- Thread starter
- #21
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
I guess it's semantics, but rather than an under-powered Skyraider lets get a more effective Avenger.
The 1942 version should have had 2000 HP for take off, at least by Midway.
The Fleetwings XBTK might have been very useful.
It also used the same engine as the F8F Bearcat. A 1942 version with 1850hp for take-off instead of 2100hp ( and 2300-3400 with water injection) might not have been quite as useful. The later engine also picked up 200hp at max continuous setting.
Did a Plane that started design in Jan 1944 use any different aerodynamics (airfoil, cowl, etc) than a 1939-40 aircraft?
Did a Plane that started design in Jan 1944 use any different knowledge of structure/s than a 1939-40 aircraft?
The Avenger was a very effective naval attack plane in World War II. It was not a great torpedo bomber because of deficiencies in American torpedoes combined with the fact that the role was gradually rendered obsolete by increased effectiveness of anti-aircraft guns. As it turned out, the Avenger became crucial to the US Navy and Royal Navy as a place to put its stuff. With the Avenger, they had a plane that could carry radar and a radar operator. It could carry sonar buoys and fido Mk 24 anti-submarine torpedoes, depth charges, rockets, extra gas tanks for overnight patrols, It could seat 6 and still land on an aircraft carrier when outfitted for carrier on-board delivery. It could carry 2,000 lb bombs. It could carry napalm. It could carry searchlights and magnetic anomaly detectors. Late in the war, they even experimented with the Avenger in electronic countermeasures and distant early warning. The Avenger may have been the successor to the TBD, but it was the predecessor to all of the anti-submarine and all the specialty aircraft that have succeeded it on American carriers.
Werent torpedoes used less and less in part because Japan had only a limited number of ships that can be attacked by torpedo, more and more missions being in support of landings etc?
Werent torpedoes used less and less in part because Japan had only a limited number of ships that can be attacked by torpedo, more and more missions being in support of landings etc?