Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Electronic units work well in dark, cool environments, especially early radar units. .
Not too cool! Bomber Command crews were obliged to turn on and warm up H2S sets before climbing to operational altitudes as it was too cold at altitude for the components (I assume this refers to the valves) to reach their operating temperatures.
Cheers
Steve
Depends on the internal components - cathode tubes, yes, but once up and running you need stabilized cool temperatures. With almost 20 years working around P-3s on and off, the coolest place on the flightline on a hot day was inside an aircraft that was going though ground avionics checks, but then again, we were dealing with components made up of PCs rather than old cathode tubes.
I don't know - most of my time were on P-3Cs Update IIIs, about the last 150 built. By that time most if not all of the electronics had PCsDid the early P-3s have vacuum tubes? It must have been a struggle to keep the first AI sets operating night after night with shocks from landing.
The P-61E was a day fighter and replaced the radar with 4 x 0.5" mgs.
Interesting I wonder what role the USAAF had in mind for it.The P-61E was a day fighter and replaced the radar with 4 x 0.5" mgs.
I don't know - most of my time were on P-3Cs Update IIIs, about the last 150 built. By that time most if not all of the electronics had PCs[/QUOTE
Hello,
P3B's and P3C's Update I,II, II.5's all had tubes in the VOR (ARC101?) receivers. If I remember correctly, The ARC 101 also had dual use of VHF receivers along with VOR (VHF Omni Directional) functions. I flew as FCO and IFT on P3B's and P3C's (UD II, II.5, III) from 1990-2007. ARC 101's were replaced over time, but they were around well past 2000............(as far as I remember)
Of the many heat sensitive items on the plane (acoustic station in P3B's) was the most sensitive. We would take the rack doors off the equipment bays to cool the equipment while chasing subs. I think we also did that on P3C UDII, II.5 DIFAR systems but memory..........
Timmy
VP-92
Did the early P-3s have vacuum tubes? It must have been a struggle to keep the first AI sets operating night after night with shocks from landing.
From Wiki...
"Two P-61B-10s (numbers 42-39549 and 42-39557) converted to daytime long-range escort fighters. Tandem crew sat under a blown canopy which replaced the turret, additional fuel tanks were installed in place of the radar operator's cockpit in the rear of the fuselage pod, and four 0.50 in (12.7 mm) machine guns took place of the radar in the nose (the 20 mm/.79 in ventral cannon were retained as well). First flight 20 November 1944, cancelled after the war ended. The first prototype was converted to an XF-15, the second lost in take-off accident 11 April 1945."
The P-61E and F-15 variants got a lot of their performance increase from the turbocharged "C" series engines (very similar to the engines used in the P-47M & N) and not by ditching the turret and crewman.
Some books claim about a 5mph difference in speed between early P-61s built without the turret (around 300) and the ones with turrets.
Climb could well have been affected.
The USAAF did operate Mosquitoes and Spitfires, so reverse-lend lease certainly existed. I think the Mosquito was, overall, a better airplane but the P-61 was probably a more capable
I think that the turret and 3-man crew on the P-61 were also a design flaw. Getting rid of the turret and the 3rd crew member would have resulted in much higher performance, as was the case with the P-61E and F-15 variants.