Chris Oakley
Banned
Explain its successes in Finland.
One part sheer luck, two parts desperate courage by Finnish air force pilots, and a dash of incompetence on the part of the pre-1941 Soviet air force.
Explain its successes in Finland.
I hadn't noticed that.A lower-powered *Bear in '40-1?
(Then again, how much performance gain arises from smaller dimensions?
)
Grumman was a vastly better company than Brewster, in honesty and production capability, but the Wildcat didn't offer an imposing performance gain over the Brewster, or the Zeke. Jimmy Thach devised his little earth-shattering tactic due to the inferior performance of the Wildcat,
P-36s seem the likely candidate. (I was trying to think what was in the pipeline at the same time as the F2A & OTL F4F-1.)
You wouldn't be wrong.Just Leo said:I guess you haven't checked.
That's enough to make fighting the A6Ms much more even.Just Leo said:357 mph vs 316 mph.
That sounds the likely winner. Somewhat less likely to be shot to pieces by A6Ms, & (judging by Finnish experience OTL) likely to give Luftwaffe 109s fits.Curtiss was doing the P-40C, which was the company Model 81
One part sheer luck, two parts desperate courage by Finnish air force pilots, and a dash of incompetence on the part of the pre-1941 Soviet air force.
I'm thinking it's also bad news for the Red Air Force, against Finn AF P-40s.
I'm confused. How will the Red Air Force P-40s suffer at the hands of Finn AF P-40s?
P-40B/C Model 81 were lighter, more maneuverable, better climb and faster than the later P-40 onwards Model 87, but less rugged and fewer guns.
Much in the same way as the Finns with the Brewster 239 than the Marine F2A-3
So early P-40s would be a better 'Pilot's airplane' than the later marks.
But even in the same model, Finns tended to be more motivated.
I had in mind Winter War combat. Am I giving the Finns P-40s too early for it?Just Leo said:I'm confused. How will the Red Air Force P-40s suffer at the hands of Finn AF P-40s?
I had in mind Winter War combat. Am I giving the Finns P-40s too early for it?![]()
One point I might wonder about is that whether the F4F starting its evolution as an operational aircraft a few years earlier also might move up the development of a couple key improvements--mostly thinking about folding wings. If that's part of the F4Fs that are in the fleet in 1941, might you see some of the same larger fighter wings that developed rapidly with the F4F-4's introduction IOTL? Admittedly, some of that was also due to combat experience (trading off the less-useful torpedo planes for more fighters after Midway, for instance), but simply being able to put more fighters on the carriers seems to have obvious utility even with pre-war doctrine. Presuming that Grumman (being a far better company at actually manufacturing planes in large numbers to reasonable quality than Brewster proved to be) can provide the planes necessary for larger fighter wings by December, that could see less of the need to trade task force CAP against escorted strikes, which gives benefits for both dive bombers and (particularly) torpedo planes.
There's two levels of "if" there, one in the introduction of folding wings for the F4F and then one about then using those capabilities to actually put more planes on deck, but I wonder about those effects.
With the extra lead time of no F2A, these problems would be solved, IMO. In addition, I'm thinking this could have beneficial knock-ons for FEAF fighters. They suffered problems with jamming when gun lube froze.seyak said:Two very relevant improvements needed in the first half of 1942 would have been a fix for the jamming guns (O'Hare would go after the Bettys with a wingman with operational guns -> no ace in a day for him and no MOH) and usable drop tanks.
Drop tanks would be a major factor in Midway allowing US carriers to send more intact and better escorted strike groups agains KB. Also the planes sent after Yorktown would face stronger CAP as there would be less need to refuel the wildcats during the day.
So, P-36s against I-16s over Finland?marathag said:Too Early.
P-40 deliveries didn't start till April 1940
With the extra lead time of no F2A, these problems would be solved, IMO. In addition, I'm thinking this could have beneficial knock-ons for FEAF fighters. They suffered problems with jamming when gun lube froze.Is there a chance to avoid that? Or is there no common lube? (Obvious question is, why didn't AAF notice this in the '30s?
)
So, P-36s against I-16s over Finland?![]()
With the extra lead time of no F2A, these problems would be solved, IMO. In addition, I'm thinking this could have beneficial knock-ons for FEAF fighters. They suffered problems with jamming when gun lube froze.Is there a chance to avoid that? Or is there no common lube? (Obvious question is, why didn't AAF notice this in the '30s?
Driftless said:Some WW2 USAAC gunners and photographers apparently used graphite powder as a non-freezing lubricant, till they acquired something better. No liquid component to freeze in the sub-zero high altitude, but very slick.
That's just the thing: if the Finns don't buy F2As but P-36s, they'd be ready to go around the time the F2As were operational OTL...provided they haven't run afoul the Neutrality Act.Driftless said:Some of the P-36/Hawk 75a-6's that the Norwegians bought and were in process of assembling at the start of Op. Weserubung wound up in Finland eventually. Find a way to get them there directly and a couple of months earlier.
My recall may be faulty.Just Leo said:Electric gun heaters spring to mind, but freezing guns in FEAF doesn't really, except for Spits over Darwin. Cowl guns have built-in heaters under them.
I did not know that. Thx.Just Leo said:Sunflower and Jojoba oil have suitable resistance to freezing but probably don't have a mil-spec. Incidentally, it was about this time that Kendall Oil formulated the first multi-viscosity gear oil, called 3 Star 80/90/140, and a mil/spec was issued for this.
Some of the P-36/Hawk 75a-6's that the Norwegians bought and were in process of assembling at the start of Op. Weserubung wound up in Finland eventually. Find a way to get them there directly and a couple of months earlier.