Which is the better fighter, P-40F or Typhoon?

P-40 or Typhoon

  • Total voters
    25

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

Status
Not open for further replies.
pbehn said:
I presume any scenario without the British still has them in Malta?
Click to expand...
Ya, that's the trouble with the Brits didn't need the U.S.s help in in one theater or the U.S. didn't need whoevers help in this theater or that or the whole war for that matter proposed by the poster who's name escapes me at the moment. Unraveling the multiple tentacles of history and trying to figure how things would have played out is a complicated task indeed.
My point in response to that poster was that inho while either would probably have ultimately prevailed without the other it misses the most important point which is it's a darn good thing we did have each others help lest that victory be so much more costly.
 
The radio equipment would be moved from the tail cone up to right behind the pilot over the engine to restore balance after removing the 100# nose armor. Balance would have been untenable without this modification.
 
The conflict in N Africa was what it was on land and in the air but it the sea battle was also critical.
 
The way I see it is the Commonwealth ensured that the war was not won by the Axis and the US ensured that it was won by the Allies.

The US involvement in North Africa has to weigh up the US planes, tanks and squadrons that provided some help, with the significant damage caused by Fellers leaking information. The UK "stealing" the SS Ohio from the US and using it to get oil to Malta was also critical. (There is a rather good book on Operation Pedestal, but I can't recall the title at the moment) If the Rommel got all the supplies that were sent, then the situation at El Alamein would be rather different.

I am watching this thread tangent closely as my Grandfather was in the Australian 9th division and his brother was in the Australian 6th Division; between them they were in North Africa from the start until El Alamein.
 
P-39 Expert said:
The radio equipment would be moved from the tail cone up to right behind the pilot over the engine to restore balance after removing the 100# nose armor. Balance would have been untenable without this modification.
Click to expand...

I would like to see a Load and Balance chart for this mod.
 

MAW I does not connect Lippert's loss to Caldwell, who claimed 2 Bf 109's at two different times; there were in all 8 claims for 109's destroyed by Tomahawk pilots during the day, for 2 109's lost. Shores also attributes Kagenack's mortal wounding to either Maxwell or Thompson of 94 squadron.


MAW I states that there were 2 combats during the day; a mid morning escort for Blenheims by 3 RAAF was interceptet by Jg27 resulting in the loss of 3 Tomahawks and 2 109's. In the afternoon engagement 6 Tomahawks from 3 RAAF and 1 from 112 Sqd were lost and 4 109's shotdown. So actual losses was 10 Tomahaawks and 6 109's in these combats.
 
I just had a look at 3 squadrons ORB for this date and can confirm the following losses -
Morning escort
AN416 F/L Saunders
AN378 P/O Lane
AK510 F/O Watson
Afternoon sweep
AN244 W/C Jefferies (force landed & rescued)
AN410 F/L Knowles
AN373 F/O Roberts
AK390 F/O Kloster
AN305 P/O Lees
AN507 Sgt Simes (rescued)
 
You have to be sure that the photo is showing the complete radio.

Some P-39s mounted the IFF gear above the engine and the regular radio stayed aft.

this is a sheet for the regular radio as used in P-39Qs (other P-39s may have had a different radio?)

Better picture.

please note that this is the radio and does not include the 37lb dynomotor.

The russians may have yanked the IFF gear and moved the communications radio. I don't know. They may have left the dynomotor in the original position.

Some aircraft equipped with IFF had components of the radio installation in 5-6 locations (or up to 9 if you include the antennas) as there were separate control boxes in the cockpit.

Dyno motors were basically (I think) an electric motor running on voltage coupled to an electric generator making another voltage on the same shaft and possible using the same magnet structure. 24/28 volt motor turning a 400volt or higher generator.
Even a small one could be heavy as anyone who has used old car generators and starter motors can tell you
 
Shortround6 said:
Dyno motors were basically (I think) an electric motor running on voltage coupled to an electric generator making another voltage on the same shaft and possible using the same magnet structure. 24/28 volt motor turning a 400volt or higher generator.
Click to expand...
12 or 24 Volt DC in; 120 Volt, 400 cycle AC out, and boy, do they whine. In the T34 it was right under the front seat and you could hear it over the engine, and that 400 cycle note (a very flat middle C) always bled through into your earphones.
Cheers,
Wes
 
My 2 cents, I'm not sure what the thread's purpose here was, the Typhoon was better at performance but never got the chance to prove it's worth so we have a comparison that is hard to make.

Great P40 history here to add to my childhood fantasies. I picked up WWII history after tiring of Sci-Fi at my local library. The first book I checked out on WWII was "The Flying Tigers".
 
Couple of radios, sometimes three, move however many you need for balance.
 
gordonm1 said:
the Typhoon was better at performance but never got the chance to prove it's worth so we have a comparison that is hard to make.
Click to expand...
They seldom if ever got to perform side by side in the same arena, so it's a theoretical discussion that lets every one exercise their scholarly research skills and advocate for their preferred interpretation. "Sci-Fi", if you will.
Cheers,
Wes
 

My daily entertainment is to spot the government broadcaster that is telling the truth, so I always do BBC, RT followed by Press TV, always in that order. Then later I follow it all up on the internet with anyone labelled a conspiracy theorist.
 
P-39 Expert said:
Couple of radios, sometimes three, move however many you need for balance.
Click to expand...

go back and look at the data sheet for the SCR-522 radio, it has the dimensions of the radio and the dynomotor. Maybe you can jam all the radio gear under the canopy over the engine and maybe you can't, I don't know for sure. Russians may have yanked the IFF radio gear to make room. But saying you could jam in however many you need to move to get the balance to work out the way you want seems a little convenient.
Maybe the P-39 is so fast, climbs so well and turns so well the pilot doesn't need vision to the rear?
 
P-39 Expert said:
Couple of radios, sometimes three, move however many you need for balance.
Click to expand...

Shortround6 said:
go back and look at the data sheet for the SCR-522 radio, it has the dimensions of the radio and the dynomotor. Maybe you can jam all the radio gear under the canopy over the engine and maybe you can't
Click to expand...
Isn't it amazing the things that people who've never gotten their hands dirty in the guts of an airplane can accomplish that lowly grease monkeys like you and I can't?
Cheers,
Wes
 




from this website: Aussie P-39 Airacobra – Emergency Defender

What I don't know is what those boxes of electronics are, looks a bit much for just the IFF? And I Don't know if the original radio is still in the tail.
This is about the most "stuff" I have seen over the engine of an Airacobra. and since it was a restoration there is some doubt as to the accuracy of the restoration job when it comes to radio placement. perhaps some licence as taken with radio placement for some reason/s?

Period photos sometimes show nothing under canopy and sometimes boxes/structures that doesn't agree with each other.

Large box (?) over the forward part of the engine?

Shorter but wider box a bit further back?

Same or different?


Two boxes over the engine?

Lots of photos with no boxes. But without actually knowing what the radio fit was on each aircraft it gets awful hard to say what could and could not be mounted over the engine.
There are drawings much like the one in post #1451 that show a box over the engine and it is labeled SRC 515 IFF.
 

Yeah I think you are right, my numbers were off, looks like 9 Tomahawks shot down, 1 x force landed - 1 more lost to flak, for 6 x Bf 109 F-4s. There were also other engagements that same day in which 2 Hurricanes were lost, plus another written off after landing to pick up a mate, for 2 x Ju 88 and 2 x Ju 87

Mea Culpa, my excuse is that the RAF losses covered two pages - the whole entry for this one day was unusually long- and I missed the ones on the previous page. However whether it was 7 Tomahawks vs. 6 Me 109s or 9 vs. 6 it really doesn't change the point being made. Either way it's an unacceptable loss ratio for the Luftwaffe, and either way they apparently made the decision to change their tactics against the Tomahawks- sticking to attacking from above and breaking away, which was an effective tactic for a long time (especially if they could catch the DAF pilots napping) but not as nearly as decisive. Didn't cause as many losses and also meant they rarely made it through to get the bombers.

This is what Shores wrote about it:

"Despite the fact that the Luftwaffe had clearly come off best from the day's actions, the cost was obviously considered too high, as it was to be the last occasion on which the 109s met Commonwealth fighters in force and dog-fought them. From this time onward they returned to their normal tactics of utilizing their superior speed and altitude performance to undertake dive-shoot-and-climb tactics, these negating the Tomahawks superior maneuverability and saving the Messerschmitt pilots from further heavy losses."

I'd also add, the Tomahawk was the oldest, least well armed and had the least powerful engine of the P-40 variants fighting in the Med, the DAF units in question were new at the time and had little training particularly on the type. The Bf 109F2 was the best Luftwaffe fighter available at that time I think, and the unit JG 27 was one of the elite of the Luftwaffe.

So I think it was a good showing for the DAF pilots and their Tomahawks. Clearly it unnerved the Germans somewhat.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

How good a plane was the P-40, really?
20 21 22
Replies
431
Views
28K
Frog
F
Effectiveness of the P-38
6 7 8
Replies
145
Views
8K
Thumpalumpacus
S
Italian series 5/6 fighters really better?
Replies
8
Views
917
GregP
A
1939-1942 FAA: Better aircraft or more aircraft?
2 3
Replies
51
Views
2K
Admiral Beez
A
S
Were the 15*69B cartridge a better option for early WWII fighters
2
Replies
24
Views
2K
tomo pauk
Menu
Log in
Register