Discussion in 'Warbirds International' started by lepper, Jul 30, 2006.
great sort of the stuff
Right, first off, refering to a site almost exclusively full of anecdotal 'evidence' given by pilots of the 109 is not the most objective kind of supporting your claims. Ask any pilot and they'll invariably tell you that their plane is the best.
Secondly, even if we take the reports on that page at face value, there are numerous statements to the effect of "the plane's elevator stiffened up at high speeds" (same for the ailerons).
FIX THE DAMN PILOTS!!
Go back on vacation, there's nothing to see here!
FIX THE DAMN FORUM!!
(if there's really nothing to see...)
...damn polish finnish megawar
I'll pwnzr u all.
If we cant fly the actual plane, and cant trust the people who flyed it then where the hell are we going to get the info ??? Russian or American intuition ?
But who do you trust more, english/US/russian pilots who flew captured 109's or finnish/german pilots who used them at daily basis? And I'm quite sure that even within these groups opinions change from side to side.
They were looking for weakness so reported only the facts nothing to be gained in telling your pilots lies that will get them killed and lets face it it dosen't matter if the planes were better or worse we won the war...And knowing the facts was a large part of it...
If I have learned anything at all since when I started taking an interest in airplanes it's that the least reliable source of information regarding an airplane are the pilots flying that plane. Oh ya sure, with the new propellor our Thunderbolts could definitely outclimb those 109s ...
I would never believe in Russian analysis, if they told Stalin that Russian planes are worse, Stalin would send them to Siberia (if he had good mood ).
If it is available I would use constructors data, but those probably lie in cupboards with "Top Secret" labels in UK or US... In UK most data will stay secret until 2050, and in US it's very hard to find anything . Why in US? Americans "kidnapped" best German engineers
probably the best german women too
also, if they were gay, they probably got the horniest german faggots too, or all the ones that didnt escape to south america...
As would have been the case with German planes only Hitler would have had them shot...I never beleave any info from German sources they had a reason to lie...
Yes, but they weren't familiar with the captured planes either. And history has shown that even english manufacturers "lied" in matter of airplanes test results. "lied"=test results were often quite optimistic)
And winning the war has really little to do with airplane comparisons. Luftwaffe was beaten mainly by superioty in numbers and due problems in maintenance, but even that wasn't enough to win war. AFAIK ground forces were needed for that
A-bomb was needed for that.
I partially agree with this. Of course this also means that I partially disagree with it, mainly in so far that it was only a matter of numbers. Don't forget that early in the war, the Germans held the advantage in just about all sectors of aerial warfare, including number of trained pilots. The Allies OTOH had to basically start from scratch as far building up a powerful airforce was concerned. That in itself is quite a feat, specially because they had to do it WHILE facing the (at that point) most powerful and competent airforce in the world. And while the Allied airforce alone was not enough to win the war, the airwar was pretty much won. In the last months of the war the Luftwaffe could occasionally still exact a heavy toll on the Allied bomber forces, but by and large the Germans were done for.
Anyway, my point is that the Germans were not only defeated by superior numbers; of course that was part of the reason why they were doomed, but the main reason was shortsighed strategical thinking - something the Allied planners were infinitely better at than their German counterparts. For instance, the Allies rotated experienced pilots back to the states where they were highly useful in passing their experience on to fresh pilots, whereas the Germans usually kept them at the front until their luck ran out. The end result was that the Germans had an initially high but gradually decreasing number of 'experts' while the Allies had an INCREASING number of adequately trained (and steadily improving) pilots.
Technologically, the Germans had a rather huge lead on the Allies initially but their superiority pretty much faded to negligible levels at the end of the war.
I know it's a painful admission to make for some people, but the Germans could neither walk on water nor were they particularly good at making strategical decisions (or winning world wars, for that matter ).
Techonologicaly, they had produced operational jet fighters at the end of the war. They used 30mm guns wile americans could not develop properly working 20mm. They had rocket technology like V2. They had remotely controled gliding bombs. They had TigerI and II which were killing alied tanks easly. They had U-boats type XXIII.
So technicaly speaking some of your statements are bullshit.
Had the war dragged on a few months longer, P-80 Shooting Stars would have become available in numbers.
There was no need for 30mm cannons on the Allied side because there were no targets requiring such heavy firepower. The 20mm guns available to Allied airforces worked well enough.
Yeah, the Germans were very proficient at wasting badly needed resources on developing super weapons with precious little effect on the outcome of the war. But I'll concede that they were definitely ahead in the field of rocketry.
I'll give you that one, too. But here, too, the Germans didn't really benefit a lot from it, except for a few notable successes vs Allied shipping.
I thought we were talking about the air war. Oh wait, we were.
The message you have entered is too short
FUCK OFF stupid robot stipid thing robot thing, fuck off
Separate names with a comma.