Why was P-36 so successful in the battle of France?

[Nodeo-Franvier]

P-36 was the most successful aircraft in the battle of France,Outperforming even more modern Dewoitine d.520.
Why was this seemingly medicore plane performed so well in 1940?

 

[GrauGeist]

Not sure how the Hawk 75 could be considered "mediocre", it was in the league of the world's top fighters in the late 30's with it's excellent roll rate, turning performance, good rate of climb and ease of handling at the controls.

It may not have been heavily armed, but that was a trait among the world's fighters of the time.

 

[Greg Boeser]

It was the best fighter they had, beside the
D 520. And the D 520 was just entering squadron service, so all the bugs hadn't been worked out yet.

 

[MIflyer]

The Battle of France was a tactical war. The Luftwaffe was not focusing on bombing cities and so their aircraft had to operate down in the optimum Hawk 75 performance envelope. The Hawk 75 was found to have much better aileron response than the Spitfire. In North Africa the Vichy Hawk 75's gave a good account of themselves against the F4F. In India the Hawk 75 with the R-1820 was good enough be used for air defense over most of the war, into 1944. Of course one reason Hawk 75's were not used in the Battle of Britain was not only that the combat was taking place at higher altitudes but that the RAF never ran out of fighters; they were running out of pilots.

 

[Vincenzo]

The Hawk 75 was the best radial engined fighter before the came of the Zero, sure in the top 5 absolute at time

 

[nuuumannn]

Yup, agree, the Hawk 75 was a good piece of kit and its only real shortcoming against the Bf 109 was its ceiling and maximum speeds/diving speeds. In good hands it was a match for the German fighter, but the Bf 109 could get away from it at will. I read an official report by the British Aeroplane and Armament Experimental Establishment that stated that the Hawk 75 was "exceptionally easy and pleasant to fly" and great at manoeuvring, at high speed it could out manoeuvre the Spitfire and Hurricane. It was an excellent dog fighter, the Bf 109 was not as good at close-in combat as either the Spitfire or Hurricane, especially in tight turns, so situationally, the Hawk could hold its own. As for the D.520, yes it was a good fighter, but it was, as mentioned, new to service and had its fair share of issues. It was very difficult to handle on the ground and was less easy to fly than the Hawk 75.

By 10 May and the invasion the Morane Saulnier MS.406 was numerically the Armee de l'Air's premier fighter, yet the Hawk 75 was arguably a better fighter. The first D.520s were entering squadron service at this time. It's also interesting to note that many of the French fighters in service were in the process of receiving variable pitch units, armour plating and gun sights, which meant the ground crews were busy getting these aircraft up to an equivalent standard as their enemy, so the odds were stacked against the French.

 

[Frog]

They were flown by good pilots, althought tempered with not so good tactics.

 

[MIflyer]

In "Flying to the Limit" they say that 227 French-ordered Hawk 75's were delivered to the British, only 5 of which were the R-1830 version, the rest being H-75A-4, powered by R-1820. and designated Mohawk IV. Deliveries began in the summer of 1940, but they had French instrumentation and different radios so Westland had to modify them. I would assume the radios were similar to the SCR-183 USAAC sets.

"During mock combat between the Hawk and a Spitfire Mk 1 the Curtiss proved to be superior in several respects. The Hawk could apply about 75% aileron at 400 MPH IAS whereas the Spitfire could apply only about 20% at the same speed."

The elevator control on the Hawk was better than the Spitfire's, which was considered to be too touchy. The Hawk pilot had considerably better visibility than the Spitfire and a much better view for landing that the Spit or Hurri due to its steeper descent.

Initial climb was better than the Spitfire but they could only attain a top speed of 302 mph with the Mohawk IV, at 14,000 ft. The Mohawk Iv could carry a bomb load of 400 lb under the wings, and that proved to be useful for CAS in the CBI..

 

[Denniss]

Can't remember but weren't the initial french Hawk 75s unarmored or lacked a self-sealing fuel tank ?

 

[nuuumannn]

Deliveries began in the summer of 1940, but they had French instrumentation and different radios so Westland had to modify them. I would assume the radios were similar to the SCR-183 USAAC sets.

The main issue that required conversion for the French H-75s to the RAF standard was the reversal of the power lever actuation. French aircraft used the reverse to the "Balls to the Wall" of conventional operation, bringing the power lever back to increase power. This was a part of the delay in getting them into service, which meant they weren't ready until 1941. The same condition was incorporated into the French ordered Grumman Wildcats that the British Purchasing Commission had acquired after the invasion on 10 May 1940. These aircraft were modified on the production line by Grumman before delivery to the Fleet Air Arm, rather than being delivered and undertaking modification later, like the H-75s.

 

[MIflyer]

Automobiles of the time had hand throttes and used the "Pull it out to go faster" approach. On one occasion a woman was seated in an Ercoupe while her husband hand propped it. When the airplane surged ahead and nearly ran over him she knew just what to do: push in the throttle to slow the engine. The airplane took off and she eventually got it turned around and landed it on the airfield, then pushed in the throttle to shut it down again and took off again. She decided that she had not put it on the ground firmly enough and collapsed the nose gear on the next landing.

 

[special ed]

At least, the French drove on the right side of the road.

 

[BobB]

The Mohawk Iv could carry a bomb load of 400 lb under the wings, and that proved to be useful for CAS in the CBI..

Compared to a P-47, a 400 lb bomb load doesn't sound like much but veterans interviewed in "Mohawks Over Burma" said that their little 50 lb bombs were very effective against river barges used to carry Japanese supplies.

 

[MIflyer]

And that feature was designed in from the first.

 

[elbmc1969]

And that feature was designed in from the first.

What are you trying to illustrate with the ad?

 

[MIflyer]

Well, I was going to show that ad and another one that showed the features of the new Hawk 75 to include bomb capacity - but I have not been able to locate it yet.

 

[Greg Boeser]

It's in the operator's manual.
Lists the various possible armament configurations.

 

[Glider]

I think its also fair to point out the the 109D was quite widely used in he Battle of France and the Hawk 75 was considered to be a considerably better fighter. The 109E in use in the Battle of France were often only armed with 4 x LMG which was matched by the 4 or 6 LMG carried by the Hawk 75

 

[Vincenzo]

109D at time of BoF was used only in night fighter unit, the 11/JG2 at Trondheim and the IV/JG2 at Hopsten.

 

[GrauGeist]

The French Hawk 75A-1 was armed with four 7.5mm MGs, two in the cowl and two in the wings.
The 75A-2 and 75A-3 was armed with six 7.5mm MGs, two in the cowl and two in each wing.

The Hawk 75A-4 (which only a half dozen reached France) had the same armament as the A2 and A-3.