(Bob M.) wrote in message . com...
I have read that the usefulness of the Bell P-39 was greatly decreased
by certain decisions made by the USAAF before it went into production
in the 1930s. Chief among these was the deletion of the
turbosupercharger, but the shortening of the wings also had an effect.
The question is, just how much more effective would this plane have
been had these changes not been made? Would it have a much greater
climb rate and been more effective at high altitudes? Or would it
still have been pretty much of a bust as a fighter/interceptor?

I think the RAF missed a trick. They should have replaced that 37mm M4
cannon with the 40mm S gun, fitted more armour and used it for ground
attack instead of the Hurricane IID and IV. It was a tough plane, good
at low level as the Russians found, and certainly better than the
Hurri.

Tony Williams
Military gun and ammunition website: http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk
Discussion forum at: http://forums.delphiforums.com/autogun/messages/