Re: Malta Aircraft Defence
 

Didn't they have P-40E/Kittyhawks rather than the Tomahawks? Do they fit into the same timescale in Middle East terms?

How do these claims match Japanese losses?

You will find some ammunition for your side of the argument in Greg Baughen's RAF On The Offensive. He is very critical of the slowness to utilise the Tomahawks, mainly in the context of adequate (or rather, inadequate) fighter strengths in the Middle East.

Re: Malta Aircraft Defence
 

Jim,

On the magnific book "A-Train" from Lt-Col. Charles W. Dryden, we do have an interesting information that the P-40E from 99th F.S. were NOT (yes NOT) equipped with oxygen system!!!!!!!

He remember a combat sortie where some Bf 109s were above that high and that his Flight tried to engage...and he passed out due to hipoxia/anoxia but recovered some seconds later. He was indeed very very lucky.

My doubt are:
a) Were ALL P-40 on the ETO/MTO not equipped with oxygen system; or
b) Due to racism on the high hierarchy of the US Army Air Corps, only the 99th F.S. did not received the oxygen system equipments?

I can quote the correct passage and pages after I return (maybe tonight or early tomorrow morning) from an appointment I do have in a couple of minutes. Now I do have to go....but this topic is quite interesting and do may surface many problems of the Allied Air Powers at time...

Adriano

Re: Malta Aircraft Defence
 

However, there are similar stories in Darwin Spitfires, and this was in a high altitude version of the Mk.V with the Merlin 46, operating up to and over 30,000ft. More likely to be incompetence within the supply system than racism.

Re: Malta Aircraft Defence
 

Here the relevant passage, page 126 of "A-Train", by Lt.-Col. DRYDEN:

"As it turned out none of us scored a victory on that mission. Ashley damaged one of the enemy planes but wasn't able to follow the smoking plane to see if it crashed, and we did not have gun cameras at that stage of the war, so he could not confirm a victory. After the break right into the attacking fighters I saw a formation of medium bombers several thousand feet above us and I climbed to engage them. No luck as my P-40 couldn't climb fast enough to catch up them and we were not equipped with oxygen for flights above 12,000 feet. Somewhere around 16,000 feet I passed out briefly. I came to a few seconds later with my plane in shallow dive."

Re: Malta Aircraft Defence
 

Graham,

Just for curiosity, but are you telling me that those Spits which flew above 30,000 feet DID NOT have oxygen systems installed? I can understand that some items (armor, etc.) may have been deleted to loose weight and gain speed and height, but the oxygen system nooo! This is a NO GO item for fighters intended to intercept at high altitude (above 12,000 feet).

I still believe (it gonna be difficult to prove it) that the pilots of 99th F.S. faced the "Jinx" and racism, being not allowed to fight properly with an airplane without oxygen system and gun cameras installed.

I really doubt that the other US Army Air Corps or even the RAF Squadrons that were operating P-40s operated in the same conditions and with the same "handicaps" as those from the 99th F.S.

A.

Re: Malta Aircraft Defence
 

PILOT'S NOTES
TOMAHAWK I
ALLISON V-1710-C15 ENGINE
4. Additional Equipment - In addition to the armament, the airplane is equipped with parachute flares, landing light, recognition device, oxygen, life preserver, radio, map case, engine and cockpit covers, navigation, formation, identification and cockpit lights. (See Section 1.)
22. Oxygen - Two oxygen bottles are carried in supports in the aft part of the fuselage, and accessible through the fuselage access door. The oxygen regulator and bayonet outlet are located on the starboard side of the cockpit. (Aircraft Nos. A.H. 741 to A.H. 990 have one bottle only)

Re: Malta Aircraft Defence
 

https://aeroscale.net/news/curtiss-p...und-walkaround

We do see that it seems that on P-40E and on the TomahawkI (previoust post), the oxygen was STANDARD.

So, why the 99th F.S. airmen did not receive them?

A

Re: Malta Aircraft Defence
 

ABOUT THE CLIMBING PERFORMANCE

WAR DEPARTMENT
AIR CORPS, MATERIEL DIVISION
Wright Field, Dayton, Ohio
September 25, 1941
MEMORANDUM REPORT ON
Pursuit Single Engine P-40E, A.C. No. 40-384


2. Climb data; propeller set for 3000 rpm for first 5 min. with throttle open tp 43.9" Hg. manifold pressure or wide when below.

Altitude
Ft. True Speed
MPH R.P.M. B.H.P. Rate of Climb
Ft./Min. Time of Climb
Min.

0 146 3000 1020 2100 0
5,000 158.5 3000 1070 2260 2.3
10,000 170.5 3000 1120 2400 4.44
11,300 173.5 3000 1065 2250 5.0
15,000 177.5 2600 795 1370 7.38
20,000 187 2600 655 880 11.82
25,000 196.5 2600 555 480 19.42
S/C 30,000 205 2600 470 100 40.1
A/C 31,350 - 2600 - 0 -

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/P-40/P-40.html

Re: Malta Aircraft Defence
 

Climb performance. All the variants of the P-40 were big, heavy airplane with relatively poor power-to-weight ratios. P-40 pilots trying to follow a climbing Bf 109F or A6M Zero often found themselves stalled and helpless (early in the war, Japanese pilots routinely baited and killed pursuing enemy aircraft using the hineri-komi maneuver (mentions of this tactic appear in 1942 and 1943 intel reports). One pilot with the 325th Fighter Group, the "Checkertails", complained, "We would stooge around and wait to get bounced" by Bf 109Fs and FW 190As using "dive and zoom tactics which gave us so much trouble." Only if the Germans tried to turn with the American P-40s (which they sometimes did), did the P-40s have much chance of drawing blood.

https://www.reddit.com/r/WarCollege/...e_p40_perform/

Re: Malta Aircraft Defence
 

Thanks for that book recommendation Graham. I'll have to get my hands on a copy.

Regarding 49th FG claims, I'm hanging out for Michael Claringbould to turn his laser research abilities onto the Darwin raids in 1942/43.