Quote:
Originally Posted by Friendly_flyer
Kind of like an Australian Hurricane?
|
nah ... if anything the Boomerang was closest in performance to the Brewster Buffalo. Slightly lower top speed but better guns (20mm) and better rate of climb. The Buffalo had a lower wing loading.
CAC Boomerang ***
Powerplant: 1,200 hp (895 kW) Pratt & Whitney R-1830 Twin Wasp radial engine,
Empty weight: 5,373 lb (2,437 kg)
Loaded weight: 7,699 lb (3,492 kg)
Maximum speed: 305 mph (265 knots, 491 km/h) at 15,500 ft (4,730 m)
Range: 930 mi (810 nm, 1,500 km)
Service ceiling: 29,000 ft (8,800 m)
Rate of climb: 2,940 ft/min (14.9 m/s)
Wing loading: 34.2 lb/ft² (167.1 kg/m²)
Armament
2× 20 mm (0.787 in) Hispano or CAC cannons
4× 0.303 in (7.7 mm) Browning machine guns
Bombs: Could be fitted when the large drop tank was not carried
F2A-3 ***
Powerplant: 1,200 hp (895 kW) Wright R-1820-40 radial engine
Empty weight: 4,732 lb (2,146 kg)
Max takeoff weight: 6,321 lb (2,867 kg)
Maximum speed: 284 mph at sea level, 321 mph at 16,500 ft (457 km/h, 516 km/h)
Range: 1,680 mi (2,703 km)
Service ceiling: 30,000 ft (9,144 m)
Rate of climb: 2,440 ft/min[5] The initial rate of climb would be further reduced with completely full petrol tanks.</ref> (744 m/min)
Wing loading: 24.1 lb/ft²
Armament
2 × 0.50 in (12.7 mm) nose-mounted M2 machine guns
2 × 0.50 in (12.7 mm) wing-mounted M2 machine guns
2 × 100 lb (45 kg) underwing bomb
EDIT:
The Boomerang would be a great addition for us Aussies .. but really wouldn't interest anyone else much
It only ever flew for the RAAF as far as I know and is going to perform pretty much like the Buffalo in game.