Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Like the P-39?
A book I am reading, "Air War Normandy" has a summary of the RAF's attitudes on drop tanks.
"Drop Tanks had been designed for use only when ferrying aeroplanes. Their use on operations was widely regarded as an aberration and imputed to the Air Ministry, where, it was supposed, the Staff's knowledge of flying was minimal."
A book I am reading, "Air War Normandy" has a summary of the RAF's attitudes on drop tanks.
"Drop Tanks had been designed for use only when ferrying aeroplanes. Their use on operations was widely regarded as an aberration and imputed to the Air Ministry, where, it was supposed, the Staff's knowledge of flying was minimal."
The Spitfire used combat drop tanks from 1942 onward. The Darwin Spitfires used 30IG tanks regularly, after the early episode where fuel starvation caused the loss of many aircraft.
A book I am reading, "Air War Normandy" has a summary of the RAF's attitudes on drop tanks.
"Drop Tanks had been designed for use only when ferrying aeroplanes. Their use on operations was widely regarded as an aberration and imputed to the Air Ministry, where, it was supposed, the Staff's knowledge of flying was minimal."
A book I am reading, "Air War Normandy" has a summary of the RAF's attitudes on drop tanks.
"Drop Tanks had been designed for use only when ferrying aeroplanes. Their use on operations was widely regarded as an aberration and imputed to the Air Ministry, where, it was supposed, the Staff's knowledge of flying was minimal."
Fixed under-wing long range tanks were developed for the Hurricane Mk I? Mk II?, entering service shortly after the BoB (I think). I am not sure of the size but I think they were listed as 90 Impgal (88 effective). The tanks had integral fuel pumps allowing the fuel to be pumped into the internal tanks to top them up. I am not sure how they were constructed but they were not of the 'paper' variety. They were not combatable or self-sealing.
Droppable tanks were developed for the Hurricane, entering service in mid-1941. The DTs were 'paper' (composite paper, plastic, and wood) with a capacity listed in AM literature as 45 Impgal (43.5 or 44.5 effective). A larger 90 Impgal (90 effective) version of the 'paper' drop tank became available shortly after the 45. Although the 90 Impgal DT could be used for CAP missions where short range and long loiter time were required, they were not normally used for combat operations, only for ferry purposes.
Fixed combatable self-sealing under-wing tanks were also developed for the Hurricane Mk II, around the same time as the drop tanks (maybe slightly before as the Mod No. is lower than for the drop tanks). They are usually listed as 44 Impgal (40 effective) in AM literature. Again, am not sure how they were constructed.
Does anyone have any photos or details of the construction of either version the fixed long-range tanks?
Does anyone have any photos or details of the construction of either version the fixed long-range tanks?
Fixed under-wing long range tanks were developed for the Hurricane Mk I? Mk II?, entering service shortly after the BoB (I think). I am not sure of the size but I think they were listed as 90 Impgal (88 effective). The tanks had integral fuel pumps allowing the fuel to be pumped into the internal tanks to top them up. I am not sure how they were constructed but they were not of the 'paper' variety. They were not combatable or self-sealing.
Droppable tanks were developed for the Hurricane, entering service in mid-1941. The DTs were 'paper' (composite paper, plastic, and wood) with a capacity listed in AM literature as 45 Impgal (43.5 or 44.5 effective). A larger 90 Impgal (90 effective) version of the 'paper' drop tank became available shortly after the 45. Although the 90 Impgal DT could be used for CAP missions where short range and long loiter time were required, they were not normally used for combat operations, only for ferry purposes.
Fixed combatable self-sealing under-wing tanks were also developed for the Hurricane Mk II, around the same time as the drop tanks (maybe slightly before as the Mod No. is lower than for the drop tanks). They are usually listed as 44 Impgal (40 effective) in AM literature. Again, am not sure how they were constructed.
Does anyone have any photos or details of the construction of either version the fixed long-range tanks?
IIRC, one of the 'virtues' of the paper tanks was that they were of no use to the Axis when dropped, as they could not be reused/recycled, unlike the aluminium tanks.
Reduce, re-use, recycle!A regular customer at the hobby shop I worked with grew up in Germany late in WW2 in the countryside, and he and his friends used to collect the aluminium tanks and cut them in half to make canoes!
Postwar some of the Lockheed P-38 steel drop tanks were converted into racers.
Arnold gets a bum rap as an acolyte in high command that stubbornly believed that 'the Bomber will always get through'. He re-prioritized the #4 priority for a fighter with 1500 mi range to #1 in the Emmons Board Report. He held the Fighter Conference a little more than a month after Pearl Harbor to prioritize combat tanks and activated Barney Giles to 'solve the escort fighter problem by the end of 1943 - with existing or new airframe' and approved Giles push to NAA/Lockheed and Republic to design more internal fuel into their fighters - July 1943. Giles and Arnold were the key HQ Command Staff to over-ride Echols and assign NAA highest priority in late 1942 to break loose tooling, Packard Merlin production and Materiel Command obstruction at the War Production Board.
The flood of issues encountered by VIII ASC with arriving P-47s and then P-38s with respect to combat readiness led to disengaging Materiel Command from Testing responsibilities and re-assign to Eglin Proving Ground in 1943.