Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Rnd 2 Grp AB - Armstrong Whitworth F.K.8 (Britain) vs Polikarpov Po-2 (SU/Russia)

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Rnd 2 Grp AB - Armstrong Whitworth F.K.8 (Britain) vs Polikarpov Po-2 (SU/Russia)

    Round 2, Group AB:

    Armstrong Whitworth F.K.8 (Britain)
    vs
    Polikarpov Po-2 (SU/Russia)




    Candidate #7 - Armstrong Whitworth F.K.8 (Britain)

    Service Intro - 1917
    Roles - bomber; recon; ground attack; tank support; contact-patrol; interceptor; artillery spotting
    Quantity Produced - 1,650
    User Nations - Britain, Australia, Paraguay

    For further info & some technical details, you can start with Wiki here:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armstrong_Whitworth_F.K.8









    Candidate #13 - Polikarpov Po-2 (SU/Russia)

    Service Intro - 1929
    Roles - trainer; ground attack; recon; liaison/general purpose
    Quantity Produced - 25,000 (very approx. - give or take a few thousand)
    User Nations - SU/Russia + at least 15 other countries

    For further info & some technical details, you can start with Wiki here:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polikarpov_Po-2









    Will you vote for the F.K.8 or the Po-2?


    Only one of these two candidates will make it to the next round!


    Which of them is the more significant and/or influential?


    Consider the criteria with care! You decide!
    80
    Armstrong Whitworth F.K.8 (Britain)
    33.75%
    27
    Polikarpov Po-2 (SU/Russia)
    66.25%
    53

    The poll is expired.

    Last edited by panther3485; 17 Jan 16, 02:33.
    "Chatfield, there seems to be something wrong with our bloody ships today!"
    Vice Admiral Beatty to Flag Captain Chatfield; Battle of Jutland, 31 May - 1 June, 1916.

  • #2
    Ha HA Comrade!

    My favourite, beautiful Russian Lady's war chariot!

    Anyone not voting for the PO-2 can meet me after this round at the back of the sheds. Defending the honour of my champion!

    Spasibo! Pobyeda!
    My Articles, ALMOST LIVE, exclusive to The Armchair!

    Soviet Submarines in WW2....The Mythology of Shiloh....(Edited) Both Sides of the Warsaw Ghetto
    GULAG Glossary....Who Really Killed The Red Baron?....Pearl Harbor At 75
    Lincoln-Douglas Debates

    Comment


    • #3
      Oh come ON!

      1,650 and three nations verses 20,000 plus and too many nations to count? WHICH one has to be the more influential?

      PO-2, 1929 servic inro and still flying and performing magnificently in World War Two?

      Your kidding...

      Looks like a line is going to have to form at the back of the sheds....
      My Articles, ALMOST LIVE, exclusive to The Armchair!

      Soviet Submarines in WW2....The Mythology of Shiloh....(Edited) Both Sides of the Warsaw Ghetto
      GULAG Glossary....Who Really Killed The Red Baron?....Pearl Harbor At 75
      Lincoln-Douglas Debates

      Comment


      • #4
        I don't know DN. can you really count on them to wait in line? Based on sheer numbers, it might not work out for you.

        Comment


        • #5
          I have to go with the Nightwitches' favorite ride.

          Pruitt
          Pruitt, you are truly an expert! Kelt06

          Have you been struck by the jawbone of an ASS lately?

          by Khepesh "This is the logic of Pruitt"

          Comment


          • #6
            The Case for the Best Multi-Role Bi-plane of all time!

            Time to bring out the boxing gloves...

            POLIKARPOV PO-2 (1928-1959)
            **Production as high as 30,000....the most numerous Bi-plane of all time.

            **ONLY Bi-plane to ever shoot down a JET..(Korea, an F-94 Starfire)

            **Modern usage found MINIMAL radar signature...ie...immune to expensive missile systems.

            **Luftwaffe on Eastern Front found it could fly at extreme low level, making it VERY extremely difficult to shot down. It's top speed was just above stall speed for German 109 and 190 fighters, making it very problematic to even draw a bead on.

            **Many surviving pilots at the end of the GPW, (and their were many of those due to low loss rate) had logged over 1,000 missions, including the highly decorated 588th Guards unit "Night Witches"

            **Only Bi-plane to have a NATO name..."Mule"

            **German nickname "Nammaschine" (Sewing Machine). effect of nightime raids on psychology and morale of German troops termed "NOTICEABLE"

            **Finn nickname..."Nerve Saw", so the normally unflappable Finns hated it as well.

            **American nickname in Korea "Bedcheck Charlie"

            **Inspired an entire M.A.S.H. episode called "5'O'Clock Charlie"

            ROLES...
            Close support
            Floatplane
            Liason
            Limosuine/VIP Personage transport
            Propaganda (with loudspeakers)
            Psywarfare
            Research platform
            Medevac
            Recon
            Artillery spotter
            Ground attack
            Night ground attack
            night intruder
            Crop dusting
            Barnstorming
            Supply
            Light bomber
            Fighter, (if it could catch anything...but if you include the Me-262 as a ground attack bomber of any kind, then the PO-2 must be considered a fighter, even if it was unsuited to the role. Can't have it both ways Panther!)


            WE are speaking of the most INFLUENTIAL BIPLANE ever built.

            Do you really want to vote for an aircraft NATO never heard of? That didn't even make World War Two? That flew ground attack missions in Korea, one of which burned 8 Mustangs, another got a Sabre, and thats just recorded missions.

            MANY Soviet pilots owe their professional lives to this marvellous piece of Russian duplication and development work, and all based on the Avro 504?

            Do I HAVE to promise a trip to the back of the sheds?

            VOTE ONE POLIKARPOV
            Last edited by Drusus Nero; 21 Jan 16, 09:37.
            My Articles, ALMOST LIVE, exclusive to The Armchair!

            Soviet Submarines in WW2....The Mythology of Shiloh....(Edited) Both Sides of the Warsaw Ghetto
            GULAG Glossary....Who Really Killed The Red Baron?....Pearl Harbor At 75
            Lincoln-Douglas Debates

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Drusus Nero View Post
              " ... Fighter, (if it could catch anything...but if you include the Me-262 as a ground attack bomber of any kind, then the PO-2 must be considered a fighter, even if it was unsuited to the role. Can't have it both ways Panther!) ... "
              I included fighter-bomber as a role for the 262 because that's what I saw in at least two of the sources I consulted.
              I quoted from wiki the last time I mentioned this.
              Furthermore, in Aircraft of WWII (Stewart Wilson, Aerospace Publications, 1998, page 123), the primary roles for the 262 are described as, "Single-seat fighter-bomber or two seat night fighter".

              For the Po-2, wiki lists the following versions with very brief descriptions of what they were for:
              U-2: Basic model, built in large numbers as a two-seat primary trainer. It was also built in many different versions, both as civil and military aircraft. The U-2 variants also included a light transport, utility, reconnaissance and training aircraft. Power plant was the M-11 radial piston engine of 75 kW (100 hp). Later models were also equipped with uprated M-11 engines of 111 kW (150 hp). Some aircraft were fitted with a rear closed cabin, other were fitted with sledges or floats.
              U-2A: Two-seat agricultural crop dusting aircraft, powered by an 86 kW (115 hp) M-11K radial piston engine. Later redesignated Po-2A after 1944.
              U-2AO: Two-seat agricultural aircraft.
              U-2AP: Agricultural aircraft, with a rear cab replaced with a container for 200250 kg (441-551 lb) of chemicals. 1,235 were built in 19301940.
              U-2G: This experimental aircraft had all the controls linked to the control column. One aircraft only.
              U-2KL: Two aircraft fitted with a bulged canopy over the rear cabin.
              U-2LSh: Two-seat ground-attack, close-support aircraft. The aircraft were armed with one 7.62 mm (0.30 in) ShKAS machine-gun in the rear cockpit. It could also carry up to 120 kg (265 lb) of bombs and four RS-82 rockets. Also known as the U-2VOM-1.
              U-2LPL: Experimental prone-pilot research aircraft.
              U-2M: This floatplane version was fitted with a large central float and two small stabilizing floats. Not built in large numbers. Also known as the MU-2.
              U-2P: Floatplane version, built only in limited numbers, in several variants with different designations.
              U-2S: Air ambulance version, built from 1934. It could take a physician and an injured on a stretcher on a rear fuselage, under a cover. Variant U-2S-1 from 1939 had a raised fuselage top upon the stretcher. From 1941 there were also used two containers for stretchers, that could be fitted over lower wings or two containers for two seating injured each, fitted under lower wings.
              U-2SS: Air ambulance aircraft.
              U-2ShS: Staff liaison version, built from 1943. It had a wider fuselage and a closed 4-place rear cab.
              U-2SP: Civil transport version, could carry two passengers in open individual cabs, built from 1933. Other roles included aerial survey, and aerial photography. A total of 861 were built between 1934 and 1939.
              U-2SPL: This limousine version was fitted with rear cabin for two passengers.
              U-2UT: Two-seat training aircraft, powered by an 86 kW (115 hp) M-11D radial piston engine. Built in limited numbers.
              U-2LNB: Soviet Air Force night attack version, built from 1942. Armed with one 7.62 mm (0.30 in) ShKAS, plus up to 250 kg of bombs under the wings for land support. Earlier aircraft were converted to improvised bombers from 1941.
              'U-2VS : Two-seat training and utility aircraft. Later redesignated Po-2VS after 1944.
              U-2NAK: Two-seat night artillery observation, reconnaissance aircraft. Built from 1943.
              U-3: Improved flying training model, fitted a 149 kW (200 hp) seven cylinder M-48 radial engine.
              U-4: Cleaned-up version with slimmer fuselage; not built in large numbers.
              - (Total U-2 manufacture: 33,000)
              Po-2:Post-war basic trainer variant.
              Po-2A: Post-war agricultural variant.
              Po-2GN: "Voice from the sky" propaganda aircraft, fitted with a loud speaker.
              Po-2L : Limousine version with an enclosed passenger cabin.
              Po-2P : Post-war floatplane version; built in small numbers.
              Po-2S: Post-war air ambulance variant, with a closed rear cab.
              Po-2S-1: Post-war ambulance version, similar to the pre-war U-2S.
              Po-2S-2: Post-war ambulance version, powered by a M-11D radial piston engine.
              Po-2S-3: Post-war ambulance version, which had two underwing containers, each one was designed to transport one stretcher patient. Also known as the Po-2SKF.
              Po-2ShS: Staff communications aircraft, fitted with an enclosed cabin for the pilot and two or three passengers.
              Po-2SP: Post-war aerial photography, geographic survey aircraft.
              RV-23: This floatplane version of the U-2 was built in 1937. It was used in a number of seaplane altitude record attempts. The RV-23 was powered by a 529 kW (710 hp) Wright R-1820-F3 Cyclone radial piston engine.
              CSS-13: Polish licence version, built in Poland in WSK-Okęcie and WSK-Mielec after World War II (about 500 built in 19481956).
              CSS S-13: Polish ambulance version with a closed rear cab and cockpit and Townend ring (53 built in WSK-Okęcie in 1954-1955, 38 converted to S-13).
              E-23: Research version, built in the Soviet Union in 1934, for research into inverted flight. ... "
              Can't see a fighter version on that list.

              Stewart Wilson's Aircraft of WWII says, "Two-seat trainer/multi-purpose utility".
              In the text for the Po-2 it says the aircraft was used for a large variety of roles and it lists about a dozen; but "fighter" is not among them.
              Doesn't mean it was never used as such, of course; but I need at least a reasonably substantial reference to support what you're saying, before I would post "fighter" as a role for the Po-2.

              I hope you understand.
              Last edited by panther3485; 21 Jan 16, 10:08.
              "Chatfield, there seems to be something wrong with our bloody ships today!"
              Vice Admiral Beatty to Flag Captain Chatfield; Battle of Jutland, 31 May - 1 June, 1916.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by panther3485 View Post
                I included fighter-bomber as a role for the 262 because that's what I saw in at least two of the sources I consulted.
                I quoted from wiki the last time I mentioned this.
                Furthermore, in Aircraft of WWII (Stewart Wilson, Aerospace Publications, 1998, page 123), the primary roles for the 262 are described as, "Single-seat fighter-bomber or two seat night fighter".

                For the Po-2, wiki lists the following versions with very brief descriptions of what they were for: Can't see a fighter version on that list.

                Stewart Wilson's Aircraft of WWII says, "Two-seat trainer/multi-purpose utility".
                In the text for the Po-2 it says the aircraft was used for a large variety of roles and it lists about a dozen; but "fighter" is not among them.
                Doesn't mean it was never used as such, of course; but I need at least a reasonably substantial reference to support what you're saying, before I would post "fighter" as a role for the Po-2.

                I hope you understand.
                Was surprised that you put the PO2 in but left out the Avro 504
                which served as
                • Bomber (in WW1 and WW2)
                • Recce
                • Artillery Spotter
                • Long range fighter
                • Night Fighter
                • Trainer
                • Staff Officer Transport
                • Squadron Hack (and general utility)
                • Marine Survey (float plane version used in Canada)
                • Kamikaze (Japanese version of Avro 504N)


                Served with more than a dozen air forces and was built in Britain, Canada, USSR (as the PO1) and Japan.
                Human history becomes more and more a race between education and catastrophe (H G Wells)
                Mit der Dummheit kaempfen Goetter selbst vergebens (Friedrich von Schiller)

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by MarkV View Post
                  Was surprised that you put the PO2 in but left out the Avro 504
                  which served as
                  • Bomber (in WW1 and WW2)
                  • Recce
                  • Artillery Spotter
                  • Long range fighter
                  • Night Fighter
                  • Trainer
                  • Staff Officer Transport
                  • Squadron Hack (and general utility)
                  • Marine Survey (float plane version used in Canada)
                  • Kamikaze (Japanese version of Avro 504N)


                  Served with more than a dozen air forces and was built in Britain, Canada, USSR (as the PO1) and Japan.
                  Speaking for myself, I'm not surprised in the slightest.

                  This is one of the main reasons I had such a long-running working-up thread before the tournament even began. The purpose of this thread was - among other things - to encourage any other interested members to suggest aircraft types that might be deemed worthy of inclusion.
                  A good number of ACG members have much better knowledge of aircraft than I do, so I think this was kinda important.
                  Besides, even if we were all equally knowledgeable, 10, 15 or 20 heads will always be better than one.

                  If there is anything to be surprised about, it's that nobody IIRC - including your good self - suggested that aircraft to me at any time during the run-up to this campaign.

                  My guess is that there are more aircraft types that (a) could/should have been included and (b) didn't get a mention.

                  Too late and too bad. What we've got now is what we've got.
                  "Chatfield, there seems to be something wrong with our bloody ships today!"
                  Vice Admiral Beatty to Flag Captain Chatfield; Battle of Jutland, 31 May - 1 June, 1916.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by panther3485 View Post
                    Speaking for myself, I'm not surprised in the slightest.

                    This is one of the main reasons I had such a long-running working-up thread before the tournament even began. The purpose of this thread was - among other things - to encourage any other interested members to suggest aircraft types that might be deemed worthy of inclusion.
                    .
                    Simply because the non alphabetic list made near almost impossible to tell what was in and what was missing
                    Human history becomes more and more a race between education and catastrophe (H G Wells)
                    Mit der Dummheit kaempfen Goetter selbst vergebens (Friedrich von Schiller)

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by MarkV View Post
                      Simply because the non alphabetic list made near almost impossible to tell what was in and what was missing
                      Sorry, but I must say I find that very hard to credit.

                      But, to clarify:
                      As the member who was putting this tournament together, I wouldn't dream of trying to excuse myself for missing the Avro 504 - nor any of the other types that might arguably have deserved inclusion - and I certainly accept primary responsibility for any oversights of that nature.
                      However, when I put up a pre-tournament working thread I am asking others to help me. A good number of those who participated in this aspect of the preparation have a much better knowledge of aircraft than I do.
                      To some extent therefore, I am relying on their opinions, knowledge and general assistance quite a lot (but without obligation on their part, naturally.)

                      As for "the non alphabetic list made near almost impossible to tell what was in and what was missing"; I really can't see anything approaching an impossibility here.

                      The list did not contain 12,800 aircraft types.
                      It didn't even contain 1,280.
                      There were 128 types listed.
                      True, they were not listed alphabetically; but neither were they listed in random order.
                      The aircraft types were listed chronologically, in the order of their year of introduction to service. This should have been obvious with even a cursory examination.
                      So there was definitely a logical order to it; one that should not have been hard to follow.

                      Anyone with even an approximate idea of when the Avro 504 must have begun its service should have had NO trouble whatsoever seeing whether it was there or not.
                      They would not have to scan through the entire list.
                      The Avro 504 commenced service around 1914, I think?
                      My list didn't have very many WW1 aircraft in it.
                      Anyone thinking of the Avro 504 and wanting to see if it was included would only have had to look at the first 10 types on the list, to come to the conclusion that it had been overlooked by me.

                      Not a hard task at all, Mr. MarkV.

                      This is especially true when we consider the length of time the working-up thread was open before the list was finalized.
                      It was running for two months.
                      A preliminary list of (IIRC) about 150 types appeared within a few days and members were invited to help pare this down to 128. You can't assist in that task unless you read the entire list, yes? Gradually, it was reduced to 128.
                      Surely, it would not have been unreasonable to expect the participating members on that thread to have read the whole list, at some stage, at least once during the two months the thread was running?

                      Sorry, but I'm calling BS on this one. Why can't we have some naked, unashamed intellectual honesty here and simply admit that during the time of the working-up thread we had ALL overlooked - or at the least, had not mentioned - the Avro 504?

                      Having said all the above, I want to reinforce my appreciation for the very considerable time and mental effort that you and a number of the other very aircraft-savvy members have put into helping and participating during both the preparation and conduct of this tournament.
                      Please understand that my comments are not intended to diminish that appreciation in any way and I sincerely hope you don't take it as such. I certainly don't want to antagonize anyone but I hope my candor is appreciated too.


                      Best regards,
                      Paul
                      Last edited by panther3485; 23 Jan 16, 02:46.
                      "Chatfield, there seems to be something wrong with our bloody ships today!"
                      Vice Admiral Beatty to Flag Captain Chatfield; Battle of Jutland, 31 May - 1 June, 1916.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        For its many roles, very wide usefulness, great numbers, longevity and sheer ubiquity it has to be the "night witch" plane for me.

                        Po-2.
                        "Chatfield, there seems to be something wrong with our bloody ships today!"
                        Vice Admiral Beatty to Flag Captain Chatfield; Battle of Jutland, 31 May - 1 June, 1916.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          PO-fighter role reference No.1....

                          It was spring of 1943. Two pilots, members of the soviet air force, were flying their planes-Polikarpov PO-2 biplanes, built mainly of wood and canvas-over a soviet railay junction. Thier passage was on it's way to being a routine patrol, until the pilots found themselves confronted by a collection of German bombers...

                          42 of them...

                          The pilots did what anyone would do piloting a plane made of plywood would do when confronted with enemy craft and enemy fire- they ducked.

                          They sent their planes into dives, returning fire directly into the center of the German formation........the outnumberd Soviets downed two planes before one of their own lost it's wing to enemy fire.The pilot bailed out, landing in a field.

                          The people on the ground who witnessed the skirmish rushed over to help the stranded pilot. They offered vodka. But the offer was refused. As the pilot would later recall,
                          "Nobody could understand why the brave lad who had taken on the Nazi sqaudron refused vodka."

                          The brave lad had refused....because it turned out that the brave lad was not a lad at all. It was TAMARA PAMYATNYKH..."

                          (Source..."The Atlantic " website page on the death at 91 of Nadezhdha Popova. The women were even refered to by the soviets as "female fighter pilots", despite their designation as "Night bomber units")
                          Armed with x1 7.62mm ShKAS machine gun, plus bombs. By the way "FIGHTER Factory " (1341 Prncess Anne Road Virginia), website lists its production figures as "in excess of 40,000"

                          HANS EGBO tells of PO-2s fitted with twin 7.62 MGs "forward firing, synchronized through the propellors", while it's other MG was "ring mounted" for the observer. A two seater "Brisfit" style fighter, in other words. (Source Hans Egbo/MRC Hans)


                          Drusus
                          My Articles, ALMOST LIVE, exclusive to The Armchair!

                          Soviet Submarines in WW2....The Mythology of Shiloh....(Edited) Both Sides of the Warsaw Ghetto
                          GULAG Glossary....Who Really Killed The Red Baron?....Pearl Harbor At 75
                          Lincoln-Douglas Debates

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            ADDENDUM...

                            Production figures quoted in MANY internet sources as high as 40,000 units, even after it ceased to be a military aircraft. Many "cottage" production facilities still tuened out examples of this ubiquitous design.

                            And, the avro 504 was a "dog", a howling dog that 'shead hair", compared to this useful, easy to maintain, very difficult to shoot down aircraft.

                            If I had the money for a replica, this would be the machine i would be buying to learn how to fly. A better trainer than many, it was VERY unforgiving in a stall, correcting itself with a gentle move to push its own nose down.

                            So easy was it to train people, that the soviets could have whole squadrons of pilots battle ready when German neophytes were still stuck in flight school. This made losses very easy to replace.

                            If this versatile and much served and battled aircraft does not make the finals, it will be a case of western bias for SURE.
                            My Articles, ALMOST LIVE, exclusive to The Armchair!

                            Soviet Submarines in WW2....The Mythology of Shiloh....(Edited) Both Sides of the Warsaw Ghetto
                            GULAG Glossary....Who Really Killed The Red Baron?....Pearl Harbor At 75
                            Lincoln-Douglas Debates

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Drusus Nero View Post
                              ADDENDUM...

                              Production figures quoted in MANY internet sources as high as 40,000 units, even after it ceased to be a military aircraft. Many "cottage" production facilities still tuened out examples of this ubiquitous design.

                              And, the avro 504 was a "dog", a howling dog that 'shead hair", compared to this useful, easy to maintain, very difficult to shoot down aircraft.

                              If I had the money for a replica, this would be the machine i would be buying to learn how to fly. A better trainer than many, it was VERY unforgiving in a stall, correcting itself with a gentle move to push its own nose down.

                              So easy was it to train people, that the soviets could have whole squadrons of pilots battle ready when German neophytes were still stuck in flight school. This made losses very easy to replace.

                              If this versatile and much served and battled aircraft does not make the finals, it will be a case of western bias for SURE.
                              Don't you mean VERY__forgiving in a stall?

                              From someone who has learnt to fly.
                              "It's like shooting rats in a barrel."
                              "You'll be in a barrel if you don't watch out for the fighters!"

                              "Talking about airplanes is a very pleasant mental disease."
                              Sergei(son of Igor) Sikorsky, 'AOPA Pilot' magazine February 2003.

                              Comment

                              Latest Topics

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X