Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2007/01/15
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]At 04:41 PM 1/15/2007, ISILVERMN@aol.com wrote: >The Messerschmidt Bf-109, also an advanced design for its time, lacked the >ability to carry drop tanks, nor could the design be easily adapted. >During the >Battle of Britain, they were forced to turn back just as the bombers were >starting their bomb runs, giving the ???few??? a clear approach to >attack them. On >the other hand, the Spitfire was designed from the start for growth, and >evolved throughout the war to remain at or near the state of the art. >Reg Mitchell >was a genius. The ME-109 from the Emil onwards could carry drop tanks, but Germany was slow to provide these in sufficient quantity to make them utile. The Spitfire did not accomodate drop tanks until the V, which appeared some months after the Bf-109E. I believe that the Hurricane could carry drop tanks on a version which appeared a bit earlier. The Allies were more inclined to use drop tanks than were the Germans as we had a lot more steel at hand than did the Axis. And our drop tanks, early in the war, could be dropped over the UK and could be recovered, while the Germans lost theirs forever. Later in the War, it was the practice of Allied fighters to fly from their tail tanks first, as these affected handling. When these were exhausted, the pilot would switch to the drop tanks, and only use the remaining wing and body tanks at the end. If the Allied fighters got bounced early in their sortie, they would dump all the fuel out of their tail tanks and drop off the underbody tank so that they could fight. Marc msmall@aya.yale.edu Cha robh b?s fir gun ghr?s fir!