Dirt, I believe a couple P-80s were deployed to Italy in 44' but were grounded due to a crash during a demonstration flight, causing them to miss combat.
I'd imagine the Meteor would be a 262 that more people could actually kill with... Be careful what you wish for
I just looked it up, your memory serves you right. They were indeed sent to the 1st.
I did vote, for Me410. Never even saw an option for Meteor, which country are we referring to?
2 of them. YP-80s at that. With a full support staff from Lockheed.THe YP-80 crash refered to occured in January, 1945 in England.Good info hereand hereUnfortunatly, it seems 1stFG.org is gone. It had the color pics and info as well.wrongway
Meteor would be ok but, what about the He 111, Ju 52, Pe-2, Yak-3, MiG-3, LaGG-3, Fairey Swordfish, Oscar, and F2A Buffalo?Just a few. We need to fill our Soviet list and finish the Luftwaffe before we adding stuff we 'want.'perdweeb
I read that there were P-80s in ETO flying out of Italy prior to the end of the war, however they did not "see action". Is this true?
I guess I'm confused; did the crash take place in italy, or else where, causing the whole program to be grounded?
XF-80A's used the General Electric J-33-GE-5 engines that were rated at 4,000 Lbs thurst, but they could not be run up too high because the exhaust gas temperatures would get so hot that they would melt the turbine blades. The YP-80's had the earliest Allison J-33 series engines that were rated at 4,000 Lbs thrust, but they suffered from reliability problems due to faulty fuel injector design and faulty fuel delivery system, which led to flameouts. When the injectors get clogged up they typically leave carbon streaks inside the tail pipe, which indicates to a mechanic the injectors need to be cleaned, flow tested or replaced. When the third YP-80 flamedout and killed Lockheed test pilot Milo Burcham, an investigation into the crash yielded the necessary improvements needed to help minimize flameouts in the production aircraft. The production P-80's used the new J-33-9/11 engines that featured much improved fuel injectors and a better and more reliable fuel delivery system. It also provided a slight increase in engine performance over the earlier engines used in the YP-80's because the newer engines ran cooler and had lower exhaust gas temperatures thanks largely to the better fuel delivery system and improved fuel injector design.
Following the investigation of the Aircraft Accident Committee, the cause of the accident was found to be that the tail pipe flange failed in tension. This allowed enough exhaust leakage to be released into the aft section of the fuselage to melt of the tail pipe lagging, the tail surface roots, and part of the fuselage aft section skin, causing rear empennage disintegration. It took a further two weeks to determine the exact cause of the in-flight fire. The distribution of all the debris was plotted, which were spread over half a mile in a relatively straight line. The first piece along the flight path was the tail pipe, which displayed evidence of forced separation of its attachment to the engine tail cone. Next in line was the vertical fin and rudder with part of the aft fuselage, this part showed excesive heat and smoke damage. The investigation also revealed "thrown turbine buckets" and it was noted that when these break away, they damage everything in their path, cables, hydraulics' etc, i.e. the engine literally blew up, taking of the rear empennage.
I'd rather have a mosquito 6 without flame dampers on the exhausts.Oh wait. I already do. So long, suckers!
