that statistic?

By that simple statement you have disgraced every single man in history that has fought on a field of battle, that has seen his friends die, that has been injured in a conflict and that has ultimately paid the ultimate price, his life.

All of those men that ran up those beaches, jumped out of those planes, ran across those fields, flew those bombers, sailed in those ships during World War 2 to secure your freedom of speech, you have insulted. You fuck-ing moron!

Who the fuck do you think you are!? Sure they were scared, who wouldn't be!? Those men were ALL scared but bravery isn't being scared, it's BEING scared and getting off your ass and doing the job anyway! You arsehole!

Now, for everyone else with a bit of sense here's an amusing website.

http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/text/france.html

Enjoy.

Oh yeah, and Smokey, you're an arsehole.

Most effective planes of the early war years

Lieutenant Colonel

"THE GREAT GAZOO"

Airman

Attachments

Tech Sergeant

Private Chemtrail Disperser

Brigadier General

Private Chemtrail Disperser

Attachments

Major General

Private Chemtrail Disperser

Senior Airman

Private Chemtrail Disperser

Airman

Attachments

Major General

Private Chemtrail Disperser

Airman

Attachments

Lieutenant Colonel

Airman

Attachments

Lieutenant Colonel

Senior Airman

Lieutenant Colonel

Users who are viewing this thread

Similar threads