Kevin J
Banned
Buying the Tomahawk and Kittyhawk gave us a good low to medium altitude fighter at lower cost than the Whirlwind.
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Buying the Tomahawk and Kittyhawk gave us a good low to medium altitude fighter at lower cost than the Whirlwind.That's true, but the altitude performance of the 110 availed it very little as a day time fighter after 1940. Or even probably by the second half of 1940. It was rapidly outclassed in North Africa, didn't do much in Russia either except as a fighter bomber.
I do understand the position of people like Dowding to not want a fighter that had limited high altitude performance, but I think (and have long argued) with the benefit of hindsight we can see that there was indeed a use for good low to medium altitude fighters, basically everywhere except the Channel front.
And perhaps more importantly, if the Peregrine wasn't cancelled right away, it seems likely they could develop a two speed supercharger for it (or adapt an existing one if that was possible).
As for the Allison, I don't see how that solves the altitude problem (maybe just due to sheer power?), and it isn't much smaller than a Merlin and only 100 lbs lighter more or less right?
That's true, but the altitude performance of the 110 availed it very little as a day time fighter after 1940. Or even probably by the second half of 1940.
True but I think Whirlwind was faster, climbed better (depending on version), was a more accurate bomber (steeper dive angle) and had the benefit (as well as the drawbacks admittedly) of two engines. I think it also had better altitude performance, as Tomahawk performance fell off after about 16,000' and the early Kittyhawk I and Ia more like 13,000 ft. Per above the Whirlwind was good up to 20,000' which is similar to the P-40F.
Yes but I think many Luftwaffe fighter pilots preferred the Franz to fight, not just to fly. Some didn't to be sure, but many did and said so both at the time and in post-war interviews.
You can think what you like. I can assure you that Prien has interviewed and spoken to more Luftwaffe veterans than you, me and possibly any one else since the war.
It was faster until over boosting came along in the second half of 1942.
The only way I see the Whirlwind staying in production in 1942 is with Twin Taurus for the Far East, but if your radar isn't working well in a tropical climate the RAF is still fucked. Not only that, you've still not got a ground based Observer Corps to cover the gaps in your radar system.Again true, but if Whirlwind hadn't been cancelled presumably by 1942 you may have a faster version yet...
If PoW's radar was working, could she have operated as a WW2-era Aegis, vectoring and coordinating fighter intercepts?The only way I see the Whirlwind staying in production in 1942 is with Twin Taurus for the Far East, but if your radar isn't working well in a tropical climate the RAF is still fucked.
Perhaps he should have just beached himself at Kota Bharu then done that.If PoW's radar was working, could she have operated as a WW2-era Aegis, vectoring and coordinating fighter intercepts?
Given the abysmal or entirely lacking IJN/IJAAF and Malayan Command radar, I imagine PoW had the best radar set-up in the entire Indian Ocean and Western Pacific at the time. So, maybe that's what Phillips should have been doing, getting his radar techs to ensure the system is up and his plotters up to speed with coordinating with RAF.
I don't doubt that - and Prien is entitled to his no doubt erudite opinion on the matter, but I know as well as you (and Jochin Prien) that German fighter pilots did / do not all speak with one voice, so it's not a binary question. And with all due respect to both yourself and Herr Prien I have read enough memoirs, autobiographies and interviews to know that many German fighter pilots who flew all three main types - E, F and G preferred the F. Some were quite outspoken on the matter. I can start transcribing and posting some excerpts, but you seem pretty well informed so I assume you are already aware of this. It's hardly a secret.
My understanding of combat between a Thunderbolt and Bf 109G-6 is that the later outperformed the former if clean, but with underwing guns the G-6 was outperformed by the Thunderbolt.
Like HMS Canopus at Battle of Falklands. Taking on all comers from the beach.Perhaps he should have just beached himself at Kota Bharu then done that.
Is was thinking of the Marat at Leningrad, sunk, refloated, used as heavy artillery.Like HMS Canopus at Battle of Falklands. Taking on all comers from the beach.
Not as a rule.
Of 740 serviceable Bf 109s on 31 August 1940, 307 were Bf 109 E-1s, 103 were E-3s, 304 were E-4s and 27 were E-7s.
Some of the E-1s might have been converted to cannon, that would be difficult to ascertain. They should have had the designation changed, but we know that did not always happen. Conversion from E-1 to E-3/4 standard was not a job that could be done in the field.
The 100 E-1s delivered up to the end of September were accepted and delivered as E-1s. I find it difficult to believe that these were cannon armed. They would not have been manufactured and accepted by the BAL under the specific designation E-1 if they were. Remember that the E-1 and E-3 were being produced concurrently, there is a reason for the different designations.
Bergstrom has calculated that roughly 40% of Bf 109s flying in the BoB were armed with just four machine guns.
Edit: I just checked. Exactly one He 112 flew in Spain, three in Hungary, at most twenty four in Romania. If that's 'entering service' so be it.
Armament wasn't much use if you couldn't get into a 'shooting solution', conversely a lighter armament could be deadly (especially if it included at least one good cannon) if you had enough of a performance / maneuverability advantage that you could own the other aircraft and get right where you needed to be.
I believe the lightly armed, streamlined interceptor / fighter was probably the role to which the 109 was best suited. The need to more heavily arm the aircraft to shoot down B-17s and Il-2s basically led to overloading the airframe and limiting it's agility.
Yes, Protection was added to the few early production examples without it. The rest left the factory with it.Speaking of protection did Whirlwind have protected fuel tanks and pilot armor?
Low gear on the Merlin 20s: 8.15:1 ratio; high gear: 9.49:1
The only ratio of the Merlin 45 being 9.089:1
* I know Whirlwind wasn't used in the BoB but had more been produced it could have been.
Earlier start and faster production, how else?How exactly would that happen?
Earlier start and faster production, how else?