Author Topic: P61 specs, and why we need it.  (Read 762 times)

Offline Meatloaf

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 58
P61 specs, and why we need it.
« on: June 11, 2009, 10:23:45 PM »
 Specifications: Northrop P-61B Black Widow
Dimensions:
Length: 49.57ft (15.11m)
Width: 65.98ft (20.11m)
Height: 14.67ft (4.47m)
Performance:
Max Speed: 366mph (589kmh; 318kts)
Max Range: 1,350miles (2,172km)
Rate-of-Climb: 2,090ft/min (637m/min)
Ceiling: 33,005ft (10,060m; 6.3miles)
 Structure:
Accommodation: 3
Hardpoints: 4
Empty Weight: 23,451lbs (10,637kg)
MTOW: 36,200lbs (16,420kg)
Power:
Engine(s): 2 x Pratt & Whitney R-2800-65 Double-Wasp 18-cylinder radial piston engines developing 2,000hp 
 
 The Northrop-produced P-61 Black Widow was the first aircraft specifically designed as a true nightfighter from the outset. After realizing the initial successes of such aircraft throughout Europe (in particular the British Mosquitoes and German Ju 88 nightfighters) Northrop engineers set forth to create this twin-boom design as a heavily-armed platform built specifically for the night sky.

The design of the Black Widow was such that the crew could operate the various systems in complete darkness, with the ability to track and ultimately destroy unsuspecting incoming enemy aircraft at will. A crew of three was required to pilot, track and engage, and the aircraft was consequently covered in a black tone to keep it from being obviously visible to the naked eye in the darkness. The twin boom arrangements housed the two Pratt & Whitney turbocharged engines and were joined at rear by a large plane and twin rudder formation. Either boom straddled the sides of the crew areas. The pilot sat in the forward cockpit with the gunner immediately behind him in an elevated position. The radar operator sat at the isolated extreme rear of the gondola, operating the SCR-720 series radar system mounted in the nose. The engine nacelles were fitted near the wing roots and generated a very solid center of gravity when both engines throttled.

Armament of the P-61 consisted of a radio-controlled dorsal turret housing a battery of 4 x 12.7mm heavy machine guns. Ventral armament consisted of an arrangement housing 4 x 20mm cannons, though these were in a fixed-forward firing position. Early models displayed a defect in flight when the dorsal turret - if held at specific right angles - caused the entire centerline of the aircraft to go off-kilter, resulting in severe buffeting issues. A quick solution resulted in the complete removal of the dorsal turret in the initial batch "A" production models until a resolution was found - the turret would be brought back into production in later "B" models. Any of the three crew members could aim and fire the dorsal turret, as a 360 degree fire arc was possible. The pilot could lock the turret in a fixed-forward alignment and fire it in addition to the 20mm cannon armament. The ability for the radar operator in the rear cockpit to aim and fire the machine guns was key as he was provided the best viewpoint of any oncoming enemy aircraft from the rear. Additional improvements in design would include a lengthening of the fuselage that directly resolved the buffeting issue and the ability for the aircraft to carry fuel drop tanks or four 1,600lb bombs into combat.

The P-61 enjoyed successes in the Second World War from its inception in 1944 onwards. The Black Widow would make more combat appearances up until 1950 - now designated as the F-61 - and become the founding member aircraft of the newly-formed US Air Defense Command, charged with defending America's airspace from the direct threat posed by the Soviet Union throughout the Cold War. The Black Widow was eventually replaced as the frontline nightfighter for the US Air Force by the North American F-82F/G Twin Mustangs beginning in 1948. The last F-61 Black Widow was officially retired from service in 1952 and did not participate in the Korean War.

Info from http://www.militaryfactory.com/aircraft/detail.asp?aircraft_id=78


So, so sum things up, I think, and im sure others in the Aces High community beleive that this would be a very adequate addition to the aces high family of aircraft, as the only true Heavy fighters we have in this game are the Bf110 G2, and the P38 series. Email me with questions or comments dcwdavid@yahoo.com  :rock :rock :rock :salute
Да здравствует Советского Союза!
aka 1BORIS

Offline PFactorDave

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4334
Re: P61 specs, and why we need it.
« Reply #1 on: June 11, 2009, 10:26:00 PM »
Uh...  Maybe we need to have night first, eh?

1st Lieutenant
FSO Liaison Officer
Rolling Thunder

Offline Meatloaf

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 58
Re: P61 specs, and why we need it.
« Reply #2 on: June 11, 2009, 10:40:49 PM »
It doesnt matter if we had night or not, it would still serve the role as a heavy fighter  :rock
Да здравствует Советского Союза!
aka 1BORIS

Offline Motherland

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8110
Re: P61 specs, and why we need it.
« Reply #3 on: June 11, 2009, 10:41:38 PM »
There are actual heavy fighters that would make great additions, like the Me 410 and the Bristol Beaufighter.

Offline Meatloaf

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 58
Re: P61 specs, and why we need it.
« Reply #4 on: June 11, 2009, 10:44:22 PM »
Beaufighter <  P61 :rock
Да здравствует Советского Союза!
aka 1BORIS

Offline Saxman

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9155
Re: P61 specs, and why we need it.
« Reply #5 on: June 12, 2009, 12:42:02 AM »
Beaufighter <  P61 :rock

The Beaufighter actually had a significant impact on the war. All that :rock must be turning the gray matter to mush.  :rolleyes:

I wouldn't mind seeing the P-61 EVENTUALLY, but there's other, FAR more important aircraft needed first. I've said it before, and I'll say it again, the Japanese plane set for the early period is ABYSMAL. Even as bad as the Russian set is, at least even without the I-16 it was still possible to run very early Eastern Front setups due to the large number of Lend/Lease birds to plug the holes. There ARE no hole fillers for Early PTO. No multi-engine bomber (Ki-67 is a very late ship) and no IJAAF fighters (Our Ki-61 is a later-war bird). The mid war set isn't much better as we don't have a true mid-war IJN fighter (A6M2 is early, and our A6M5 is a later ship) or ANY strike craft (B5N and D3A are HORRIBLY out-dated for anything after the beginning of 1943, and as said before, the Ki-67 is much later).
Ron White says you can't fix stupid. I beg to differ. Stupid will usually sort itself out, it's just a matter of making sure you're not close enough to become collateral damage.

Offline trigger2

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1342
Re: P61 specs, and why we need it.
« Reply #6 on: June 12, 2009, 01:33:23 AM »
The Beaufighter actually had a significant impact on the war. All that :rock must be turning the gray matter to mush.  :rolleyes:

I wouldn't mind seeing the P-61 EVENTUALLY, but there's other, FAR more important aircraft needed first. I've said it before, and I'll say it again, the Japanese plane set for the early period is ABYSMAL. Even as bad as the Russian set is, at least even without the I-16 it was still possible to run very early Eastern Front setups due to the large number of Lend/Lease birds to plug the holes. There ARE no hole fillers for Early PTO. No multi-engine bomber (Ki-67 is a very late ship) and no IJAAF fighters (Our Ki-61 is a later-war bird). The mid war set isn't much better as we don't have a true mid-war IJN fighter (A6M2 is early, and our A6M5 is a later ship) or ANY strike craft (B5N and D3A are HORRIBLY out-dated for anything after the beginning of 1943, and as said before, the Ki-67 is much later).

+1
Sometimes, we just need to remember what the rules of life really are: You only
need two tools: WD-40 and Duct Tape. If it doesn't move and should, use the
WD-40. If it shouldn't move and does, use the duct tape.
*TAs Aerofighters Inc.*

Offline Ack-Ack

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 25260
      • FlameWarriors
Re: P61 specs, and why we need it.
« Reply #7 on: June 12, 2009, 05:23:06 PM »



So, so sum things up, I think, and im sure others in the Aces High community beleive that this would be a very adequate addition to the aces high family of aircraft, as the only true Heavy fighters we have in this game are the Bf110 G2, and the P38 series. Email me with questions or comments dcwdavid@yahoo.com  :rock :rock :rock :salute


The only heavy fighter we have in the game are the Bf 110 series.  The P-38 is not a heavy fighter nor was it ever classified as such.


ack-ack
"If Jesus came back as an airplane, he would be a P-38." - WW2 P-38 pilot
Elite Top Aces +1 Mexican Official Squadron Song

Offline Meatloaf

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 58
Re: P61 specs, and why we need it.
« Reply #8 on: June 12, 2009, 05:47:51 PM »
I stand corrected       :rock :rock :noid
Да здравствует Советского Союза!
aka 1BORIS

Offline Meatloaf

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 58
Re: P61 specs, and why we need it.
« Reply #9 on: June 12, 2009, 06:25:58 PM »
Quote
I wouldn't mind seeing the P-61 EVENTUALLY, but there's other, FAR more important aircraft needed first. I've said it before, and I'll say it again, the Japanese plane set for the early period is ABYSMAL. Even as bad as the Russian set is, at least even without the I-16 it was still possible to run very early Eastern Front setups due to the large number of Lend/Lease birds to plug the holes. There ARE no hole fillers for Early PTO. No multi-engine bomber (Ki-67 is a very late ship) and no IJAAF fighters (Our Ki-61 is a later-war bird). The mid war set isn't much better as we don't have a true mid-war IJN fighter (A6M2 is early, and our A6M5 is a later ship) or ANY strike craft (B5N and D3A are HORRIBLY out-dated for anything after the beginning of 1943, and as said before, the Ki-67 is much later).
noone wants another plane that will catch on fire at the earliest convenience
Да здравствует Советского Союза!
aka 1BORIS

Offline Saxman

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9155
Re: P61 specs, and why we need it.
« Reply #10 on: June 12, 2009, 07:54:41 PM »
noone wants another plane that will catch on fire at the earliest convenience

The game isn't restricted to the Main Arenas. FSO, Scenarios and AvA BADLY need more Japanese aircraft, it's probably the most neglected in the game (as I said, the Russians heavily used Lend/Lease early in the war, and the Italians used a lot of German aircraft). We can't accurately run any early China/AVG scenarios. We have massive holes for mid war. Even the late war Japanese set is lacking.

I'm sorry if it means not getting yet another late-war American uber ride, or yet ANOTHER addition for the overly-represented Western/Eastern Front, but these additions are SERIOUSLY needed.
Ron White says you can't fix stupid. I beg to differ. Stupid will usually sort itself out, it's just a matter of making sure you're not close enough to become collateral damage.

Offline 1Boner

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2285
Re: P61 specs, and why we need it.
« Reply #11 on: June 12, 2009, 09:57:22 PM »
LMFAO!!! :rofl


Oh yeah, PERK IT!!
« Last Edit: June 12, 2009, 10:02:41 PM by 1Boner »
"Life is just as deadly as it looks"  Richard Thompson

"So umm.... just to make sure I have this right.  What you are asking is for the bombers carrying bombs, to stop dropping bombs on the bombs, so the bombers can carry bombs to bomb things with?"  AKP