Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Place your bets!

Collapse
This is a sticky topic.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by Jose50 View Post
    Definitely the Lockheed C-130. C-47 a close second but not able to match the capacity or range.
    If you could put money on it, would you?
    "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


    • #32
      Originally posted by Jose50 View Post
      Definitely the Lockheed C-130. C-47 a close second but not able to match the capacity or range.
      Agreed on the range and capacity, but ...

      The C-47/DC-3 shows up about 20+ years earlier, and is still in use.

      It's appearance had a "shake-up" to commercial airliner industry of it's time, causing many makers to rush back to the drawing boards, and it's played a few roles more than the Herc in it's lifetime. Granted the Herc is a significant advance over the C-47 and shows the lineage of influence from both the C-119 and the C-123. A close contest, but I'm putting money on the C-47 as first and C-130 Herc as second.
      TANSTAAFL = There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by panther3485 View Post
        I know a few members who would argue that the combination of sheer longevity, simple ruggedness, all-round usefulness in a decent variety of roles, ubiquity and very high production numbers for the Po-2 should put it in the final 8, at least.
        I can't say I'd be in too much of a hurry disagree with them either.

        However, so far as ACG members' opinions and these polls are concerned, time and the next few Rounds will tell, I guess.
        Yeah, and I "like" the Po-2 as well, but how did it influence any trends in future aircraft designs and mission capabilities, other than maybe leading towards the AN-2?
        TANSTAAFL = There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by BELGRAVE View Post
          The B-29 was truly a marvel, revealing a quantum leap over the B-17, a heavy bomber par excellence-but "multi-role" ?
          Along with establishing the effective pressurization systems for high-altitude bombers, the remote controlled turret application, and being the only WWII bomber that could and did drop nuclear weapons in warfare (all of which puts it over and above both the B-17 and B-24 IMO), it was the one four-engined aircraft of USA use with a longer life service over the other two, especially as the B-50 upgrade, which included the tanker, recce-ELINT, and 'mother-ship' (Bell X-1) roles and perhaps a couple of others I need to chase down. Of all the four engined bombers to serve in WWII and beyond, this was the queen of Heavy Bombers until the B-52 shows up, again IMO. Not to mention the foundation of the 377/KC-97 series of aircraft. IOW, a lot of "significant and influence" on future designs and trends, including the Soviet copy into the TU-4 and evolution of the TU-95.
          TANSTAAFL = There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by G David Bock View Post
            Agreed on the range and capacity, but ...

            The C-47/DC-3 shows up about 20+ years earlier, and is still in use.

            It's appearance had a "shake-up" to commercial airliner industry of it's time, causing many makers to rush back to the drawing boards, and it's played a few roles more than the Herc in it's lifetime. Granted the Herc is a significant advance over the C-47 and shows the lineage of influence from both the C-119 and the C-123. A close contest, but I'm putting money on the C-47 as first and C-130 Herc as second.
            Inclined to agree with this; much as I do love, and have a strong personal connection to, the Herc.

            Originally posted by G David Bock View Post
            Yeah, and I "like" the Po-2 as well, but how did it influence any trends in future aircraft designs and mission capabilities, other than maybe leading towards the AN-2?
            I would say, in terms of influencing future aircraft design as such; not all that much.

            However, this is not the only way in which an aircraft can be "influential". There are other dimensions of influence. For example, simply being available in massive numbers, to train new pilots and fill much needed roles in a nation's OOB, can be seen as influential in its own right; contributing substantially - in the case of the Po-2 - to vital outcomes in a World War.

            Then there are the various dimensions of significance to ponder as well; some of which would be inter-woven with the influence factors.

            Taken overall, IMHO the Po-2 is (or should be rightfully considered) one of the stronger candidates in this tournament. Not saying finalist or even semi-finalist; but possibly a quarter-finalist would not be too much out of order if it gets that far?
            Last edited by panther3485; 06 Feb 16, 22:54.
            "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


            • #36
              10/1 on, the dH 98 'Mosquito'.
              The PLO claims ALL of Israel!!! There will and can NEVER be a "2 State solution".

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by ozjohn39 View Post
                10/1 on, the dH 98 'Mosquito'.
                I really love the Mossie but love aside, I still think it's one of the strongest contenders out of our 128 starters. I reckon it would be a travesty if it didn't make the quarter-final at least.

                Having said this, have you voted in any of the polls yet? If not, we only have about 4 hours to go before the current round (Round 2) closes. If you can see your way clear to casting your Round 2 votes before the closure, and if you stay with us to the Final, you will also be eligible for the campaign ribbon. (You can miss one round and still get it.)

                Hope to have you on board.
                "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


                • #38
                  Originally posted by G David Bock View Post
                  So before this round ends, I'm throwing out an updated projection of sorts. Based mostly on my hunches of how I thinking the voting will go, given the trends, with a couple placed based on my bias. (This will be quick and just a listing, I have to dash out, so may give some explanations later.)

                  1. C-47(DC-3) Dakota
                  2.C-130 Herc
                  3. AD-1 Skyraider
                  4. Mosquito
                  5. F-15 Eagle
                  6. F-18 Hornet/Super Hornet

                  7. & 8. become real toss-ups for now. I see a handful of close contenders for the last two slots, in order of my guess on their probabilities;

                  B-24 Liberator
                  Harrier
                  F-16 Falcon
                  Fieseler Fi-156 Storch
                  F-4 Phantom
                  PBY Catalina

                  Some of these more on the significant or influential part they played rather than the number of multi-roles.
                  Wiping egg from face, let's scratch the above.

                  I neglected to fully scope the "game mechanics/system" and see now how the grouping by time period is going to inject some amusing twists as we get to the near(quadra?) final eight~four. Already in round three some of my top six~eight are locked into elimination from the next round of sixteen~eight.

                  I'll have to redo this list after I have time to gauge how the latest groupings will filter out in the votes, and then those survivors ...
                  TANSTAAFL = There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by G David Bock View Post
                    Wiping egg from face, let's scratch the above.

                    I neglected to fully scope the "game mechanics/system" and see now how the grouping by time period is going to inject some amusing twists as we get to the near(quadra?) final eight~four. Already in round three some of my top six~eight are locked into elimination from the next round of sixteen~eight.

                    I'll have to redo this list after I have time to gauge how the latest groupings will filter out in the votes, and then those survivors ...
                    No egg on face, David; you're far from being the only member who hadn't immediately caught on to how the time groups influence pairings.

                    The idea got started from some previous tournaments where a few members expressed reservations about comparing candidates widely separated by time (for example, WW1 or even WW2 vs the current era).

                    In a tournament such as this, which does indeed have planes spread over such a period, dividing them into 8 time groups at the beginning and keeping the pairings strictly within the groups sorta does makes sense. However, it also considerably limits the range of pairings available within each group. That's part of the reason I go to 4 time groups for Rounds 2 and 3, with my options open at Round 4 but in any case, finishing up with only one "group" for the Semi-Final and the Final.

                    Regardless, depending on the results of successive rounds it is still VERY possible that members will end up having to evaluate the Significance/Influence factors of aircraft from different eras against each other in the later stages of the tournament. For example, what if one of the matches in the Semi-Final pitted, say, the Mosquito or the C-47 against the F-15? Far from an impossible development.

                    Therefore, both time spread and matchings of quite different types against each other are ultimately never going to be totally avoidable. In fact, it would be impossible to avoid them altogether even if the pairings were made in some other fashion.

                    I could introduce a small variation - such as going to just 2 groups from Round 4 instead of Round 5 - but otherwise, the basic plan for this tournament will follow along similar lines to the previous one (Most Significant/Influential Fighter Plane), as shown below:

                    Round 1 - 128 planes in 8 grps, 16 per grp (A,B,C,D,E,F,G,H)
                    Round 2 - 64 planes in 4 grps, 16 per grp (AB, CD, EF, GH)
                    Round 3 - 32 planes in 4 grps, 8 per grp (AB, CD, EF, GH)
                    Round 4 - 16 planes in 4 grps, 4 per grp (AB, CD, EF, GH)
                    Round 5 (Q-Final) - 8 planes in 2 grps, 4 per grp (A-D, E-H)
                    Round 6 (S-Final) - 4 planes, all groups combined (A-H)
                    Round 7 (Final) - 2 planes

                    Using that matrix as a general guide, you should be better able to work out some probabilities.
                    Last edited by panther3485; 08 Feb 16, 01:55.
                    "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


                    • #40
                      Looks the initial guesses posted here were on the money.
                      "In modern war... you will die like a dog for no good reason."
                      Ernest Hemingway.

                      Sapere aude.

                      Comment

                      Latest Topics

                      Collapse

                      Working...
                      X