Which airplanes weren't given a fighting chance

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

I love the p40, it's too bad it never got the teardrop canopy. If it had ever gotten the armament it deserved from the beginning such as 6 .50's or 4 20ml cannons, or maybe the engine it deserved from the beginning... And you are right Curtiss just gypped the hell outta the hawk, they generally they got rid of whatever wasn't requested for no matter how useful it may have been.
 
You have a point. The P-40 was in dire need of the 6 .50 and 20mm guns. It would have been very worthy in combat.

I still think the Junkers 390 deserved a figthing chance because at the time it was the largest bomber made. Hilter in the beggining of the war had a chance to produce 4-engined bombers including the elusive 6-engined bomber.

They would have been useful at the Battle of Britain.
 
Re-2007 :D

cc2re2007tc_1.jpg
 
Thats a good question. We gave alot of them for the Russians to use during the Lend-Lease act and the US that built them never really used them that much!
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back