Talk:Seversky P-35

Check your spelling of Kartvelli. --squadfifteen 3/10/05

AT-12 Guardsman

I pulled out the bit below, it belongs in the AT-12 article. - Emt147 ^Burninate! 06:46, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

Incidentally, Seversky also built a refinement of the original two-seat fighter concept embodied by the SEV-2XP, resulting in a fighter-bomber designated the 2PA Guardsman, which was available with retractable landing gear or floats. The USSR bought one with each landing gear option, plus a manufacturing license, but never put the type into production.

The Japanese Imperial Navy actually bought 20 2PAs, apparently through a subterfuge to conceal the ultimate customer, but found them disappointing. Two of them were passed on the Asahi Shimbun newspaper as hacks. Sweden ordered 52 2PAs as dive-bombers, but only two were delivered before the US embargoed exports of fighters to Sweden in October 1940, and the other 50 ended up in USAAC hands as the AT-12 Guardsman.

Never mind, I got it sorted out. The text is back in the article. - Emt147 ^Burninate! 07:41, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

Rewrite

I've rewritten the entire article and made it conform to the WikiProject Aircraft manual of style: Wikipedia:WikiProject_Aircraft/page_content - Emt147 ^Burninate! 08:08, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

More international

This same plane was also built under licence by the italians (Reggiane 2000 Falco with Piaggo engine) and the hungarians (WM Héja with the Gnome Rhone K14 engine). 195.70.32.136 12:03, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Nope, the Reggiane Re.2000 is not a licence built version of P-35! It's a completely new design. Sure they look alike, but that's due to other reasons. There are several other cases of look-a-likes with no relations in aviation history, Convair 240 and Martin 202 beeing one other. --Towpilot 23:45, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

This is a persistent myth; Brian Sullivan ("Downfall of the Regia Aeronautica", in Higham & Harris' Why Air Forces Fail, p.140-1) repeats it, claiming Seversky illegally sold the design. Trekphiler (talk) 08:47, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

P-35 vs P-35A

There are some understandable confusions about wich version of the airplane that is on dispaly in Dayton today. The museum use to have an ex Swedish Air Force J 9 on dispaly, painted as a P-35A. P-35A is as we know the US designation of the Swedish version only. It has a slightly longer fuselage and a bigger engine than the P-35. The difference in engine size is easy to see. After some years on display a real P-35 with the small engine was found and put on display, but painted as a P-35A! The Swedish J 9/P-35A was traded with Kermit Weeks for a Grumman Duck. The paintjob chosen was probably because only P-35A saw combat, and not the P-35. The old website of the museum had a caption with the picture of the P-35 calling it a P-35A probably because it was painted as a P-35A! But it's easy to understand if someone also remembered the fact that they use to have a P-35A, and therefore calling the new airplane a P-35A since it's painted as one!

Therefore, an old picture from the museum can be the old P-35A no longer there. The airplane presently on display IS a P-35, not a P-35A! --Towpilot 02:36, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

BTW- we are both right- Check the photograph, it is a P-35 (USAAC Serial no. 36-0404) marked as the P-35A flown by the 17th Pursuit Squadron commander, 1 Lt. Buzz Wagner, in the Philippines in the spring of 1941. Bzuk 3:08 6 January 2007 (UTC).

Cut it out

I deleted this

"The P-35's successor, the P-43 Lancer, was based on the P-35 (and its lightweight, higher-speed counterpart, the P-44 Rocket), and was already outdated compared to British and German warplanes currently in service over Europe. Kartveli began to consider its successor using lessons learned from the P-35, P-43, and P-44, eventually emerging as the P-47 Thunderbolt.

as irrelevant to the P-35. Fit it into the P-43 page, if you can. (I tried & failed, most of it's there already, & better.) Trekphiler (talk) 08:50, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

A slight, oblique reference to the design continuation was made, probably the only real relevance to the earlier P-35 development. FWIW Bzuk (talk) 17:34, 1 January 2008 (UTC).

Armament

The USAAC P-35 was delivered with two fixed, forward-firing Colt-Browning 0.30" LMGs in the fuselage decking, synchronized to fire through the aircsrew. Some of these aircraft received one fixed, forward-firing Colt-Browning 0.30" M2 LMG and one fixed, forward-firing Colt-Browning 0.50" M2 HMG mounted in the fuselage decking and synchronized to fire through the airscrew. This was in keeping with USAAC practice at the time (the Boeing P-26 series had this same configuration tried on it). Pilot criticism and tests at Wright Field established that the pairing of the 0.50" and 0.30" Colt-Browning machineguns in the fuselage decking was unsatisfactory; the two weapons have very different ballistic characteristics, something of supreme importance in employing a fighter aircraft as an air-superiority weapon (it is less-than-ideal even for ground support aircraft, though the P-39 series retained this armament for a very long time).

The Swedish aircraft were armed with two fixed, forward-firing Colt-Browning 0.30" M2 LMGs in the fuselage decking, synchronized to fire through the aircsrew, and two fixed, forward-firing Colt-Browning 0.50" M2 HMGs mounted in the wings, one to either side. This aircraft was employed by the USAAF in the Philippines during the early Pacific War. As war losses and damage accumulated, many aircraft had their Colt-Browning LMGs replaced by the Colt-Browning HMGs, thus ending their brief active service armed with three or four fixed, forward-firing Colt-Browning HMGs. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.145.145.127 (talk) 19:41, 25 May 2012 (UTC)