random questions

[Bernhart]

Just putting out a random question, might leave this as an open thread if allowed. Would ground crew i.e.. armament crews from a hurricane squadron be able to rearm a spitfire during battle of Britain? I know the gun layouts would be different and the caliber is the same , but are the belts laid out differently?

 

[Airframes]

Slightly different layout of the ammo tanks and feed, but loading was the same and yes, Hurricane armourers should be able to handle a Spitfire.

 

[pbehn]

As far as I am aware RAF fighter command had armourers trained on all types, when Spitfire squadrons replaced Hurricane squadrons they didnt replace all the ground crew, by the time of the BoB both types had been in service for years, its highly unlikely that any airfield had no one with experience on both types.

 

[Snautzer01]

They had manuals

 

[Crimea_River]

The Hurricane crews would probably curse the relatively tight space in the Spitfire.

 

[MiTasol]

I will find and post the relative parts of the RAAF armourers training notes that cover this. Interestingly the late 43 RAAF notes were all about Spitfires and Hurricanes and German aircraft even though the vast majority of RAAF fighters were P-40s and all the aircraft they were fighting were Japanese.
But basically yes - an armourer was an armourer and worked on all types

 

[Dimlee]

If Hurricane armourers run into trouble, just call Uncle Joe and ask for some "girl power" through the reverse lend-lease.

 

[MiTasol]

Re #6 above.
Here is the gun section Table of Contents from the RAAF Armourers Notes (also used to train pilots and air gunners) and the Browning section which you will see has no type specific material (and a couple of the random target pages - remember Australia is in the Pacific and Do 217, Ju88, etc were not likely targets anywhere in the Pacific in or after Dec 1943). There are no pages covering Japanese aircraft

[edited for clarity]

 

[P-39 Expert]

If Hurricane armourers run into trouble, just call Uncle Joe and ask for some "girl power" through the reverse lend-lease.
View attachment 606527

You probably get asked this all the time, but concerning WW2 is it better to use "Russian" or "Soviet"? Thanks in advance.

 

[fubar57]

Not to be written in stone....I have four books on the Alaska-Siberia Airway and all four use Soviet. They were published between 1996 - 2016 so this may be taken into consideration.

 

[P-39 Expert]

Not to be written in stone....I have four books on the Alaska-Siberia Airway and all four use Soviet. They were published between 1996 - 2016 so this may be taken into consideration.

How long did the trip from Buffalo to Alaska take? In a P-39 or P-40.

 

[Greyman]

You probably get asked this all the time, but concerning WW2 is it better to use "Russian" or "Soviet"? Thanks in advance.

Depends on exactly what you're referring to. Somewhat like England and the United Kingdom. Soviet is the better 'catch-all' just in case you're referring to something that happens to be Belarusian, Ukrainian, etc. and not Russian.

 

[fubar57]

How long did the trip from Buffalo to Alaska take? In a P-39 or P-40.

It looks like aircraft from the U.S. plants were marshalled to Great Falls, Montana and from there headed to the USSR. I'll see if I can find something more definitive.

 

[P-39 Expert]

Depends on exactly what you're referring to. Somewhat like England and the United Kingdom. Soviet is the better 'catch-all' just in case you're referring to something that happens to be Belarusian, Ukrainian, etc. and not Russian.

Makes sense, I hadn't considered that Russia is made up of a lot of states.

 

[fubar57]

P-39 Expert If you like, when no one at my house is on the web, I can PM you the books

 

[P-39 Expert]

P-39 Expert If you like, when no one at my house is on the web, I can PM you the books

No thanks. I've searched the internet trying to find out and still haven't. If you run across it let me know.

Just guessing, a day (maybe two) from Buffalo to Great falls, then two days up to Alaska.

 

[Greyman]

Makes sense, I hadn't considered that Russia is made up of a lot of states.

No, the Soviet Union was made up of several states -- Russia being one of them.
Just like the United Kingdom is made up of several states -- England being one of them.

 

[fubar57]

The route shown on one of the book covers

 

[Dimlee]

You probably get asked this all the time, but concerning WW2 is it better to use "Russian" or "Soviet"? Thanks in advance.

Good question... I always say "Soviet" (Sovetskiy) when speaking about the Soviet period unless the subject relates to something native Russian (language, cuisine, culture, etc.).
USSR consisted of 15 main (Union) republics and RSFSR (Russian republic) was just one of them, albeit the largest in territory and population.
I think this is sufficient reason to stay with the "Soviet".
Dzerzhinskiy was Pole. Stalin was Georgian. Berzin, the creator of GULag, was Latvian, and so on.

P.S. There are other reasons as well but they require much longer explanation.

 

[P-39 Expert]

Good question... I always say "Soviet" (Sovetskiy) when speaking about the Soviet period unless the subject relates to something native Russian (language, cuisine, culture, etc.).
USSR consisted of 15 main (Union) republics and RSFSR (Russian republic) was just one of them, albeit the largest in territory and population.
I think this is sufficient reason to stay with the "Soviet".
Dzerzhinskiy was Pole. Stalin was Georgian. Berzin, the creator of GULag, was Latvian, and so on.

P.S. There are other reasons as well but they require much longer explanation.

So when talking about WW2 it is correct to use "Soviet"?