Quote:
Originally Posted by Graham Boak
Keep trolling, TC!
The Russians rejected the Hurricane Mk.IV because of the limited armour compared with the Il.2, and more generally because they had been disillusioned with the performance and reliability of the Hurricane on the lower-octane fuel and the oils available in the Soviet Union. Unlike the P-39, it wasn't worth establishing special supply lines to ensure sufficient 100 octane fuel. Also, I don't believe they got their Mk.IVs until comparatively late in 1943 or 1944, which was hardly the optimum time to consider introducing them into service.
|
Please provide source/s for your statements, Graham. You may insult me if you wish by calling me a troll, but I cannot be alone in wanting FACTS rather than opinions.
And while you're at it, please explain why Russians would want more armour than the Hurricane IV provided. 2TAF assumed unarmoured aircraft benefited from superior performance which translated into enhanced survivability. Surely the VVS wanted their aircraft to survive? We have been told many thousands of Il-2s were destroyed, with the implication that the VVS had no idea whet they were doing. Surely the VVS would have been looking for something better? The Hurricane IV lifted more stores than the Il-2, and flew them faster. So why reject the Hurricane IV in favour of the death trap Il-2? Factual, referenced answers to these questions, please.
And how could the VVS have known that 1943 or 1944 could be "hardly the optimum time" for service introduction of the Hurricane IV unless they had enjoyed 20/20 vision derived from hindsight? Your interjections, Graham, could benefit from greater intellectual rigour and less emoting.
I revert to the question: does anyone know the actual reason/s given by the Russians for rejecting the Hurricane IV in favour of the Il-2? These actual reasons might teach us all something, and might rattle all our prejudices.
And would the Moderator please confirm that requesting facts from people in a position to know them is not the same as trolling.
Tony