This article is within the scope of the Aviation WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.AviationWikipedia:WikiProject AviationTemplate:WikiProject Aviationaviation articles
This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles
I'm not sure about the supposed choice of the radial engine because of it's "lower profile". I've never heard of anything like that, and the only time a radial has a lower profile is from fire directly below (or to the sides). These are always leading (deflection) shots at a moving target, and thus only a lucky shot would hit anyway. The real dangerous fire comes from ahead, the same area where you are shooting at, since you present the enemy with a relatively stationary target from this angle. From the front, an inline actually presents LESS of a target than a radial. I'm pretty sure the major advantage of radials is that they don't have a vulnerable radiator to put out of action with a single bullet, and they are somewhat more tolerant of damage (but only to a certain point). .45Colt 13:52, 6 February 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by .45Colt (talk • contribs)
