Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
1. Does the gun-laying radar have to be a separate unit from the search radar?
The British hadn't told them how to make it yet....
Do you ever wonder how people so advanced in their thinking they can come up with stuff like jet engines, fire control radar, angled carrier decks, optical landing systems, steam catapults, hydraulic arresting gear, etc, etc, etc,...ad infinitum, before anybody else, yet can't master such basic stuff as gaskets that don't leak and reliable generators, voltage regulators and aircraft and automotive electrical systems?Sneaky brits keeping the good stuff for themselves!
Shortround6 said:For the P-61 there are a number of questions.
1. Does the gun-laying radar have to be a separate unit from the search radar?
2. if so what is the drag of the new aerial/radar dome (at the tail of a four engine bomber the added drag is minimal.)
3. The gun-laying radar would only work on the turret mounted guns (four .50s) leaving the main armament (four 20mm cannon) unused.
4. if the forward "gunner" is tracking and trying to get firing solution using the gun laying radar and turret, who is watching the search radar?
I thought the USAAF only used the Mosquitos as photo-reconnaissance?Dana Bell said:To be fair, I started researching American Mosquito night fighters back in the '70s
wuzak said:The SCR 720 radar had a conical field of view ahead of the aircraft. Using this would severely restrict the use of the gun-laying function.
- What extent did the British have in the design of the SCR-720?
- When you say "conical field of view" do you mean a spin-scan? I've never heard that before...
[An early 10 kW version, built in England by the General Electric Company Research Laboratories, Wembley, London (not to be confused with the similarly named American company General Electric), was given to the US government in September 1940. The British magnetron was a thousand times more powerful than the best American transmitter at the time and produced accurate pulses. At the time the most powerful equivalent microwave producer available in the US (a klystron) had a power of only ten watts.
Search
Ranges: 1, 10, 20, and 100 statute miles. Azimuth Search: 180° forward sector. Elevation Search: operator may select any one of 4 sectors: 0° to 0° (level), -5° to +5°, +5° to +20° and +20° to +50°. In later models the ranges are changed to 5 miles, expanded sweep (dog leg), 10 20, and 100 statute miles.
P-61 & Turret: I figure the turret could be used as a forward-firing blind-shooting system if it was pointed dead-ahead. My guess is that the azimuth and elevation would be combined with data including the aircraft's speed, g-load, and possibly the rate at which the turret is being moved. I could be wrong...
Did we call this airplane the F-8? Or something else?USAAF 416th Night Fighter Squadron
Lancaster AGLT Radome: That has to do with the Avro Lancaster, not the P-61.
We should get Token on here; he's a radar professional. Based on my 45-year-ancient experience with interceptor radars and my 50-year-old memory of P-61 magazine articles written when their veterans were still alive, here's my take on this radar.For the P-61 there are a number of questions.
1. Does the gun-laying radar have to be a separate unit from the search radar?
2. if so what is the drag of the new aerial/radar dome (at the tail of a four engine bomber the added drag is minimal.)
3. The gun-laying radar would only work on the turret mounted guns (four .50s) leaving the main armament (four 20mm cannon) unused.
4. if the forward "gunner" is tracking and trying to get firing solution using the gun laying radar and turret, who is watching the search radar?