Page 7 of 12
Re: Aircraft thread
Posted: Tue Jan 26, 2021 8:42 pm
by laurent
Yeeb wrote: ↑Tue Jan 26, 2021 6:10 pm
Air nerds - anyone get this one?
I will admit, I never heard of this before I found it !
Absolute minger of an aircraft !
Not as bad as some of Fairey's horror this is a Liore Olivier / SNCASE prototype SE100 supposed to replace the Potez 630.
Re: Aircraft thread
Posted: Tue Jan 26, 2021 11:55 pm
by mat the expat
Torquemada 1420 wrote: ↑Tue Jan 26, 2021 9:38 am
mat the expat wrote: ↑Mon Jan 25, 2021 11:48 pm
At one point, with a flying career out the window, I was considering Photographic interpretation in the RAF.
I was lucky living in North Wales - I live high up and could look down onto the jets in the valleys below - My high-point was standing with my bike and an brace of F15E's rolling inverted over the ridge and the back seater giving me the thumbs up as they passed over me
Ditto-ish for me. Flying career went West. Now I play with this:
Re: Aircraft thread
Posted: Wed Jan 27, 2021 10:20 am
by Yeeb
laurent wrote: ↑Tue Jan 26, 2021 8:42 pm
Yeeb wrote: ↑Tue Jan 26, 2021 6:10 pm
Air nerds - anyone get this one?
I will admit, I never heard of this before I found it !
Absolute minger of an aircraft !
Not as bad as some of Fairey's horror this is a Liore Olivier / SNCASE prototype SE100 supposed to replace the Potez 630.
Tres bien
Possibly the least french looking ww2 era aircraft of all time , hideously ugly but had decent performance , armament, and propellers & gunsights. You are going to have to post which Fairey aircraft you mean as I can’t place something as horrible as that, possibly the gannet but that had a specific role and those aircraft often look very odd.
Re: Aircraft thread
Posted: Wed Jan 27, 2021 12:07 pm
by Torquemada 1420
Yeeb wrote: ↑Wed Jan 27, 2021 10:20 am
You are going to have to post which Fairey aircraft you mean as I can’t place something as horrible as that, possibly the gannet but that had a specific role and those aircraft often look very odd.
I think Blackburn would have a serious shot at taking all 3 podium slots in this comp. Firebrand, Beverley, Roc, Botha...............
Re: Aircraft thread
Posted: Wed Jan 27, 2021 12:55 pm
by Yeeb
Torquemada 1420 wrote: ↑Wed Jan 27, 2021 12:07 pm
Yeeb wrote: ↑Wed Jan 27, 2021 10:20 am
You are going to have to post which Fairey aircraft you mean as I can’t place something as horrible as that, possibly the gannet but that had a specific role and those aircraft often look very odd.
I think Blackburn would have a serious shot at taking all 3 podium slots in this comp. Firebrand, Beverley, Roc, Botha...............
Don’t know how they survived at the time because every one of their aircraft was dogshit
The US equivalent was Brewster which was basically a scam artist getting money out of the government.
Re: Aircraft thread
Posted: Wed Jan 27, 2021 1:05 pm
by Yeeb
There are actually lots of aircraft ‘what-if’ questions from that era.
Why were fw190’s produced more when it was clearly superior to me109
Why didn’t the defiant get forward guns or a variant with no turret
Why didn’t the whirlwind get new engines as it was a lovely plane
Why was the liberator produced more than the b17 when it was worse in every respect bar range
Why wasn’t frank whittle given more help earlier ? BoB would have been easier had we had meteors then !
What if Mitchell’s bomber prototype not got destroyed ?
We was the Herschel Uhu largely ignored as it was decent ?
Why didn’t Germany get a proper 4 engine heavy bomber ? (Or for that matter, ussr or japan)
Re: Aircraft thread
Posted: Wed Jan 27, 2021 1:43 pm
by Torquemada 1420
Yeeb wrote: ↑Wed Jan 27, 2021 1:05 pm
There are actually lots of aircraft ‘what-if’ questions from that era.
Why were fw190’s produced more when it was clearly superior to me109
Why didn’t the defiant get forward guns or a variant with no turret
Why didn’t the whirlwind get new engines as it was a lovely plane
Why was the liberator produced more than the b17 when it was worse in every respect bar range
Why wasn’t frank whittle given more help earlier ? BoB would have been easier had we had meteors then !
What if Mitchell’s bomber prototype not got destroyed ?
We was the Herschel Uhu largely ignored as it was decent ?
Why didn’t Germany get a proper 4 engine heavy bomber ? (Or for that matter, ussr or japan)
I'll try and answer a couple quickly
- Defiant. Awful aircraft but there was an RAF obsession with mid gun turrets at the time. Ironically, this made it suitable as night fighter against bombers.
- I think the Liberator was a production thing. US simply could not retool for an entire switch without hampering desperately needed production: losses of B17s and B24s were huge.
- Whittle. Because the MOD/RAF were conservatively minded morons hence the delays in the bouncing bomb and the non production of Miles 20 or MB5. They hated new tech.
- The Germans did have a proper 4 engine bomber. They just never seemed to recognise it. FW-200.
Re: Aircraft thread
Posted: Wed Jan 27, 2021 1:51 pm
by Sandstorm
Yeeb wrote: ↑Wed Jan 27, 2021 1:05 pm
There are actually lots of aircraft ‘what-if’ questions from that era.
Why were fw190’s produced more when it was clearly superior to me109
Why didn’t the defiant get forward guns or a variant with no turret
Why didn’t the whirlwind get new engines as it was a lovely plane
Why was the liberator produced more than the b17 when it was worse in every respect bar range
Why wasn’t frank whittle given more help earlier ? BoB would have been easier had we had meteors then !
What if Mitchell’s bomber prototype not got destroyed ?
We was the Herschel Uhu largely ignored as it was decent ?
Why didn’t Germany get a proper 4 engine heavy bomber ? (Or for that matter, ussr or japan)
Tory Scum and Idiot Republicans. Same as 2020.
Re: Aircraft thread
Posted: Wed Jan 27, 2021 1:55 pm
by Yeeb
Torquemada 1420 wrote: ↑Wed Jan 27, 2021 1:43 pm
Yeeb wrote: ↑Wed Jan 27, 2021 1:05 pm
There are actually lots of aircraft ‘what-if’ questions from that era.
Why were fw190’s produced more when it was clearly superior to me109
Why didn’t the defiant get forward guns or a variant with no turret
Why didn’t the whirlwind get new engines as it was a lovely plane
Why was the liberator produced more than the b17 when it was worse in every respect bar range
Why wasn’t frank whittle given more help earlier ? BoB would have been easier had we had meteors then !
What if Mitchell’s bomber prototype not got destroyed ?
We was the Herschel Uhu largely ignored as it was decent ?
Why didn’t Germany get a proper 4 engine heavy bomber ? (Or for that matter, ussr or japan)
I'll try and answer a couple quickly
- Defiant. Awful aircraft but there was an RAF obsession with mid gun turrets at the time. Ironically, this made it suitable as night fighter against bombers.
- I think the Liberator was a production thing. US simply could not retool for an entire switch without hampering desperately needed production: losses of B17s and B24s were huge.
- Whittle. Because the MOD/RAF were conservatively minded morons hence the delays in the bouncing bomb and the non production of Miles 20 or MB5. They hated new tech.
- The Germans did have a proper 4 engine bomber. They just never seemed to recognise it. FW-200.
Hmmm I read that the defiant was quite nice to fly and comparable to a hurricane in speed despite lugging the weight around
The fw200 was only in low numbers and used to break apart as it’s spar was too weak, couldn’t handle the loads of lifting 14000lb or bombs like the Lancaster could.
Re: Aircraft thread
Posted: Wed Jan 27, 2021 6:54 pm
by Calculon
Torquemada 1420 wrote: ↑Wed Jan 27, 2021 1:43 pm
[
- I think the Liberator was a production thing. US simply could not retool for an entire switch without hampering desperately needed production: losses of B17s and B24s were huge.
The liberators were consideredly faster
could carry a similar payload much further or a larger payload the same distance
had a lower loss per sortie ratio (even when looking at the same theatre)
Served in transport and anti U-boat roles for which the b17 was less suitable
Completely replaced the b17 in the Pacific
Re: Aircraft thread
Posted: Wed Jan 27, 2021 7:18 pm
by Yeeb
Calculon wrote: ↑Wed Jan 27, 2021 6:54 pm
Torquemada 1420 wrote: ↑Wed Jan 27, 2021 1:43 pm
[
- I think the Liberator was a production thing. US simply could not retool for an entire switch without hampering desperately needed production: losses of B17s and B24s were huge.
The liberators were consideredly faster
could carry a similar payload much further or a larger payload the same distance
had a lower loss per sortie ratio (even when looking at the same theatre)
Served in transport and anti U-boat roles for which the b17 was less suitable
Completely replaced the b17 in the Pacific
The loss ratio was worse for the b24 until 1945, it wasn’t as combat robust / better than the b17.
Once ze Luftwaffe stopped being as effective toward the end, the greater numbers of b24s helped skew the overall stats in its favour , but earlier on in the war, the Doolittle’s etc much preferred the b17 in Europe. B17 also flew higher with its chunkier wing.
Seeing as it was designed years later, it wasn’t as big a step up as say b17 to b29 in performance.
Re: Aircraft thread
Posted: Wed Jan 27, 2021 8:02 pm
by Calculon
Yeeb wrote: ↑Wed Jan 27, 2021 7:18 pm
Calculon wrote: ↑Wed Jan 27, 2021 6:54 pm
Torquemada 1420 wrote: ↑Wed Jan 27, 2021 1:43 pm
[
- I think the Liberator was a production thing. US simply could not retool for an entire switch without hampering desperately needed production: losses of B17s and B24s were huge.
The liberators were consideredly faster
could carry a similar payload much further or a larger payload the same distance
had a lower loss per sortie ratio (even when looking at the same theatre)
Served in transport and anti U-boat roles for which the b17 was less suitable
Completely replaced the b17 in the Pacific
The loss ratio was worse for the b24 until 1945, it wasn’t as combat robust / better than the b17.
Once ze Luftwaffe stopped being as effective toward the end, the greater numbers of b24s helped skew the overall stats in its favour , but earlier on in the war, the Doolittle’s etc much preferred the b17 in Europe. B17 also flew higher with its chunkier wing.
Seeing as it was designed years later, it wasn’t as big a step up as say b17 to b29 in performance.
From what I've read the loss ratio was worse during the same period. The b24 was heavier, so arguably more "robust", but that is fairly subjective. Would have though that even though the b17 could fly higher when lightly loaded, under combat loads it flew at the same altitude as the b24
Re: Aircraft thread
Posted: Wed Jan 27, 2021 8:37 pm
by Yeeb
Calculon wrote: ↑Wed Jan 27, 2021 8:02 pm
Yeeb wrote: ↑Wed Jan 27, 2021 7:18 pm
Calculon wrote: ↑Wed Jan 27, 2021 6:54 pm
The liberators were consideredly faster
could carry a similar payload much further or a larger payload the same distance
had a lower loss per sortie ratio (even when looking at the same theatre)
Served in transport and anti U-boat roles for which the b17 was less suitable
Completely replaced the b17 in the Pacific
The loss ratio was worse for the b24 until 1945, it wasn’t as combat robust / better than the b17.
Once ze Luftwaffe stopped being as effective toward the end, the greater numbers of b24s helped skew the overall stats in its favour , but earlier on in the war, the Doolittle’s etc much preferred the b17 in Europe. B17 also flew higher with its chunkier wing.
Seeing as it was designed years later, it wasn’t as big a step up as say b17 to b29 in performance.
From what I've read the loss ratio was worse during the same period. The b24 was heavier, so arguably more "robust", but that is fairly subjective. Would have though that even though the b17 could fly higher when lightly loaded, under combat loads it flew at the same altitude as the b24
Can’t recall what book it was , but a German fighter pilot said that b17’s were much harder to knock out of the sky for several reasons:
Thicker wings meant they could take more damage before failure ban b24 who could have a shell blow a hole right through it.
Thicker b17 wing allowed for greater height, which one model of fighter (let’s say 109g) really struggles to get the height and any manouverbility with as was near limits & stall. The much later b36 could out turn some fighters at altitude because of its thick wing
And overall in fuselage the b17 was more robust also.
Re: Aircraft thread
Posted: Wed Jan 27, 2021 11:00 pm
by mat the expat
Yeeb wrote: ↑Wed Jan 27, 2021 1:05 pm
Why didn’t the defiant get forward guns or a variant with no turret
Addding the weight of guns+ammo made it a dog
It was very effective as a night-fighter
Re: Aircraft thread
Posted: Thu Jan 28, 2021 12:21 pm
by Torquemada 1420
mat the expat wrote: ↑Wed Jan 27, 2021 11:00 pm
Yeeb wrote: ↑Wed Jan 27, 2021 1:05 pm
Why didn’t the defiant get forward guns or a variant with no turret
Addding the weight of guns+ammo made it a dog
It was very effective as a night-fighter
See above
Re: Aircraft thread
Posted: Thu Jan 28, 2021 4:13 pm
by Niegs
What's the role of the lad in the bubble?
Re: Aircraft thread
Posted: Thu Jan 28, 2021 4:36 pm
by tc27
The label says observer. Makes sense in so far as the cockpit has limited FoV.
Re: Aircraft thread
Posted: Thu Jan 28, 2021 5:09 pm
by Torquemada 1420
Niegs wrote: ↑Thu Jan 28, 2021 4:13 pm
What's the role of the lad in the bubble?
Nav: but agree it was an odd layout.
Re: Aircraft thread
Posted: Thu Jan 28, 2021 9:57 pm
by mat the expat
Torquemada 1420 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 28, 2021 5:09 pm
Niegs wrote: ↑Thu Jan 28, 2021 4:13 pm
What's the role of the lad in the bubble?
Nav: but agree it was an odd layout.
Reloading the 20mm Oerlikon cannon as well as they were drum fed
Oddly, the beast version of Whispering Death had 2 .50" guns in the left wing and 4 in the right
Re: Aircraft thread
Posted: Fri Jan 29, 2021 2:32 am
by RichieRich89
Some Beaufighters had a rear-facing machine gun for the observer.
Re: Aircraft thread
Posted: Fri Jan 29, 2021 10:16 am
by Torquemada 1420
RichieRich89 wrote: ↑Fri Jan 29, 2021 2:32 am
Some Beaufighters had a rear-facing machine gun for the observer.
The 1/72nd I made as a kid did.
Re: Aircraft thread
Posted: Fri Jan 29, 2021 6:48 pm
by Phredd
From the BAe archive shows rear facing machine gun
Re: Aircraft thread
Posted: Sat Jan 30, 2021 1:45 am
by mat the expat
Phredd wrote: ↑Fri Jan 29, 2021 6:48 pm
From the BAe archive shows rear facing machine gun
I think it was mainly the European theatre ones - more risk of being jumped
Re: Aircraft thread
Posted: Tue Feb 02, 2021 11:23 am
by Yeeb
mat the expat wrote: ↑Thu Jan 28, 2021 9:57 pm
Torquemada 1420 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 28, 2021 5:09 pm
Niegs wrote: ↑Thu Jan 28, 2021 4:13 pm
What's the role of the lad in the bubble?
Nav: but agree it was an odd layout.
Reloading the 20mm Oerlikon cannon as well as they were drum fed
Oddly, the beast version of Whispering Death had 2 .50" guns in the left wing and 4 in the right
I think the machine guns were .303’s not 50 cals
It’s the most overpowered aircraft on War thunder , it just zaps foes
Re: Aircraft thread
Posted: Tue Feb 02, 2021 1:18 pm
by Torquemada 1420
Who has this guy got in his pocket to get away so lightly with this?
https://ukaviation.news/arrogant-pilot- ... -raf-base/
Illegal landing on RAF base without even having a pilot's licence. And in a PC12 FFS.
Re: Aircraft thread
Posted: Tue Feb 02, 2021 7:24 pm
by GogLais
It's astonishing but I guess it's a lot of money by Caernarfon standards. I grew up within a stone's throw of Valley - Vampires, Gnats and Vickers Varsities.
Re: Aircraft thread
Posted: Tue Feb 02, 2021 8:09 pm
by Torquemada 1420
GogLais wrote: ↑Tue Feb 02, 2021 7:24 pm
It's astonishing but I guess it's a lot of money by Caernarfon standards. I
grew up within a stone's throw of Valley - Vampires, Gnats and Vickers Varsities.
I know this is a massive long shot given the commonality of name, but did you know a petite goth girl, Tracey Thomas?
Re: Aircraft thread
Posted: Tue Feb 02, 2021 8:10 pm
by Sandstorm
Pussy Government’s fault again. Should have confiscated and crushed his plane.
Re: Aircraft thread
Posted: Tue Feb 02, 2021 10:21 pm
by GogLais
Torquemada 1420 wrote: ↑Tue Feb 02, 2021 8:09 pm
GogLais wrote: ↑Tue Feb 02, 2021 7:24 pm
It's astonishing but I guess it's a lot of money by Caernarfon standards. I
grew up within a stone's throw of Valley - Vampires, Gnats and Vickers Varsities.
I know this is a massive long shot given the commonality of name, but did you know a petite goth girl, Tracey Thomas?
Afraid not, goths hadn't been invented when I left.
Re: Aircraft thread
Posted: Tue Feb 02, 2021 10:56 pm
by mat the expat
GogLais wrote: ↑Tue Feb 02, 2021 7:24 pm
It's astonishing but I guess it's a lot of money by Caernarfon standards. I grew up within a stone's throw of Valley - Vampires, Gnats and Vickers Varsities.
My old stomping ground in the Cadets - 1310 Eryri!
We used to go to Valley to be "bodies" for the SARTU unit. Great fun being dropped off on the mountains.
The AEF at Woodvale would often fly over and base themselves at Valley.
The base is one of the best for spotting unusual aircraft as it's the designated emergency base for landings post Atlantic crossing
Re: Aircraft thread
Posted: Wed Feb 03, 2021 9:50 am
by Torquemada 1420
GogLais wrote: ↑Tue Feb 02, 2021 10:21 pm
Torquemada 1420 wrote: ↑Tue Feb 02, 2021 8:09 pm
GogLais wrote: ↑Tue Feb 02, 2021 7:24 pm
It's astonishing but I guess it's a lot of money by Caernarfon standards. I
grew up within a stone's throw of Valley - Vampires, Gnats and Vickers Varsities.
I know this is a massive long shot given the commonality of name, but did you know a petite goth girl, Tracey Thomas?
Afraid not, goths hadn't been invented when I left.
LOL. She would be 54 now so an original goth. Reason I asked is she was closest friends with the 1st boss and Valley probably only has 10 inhabitants..........
Re: Aircraft thread
Posted: Wed Feb 03, 2021 10:35 am
by GogLais
Torquemada 1420 wrote: ↑Wed Feb 03, 2021 9:50 am
GogLais wrote: ↑Tue Feb 02, 2021 10:21 pm
Torquemada 1420 wrote: ↑Tue Feb 02, 2021 8:09 pm
I know this is a massive long shot given the commonality of name, but did you know a petite goth girl, Tracey Thomas?
Afraid not, goths hadn't been invented when I left.
LOL. She would be 54 now so an original goth. Reason I asked is she was closest friends with the 1st boss and Valley probably only has 10 inhabitants..........
I'm a farm boy, I didn't grow up anywhere as cosmopolitan as Valley. Valley even had traffic lights.
Re: Aircraft thread
Posted: Wed Feb 03, 2021 12:23 pm
by Torquemada 1420
GogLais wrote: ↑Wed Feb 03, 2021 10:35 am
Torquemada 1420 wrote: ↑Wed Feb 03, 2021 9:50 am
GogLais wrote: ↑Tue Feb 02, 2021 10:21 pm
Afraid not, goths hadn't been invented when I left.
LOL. She would be 54 now so an original goth. Reason I asked is she was closest friends with the 1st boss and Valley probably only has 10 inhabitants..........
I'm a farm boy, I didn't grow up anywhere as cosmopolitan as Valley. Valley even had traffic lights.
Re: Aircraft thread
Posted: Tue Mar 23, 2021 4:33 pm
by Torquemada 1420
Re: Aircraft thread
Posted: Thu Mar 25, 2021 3:04 pm
by Yeeb
Quiz time !
Anyone recognise this bad boy ?
Re: Aircraft thread
Posted: Thu Mar 25, 2021 10:08 pm
by GogLais
Yeeb wrote: ↑Thu Mar 25, 2021 3:04 pm
Quiz time !
Anyone recognise this bad boy ?
It may look like a random collection of letters but I believe it's an FMA AeMB.2. The trouser fairings were the clue.
Re: Aircraft thread
Posted: Fri Mar 26, 2021 9:14 am
by Torquemada 1420
GogLais wrote: ↑Thu Mar 25, 2021 10:08 pm
Yeeb wrote: ↑Thu Mar 25, 2021 3:04 pm
Quiz time !
Anyone recognise this bad boy ?
It may look like a random collection of letters but I believe it's an FMA AeMB.2. The trouser fairings were the clue.
Quality banana republic engineering.
Re: Aircraft thread
Posted: Fri Mar 26, 2021 6:31 pm
by Yeeb
Jeez you guys are good
Yep you are correct - I will freely admit until a week or so ago, I had never heard of it. I know they did a mosquito style plane, and one after with six cannon, but never knew the predecessor until now. Just reminded me of a seventies dude wearing flares, wearing a tit.
Re: Aircraft thread
Posted: Fri Apr 30, 2021 9:38 am
by Torquemada 1420
Here's a thing I heard in a doco recently that I thought had to be incorrect......... but turns out to be true.
The B17's bomb load was no more than a Mosquitos!!!!
B17
Bombs:
Short range missions (<400 mi): 8,000 lb (3,600 kg)
Long range missions (≈800 mi): 4,500 lb (2,000 kg)
Mosquito
Bombs: 4,000 lb (1,800 kg)
And for comparison........
Lancaster
Bombs: Maximum normal bomb load of 14,000 lb (6,400 kg) of bombs
although I've seen specs listed as high as 21,000lb i.e. 5x what the B17 could manage.
BTW, the Liberator was not much better than her sibling.
Re: Aircraft thread
Posted: Fri Apr 30, 2021 10:28 am
by Yeeb
You are a massive plane nerd torq, how did you not know this already ??!
Iirc the b17 it was for the longer range, some of the rear bomb bay was filled with an auxiliary tank for fuel . The Lanc 21k was only when they removed the H2S dome underneath and was for special occasions , 12k was normal load I think - one big bomb, four medium ones , and then a bunch of smaller 250lb ones or incendiaries (depending on what wave they were, first waves were HE to blow up buildings and gas mains, later ones had incendiaries to set all the gas on fire )