-
Please see the most recent updates in the "Where did the .com name go?" thread. Posts number 16 and 17.
-
IMPORTANT DOWNLOADING INFORMATION - ALL MEMBERS PLEASE READ
Please see this thread for updates. Update Thread
SOH ADMINISTRATION
Question about The Armee de l'Air, 1940 organization...
- Thread starter Rami
- Start date
gastonj
Members +
Reply...
JMC,
Thank you. I surmise that based on the fact that these units were being formed by early June, the French Air Force had rates of attrition high enough that there were not enough aircraft (or pilots) to maintain squadron strength, so these units could have essentially been consolidation units.
JMC,
Thank you. I surmise that based on the fact that these units were being formed by early June, the French Air Force had rates of attrition high enough that there were not enough aircraft (or pilots) to maintain squadron strength, so these units could have essentially been consolidation units.
gastonj
Members +
Hi,
These units were intended for the defense of sensitive points like the factories of armament. Paradoxically, at the end of the French campaign the air force had more planes and pilots than at the beginning. The problem was that it no longer had enough airfields following the advance of German ground troops. The Luftwaffe failed to eliminate the Air Force, weakened considerably and this contributed greatly to the delay in launching the Battle of Britain.
JMC
Reply...
Gastonj,
That's a good point. One of the things I find to be an interesting comparison about the French Air Force when compared to the RAF and Bomber Command was that the British seemed to be the fortunate beneficiaries of very good timing, as well as good quality. They geared up fighter production at the exact right moment for the task at hand, and the Hurricane and Spitfire were both just good enough at the time of the German air invasion to fend off a weakened Luftwaffe after the Battle of France.
For the French, bomber designs entering service in 1939-1940 were actually well ahead of where the British were at that point, and in fact, you could argue their bombers were superior to their German counterparts, except for the engines. The Gnome-Rhone radials had continuous problems, and the Hispano-Suiza 12Y was under-powered, which hampered their fighter designs.
If the Dewoitine D.520 had an engine of parity to the Daimler-Benz or a Merlin, its performance would have likely been roughly equal to the Bf-109. The Klimov series engines the Soviets used for the Yakovlev and some of the LaGG fighters were essentially enlarged Hispano-Suiza engines.
It always creates a great "what if" to imagine what twelve months of additional manufacturing time for the French would have produced in terms of aircraft, tanks, and engine quality. The Char B1 bis tanks could actually get the better of German Panzers.
Gastonj,
That's a good point. One of the things I find to be an interesting comparison about the French Air Force when compared to the RAF and Bomber Command was that the British seemed to be the fortunate beneficiaries of very good timing, as well as good quality. They geared up fighter production at the exact right moment for the task at hand, and the Hurricane and Spitfire were both just good enough at the time of the German air invasion to fend off a weakened Luftwaffe after the Battle of France.
For the French, bomber designs entering service in 1939-1940 were actually well ahead of where the British were at that point, and in fact, you could argue their bombers were superior to their German counterparts, except for the engines. The Gnome-Rhone radials had continuous problems, and the Hispano-Suiza 12Y was under-powered, which hampered their fighter designs.
If the Dewoitine D.520 had an engine of parity to the Daimler-Benz or a Merlin, its performance would have likely been roughly equal to the Bf-109. The Klimov series engines the Soviets used for the Yakovlev and some of the LaGG fighters were essentially enlarged Hispano-Suiza engines.
It always creates a great "what if" to imagine what twelve months of additional manufacturing time for the French would have produced in terms of aircraft, tanks, and engine quality. The Char B1 bis tanks could actually get the better of German Panzers.
gastonj
Members +
Hi,
The Dewoitine D520 was probably the best design of the 1940s even with the Hispano 12Y. Many German aces, veterans of the spanish war like Molders for example, paid the price. In 1944 without improvement since 1940 the Hungarians with the D520 shot down B24 and P38.
The Gnome-Rhône 14N was the MB 152, MB 155 engine, the Leo 45 engine, the MB 174 engine, the BR 693 engine, the Amiot 354 engine, all planes without engine problems. The 14K was bad but not 14N. The engine of the Mitsubishi Zero was an almost exact copy of it.
The inferiority of French planes compared to British or American is a legend. Only the MS 406 could rightly be regarded as inferior to the Bf-109e but, in June 1940, it no longer constituted the main part of the fighters of the Air Force. From Dunkirk, no more English aircraft flew over France. The French campaign (from May 10 to June 25, 1940), except for the first 15 days, was a matter between French, Germans and then Italians. The film "Dunkirk" is in itself an insult to France. The Hurricanes or spitfires were not the only ones above Dunkirk, the perimeter defenders were the French, these are more than 84 French warships without counting the merchant ships which took part in the battle and the evacuation of the French troops. Just read the memories of the German military and Churchill himself to be convinced. It is true that France never considered Dunkirk as a victory but rather as a defeat ...not to say something annoying for the British!
JMC
The Dewoitine D520 was probably the best design of the 1940s even with the Hispano 12Y. Many German aces, veterans of the spanish war like Molders for example, paid the price. In 1944 without improvement since 1940 the Hungarians with the D520 shot down B24 and P38.
The Gnome-Rhône 14N was the MB 152, MB 155 engine, the Leo 45 engine, the MB 174 engine, the BR 693 engine, the Amiot 354 engine, all planes without engine problems. The 14K was bad but not 14N. The engine of the Mitsubishi Zero was an almost exact copy of it.
The inferiority of French planes compared to British or American is a legend. Only the MS 406 could rightly be regarded as inferior to the Bf-109e but, in June 1940, it no longer constituted the main part of the fighters of the Air Force. From Dunkirk, no more English aircraft flew over France. The French campaign (from May 10 to June 25, 1940), except for the first 15 days, was a matter between French, Germans and then Italians. The film "Dunkirk" is in itself an insult to France. The Hurricanes or spitfires were not the only ones above Dunkirk, the perimeter defenders were the French, these are more than 84 French warships without counting the merchant ships which took part in the battle and the evacuation of the French troops. Just read the memories of the German military and Churchill himself to be convinced. It is true that France never considered Dunkirk as a victory but rather as a defeat ...not to say something annoying for the British!
JMC
Reply...
Gastonj,
I admire your passion, but with all due respect, the Dewoitine D-520 was certainly not the best design of the 1940s. To be sure, it was a good fighter, and did have its fair share of success, however, it had a tendency to stall in tight turns due to the shape of the wing.
The Bloch MB 150 series were also not exactly world-beaters, especially with pitch stability and overall performance. These two aircraft, which they had the most of on 10 May, were almost literally lambs to the slaughter during the first fifteen days. (I covered this during the Battle of France - Part I)
I am now getting into the Battle of France Part II, which will go from 26 May until the end of the conflict. In this process, I am seeing how the Dewoitine became the front-line French fighter as May moved into June, and indeed it can hold its own against German 109s and 110s, as well as attacking bombers. I've become quite fond of flying it in combat.
But let's not go too far here.
Gastonj,
I admire your passion, but with all due respect, the Dewoitine D-520 was certainly not the best design of the 1940s. To be sure, it was a good fighter, and did have its fair share of success, however, it had a tendency to stall in tight turns due to the shape of the wing.
The Bloch MB 150 series were also not exactly world-beaters, especially with pitch stability and overall performance. These two aircraft, which they had the most of on 10 May, were almost literally lambs to the slaughter during the first fifteen days. (I covered this during the Battle of France - Part I)
I am now getting into the Battle of France Part II, which will go from 26 May until the end of the conflict. In this process, I am seeing how the Dewoitine became the front-line French fighter as May moved into June, and indeed it can hold its own against German 109s and 110s, as well as attacking bombers. I've become quite fond of flying it in combat.
But let's not go too far here.
gastonj
Members +
Hi,
Lindbergh said that the best aircraft would be the D.520 with the Daimler engine. Really the D.520 was hard to drive but in hands of experimented pilots she was very efficient. The quality of the MB-150 series was the power of fire, a big advantage to shoot down bombers.The MB-152 and the MB-155 were excellent firing platforms and were very robust, suffering severe damage.
In tests, the D.520 outperformed the Hurricane in all cases and was on a par with the Bf-109E captured in May 40 with 180 hp less. A 1200 hp Hispaino version was to be released to equip the D.551 and improve the D520 and MS 410.
If we could classify the fighters of the Air Force we would put in number one the D.520 then the MB 152/155 and then the P-36. The MS 406, if it was difficult enough to shoot down given its flight qualities, was ineffective due to its too low speed.
You're relying a bit too much on British or US literature, from people who have never flown these planes. Do not forget either that, considering the biggest defeat in their history, the French have also tended to accuse the supposed defects of their equipment. In addition, the army has constantly denounced the absence of French aircraft in the sky, which the victories and losses of course dispute.
During this campaign we can wonder what was the real quality of the German pilots (except the veterans of the Spanish war) if we refer to the success of the French P-36 against the Bf-109e.
JMC
Lindbergh said that the best aircraft would be the D.520 with the Daimler engine. Really the D.520 was hard to drive but in hands of experimented pilots she was very efficient. The quality of the MB-150 series was the power of fire, a big advantage to shoot down bombers.The MB-152 and the MB-155 were excellent firing platforms and were very robust, suffering severe damage.
In tests, the D.520 outperformed the Hurricane in all cases and was on a par with the Bf-109E captured in May 40 with 180 hp less. A 1200 hp Hispaino version was to be released to equip the D.551 and improve the D520 and MS 410.
If we could classify the fighters of the Air Force we would put in number one the D.520 then the MB 152/155 and then the P-36. The MS 406, if it was difficult enough to shoot down given its flight qualities, was ineffective due to its too low speed.
You're relying a bit too much on British or US literature, from people who have never flown these planes. Do not forget either that, considering the biggest defeat in their history, the French have also tended to accuse the supposed defects of their equipment. In addition, the army has constantly denounced the absence of French aircraft in the sky, which the victories and losses of course dispute.
During this campaign we can wonder what was the real quality of the German pilots (except the veterans of the Spanish war) if we refer to the success of the French P-36 against the Bf-109e.
JMC