buffnut453
Captain
And don't come out until you've repented of your ways!!!!
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Thai Hawks and Vichy D.510s both fought over French Indo-China! So, you're covered on both ends.Certainly the fixed undercarriage Curtiss Hawk (M,N and O, data for 75-O: 451 Km/h (280 mph) - my sources are somewhat contradictory as for armament, but some with at least 4 x 7.62 Madsen M.1935, some with six, some with two Madsen 23 mm replacing two machine guns. I'm not sure why not sold to combatants should disqualify them, anyway China certainly was a combatant (and even to some extent Thailand), though they may not have seen much combat. Then again, I'm not sure how much combat Dewoitine D.510 saw, but would be thrilled to learn more.
Nakajima Ki-27 - 470 km/h (290 mph) 2 × 7.7 mm (0.303 in) Type 89 machine guns
Fokker D.XXI - 460 km/h (285 mph), 4 × 7.7 mm (0.303 in) Vickers machine guns
Fiat CR.42 - 441 km/h (274 mph) 2 × 12.7 mm (0.500 in) Breda SAFAT machine guns
Mitsubishi A5M - 435 km/h (270 mph) 2× 7.7 mm (0.303 in) Type 97 aircraft machine guns
Gloster Gladiator -407 km/h (253 mph) 4 x .303 in Vickers machine guns
Dewoitine D.510 - 402 km/h (250 mph) 1 × 20 mm (0.787 in) Hispano-Suiza HS.9 cannon, 2 × 7.5 mm (0.295 in) MAC 1934 machine guns
PZL P.11 - 390 km/h (240 mph) 4 x 7.92 mm (0.312 in) FN Browning machine guns.
Don't believe most of what you've read about Japanese fighters shot down in the Philippines. Virtually all were not confirmed, including Wagner's. At best, Most accounts have a G3M shot down by Villamor, but his DSC citation doesn't specifically mention an aircraft destroyed.Don't forget the Boeing P-26.
It's top speed was 234 and had either twin .30 MGs or a combination of a .30 MG and a .50 MG.
It had the distinction of downing some A6Ms during the invasion of the Philippines, flown by Philippine Army pilots.
It was also used by the Chinese Air Force.
In regards to the Curtiss, the Hawk 75H/M did see service in China.
It was also a tank-buster: doctrine called for making steep dive attacks to shoot through the top armor of enemy tanks.
See post #1Miles M.20 333 mph and a bubble canopy to bootView attachment 610647
I excluded the Miles M.20 and IAR 15 as these two didn't go past the testing phase.
Not vertical dives. With a 20mm firing downhill, you didn't have to shoot from point-blank. Pull-outs weren't a problem.Sounds like an excellent way of getting rid of your surplus pilots.
It did become a problem with the next generation. There are indications that the prototype Loire-Nieuport 161 crashed because the test pilot didn't realize how fast the airplane would get in a deep strafing dive and didn't leave enough time to pull out. The LN.161 lost to the M.S.406, and the crash probably didn't help. (I suspect that the test pilot knew intellectually how fast the airplane might go, but his "flying intuition" was calibrated to slower aircraft.)
Not vertical dives. With a 20mm firing downhill, you didn't have to shoot from point-blank. Pull-outs weren't a problem.
The Roc must win one of these polls, sometime
View attachment 610740
At the time, anti-tank rifles were in service. Tanks of the 1930s weren't as well protected as those serving in 1942.Ok, 60 degree dive. What is the pull out height needed?
Armor is about 1.4 (?) times thicker than nominal dimension due to angle.
You are shooting at a target about the size of van, not even a bus. getting hits requires you to be how close?
Evidence of a pro-nazi sentiment in the UK's defence industry?The Roc must win one of these polls, sometime
View attachment 610740
Wow what a looker looks like someone sat on it
So, when are you building a kit of one?
As soon as I can find a horrible badly moulded kit I will be on it