Thanks for answering Worsham.
Maine? Interesting. Would have been Massachusetts then. They did go far away (almost Canada, like Marc suggested).
Coolest aircraft made during WW2
-
On 2002-03-26 17:18, Soon_U_Die wrote:
For its role…hands down the Russkie Sturmovik ground assault aircraft.Joseph Stalin…promptly ordered that production of the Sturmovik was to take priority over production of all other weapon systems, ground or air.
SUD
Yes, the Ilyushin 2 was an awesome aircraft–nicknamed the flying tank (much like the American P-47 “Thunderbolt”) because of its ability to take incredible damage and still bring one home–definitely a plus for the pilot…
I, too think ground-attack planes deserve more of the limelight…
Ozone27
-
A lot of the german aces shot a good deal of aircraft down before Russia.
Still, by statistics, the Russian planes were inferior (well, maybe equal to a crappy Me 109.) -
The ME 109 was not a “crappy” aircraft.
-
Actually at lower altitudes (where most of the fighting on the Eastern Front took place) Russian planes had the advantage. The only exception I can think of to this are the MiGs; they were fairly poor below 16,500 ft but they were great above that, being a full 30 mi/hr faster than a Bf 109 at altitude. Since there were no Bf 109s (or other German aircraft) at that altitude MiGs were used as high altitude recon craft.
I believe that most German aces on the Eastern Front got a large number of their kills when strafing the virtually unprotected airfields in the early days of the invasion when an unholy percentage of the VVS was destroy. -
I don’t think that the Me-109 would be a crappy aircraft if the Germans produced over 30,000 of them (the highest build of any fighter).
-
A pilot doesnt get a “kill” for shooting up aircraft on a runway.
Stukas did most of the ground damage anyway.
-
[ This Message was edited by: Mr Ghoul on 2002-03-27 17:09 ]
-
I think in the first day of operation barbrossa, 1500 russian planes were destroyed, somewhere around 5,500 in one month. some good times for the luftwaffe.
my “crappy” me 109 comment stands. that guy named Kurt Tank who designed the Fw190 said the Me 109 was a “thirdbred racehorse”, and Heinkel came out with the He100, which came out barely after the me109 and was far better (especially speedwise.) I do not know how simple to build the Me 109 was, so maybe that was a factor…but maybe it wasn’t.
-
Was Kurt Tank a pilot?
It was a fine plane for most of the war.
-
Well if you look at the characteristics of the Me-109 was a formidable opponent. Its low speed handling qualities were excellent and its rate of climb matched the Spitfire.
It had a higher service ceiling and the major advantage of fuel injection. This allowed the Me-109’s powerplant to run flawlessly regardless of the aircraft’s attitude, which did not cut out at of negative G.
I think that the weakness of Me-109 were more on logistics and design rather then actual preformance. The cockpit of the M-109 was very small, poor visibility, poor range and endurance, hard to land.
However compared with the likes of the P-51 Mustang the 109 was definately obsolete.
Never before have we had so little time in which to do so much
[ This Message was edited by: TG Moses VI on 2002-03-27 19:47 ]
-
Kurt tank was an aircraft designer, who also designed the Ta-183, the father if the Mig 15.
Some Me109 statistics:
first Me109: Bf109a, designed september 1935many types later, the ones in the beginning of the war were the Bf 109 D,E, and E-0 had MG17 machine guns for firepower.
The Bf 109 E-1 introduced 20mm cannons, and had a top speed of 354 MPH (first made in the beggining of 1939.)
near the end of the war, Me109s had speeds over 429 MPH. Two were operational before wars end (the K-14) that was as fast as 450MPH top speed.
The He100, which was competing to be built, but the Me109 was chosen, even though the He100 was better. Initial stability problems were fixed, and it had a top speed of 416MPH armed with two MG17s and a 20mm cannon, with a range of 625 miles.
I don’t have time right now to go into other aircraft…i’ll get back to you guys later.
-
some more statistics:
"Specifications (Fw 190D-9):
Engine: One 1,176-hp Junkers Jumo 213A-1 inverted V-12 piston engine
Weight: Empty 7,694 lbs., Max Takeoff 10,670 lbs.
Wing Span: 34ft. 5.5in.
Length: 33ft. 5.5in.
Height: 11ft. 0in.
Performance:
Maximum Speed: 426 mph
Ceiling: 39,370 ft.
Range: 519 miles
Armament:
Two 13-mm (0.51-inch) MG 131 machine guns
Two 20-mm MG 151
One 1,102-pound SC500 bombNumber Built: 20,051"
http://www.warbirdalley.com/fw190.htm
more advanced versions of the Fw190 were made, supposedly faster and more manueverable than the mustang, but there were engine problems (poor craftsmanship), and only two Ta 152H-1s survived the war.
"Specifications (Bf-109G-6):
Engine: 1800-hp Daimler-Benz DB-605 inverted V-12 piston engine
Weight: Empty 5,893 lbs., Max Takeoff 6,945 lbs.
Wing Span: 32ft. 6.5in.
Length: 29ft. 7in.
Height: 11ft. 2in.
Performance:
Maximum Speed at at 23,000 ft: 385mph
Ceiling: 38,500 ft
Range: 450 miles
Armament:
Two 13mm (0.51-inch) MG131 machine guns
Three 20mm MG151 cannonNumber Built: ~35,000"
i think i stated earlier that there was a me109 built that went somewhere in the 400s, but i can’t find it at this time."Specifications (P-51D):
Engine: One 1,695-hp Packard Merlin V-1650-7 piston V-12 engine
Weight: Empty 7,125 lbs., Max Takeoff 12,100 lbs.
Wing Span: 37ft. 0.5in.
Length: 32ft. 9.5in.
Height: 13ft. 8in.
Performance:
Maximum Speed: 437 mph
Ceiling: 41,900 ft.
Range: 1300 miles
Armament: Six 12.7-mm (0.5 inch) wing-mounted machine guns, plus up to two 1,000-lb bombs or six 127-mm (5 inch) rockets.Number Built: Approximately 15,018 (including ~200 built in Australia)"
The Mustang was the king of piston engined planes, and in my opinion, the most effective fighter of the war.
-
Heck yeah! The P-51D was indeed what I considered the best plane of the war. It preformed well at all altitudes and had unmatched fuel endurance and speed. Plus the P-51D was suited for a variety of task ranging from low level dive bomber to high altitude Bomber escorts. If that wasn’t enough the P-51 was also successful against Me-262 Jet Fighters and Communists MiGs in the Korea War.
-
wasn’t the top P51 faster than the Do335 Pfeil?
i think the mustang holds the record for fastest piston engined plane…
my brother tells me that the maker of a battlebot named “T-Wrex” and “Omega-13” made the fastest piston engined plane and a robotic arm for something to do with the Titanic. i don’t believe him though. Tell me if i’m wrong, but the top mustang goes 484 i believe.
-
I can dispute the P-51’s “good” record against the Me-262. First off, P-51 pilots had extensive training before combat. So when they went into battle, they were prepared. Many of the P-51 kills against the Me-262 occurred when the Me-262 was either taking off or landing. The Me-262 was vulnerable during take off because its jet engines had poor initial acceleration. During landings, it was hard for the Me-262 to abort landings and get back into the air to fight off enemy aircraft. When it usually tried, it ended up in disaster. In both situations, the Me-262 was a sitting duck and an easy kill. Another point, the training of the jet pilots. Here we have a novel technology such as jet fighters and pilots receive the minimum of training. That could only lead to disaster. My last point, many of the Me-262 missions were basically suicide missions. For example, the largest single sortie of Me-262’s involved 55 of them versus a fleet of 2,000 US fighter escorts and bombers. 27 of the jets were destroyed. I rest my case. A little long, but people need to here both sides of the lop-sided story.
-
484 seems like a rather high estimate, (usually P-51s will reach speeds of 450 mph with a cruising speed of 275 mph) but if that’s the top speed of any P-51 in existence then I guess I beleive you. Just one quick question though, was that speed using a War Model P-51 or one built post-WII?
As for the comment made of P-51s vs. Me-262, I thought that many Me-262 pilots were veteran/elite German pilots such as Aldolf Galland in Jagdverband 44. If it was true that most Me-262 pilots were inexperienced then the Germans would have no problems filling the 400 extra Me-262s that no one had time to fly. Of course getting aquatinted with the plane is a different story. Plus another problem was the “cheap” tactic was P-51s shooting up Me-262 as they were trying to land.
Granted that the Allies had such overwhelming air superiority, which meant the destruction of the Luftwaffe wasn’t that lopsided of an affair. If you compare stats in July 1943 the Allies could only muster some 200 escorts for bomber formations vs. the German’s 600 interceptors. Even then the American P-47 was enjoying high kill ratios. As for the P-51 (even with the allies advantages in numbers and traning) it’s still impressive for such a mass-produced plane to post a kill ratio of 19 to 1, the highest of any fighter in history.
-
“If it was true that most Me-262 pilots were inexperienced then the Germans would have no problems filling the 400 extra Me-262s that no one had time to fly.”
All I have to say to that is fuel. No fuel, no flying. That simple.
-
No fuel, no flying. No Caucases, no fuel…
No wonder German Infantry about 1944 had a saying about aircraft:
“…if its green, its American. If its tan, its British. If it’s invisible, it’s one of ours…”
Ozone27
-
Acutally the materials used by the Me-262 was what really plagued the use of the Me-262. The early Me-262s 004A was a fairly sound performer when premium steels were used, and early versions were known to achieve a 200-250 hour service life. However, the diversion of critical materials into U-boat production and other projects late in the war forced Junkers to produce the 004B model with only 1/3 of the high grade steel that had been used in the 004A. It was to be a disastrous concession for the Me 262.
As for fuel consumption the, the Me-262 used diesel fuel which was in less demand than the standard avaition fuel used by the Me-109 and Fw-190.
-
The me262 used J2 jet fuel… i never heard that it used diesel.
"As for the comment made of P-51s vs. Me-262, I thought that many Me-262 pilots were veteran/elite German pilots such as Aldolf Galland in Jagdverband 44. If it was true that most Me-262 pilots were inexperienced then the Germans would have no problems filling the 400 extra Me-262s that no one had time to fly. Of course getting aquatinted with the plane is a different story. Plus another problem was the “cheap” tactic was P-51s shooting up Me-262 as they were trying to land. "
You see, the first Me262s were given to very experienced pilots, and for a month in the august of 1944, the me262 seemed invincible. there were not enough experience pilots to go around, so both pilots with 15 hours flying experience, and flying aces flew the sturmvogel.
Now an organized German airforce would of been able to cover Me262s for landing and take off, but at the end of the war, that wouldn’t be. the most jet aircraft in the air once during world war two 57 Me262s, facing 1200 fighter escorts (P51s) and 800 bombers (I believe B17s.) The Me262s held their own, as stated above.
Another huge problem was the materials needed for effective jet engines. They had a 10 hour life (Jumo 004b turbo jet), and lacked important alloys capable of withstanding high heats. The excellently designed german engines had no choice but be made entirely out of steel…the engines would distort. Great Britiain siezed all of the available Chromium supplies in Turkey (A very important metal in jet aircraft production.) Adolf Galland said something along the lines with that a perfect jet would have the engines of a globster meteor, and the body of a me 262. The Jumo 004b had more power than the british engine, and with chromium, could of been far more powerful and durable. no country would consider building a jet engine entirely out of steel, and some how the germans pulled it off.
The Me262 was the best, and had a lot more potential. The P51D was different though, it was a war winner, and it was useful in the missions it was put in.
Suggested Topics
