Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Best fighter and bomber of WW1

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

  • #16
    Originally posted by Jeff Simmons View Post

    It could turn faster than a Nolan Ryan curve ball,
    The baseball reference kinda brings the whole WW1 aviation thing into perspective. A cammel might have turned tighter than his curve, but many WW1 aircraft couldn't out run his fastball. Things sure have come a long way.

    Comment


    • #17
      fastballs

      So if we'd have been able to put Ryan and Randy Johnson in the back seat of a fighter, would they have become aces by throwing fastballs at enemy aircraft? (You'll have to forgive me...my love of baseball is only surpassed by my interest in history).
      Last edited by Jeff Simmons; 13 May 10, 13:25.

      Comment


      • #18
        Well, Randy did do a heck of a job on that one bird.

        Comment


        • #19
          Taube

          Thanks, Rojik, for your input on the German Taube. I didn't know it could carry bombs. Hell, the thing looks like it wouldn't even get off the ground. Some engineer was obviously putting form before function.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Jeff Simmons View Post
            Thanks, Rojik, for your input on the German Taube. I didn't know it could carry bombs. Hell, the thing looks like it wouldn't even get off the ground. Some engineer was obviously putting form before function.
            Without being sure I would guess that it was just a simple deal where the pilot tossed the bombs over the side. Taube time was over by the 2nd of Sept 1914 so I would assume it was a pretty ad hoc and primitive arrangement.
            Matthew 5:9 Blessed are the cheesemakers

            That's right bitches. I'm blessed!

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by James Hacker MP View Post

              As to bombers, not sure. Was the Hydrabad post-war? I seem to recall 1923, not sure where that number has popped out from, though.
              It's Hyderabad, Minister.
              And whilst not being able to ascertain a printed reference to the aircraft in Hansard, I am sure that you will be pleased to learn that a perusal of some of the following documents, at the right juncture, will allow us to conclude that, whilst not putting too fine a point on it, that the aircraft in question, was indeed first flown in 1923, and, as a result, your recollection may be considered to be correct.

              Welcome to ACG, Minister.

              http://www.aviastar.org/air/england/..._hyderabad.php

              http://www.rafmuseum.org.uk/online-e...-hyderabad.cfm
              Last edited by At ease; 14 May 10, 00:44.
              "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


              • #22
                I would have liked to see how the Sopwith Triplanes could have done against the Fokker Triplanes.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by Exorcist View Post
                  I would have liked to see how the Sopwith Triplanes could have done against the Fokker Triplanes.
                  Probably would have been a pilot skill thing. I believe the Sopwith was 10-15 MPH faster but it only had one gun. My understanding is that both turned and climbed well. I'm not sure it ever happend but it would have been a sight.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Best Bomber of all; the Russian one. They could have been doing to Berlin what the Zepps were trying to do to London, and never did succeed at.

                    Best Fighter.... that's tough, since so much changed along the way and some folks want to break it down by year and season.

                    Make mine a SPAD. It evolved right along with the war, Sometimes it might have been a little outclassed, but it was always a solid contender and an all around good aircraft.
                    And you know, it just looks right... if you follow what I mean.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by At ease View Post
                      It's Hyderabad, Minister.
                      And whilst not being able to ascertain a printed reference to the aircraft in Hansard, I am sure that you will be pleased to learn that a perusal of some of the following documents, at the right juncture, will allow us to conclude that, whilst not putting too fine a point on it, that the aircraft in question, was indeed first flown in 1923, and, as a result, your recollection may be considered to be correct.

                      Welcome to ACG, Minister.

                      http://www.aviastar.org/air/england/..._hyderabad.php

                      http://www.rafmuseum.org.uk/online-e...-hyderabad.cfm
                      Ah, of course! Yes, often gets me, that e. Same with the extra e in "sovereign", I always have to make sure I've put it in.

                      Thanks!

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by llkinak View Post
                        Probably would have been a pilot skill thing. I believe the Sopwith was 10-15 MPH faster but it only had one gun. My understanding is that both turned and climbed well. I'm not sure it ever happend but it would have been a sight.
                        They tried fitting a second Vickers on a couple of Tripes, the added weight effected performance drastically.

                        The long toll of the brave
                        Is not lost in darkness
                        Over the fruitful earth
                        And athwart the seas
                        Hath passed the light of noble deeds
                        Unquenchable forever.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by James Hacker MP View Post
                          Ah, of course! Yes, often gets me, that e. Same with the extra e in "sovereign", I always have to make sure I've put it in.

                          Thanks!
                          After all, Minister, "e" is for EUROPE. Mustn't upset Brussels.
                          Last edited by At ease; 15 May 10, 10:44.
                          "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


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by At ease View Post
                            After all, Minister, "e" is for EUROPE. Mustn't upset Brussels.
                            Ah yes. Same with "sovereign", actually. Another concept they have difficulty understanding, you see.

                            Comment

                            Latest Topics

                            Collapse

                            Working...
                            X