GregP
Major
Without that armor, the CG would be farther aft, and aft CG was already a problem. It would take some thinking that I'm pretty sure they DID.
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
We've spent pages on this already, nose armor can be deleted by making other internal adjustments such as moving the radio up from the tail cone to above the engine. Bell stated that nose armor was not needed. They were able to reballast for different nose cannons that differed in weight by 140lbs. More heresay beating a dead horse.Without that armor, the CG would be farther aft, and aft CG was already a problem. It would take some thinking that I'm pretty sure they DID.
So, 75 years after the fact, we need to ask why they didn't do it?We've spent pages on this already, nose armor can be deleted by making other internal adjustments such as moving the radio up from the tail cone to above the engine. Bell stated that nose armor was not needed. They were able to reballast for different nose cannons that differed in weight by 140lbs. More heresay beating a dead horse.
They could have been a lot more judicious about what they put into the plane in the early models D/F/K/L/P-400. The later models with the uprated engine were fine as they were. The basic airframe was light enough. They didn't need the .30cal wing guns, after all they had a 37mm cannon and two .50cal MGs. And the 100lb nose armor plate was redundant, no other planes had their nose reduction gear armored. Those items total around 300-500lbs, depending on the amount of .30cal ammunition carried. A fully equipped P-39D without those items weighed about 7150lbs versus up to 7850lbs normal gross weight. Russians deleted the wing guns and the IFF radio and did really well with it.
I don't know why they didn't eliminate those unnecessary/redundant items. All the other countries were very careful to control the weight of their planes, but the AAF and Navy seemed to try and cram as much crap into their planes as they could.So, 75 years after the fact, we need to ask why they didn't do it?
Were they just complete dumbasses or what?
I don't know why they didn't eliminate those unnecessary/redundant items. All the other countries were very careful to control the weight of their planes, but the AAF and Navy seemed to try and cram as much crap into their planes as they could.
IFF is redundant if there is no radar at your base. In 1942 Port Moresby didn't have radar until October and Guadalcanal until September. PM had Australian radar but it was too far away to do any good. IFF is also redundant in every plane on a mission. A 16 plane squadron mission didn't need every plane in the squadron to have an IFF set.Unnecessary items such as IFF?
The full size wind tunnel at Langley Field was limited to 125 mph, so those are estimates.
Plus was EVERY modification suggested by those wind tunnels test ever applied to a real P-39 ?
he only operational experience the AAF had with turbos was the P-30/PB-2.
Ah, B-17 iirc.
IFF is redundant if there is no radar at your base. In 1942 Port Moresby didn't have radar until October and Guadalcanal until September. PM had Australian radar but it was too far away to do any good. IFF is also redundant in every plane on a mission. A 16 plane squadron mission didn't need every plane in the squadron to have an IFF set.
The Russians had American lend lease radar from May 1943 but removed the IFF set (along with the .30cal wing guns) as standard procedure anyway.
USN planes probably need a set on every plane given their unique situation. Each aircraft carrier had radar and needed to account for each plane sent out.
Clearly the people who went into combat decided they did need the armour. In fact, all the airforces of all nations, who went to war decided that they needed armour.Bell stated that nose armor was not needed.
If they had such flexibility why didn't they make changes to make the aircraft safer or at least more flexible from a COG position.They were able to reballast for different nose cannons that differed in weight by 140lbs.
More heresay beating a dead horse.
As did the XP-37. The P-30 first flew in 1934. 60 of them were built.The Bell YFM-1 had turbosupercharged Allison V-1710-9 engines - first flew in '37.
A 14th Y1B-17 (37-369), originally constructed for ground testing of the airframe's strength, was upgraded and fitted with exhaust-driven General Electric turbochargers. Scheduled to fly in 1937, it encountered problems with the turbochargers, and its first flight was delayed until 29 April 1938.The first B-17 with turbos, the YB-17A, first flew with turbos on 29 April 1938.
The XP-39 made it's first flight on 6 April 1938.
Russians deleted the wing guns and the IFF radio and did really well with it.
The Bell YFM-1 had turbosupercharged Allison V-1710-9 engines - first flew in '37.
A 14th Y1B-17 (37-369), originally constructed for ground testing of the airframe's strength, was upgraded and fitted with exhaust-driven General Electric turbochargers. Scheduled to fly in 1937, it encountered problems with the turbochargers, and its first flight was delayed until 29 April 1938.