Leandros
Posts: 1740
Joined: 3/5/2015
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: inqistor
Planes without armor were considered in US, unfit for front-line duty. That's why they were never sent to front, but there should be almost 200 available for defense of West Coast. If KB would decided to attack HOLLYWOOD, every Wild Bill Kelso should be ready to defend the skies.
Well, the P-40Bs in the Philippines did not have armour or self-sealing fuel tanks, either. The P-40Es did, but Bartsch in his "Doomed at the start" writes that the pilots there actually preferred the "B" because of its better range, climb and turn performance (lighter).
Kelso flew a P-40...
quote:
ORIGINAL: inqistorAnd game gets P-36 armament wrong. 0.30 and 0.50 cal were factory settings, but Army planes had additional four 0.30 cal in wings.
Buck is correct, the USAAC P-36s did not have wing-mounted MGs in December '41. This can be seen from actual pictures at the time. Thirty-some were modified at one time but were modified back to the original configuration. However, to mount a second .50 in the nose was a simple operation. It was tried by the USAAC and was the standard on the Norwegian and Dutch Hawk 75 orders in 1939/40.
That said, the quoted web-site is conspicious for not having any references to Beauchamp and Cuny: Curtiss Hawk 75 - the P-36/Hawk 75 bible - to me, anyway. 344 pages of P-36 and Hawk75, the export model.
Fred
_____________________________
|
Printable Version
RE: But I LIKE that plane!! - 
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread