# If you were a pilot in ww2 which plane would you want to fly



## Xdominick97 (Mar 30, 2012)

What plane do would want to fly into combat with


----------



## Tangopilot89 (Mar 31, 2012)

My apologies for not posting for about a month, been quite busy lately.

A difficult choice on this poll, would like to fly virtually all of them. If you forced my hand, I would probably pick the Spitfire for the fighters and the B-17 for the bombers.

Andy


.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## N4521U (Mar 31, 2012)

Easy, Corsair.....
Haven't you heard...............

size matters!

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## oldcrowcv63 (Mar 31, 2012)

corsair


----------



## Elmas (Mar 31, 2012)

First choice, Serie 5 fighters: Macchi 205, Reggiane 2005, Fiat G55.
Serie "6" even better.....
Among non-Italians, Spitfire.
Twin engine: P38 or Mosquito.
Heavy: B29.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Agree Agree:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## futuredogfight (Apr 2, 2012)

Please add other. The Hawk 75 is my mount.


----------



## fastmongrel (Apr 6, 2012)

A Photo Recon Mossie. You get to fly high and fast what else is important.


----------



## woljags (Apr 6, 2012)

mossie for me chaps


----------



## meatloaf109 (Apr 6, 2012)

If you want pure ruggedness, versitality, speed and surviveability; give me a Chance Vought Corsair every time!
Disclamer: for b!tchin' speed and firepower at altitude, a Ta. 152 H.0. 
It's E.T.O. vs. P.T.O., kids!
Oh, goodness, I have opened up a can 'o worms!


----------



## brucejscott (Apr 6, 2012)

Something of a broad range here don't you think. Is this single combat or a bombing mission? My choice would be F4U and B-24.


----------



## Thorlifter (Apr 6, 2012)

Easy choice for me. I'll fly shotgun with Pappy.

F4U Corsair.


----------



## davebender (Apr 7, 2012)

Didn't enter combat until the summer of 1944. By then both Germany and Japan were in serious trouble so a P-51D pilot has a relatively good chance to survive the war.

F8F would be better still as it was a post-war aircraft. But picking an aircraft that didn't see WWII combat is cheating.


----------



## Readie (Apr 12, 2012)

Fighter. The one and only Spitfire a plane so beautifull it makes you eyes water.
Twin Engined. Mosquito.
Bomber. No Lancaster? 

The main thing I would prefer would be a Merlin engine, reliable .303's and/or 20 cannons.

John


----------



## Airframes (Apr 12, 2012)

A Piper Cub - in Scotland !

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Rogi (Apr 20, 2012)

Please add the Yak, any Yak tbh  3,7,9 etc


----------



## pbfoot (Apr 20, 2012)

Flying a Norseman a long the NW Staging route hopefully after graduating from a Geology course , then I could be rolling in oil and you'd be calling Diamond PB


----------



## davparlr (Apr 28, 2012)

P-51, F4U, A-20, A-26 ??? I don't think I would like to be on an aircraft carrier so no F4U. I guess the P-51, I like the speed. I really admire the A-20.


----------



## Night Fighter Nut (Apr 30, 2012)

Oddly enough, you have P-51 listed twice...  I like the FW-190.


----------



## renrich (May 1, 2012)

The best all around fighter-fighter bomber in the war; The F4U Corsair.


----------



## ccheese (May 6, 2012)

renrich said:


> The best all around fighter-fighter bomber in the war; The F4U Corsair.



One man's opinion....

Charles

Reactions: Agree Agree:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## parsifal (May 6, 2012)

to be honest, i would love to fly any of them. Different question is 'which one would i like to fight in?" For me i dont have to think too long and hard.....mosquito.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## javlin (May 6, 2012)

Speed speed speed "Mosquito" nothing like Rolls

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## bobbysocks (May 7, 2012)

going for for the 51 of course. but depending on the year i would jump in certain versions of the 109 and 190s. and who wouldnt want to try a 262!!


----------



## renrich (May 12, 2012)

" If the US had to pick one fighter bomber to produce during the war, it should have been the Corsair." -Rex Barber- one of the P38 pilots who killed Admiral Yamamato. page 19, "Corsair" by Barrett Tillman. Another man's opinion but one with real experience.


----------



## blastermike66 (May 12, 2012)

for high altitude "boom and zoom", then low altitude strafign and bomb runs, you can't beat the P-47!1 and Despite the fact that my favs are the P-51B first, the spitfire IX second, overall, I'd go Jug- if you faced a experten at 15 to 20K in an FW190, he'd be pumping cannon rounds at you and we are talking a lot of german "lead". above 25K? the dora model or a 109 K- fast and deadly both. The Spitfires and mustangs could easily tangle with the Luftwaffes best, but in a life or death, where BOTh could be taken out by a single cannon round? tougher plane to take down and you could DIVe like hell to get away, utrn the nose up and come screaming back to pour the ammo of 8 .50 cals into your enemy!


----------



## GrauGeist (May 13, 2012)

For a fighter, I'll go with the Fw190A-8 (unless I could get my hands on a He280) and for a bomber, I'll pick the trusty Dauntless (I know it's not on the list, but it _is_ technically a bomber...)


----------



## Njaco (May 13, 2012)

Would love to fly the 262, 51 or any of the choices.

But going on personal taste and according to the many reports of pilots - outside of its performance and looks - that the Spitfire just made you feel comfortable in it, I'm going with the Spitty!


----------



## triggercreep (May 31, 2012)

I would trust my life to the F4U Corsair.


----------



## [SC] Arachnicus (Jun 3, 2012)

Corsair first
Hellcat second


----------



## treyzx10r (Jun 3, 2012)

He219 would be my choice


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jun 3, 2012)

Why the 219?


----------



## Matt308 (Jun 3, 2012)

Why not!? The Owl is the penultimate of twin engine technology. Fast, maneuverable, firepower, with twin ejection seats for when my analysis is completely wrong... that's a great choice.  I think.

Take the VHF frickengrubben antennas off the front of her and she is a thing of beauty.


----------



## GrauGeist (Jun 3, 2012)

What, Matt...you don't like the FarkenGruven antlers up there? 

I think they looked kind of menacing, to be honest!


----------



## Juha (Jun 3, 2012)

Spitfire LF VIII
a good combination of fairly easy handling, high performance and great manouvrability.

Juha

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Procrastintor (Jul 14, 2012)

P-40, just because it's rugged and I like surviving, it's probably my favorite thing.


----------



## herman1rg (Jul 14, 2012)

Hawker Hurricane for me but as it's not listed I chose the Mosquito


----------



## [SC] Arachnicus (Jul 24, 2012)

Also the P-47. Armored well.


----------



## stona (Jul 24, 2012)

I'd like to fly and fight in a Spitfire XIV. Fantastic performance and by the time it entered service most of my opponents were barely trained,which increases my chance of survival more than any aeroplane.
Steve


----------



## Outta Leftfield (Jul 30, 2012)

My vote is for the mossie. It was fun to fly, versatile, and had a great crew survival rate. That's a pretty good package!


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jul 30, 2012)

Outta Leftfield said:


> It was fun to fly



And you have flown it?


----------



## Outta Leftfield (Jul 30, 2012)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> And you have flown it?



Unfortunately not. I'm just going by reputation.


----------



## hurricane55 (Aug 2, 2012)

If I were to choose one of the above aircraft to use in combat in WWII I would chose the F4U Corsair. True, it was difficult to fly, but it was the most agile fighter the Allies had in the Pacific.


----------



## zoomar (Nov 7, 2012)

I went with the Mustang. Not because it's my favorite plane (the Spit is) or the best (although it might be), but because it's American and as an AAF pilot I'd get rotated home after a while with a better chance of surving that if I was German, Russian, or Japanese. Also, by the time the Mustang was "over there" the Allies were well on their way to acheiving aerial supremacy this would also increase my chances of survival. The problem with my favorite Spit models, is I'd be up against the cream of the Luftwaffe when the LW still could muster air superiority.


----------



## Merlin Power (Jan 8, 2013)

I voted for the Spitfire. I like that most Spitfire pilots suggest that you dont sit on a Spitfire but that you sit IN a Spitfire, shrinks around you if you will.

Not to mention the agility of the Spitfire which it was well known for in Europe. Also, the shorter range that it has I see as an advantage as you would not have to endure the very long missions pilots of other planes would have to endure (like 8 hours in a P-51).

The only thing that I wonder is whether I could fit my 6 foot 4, 110kg frame in a Spitfire and be able to fly it in combat effectively. If not, then I would have to take the Mossie.


----------



## R Pope (Jan 8, 2013)

I always liked the Westland Whirlwind. Second, the Hornet, though it was too late for WWII. Of the choices given, it would be the Mosquito or the Spit.


----------



## vinnye (Jan 8, 2013)

I avoided going down the Nationalistic route and voted for the Corsair - lots of performance, firepower, range and rugged.
My second fighter would be P57 because it could take a lot of hammer!
For looks it would have to be a Spitfire IX or XIV - followed by P51D - late models have advantage of your oponent is less likely to be well seasoned veterans and more likely Rookies.
For a bomber - B29 and the Mossie.


----------



## T Bolt (Jan 8, 2013)

P-47. Massive firepower with the 8 .50s, could hold its own in a fight and could tale a lot of punishment.


----------



## Jerry W. Loper (Jan 8, 2013)

If I was in a B-29 Superfortress, I'd know that (1) the war was almost over and I'd be unlikely to see enemy fighters, and (2) if enemy fighters did show up, my escort would be P-51 Mustangs.


----------



## Jack_Hill (Jan 8, 2013)

Most of them.

Why no LaGG or Yak on your list ?
Voted Me-262 for high speed margin, advanced technology and firepower.


----------



## Aozora (Jan 9, 2013)

P-47N: Radial engine which could take a beating and still get you home, overall one tough machine, cockpit big enough to run around in and dodge bullets, long range, high speed.


----------



## nuuumannn (Jan 9, 2013)

Oooh, tough one, the're some real beaut aircraft listed there, lots of greats not listed too. If I was pilot material in WW2 (and after) I would have hoped to have gotten a job as a test pilot and would have worked evaluating foreign/enemy designs, rather like Eric 'Winkle' Brown, or US pilots flying Watson's Whizzers.

Knowing my luck I would have ended up as an airframe fitter changing DC-3 wheels on some godforsaken mosquito ridden Pacific Island...


----------



## Matt308 (Jan 9, 2013)

Beech Staggerwing. Art deco at it's best and the stories from the people you would have ferried around would fill a library.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## J dog (Jan 9, 2013)

Well I am one for speed and I like speed a lot. I like the speed and advancements of the Me262 jet and how it adapted the swept wing and the new jet engine. so I pick that if I was to choose a second fighter I would choose the Mosquito. for Bomber I would choose the Arado 234 because it had so much more growing room and was at times at certain altitudes faster than the Me 262. The Piston bomber I would choose the Super-fortress.

The next fighter is The Jug because I saw on Dogfights that this young man in WW2 (he's not so young now) was shot over 200 times on one side and stopped counting after that. That fact and the 8 50's and the fact that he made it back with a burning engine which was not a smart idea but I like a great reliable and hell sustaining plane that could take a punch and still return home.


----------



## aurora-7 (Jan 10, 2013)

My favorite quote was one from a Thunderbolt pilot.

"If you want to send a picture back to your girl, you sat in a P-51. If you're going into combat, you sit in a P-47"

A P-47D (bubbletop) for me.


----------



## J dog (Jan 10, 2013)

Yes I love bubble tops. there's a certain quality that makes them seem safer, cooler, and adds less drag in my opinion.


----------



## Boa (Jan 23, 2013)

F8F, its just something about that bird that makes me tilt my head to the side and smile...


----------



## Njaco (Jan 23, 2013)

nuuumannn said:


> Oooh, tough one, the're some real beaut aircraft listed there, lots of greats not listed too. If I was pilot material in WW2 (and after) I would have hoped to have gotten a job as a test pilot and would have worked evaluating foreign/enemy designs, rather like Eric 'Winkle' Brown, or US pilots flying Watson's Whizzers.
> 
> Knowing my luck I would have ended up as an airframe fitter changing DC-3 wheels on some godforsaken mosquito ridden Pacific Island...



Nope, close....you get to test fly the Bachem Natter.

Reactions: Funny Funny:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Marcel (Jan 25, 2013)

Matt308 said:


> Beech Staggerwing. Art deco at it's best and the stories from the people you would have ferried around would fill a library.


 
Totally agree. Imo one of the best looking aircraft ever build. And chances are you'll be much safer flying this one than any of the other aircraft.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Agree Agree:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## tengu1979 (Jan 25, 2013)

I chose 109 by few reasons. 
1. The place i was born in Poland today WAS a part of Germany in the 30s so I would not have much choice. (I am 1/8th German anyway). 
2. Well playing IL-2 (know it is not much reference but anyway) it siuts my style of flying better than spits or yaks.......
3. Love the shape (more than FW190)


----------



## Junglerot (Mar 25, 2013)

SBD Queen of the Pacific--
How do I love thee,
Let me count the ways:
Shoho,
Akagi,
Soryu,
Kaga,
Hiryu,
Mikuma,
Ryujo,
and many more.


----------



## Readie (Mar 27, 2013)

Mossie for me first choice. Fast, agile and er fast.
P47 second choice. Tough as they come.That'll do for me Tommy.
Cheers
John


----------



## Coyote (May 28, 2013)

Had to take the Corsair. Nice balance of firepower/speed/maneuverability/ durability.


----------



## BlackSheepTwoOneFour (May 29, 2013)

First and foremost - the F4U-1 Corsair. Can you imagine what it can do in a dogfight against the 190s and 109s?

Others would be P-38, P-47D, and P-51


----------



## Procrastintor (May 30, 2013)

aww poor Zero has that many votes.


----------



## evangilder (Jun 1, 2013)

You say that, but for it's time, it was a world class weapon. How many allied airmen were lost before it was realized that in a slow speed, turning fight, you are most likely going to lose to a Zero. You need to read up more facts and listen to less propaganda. Doing so is a benefit to history. Not doing so is a great disservice to not only history, but the ones who lived it.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jun 1, 2013)

BlackSheepTwoOneFour said:


> First and foremost - the F4U-1 Corsair. Can you imagine what it can do in a dogfight against the 190s and 109s?
> 
> Others would be P-38, P-47D, and P-51



Actually we have somewhere on the forum here copies if the actual USAAF tests done between a Corsair and a Fw 190. The USAAF actually ranked them fairly equal, giving advantages and disadvantages to both over the other. Basically that it would come down to pilot skill. 

The 109 was no pushover either...


----------



## swampyankee (Jun 29, 2013)

Since I'm USian, I have to pick a US aircraft (despite the fact that the USAAF operated both Spitfires and Mosquitoes....), then a fighter aircraft, and I'd want the best, so I'd pick the Bearcat. Do note, however, that the Bearcat never saw combat in WW2. Of the aircraft that actually saw combat, I'd say the Hellcat. Yes, I know that the Corsair was better in many ways, but I'm only 5'8" tall, and the ergonomics of a Corsair sucked big time for people who were not vertically overendowed. Were I 6'4", my choice may be different.


----------



## B-17engineer (Jun 29, 2013)

Give me a B-25j


----------



## Wayne Little (Jun 29, 2013)

Think I would prefer the P-47, tough, rugged, take a lot of punishment and carries plenty of firepower to boot....


----------



## Lucky13 (Jun 29, 2013)

Hmmmmm......does the Dora-9 fall under the 190 then? 
Quite like the P-38, nice to have a spare engine, just in case and the highest scoring aces flew '38's!
Then, always had a soft spot for '4-U, the '47, 8 .50's would ruin anyones day, the '51's range.....oooh I don't know!

F-8 Crusader?

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Funny Funny:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Jun 29, 2013)

Wow - this this thread is still rollin!

ASW Patrol, SAR, Key West NAS flying a JRF-5 "Grumman Goose."

Debrief at "Sloppy Joe's."

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## swampyankee (Jun 29, 2013)

Lucky13 said:


> F-8 Crusader?



Ooh, you funny guy, you. Be better with better guns, though.


----------



## muscogeemike (Jun 29, 2013)

Robert Heinlein addressed this question in one of his books. His opinion was a multi engine (the more the better) Sea Plane or Flying Boat.
His reasoning: over 2/3 of the world is water therefore better chance of landing the plane; more engines increases survival if one or more is lost; this type of aircraft in not usually used in active combat roles so less chance of getting shot at. Also a large crew means help is available.


----------



## rlgdestroyu (Aug 20, 2013)

P47...I agree with Wayne Little. Gabreski did alright with one....


----------



## zoomar (Sep 3, 2013)

Bearcat. Not only a fine airplane but by the time it was around you had very little chance to be shot down. I'm no dummy

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## HBPencil (Sep 3, 2013)

"Take into combat" is a broad term so I voted for the Spitfire due to its air-to-air and recon capabilities (I'm thinking of the XIVe and PR XIX) although the F4U was a close second for me, especially due to its ground pounding abilities.


----------



## Conslaw (Sep 22, 2013)

I'd pick the F6F, because it had sufficient performance to dominate its adversaries, but it was also tough and carrier-friendly. You can count on it to bring you home safely. I think the Corsair was a beautiful aircraft with great performance, but it was not as docile as the F6F Pussycat.


----------



## DerGiLLster (Feb 10, 2016)

The Focke-Wulf 190, the best German piston engine plane of that time. Exceptionally well armed and protected. Speed was pretty good too. Maneuverability wasn't the best compared to the British counterpart Spitfire. 

Too bad they hadn't replaced the Bf 109 in the war. Certainly would have complimented some of the Luftwaffe aces who would have achieved higher kill-streaks if they had flew it.

I am aware that many had, yet some were still flying the Bf 109 even by the war's end.


----------



## GrauGeist (Feb 10, 2016)

DerGiLLster said:


> The Focke-Wulf 190, the best German piston engine plane of that time. Exceptionally well armed and protected. Speed was pretty good too. Maneuverability wasn't the best compared to the British counterpart Spitfire.
> 
> Too bad they hadn't replaced the Bf 109 in the war. Certainly would have complimented some of the Luftwaffe aces who would have achieved higher kill-streaks if they had flew it.
> 
> I am aware that many had, yet some were still flying the Bf 109 even by the war's end.


Problem is, the Fw190 was not a performer at high altitudes where the Bf109 was and the ETO was a predominately high-altitude theater. So the Bf109 was a critical factor in the airwar right to the end.

Where the Fw190 showed it's strengths, were at moderate to lower altitudes and if you were an Allied pilot, you had better bring your best game.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## fastmongrel (Feb 10, 2016)

If you were an Experten the 109 was the bird to fly. Fast, good maneuverability and enough firepower. The quirks in the handling could catch out the inexperienced but men with thousands of hours knew how to get the best out of it.


----------



## Glider (Feb 21, 2016)

I went for the Spitfire simply because whatever part of the war you are talking about and whatever your opponent, you normally had at least one advantage, normally a lot more, to use. Few aircraft could say that.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Like List reactions


----------



## Vince P (Mar 4, 2016)

B-17... but if I was to choose a fighter then P-51 or P-40


----------



## Michael Paquette (Aug 4, 2016)

Toss up for me between a Thunderbolt and Corsair. They Corsair's faster but I think the Thunderbolt can take just a bit more punishment. Plus from pilots I've talked to and read about, the Corsair seems to be a bit of a more of a hand full to fly than the Thunderbolt.


----------



## Guv (Mar 20, 2017)

A Corsair faster than my P-47M??  
Lets Drag, Eight 50's and 500 mph, pretty impressive! 
I'm a Texan so it's got to be a US or British plane. Not to fly, but the FW 200 is one of my favorite WW2 aircraft.


----------



## Shortround6 (Mar 20, 2017)

P-47M.......
Eight 50's...............??????

500mph.................??????


----------



## fastmongrel (Mar 21, 2017)

P47M
6 x .50s
470mph when the engine didn't blow up

Reactions: Bacon Bacon:
1 | Funny Funny:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Guv (Mar 21, 2017)

Drive It like you stole It!
Some report 6 .50's some say 8 .50's.
Shot down several ME-262's.
Some reports of 507 mph using emergency power.
Even 470 is moving.
Not too shabby for such a heavily armored fighter.


----------



## Shortround6 (Mar 21, 2017)

I think some people are confusing the performance of the XP-47J





With the service aircraft P-47M





Please see : http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/p-47/p47m-n-speed.jpg
for a better idea of the speed capability of the P-47M 470mph (or a bit less) using 72in of manifold pressure, there isn't any higher
_emergency_ power. Military power was 54.5in MAP. 
The XP-47J not only used the different lower air intake, it used a cooling fan inside the tight cowl and a lighter structure. It was over a ton lighter than a P-47D at normal loaded condition and about 1000lbs lighter when empty. A P-47M was only about 300lbs lighter than a P-47D empty.
Sorry fanboys, but actual performance wasn't really all that great unless you were over 30,000ft. P-47M at 20,000ft was good for about 440mph. A P-51 using 100/130 fuel could do about 420mph at 20,000ft. Using 100/150 they could do about 440mph. Even the old P-47Ds could do over 430mph at 20,000ft given 100/150 fuel and/or water injection. The "C" series engine and better turbo on the "M"s really came into their own at 33,000ft and above.

BTW, this website has a number of errors: The Republic P-47M  -Tje Fastest Piston Engine Fighter In WW II
and please remember the cube rule. powere needed goes up with cube of the speed and that is only for speeds up to about .6-.7 of sonic. you need a lot more at higher mach speeds. An extra 20-30mph at 470mph is not the result of a few tweaks by a front line mechanic. you need hundreds of extra horsepower. Please note that at 15,000ft an P-47M had to use an extra 700hp to go from 383mph to 418mph. a 35mph increase. Granted the air at over 30,000ft is a lot thinner.
The whole bit about an R-2800 making 3600hp on the test stand is more than a bit bogus. It did it and yes it did do it on 100/130 fuel, however it was using an absolutely amazing amount of water/alcohol fluid and 150in of manifold pressure to do it. It also was an older "B" series engine and no it didn't do it for 250hours.

Reactions: Agree Agree:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Zippythehog (Apr 9, 2017)

Sort of a wide range within the types- there is a big difference in early war types to the end. 

But a Spitfire for me please.


----------



## swampyankee (Apr 9, 2017)

DerGiLLster said:


> The Focke-Wulf 190, the best German piston engine plane of that time. Exceptionally well armed and protected. Speed was pretty good too. Maneuverability wasn't the best compared to the British counterpart Spitfire.
> 
> Too bad they hadn't replaced the Bf 109 in the war. Certainly would have complimented some of the Luftwaffe aces who would have achieved higher kill-streaks if they had flew it.
> 
> I am aware that many had, yet some were still flying the Bf 109 even by the war's end.




....although some of those Bf109s and FW190s got caught out by the much-maligned P-40.....


----------



## soulezoo (Apr 10, 2017)

FLYBOYJ said:


> Wow - this this thread is still rollin!
> 
> ASW Patrol, SAR, Key West NAS flying a JRF-5 "Grumman Goose."
> 
> Debrief at "Sloppy Joe's."



I think I said this in another thread as well... I would take the P-47N and fly high cover for FBJ!

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## The Basket (Apr 11, 2017)

Mosquito.
I think as a survival plane not much better.


----------



## swampyankee (Apr 14, 2017)

For me, at least the entry for the Bearcat is bolded and starred, but no other one is. Is there a particular reason?


----------



## soulezoo (Apr 14, 2017)

swampyankee said:


> For me, at least the entry for the Bearcat is bolded and starred, but no other one is. Is there a particular reason?


 Could be mistaken, but I believe that is identifying, for you alone, your choice in the poll.


----------



## swampyankee (Apr 15, 2017)

soulezoo said:


> Could be mistaken, but I believe that is identifying, for you alone, your choice in the poll.


Makes sense. Probably voted for it and forgot. CRS syndrome.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## dogsbody (Apr 15, 2017)

Thought it's not on the list of choices, I pick the Hawker Tempest. It's my favourite on CFS3.


Chris


----------



## Fighterguy (Apr 22, 2017)

I had a hard choice between P-47's ruggedness and the P-38's twin engines and center mounted .50 cal and 20mm cannon. (would've been interesting to see the P-38K, with Merlin engine, in production). The P-38 won. The F6F was a close third, but I'm partial to AAF/USAF aircraft, though the Spitfire is a super-sexy beast.


----------



## soulezoo (Apr 25, 2017)

Fighterguy said:


> I had a hard choice between P-47's ruggedness and the P-38's twin engines and center mounted .50 cal and 20mm cannon. (would've been interesting to see the P-38K, with Merlin engine, in production). The P-38 won. The F6F was a close third, but I'm partial to AAF/USAF aircraft, though the Spitfire is a super-sexy beast.


 The P-38k would be interesting; however, while the more powerful engine would allow it to accelerate faster (already impressive), it won't do anything to relieve the compressibility issues and therefore top speed is still no bueno.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## pbehn (Apr 25, 2017)

If I was a qualified front line pilot in 1939 I wouldnt like to wait until the Bearcat come into service to get a flight.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Gabelschwanz_Teufel (Apr 27, 2017)

Wow! I am delightfully surprised that my choice of the Navy Corsair was so popular. I began to choose my avatar and username, which is the German name for the Lightning....The twin tailed devil. But then I reconsidered and thought that I would rather fight in the Pacific Theater than in the skies over Europe. Also, I'd rather have been Navy or Marine than Army Air Corps. I'd also rather be stationed on a Pacific isle than Europe. 

I also think the attrition rate was better for the Pacific pilots?

And I really loved Black Sheep Squadron! LOL

Cheers.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Gabelschwanz_Teufel (Apr 27, 2017)

fastmongrel said:


> A Photo Recon Mossie. You get to fly high and fast what else is important.




Uh, I dunno. Maybe actually being armed? LOL


----------



## danperin (Oct 9, 2017)

P-47D!

Reactions: Agree Agree:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## swampyankee (Oct 9, 2017)

pbehn said:


> If I was a qualified front line pilot in 1939 I wouldnt like to wait until the Bearcat come into service to get a flight.



Quite true. I'm USian, so my fighter choices in 1942 -- before that is not relevant -- are the Wildcat, P-40, the P-39, and, possibly, Spitfires.

I think I'd take a Catalina.


----------



## Shortround6 (Oct 9, 2017)

Flying out of Florida


----------



## Greg Boeser (Oct 9, 2017)

One of the late war German ones.
"If you see a silver plane, it's American, if you see a green one, it's British, and if it's invisible, it's one of ours."

Reactions: Funny Funny:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Carboncrank (Oct 9, 2017)

danperin said:


> P-47D!



Maybe the question is too vague. What kind of combat would you want to fly a jug in? Let's say air to air combat and there's a load of 109's a 190's coming. You are running up to the flightline and you can choose between a mustang and a jug. 

You first job is to shoot down bad guys. Your second job is to not get killed. Big powerful tough or fast and nimble? Big target or small one? 

While one reason humans evolved is because we're tough as mammoth hide, the main reason is because we have big brains. Darwin say the smart man call is better than the tough hard man call. 

Now, if the combat assignment is shooting up trains and convoys and bad guys on the ground the smart call is different. There's that whole rifle shot in the Prestone tank thingy.


----------



## parsifal (Oct 9, 2017)

For most pilots in WWII, the objective isn’t to kill the enemy, its just to stay alive. Numerous studies show that about 80% of the killing is done by 20% of the pilots. The rest are just there as target, to increase the chances for the real killers in the group.


----------



## fastmongrel (Oct 10, 2017)

parsifal said:


> 80% of the killing is done by 20% of the pilots



Probably nearer 90% to 10% and the big scorers were one in a hundred.


----------



## pbehn (Oct 10, 2017)

fastmongrel said:


> Probably nearer 90% to 10% and the big scorers were one in a hundred.


The bare statistics hide a lot of things. For example in many German squadrons the prestige of the squadron was enhanced by having a top scorer so the squadrons efforts were geared to increasing one or two pilots. On the other side the RAF used "weavers" for a while flying behind the formation. This was the place most likely to be "bounced" and frequently given to new pilots i.e.least experienced. They suffered very high losses.

I would say that for the first few missions at least a pilot should be more concerned with survival than anything else, not easy to do though.


----------



## swampyankee (Oct 10, 2017)

parsifal said:


> For most pilots in WWII, the objective isn’t to kill the enemy, its just to stay alive. Numerous studies show that about 80% of the killing is done by 20% of the pilots. The rest are just there as target, to increase the chances for the real killers in the group.



I’ve read — I think it was a book by Gwyn Dyer — that only about 15% of the soldiers in a firefight used their weapons. Interestingly, it wasn’t always the same 15%: everybody was about equally active overall,


----------



## pbehn (Oct 10, 2017)

swampyankee said:


> I’ve read — I think it was a book by Gwyn Dyer — that only about 15% of the soldiers in a firefight used their weapons. Interestingly, it wasn’t always the same 15%: everybody was about equally active overall,


This is a human trait. There was documentary on TV about an excavation of a battlefield site from the US war of independence or civil war. Some of the muskets found had a high number of cartridges rammed down the barrel one on top of the other, in the most rigid of military activity some were just going through the motions.. In another documentary which covered all areas of the military it estimated that less than 5% of males in military service were true "warriors". Whereas 10, 15 or 20% can do the killing 5% or less can do it and then return to their previous life unchanged


----------



## soulezoo (Oct 12, 2017)

pbehn said:


> This is a human trait. There was documentary on TV about an excavation of a battlefield site from the US war of independence or civil war. Some of the muskets found had a high number of cartridges rammed down the barrel one on top of the other, in the most rigid of military activity some were just going through the motions.. In another documentary which covered all areas of the military it estimated that less than 5% of males in military service were true "warriors". Whereas 10, 15 or 20% can do the killing 5% or less can do it and then return to their previous life unchanged



This is all true. And to add, many soldiers who do fire their weapons, unconsciously aim to miss (i.e. shoot blindly upwards for instance), or close their eyes while firing. .


----------



## pbehn (Oct 12, 2017)

soulezoo said:


> This is all true. And to add, many soldiers who do fire their weapons, unconsciously aim to miss (i.e. shoot blindly upwards for instance), or close their eyes while firing. .


It makes me laugh on TV news programmes when irregular "fighters" are shown doing just that on camera. It even fools the reporters who describe them as fearless or fanatics depending on which image they want to project.


----------



## Greg Boeser (Oct 12, 2017)

The saying in Iraq was "Allah will guide my bullets."


----------



## swampyankee (Oct 12, 2017)

Greg Boeser said:


> The saying in Iraq was "Allah will guide my bullets."


Kind of like the people who eschew medical trearment for prayer?


----------



## Greg Boeser (Oct 12, 2017)

Perhaps.
I prefer prayer _with _medical treatment. I'm a form believer in using all that God's creation has provided for my well being, and thanking Him for it.


----------



## parsifal (Oct 13, 2017)

Ive been under fire. Id be interested to hear how other people reacted when under fire.

I certainly did not shut my eyes or not want to mete out retribution to the sobs shooting at me. To be honest, I was scared sh*tless before and after the events, but whilst it was happening, I found I just shut out everything and got on with the job of returning fire.

It was a case of a drug runner firing at my guys as we were boarding to search and apprehend his vessel. Lucky for us he was bloody scared as well. My guys hit the deck, I pulled out my pistol, emptied 13 rounds into the wheelhouse, swore at the little t*rd, was reloading and telling this loser to come out so I could put him out his misery. it was about that time that someone told me he was trying to surrender. Within seconds I was on the deck myself, the adrenalin was that intense. I would say that people do act uncharacteristically when under fire, and often unpredictably. I don't normally behave like a murderous nutter most of the time, though there are people in this place who might think differently. 

There have been episodes since, but none as intense as that. Maybe I got used to it.
,

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Winner Winner:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Carboncrank (Nov 1, 2017)

parsifal said:


> For most pilots in WWII, the objective isn’t to kill the enemy, its just to stay alive. Numerous studies show that about 80% of the killing is done by 20% of the pilots. The rest are just there as target, to increase the chances for the real killers in the group.



Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. 

I hear a lot of extraordinary claims being made in the last few posts and zero extraordinary proof. 

This is the age of search engines. Opinions are meaningless unless you can connect them to the reasons you hold them. facts and data are easy to find. All the information in the history of mankind is basically at your fingertips . 

Use it. 

I do not buy the premise that most Pilots were flying around just avoiding combat. And nobody here is bothered to source that notion. Some facts are that we had more pilots coming through training than we knew what to do with. We washed out thousands of fighter pilots. My father was a Hellcat pilot. I know what he went through in flight training. Only the most aggressive true believers made it out of fighter pilot flight schools. If you didn't show the proper aggression you ended up being a flying truck driver in a c-47 or a B-17. Most all of them were itching for a fight. Read the books written by fighter pilots. They hated missions where they couldn't find a fight. My uncle was a bombardier on a B-17 shut down December 1st 1943 And spent 18 months in prisoner-of-war camps. He said B-17 bombing missions were absolutely terrifying. The helpless feeling of making long flights in broad daylight with German Fighters trying to kill you and the German 88's on the ground trying to kill you and all you can do is keep flying in a straight line. And this was before the Mustangs. But he says almost without exception everybody did the professional job they were trained to do. I've read the daily reports of the 91st Bomb Group 322nd Squadron through 1943. I see no evidence of the kind of cowardice you are inferring. I didn't hear it from my uncle, I didn't hear it from my father, I didn't hear it from my father's best friend who flew b-29s. I didn't hear it the air crew guys that I've met or the Guadalcanal veteran that I met and others.(as a long hair anti-war Counter Culture type I somehow became friends with this Guadalcanal veteran.... And a Korean War Navy SEAL now that I think of it.)

And cowardice is what several you are inferring by these claims that only a small percentage of World War II soldiers in fighter squadrons and an infantry actually participated in the fight. You're inferring cowardice.

What I've read, and what I've heard from direct sources is that by the time you made it to combat the thing you are most worried about was letting down the other guys in your squad or your squadron. 

The kind of thing you're talking about more describes the later years of Vietnam more than it does World War II, but that's a whole different story. But even in Vietnam the combat infantryman feared most doing something that got one of his friends killed. 

If you're in a Fighter Squadron in World War II and you end up in a fight with the Enemy you don't have a choice but to fight. 

Even in the real world best defense is an offense. 

One time long ago this huge tough guy took a swing at me at a bar. I have extremely fast reflexes and he missed badly. As his arm went across me he was close enough that I got hold of his shirt at the chest as we went to the floor I held him as close to my body as I could so that he couldn't get his arms out and swing. People stepped in and broke it up. 

But that does not describe combat. 

This is not a glorification of War. There is no glory in war, ever. I hate the war, not the warrior.

Reactions: Disagree Disagree:
2 | Like List reactions


----------



## parsifal (Nov 1, 2017)

I was relying mostly on jim Dunnigans book "Dirty Little Secrets of WWII". I know Jim and can say he is now a senior adviser to the US department of defence. There are few people with grater general military knowledge than he. 


Referring to this passage in Dunningan's book

"One of the more unpleasant aspects of air warfare is that there were only two kinds of pilots, aces (who shot down five or more aircraft) and targets (pilots who got shot down). There was no middle ground. There was no "average" pilot. During the war, a new pilot, on average, had about a 7 percent chance of being shot down on his first encounter with the enemy. As he experienced more combat, his chances of survival increased. By his tenth combat, his chances of getting shot down were less than 1 percent and tended to stay there for the rest of his career. Only 5 percent of pilots shot down five or more aircraft. The rest, for the most part, served mainly to provide victims for the aces in air-to-air combat. Only about a half of all pilots ever shot down another aircraft, and only 10 percent of that august group obtained five kills and qualified as an ace. Fortunately, many fighter pilots were able to apply themselves usefully in ground attack missions."

I dont now have a copy of his book, having lent it to someone, who decided not to return it. .

FWIW, I did find a thesis at some point by someone at USACGSC on air-to-air combat, where the section on Vietnam noted that TOPGUN trained naval aviators accounted for 50% of their squadron's kills.

no implication on cowardice mentioned or implied here. its a question of combat experience .

Stephen Bungay quotes similar figures in Chapter 20 of _Most Dangerous Enemy_, "Hunters and Hunted" - 5% of pilots scoring 40% of all kills. He cites _Systems Analysis Problems of Limited War_, a 1966 paper by Herbert K. Weiss, and Mike Spick's _The Ace Factor_, though I'm afraid I haven't got either to check the originals.

Bungay looks at RAF claims during the Battle of Britain where 2,927 pilots made 2,698 claims. 104 of those pilots were aces (five or more claims) and they made 806 claims, so about 30% of the claims were made by 3.5% of the pilots, broadly in line with the previous figures. He briefly assesses the qualities that allowed a pilot to survive (flying ability, eyesight and mental capability/situational awareness); in aces these were combined with the ability to hit a target (many of the more successful pilots were keen hunters).

So where are your sources to refute these analyses?

Reactions: Bacon Bacon:
1 | Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## pbehn (Nov 1, 2017)

Carboncrank said:


> Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.
> 
> I hear a lot of extraordinary claims being made in the last few posts and zero extraordinary proof.
> 
> ...



Perhaps you should rest a while, read your own post and consider the complete contradictions it has within and then consider the contradictions with historical evidence. There is a poster here who has on his siggy "if it is a fair fight you have done something wrong" that is the basis of air combat. Knocking your enemy out of the sky before he sees you or can hit you is the ideal all branches of all air forces worked towards and still do.

If you want to bring personal experience into the discussion, I was a motorcycle racer which seems like an aggressive sport. Purely aggressive riders crash well and often. It is the skilled riders that win the race, the best are not aggressive at all but out ride and out think their rival. Your dad may or may not have been aggressive in a Hellcat, What is certain is no one was ever allowed to fly a Hellcat purely because he was aggressive. One Ace produced by the Battle of Britain was Bob Doe he was in no way aggressive at all, and was not an outstanding pilot he hated flying inverted, his strength was he concerned himself with his own survival. That is not cowardice it is sensible, every combat he survived he improved until he could match the best. There were many courageous and aggressive pilots lost their lives by disobeying orders chasing LW aircraft back over the channel. I respect their courage but that is no way to win the battle you are involved in

Reactions: Informative Informative:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Nov 1, 2017)

FLYBOYJ said:


> Wow - this this thread is still rollin!
> 
> ASW Patrol, SAR, Key West NAS flying a JRF-5 "Grumman Goose."
> 
> Debrief at "Sloppy Joe's."



I would never have qualified for a commission or flight training in WARII, would have wound up a Garand pilot, but would have applied for a transfer to be your enlisted plane captain down at NQX.
Applaud your choice of a debriefing room, but couldn't join you; off limits to enlisted back then.
Cheers,
Wes

PS: According to old timer Conchs who remembered WarII, enlisted guys at the Air Station, the seaplane base, and the Naval Station and submarine base weren't allowed off base except for special circumstances. Only officers had the run of the town. And local girls weren't allowed on base to visit the EM club, as they were in my day. All the restrictions of a combat zone (it was surrounded by U-boat waters) without the overseas pay or the combat pay.

Reactions: Funny Funny:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Nov 1, 2017)

Carboncrank said:


> And cowardice is what several you are inferring by these claims that only a small percentage of World War II soldiers in fighter squadrons and an infantry actually participated in the fight. You're inferring cowardice.



Care to support that opinion?

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Agree Agree:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## parsifal (Nov 1, 2017)

I guess in a way he has, though not very well. I don't think we are saying anything about cowardice here, its about experience.

I was never a pilot, but I did direct pilots. new pilots have their hands full just getting up and then back. they have less situational awareness and they are nervous. that's not cowardice, its nerves. it takes time to get your air groups up to steam, and the importance of the unit leaders cannot be over-stated.


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Nov 1, 2017)

Carboncrank said:


> Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.
> 
> I hear a lot of extraordinary claims being made in the last few posts and zero extraordinary proof.
> 
> ...


My OPINION is you're misconstruing here. Take a fighter finger four; you've got one, possibly two shooters, for at best a 50% shooting opportunity. For a vic, it's one in three. Does that make the wingmen cowards? I think not! It takes gonads to hold your leader's back while yours hangs out in the breeze. Aces only become aces by surviving their apprenticeship on their leader's wing. Once they graduate to section or flight leader, if their marksmanship or tactical skill or acrobatic ability isn't stellar, does that make them cowards? Not being a shooter is not the same as cowardice. Nor does it imply avoiding combat.
Cheers,
Wes

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Agree Agree:
2 | Like List reactions


----------



## swampyankee (Nov 2, 2017)

RE: Cowardice.

The number I've heard-- and I believe that this number was derived by interviewing combat veterans in several armed forces, including the USMC and US Army -- was either from Gwynne Dyer's book _War _and its associated mini-series or, more likely, John Keegan & Richard Holmes' mini-series _Soldiers: A History of Men in Battle_. One of the comments was that post-WW2 armies are trying very hard to get that 15% up to 100%. A somewhat counter-intuitive statement was that the composition of that active 15% was not constant, _i.e_, you couldn't go into a unit and pull out the 15% super-soldiers and discharge the 85% failures, because people jumped from one group to another.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Informative Informative:
2 | Like List reactions


----------



## pbehn (Nov 3, 2017)

swampyankee said:


> RE: Cowardice.
> 
> The number I've heard-- and I believe that this number was derived by interviewing combat veterans in several armed forces, including the USMC and US Army -- was either from Gwynne Dyer's book _War _and its associated mini-series or, more likely, John Keegan & Richard Holmes' mini-series _Soldiers: A History of Men in Battle_. One of the comments was that post-WW2 armies are trying very hard to get that 15% up to 100%. A somewhat counter-intuitive statement was that the composition of that active 15% was not constant, _i.e_, you couldn't go into a unit and pull out the 15% super-soldiers and discharge the 85% failures, because people jumped from one group to another.


Air combat is in some ways a special case. A pilot qualified on a bi plane cannot be strapped into a Spitfire and take part in combat he is a danger to himself and his squadron until he has at least 50 hours training and not really effective until he has about 200 hours on type.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## vikingBerserker (Nov 3, 2017)

I have always loved the P-47 and the fact it had 8 x .50's.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Nov 3, 2017)

vikingBerserker said:


> I have always loved the P-47 and the fact it had 8 x .50's.


Juggernaut
Unbelievable
Gravity defying
Sh!t hot
!

True Belief = Faith in God and Pratt and Whitney.


----------



## swampyankee (Nov 3, 2017)

pbehn said:


> Air combat is in some ways a special case. A pilot qualified on a bi plane cannot be strapped into a Spitfire and take part in combat he is a danger to himself and his squadron until he has at least 50 hours training and not really effective until he has about 200 hours on type.



I agree. Interestingly, a number of quite successful combat pilots were not very good technical pilots; this was probably a bigger issue during WW1 than WW2. I suspect that the not shooting issue is more prevalent in large, conscript armies than in smaller, professional volunteer forces. This, too, doesn't apply to fighter pilots. Many combat aircraft are notoriously difficult to fly, requiring constant attention; this is one of the reasons that I get rather aggravated by people who discount the importance of how easy a combat aircraft is to fly. A lot of WW2 pilots were put into squadron service with less than 150 total flight hours and fewer than 40 hours in type (Supermarine Spitfire - A pilot's memoirs).

Reactions: Agree Agree:
2 | Like List reactions


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Nov 3, 2017)

swampyankee said:


> I get rather aggravated by people who discount the importance of how easy a combat aircraft is to fly.


Two of the most successful fighters of all time in terms of kills, the Fokker D-7 and the Grumman F6F, were renowned for their ease of handling and forgiveness of pilot inexperience while giving outstanding combat performance. They were acemakers. It doesn't get much better than that!
Cheers,
Wes


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Nov 3, 2017)

swampyankee said:


> A lot of WW2 pilots were put into squadron service with less than 150 total flight hours and fewer than 40 hours in type


In my modern era flight instructing days, no insurance company would cover a pilot with less than 200-300 hours total time and 20-30 dual instruction in type to fly any retractable gear airplane.
In the "bad old days" I set off on a 1500 mile cross-country odyssey in my first "complex/high performance airplane", a T-34, with 100 hours in my logbook and 5 hours dual in type. First leg was 200 miles over water at night. The Good Lord protects fools and aviators!
Cheers,
Wes


----------



## pbehn (Nov 3, 2017)

swampyankee said:


> I agree. Interestingly, a number of quite successful combat pilots were not very good technical pilots; this was probably a bigger issue during WW1 than WW2. I suspect that the not shooting issue is more prevalent in large, conscript armies than in smaller, professional volunteer forces. This, too, doesn't apply to fighter pilots. Many combat aircraft are notoriously difficult to fly, requiring constant attention; this is one of the reasons that I get rather aggravated by people who discount the importance of how easy a combat aircraft is to fly. A lot of WW2 pilots were put into squadron service with less than 150 total flight hours and fewer than 40 hours in type (Supermarine Spitfire - A pilot's memoirs).


A great read Swampy. There was a passage in Bungays "The most dangerous enemy" where Bob Doe described how he flew which was not how he was taught, he used to throw the plane about in very violent random control inputs figuring that if he didn't know exactly what he was doing next no enemy could get a lead on him for a shot. My numbers were based on what I undersatand about the best and worst cases of allied fighter pilots. Battle of Britain pilots in the worst case had 40 to 50 hours on type and that was not enough, I understand US pilots by 1944 had approx. 200 hrs on type or similar and that made a huge difference.


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Nov 3, 2017)

pbehn said:


> Battle of Britain pilots in the worst case had 40 to 50 hours on type and that was not enough, I understand US pilots by 1944 had approx. 200 hrs on type or similar and that made a huge difference.


A late neighbor of mine started flying raids out of North Africa as a green B-24 aircraft commander in late '42. He flew his 200th hour (total time since first flight) over the target on his first mission. This was after he and his green crew had ferried their brand new bird across the Carribean, South America, the South Atlantic, and the Sahel in hurricane season. He had fifty hours in type at the time, including the ferrying and the outbound leg across the Med.
Cheers,
Wes

PS: He survived his tour, including 3 trips to Ploesti, went on to command a B-24 training squadron out of Westover AAF, and became Deputy Commissioner of Aeronautics for Vermont. And he gave me my first airplane ride. Years later, I got to return the favor and give him a Biennial Flight Review in the same state airplane. Such a privilege is a rare and precious thing.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Like List reactions


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Nov 4, 2017)

pbehn said:


> Some of the muskets found had a high number of cartridges rammed down the barrel one on top of the other, in the most rigid of military activity some were just going through the motions..


Have you ever fired one of these "muskets"? I own one. Both the report and the recoil are much "softer" than a more modern (WWI, WWII, KW) weapon. It's not hard to imagine a city boy soldier who didn't grow up around guns not noticing in the din and stress of battle that his piece was misfiring and winding up with multiple loads in his barrel.
There were battles where opposing sides fired at each other at point-blank range for an hour or more across a stone wall, a thicket or a hedgerow. Or even a couple of rail fences. (Remember the opening scene of "Dances With Wolves"?) Not everybody is born with the fortitude to keep a cool head in a situation like that.
Cheers,
Wes


----------



## swampyankee (Nov 4, 2017)

XBe02Drvr said:


> Have you ever fired one of these "muskets"? I own one. Both the report and the recoil are much "softer" than a more modern (WWI, WWII, KW) weapon. It's not hard to imagine a city boy soldier who didn't grow up around guns not noticing in the din and stress of battle that his piece was misfiring and winding up with multiple loads in his barrel.
> There were battles where opposing sides fired at each other at point-blank range for an hour or more across a stone wall, a thicket or a hedgerow. Or even a couple of rail fences. (Remember the opening scene of "Dances With Wolves"?) Not everybody is born with the fortitude to keep a cool head in a situation like that.
> Cheers,
> Wes




Muskets and rifled muzzle-loaders also had quite high rates of misfire, especially in damp weather. I've heard numbers as high as 25%. Black powder would also foul bores pretty quickly, probably not helping things.


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Nov 4, 2017)

swampyankee said:


> Muskets and rifled muzzle-loaders also had quite high rates of misfire, especially in damp weather. I've heard numbers as high as 25%. Black powder would also foul bores pretty quickly, probably not helping things.


The Civil War era Springfield Rifle Musket uses a peculiar "top hat" percussion cap that requires that it be pressed on the nipple just so. If you stick it on in a hurry or with shaking hands it may not seat properly and can pop off when you throw the weapon up to your shoulder to shoot. In the heat of battle a stressed out terrified soldier could easily not notice losing his cap. With all the sound and fury he may not notice that his weapon didn't fire, either.
Cheers,
Wes


----------



## fastmongrel (Nov 5, 2017)

XBe02Drvr said:


> Have you ever fired one of these "muskets"? I own one. Both the report and the recoil are much "softer" than a more modern (WWI, WWII, KW) weapon. It's not hard to imagine a city boy soldier who didn't grow up around guns not noticing in the din and stress of battle that his piece was misfiring and winding up with multiple loads in his barrel.
> There were battles where opposing sides fired at each other at point-blank range for an hour or more across a stone wall, a thicket or a hedgerow. Or even a couple of rail fences. (Remember the opening scene of "Dances With Wolves"?) Not everybody is born with the fortitude to keep a cool head in a situation like that.
> Cheers,
> Wes



My Pedersoli Enfield P53 can set off car alarms at 50 yards.

Black Powder firearms are LOUD and after 10 rounds or so the fouling in the barrel makes the recoil painful. Propelling a 500 grain (1 1/4 ounce) lump of lead with 60 to 70 grains of BP is not soft. I usually shoot a 470 grain bullet cast from a Lee mould and use a 45 grains by equivalent volume measure of Pyrodex. 

If your using stuff like Pyrodex or Goex they are not Black Powder and are more like solid rocket fuel in that they burn steadily and produce a push to the end of the barrel rather than the thump that genuine BP produces.

This Youtube vid is too simplistic for a proper test but shows how BP differs to modern substitutes like Pyrodex.

_View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UhwlsthKv_w_


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Nov 5, 2017)

swampyankee said:


> Muskets and rifled muzzle-loaders also had quite high rates of misfire, especially in damp weather. I've heard numbers as high as 25%.


On a humid, not even damp, day my flintlock Kentucky sometimes misfires as much as 50%. I sometimes wonder how the old guys got by with them.
Cheers,
Wes

EDIT: (one day later) one of my old timer flintlock fanatic friends called me up:"Saw ya spoutin' off on some airplane forum on th' Intynet, knewed rightway twas you. Still usin' dex in yer kaintuck, aintcha? TSK, TSK, TSK, serve ya right. Nuthin' but fffg POWDAH fer th'charge n'ffffg fer prime. N' ya gotta keep ya pan n' vent n' pick CLEAN, son."


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Nov 5, 2017)

fastmongrel said:


> My Pedersoli Enfield P53 can set off car alarms at 50 yards.
> 
> Black Powder firearms are LOUD and after 10 rounds or so the fouling in the barrel makes the recoil painful. Propelling a 500 grain (1 1/4 ounce) lump of lead with 60 to 70 grains of BP is not soft. I usually shoot a 470 grain bullet cast from a Lee mould and use a 45 grains by equivalent volume measure of Pyrodex.


1863 Springfield rifle musket replica; .58 cal Mineh ball out of an ancient Lyman (I think) mold, 60 grains + - BP or Pyrodex out of a replica US Army standard issue measure for making up cartridges.
For shooting comfort I'll take 10 rounds of '63 Springfield over 10 of '03 Springfield any day. (Or .303 SMLE, M1917 Enfield, '98 Mauser, 7.7 Arisaka, BAR,...you name it.) The difference in feel is like the difference in burn in your video: smoother and steadier (BP) vs sharper, harder, and more explosive (Smokeless). More of a good solid shove than a karate kick. More of a boom than a crack. The ol' shoulder ain't what it used to be!
Cheers,
Wes


----------



## swampyankee (Nov 5, 2017)

XBe02Drvr said:


> On a humid, not even damp, day my flintlock Kentucky sometimes misfires as much as 50%. I sometimes wonder how the old guys got by with them.
> Cheers,
> Wes



Well, that's what bayonets were for. Also, you couldn't store them loaded. That's why people carried swords, not guns, for self-defense.


----------



## ARTESH (Nov 5, 2017)

Well, I'm not Expert in ww2 Airplanes ...

But, I would say my Chose is

Romanian IAR 80


----------



## drewwizard (Nov 9, 2017)

My uncle was a ferry pilot during WWII. Flew essentially all the allied fighters while ferrying US aircraft to Russia through Alaska, including British aircraft. The one that he believed was the best aircraft was by far the P-38. Very comfortable to fly, robust with the two engines as well as fast and maneuverable. Given that I voted for the ME-262. It's the most advanced of all of them. Real fan of the TA-152, but if my life was on the line, I would look for every advantage I could get.

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Like List reactions


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Nov 13, 2017)

drewwizard said:


> Given that I voted for the ME-262. It's the most advanced of all of them. Real fan of the TA-152, but if my life was on the line, I would look for every advantage I could get.


Brave man. Even the "Experten" had a hard time surviving the war in 262s. Your worst enemy is your own mount, and if that doesn't get you there's always a sky full of Mustangs and Tempests determined to not let you take off or land in peace. Low slow and dirty you are target practice.
Cheers,
Wes


----------



## Peter Gunn (Nov 14, 2017)

XBe02Drvr said:


> *SNIP*
> 
> EDIT: (one day later) one of my old timer flintlock fanatic friends called me up_*:"Saw ya spoutin' off on some airplane forum on th' Intynet, knewed rightway twas you. Still usin' dex in yer kaintuck, aintcha? TSK, TSK, TSK, serve ya right. Nuthin' but fffg POWDAH fer th'charge n'ffffg fer prime. N' ya gotta keep ya pan n' vent n' pick CLEAN, son."*_




Wes,

Ummm... What?


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Nov 14, 2017)

Peter Gunn said:


> Extraneous post. Delete please.


Why? He actually does talk like that. Old timer from Tennessee, see him from time to time at muzzleloader shoots, and we Josh each other over the phone occaisonaly. I call him "Gramps" and he calls me "Damn Yankee Whippersnapper" or just "Whip" for short. He buys me a beer and I buy him a shot or two of Jack Daniels. He's about twenty or so years older, which puts him in his nineties, but has many more years than that edge on me in the wisdom department. Sharp as a tack and spry as a rooster, and shows no signs of slowing down. Was a teenage machinist in WarII, and is still building beautiful muzzleloaders. Has an amazing self-education, but it's in his eyes and ears and fingertips, not his speech.
Sorry, this whole muzzleloader chat has drifted way off topic. Let's stop here. My apologies if I've offended anyone.
Cheers,
Wes


----------



## Shortround6 (Nov 14, 2017)

Yep, the priming powder keeps flying out of the pan when trying to shoot them long rifles from an airplane

Reactions: Funny Funny:
3 | Like List reactions


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Nov 14, 2017)

Shortround6 said:


> Yep, the priming powder keeps flying out of the pan when trying to shoot them long rifles from an airplane


Isn't that how you get freckles?


----------



## Peter Gunn (Nov 14, 2017)

XBe02Drvr said:


> Why? He actually does talk like that. Old timer from Tennessee, see him from time to time at muzzleloader shoots, and we Josh each other over the phone occaisonaly. I call him "Gramps" and he calls me "Damn Yankee Whippersnapper" or just "Whip" for short. He buys me a beer and I buy him a shot or two of Jack Daniels. He's about twenty or so years older, which puts him in his nineties, but has many more years than that edge on me in the wisdom department. Sharp as a tack and spry as a rooster, and shows no signs of slowing down. Was a teenage machinist in WarII, and is still building beautiful muzzleloaders. Has an amazing self-education, but it's in his eyes and ears and fingertips, not his speech.
> Sorry, this whole muzzleloader chat has drifted way off topic. Let's stop here. My apologies if I've offended anyone.
> Cheers,
> Wes



Wes,

The post you quoted was not directed at you, it was in response to something else in the thread that I would like the Mods to delete. The post above it WAS in response to your black powder post and was in jest. My apologies for any confusion or possible insult.

( I changed the text to better communicate to the mods )


----------



## drewwizard (Nov 14, 2017)

XBe02Drvr said:


> Brave man. Even the "Experten" had a hard time surviving the war in 262s. Your worst enemy is your own mount, and if that doesn't get you there's always a sky full of Mustangs and Tempests determined to not let you take off or land in peace. Low slow and dirty you are target practice.
> Cheers,
> Wes


Yes the disadvantage of the ME-262 was the hostile skies over Germany and being heavily outnumbered. Given even odds, I would still vote for the ME-262. Maybe the HE-163? salamander. Speed is life in hostile skies.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Nov 14, 2017)

Peter Gunn said:


> Wes,
> 
> The post you quoted was not directed at you, it was in response to something else in the thread that I would like the Mods to delete. The post above it WAS in response to your black powder post and was in jest. My apologies for any confusion or possible insult.
> 
> ( I changed the text to better communicate to the mods )



Done. At least I hope I deleted the correct post.


----------



## Peter Gunn (Nov 15, 2017)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> Done. At least I hope I deleted the correct post.



Yes indeed, thank you.


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Nov 15, 2017)

drewwizard said:


> Given even odds, I would still vote for the ME-262.


Even odds is a pipe dream! If the odds are even, you've already screwed up. You're supposed to kill the other guy before he realizes you're there. If surviving the war is your objective, I think you'd have been better off in a late model HE219. Most night bombers didn't have belly turrets, and you could play your "organ music" mostly un molested. Most allied deep penetration night fighters would be fighting you at a great disadvantage of fuel and endurance if they could reach you at all. And when the time came, you'd have the speed and stealth to escape to the west and avoid the Russians.
I didn't make an aircraft choice, as that would not have been an option for me. My destiny would have been limited to an M1 Garand.
Cheers,
Wes


----------



## swampyankee (Nov 15, 2017)

drewwizard said:


> Yes the disadvantage of the ME-262 was the hostile skies over Germany and being heavily outnumbered. Given even odds, I would still vote for the ME-262. Maybe the HE-163? salamander. Speed is life in hostile skies.



The Me163?

Oh the nazis should have built more of those. They'd lose faster.

Reactions: Funny Funny:
2 | Like List reactions


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Nov 16, 2017)

swampyankee said:


> The Me163?
> 
> Oh the nazis should have built more of those. They'd lose faster.


At least the Japanese were honest and called their rocket bomb the suicide machine it was. The Germans tried to pretend theirs was survivable.
BTW, one of the original Me163 test pilots, Rudi Opitz, was still instructing in gliders with Nutmeg Soaring in Connecticut as of the late 80s or early 90s. They used to come up and fly with us at Sugarbush during the annual wave camp.
Cheers,
Wes

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## swampyankee (Nov 17, 2017)

XBe02Drvr said:


> At least the Japanese were honest and called their rocket bomb the suicide machine it was. The Germans tried to pretend theirs was survivable.
> BTW, one of the original Me163 test pilots, Rudi Opitz, was still instructing in gliders with Nutmeg Soaring in Connecticut as of the late 80s or early 90s. They used to come up and fly with us at Sugarbush during the annual wave camp.
> Cheers,
> Wes




I met him when I worked at Lycoming, probably for about 3 seconds when I was one of the test engineers on the ALF-502. There were some people with interesting histories there. I vaguely remember being told that one of the people working in the engineering department was an Austrian Jew who flew for the RAF.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## drewwizard (Dec 12, 2017)

ME-163 was an incredible aircraft. Unfortunately the prototype rocket engines were far more deadly than the plane. They just finished up a test at the end of the war which would have made the ME-163 extremely deadly. Vertical cannon which were triggered automatically by the shadow of a plane above it. Just fly under a B-17 at 650 MPH, and the cannon automatically trigger by the shadow of the plane above. Almost guaranteed kill and no defense. Rockets were regularly blowing up on launch pads into the 1960's. Long way to go before a rocket powered plane would be reasonably safe for it's pilot.


----------



## pbehn (Dec 12, 2017)

drewwizard said:


> ME-163 was an incredible aircraft. Unfortunately the prototype rocket engines were far more deadly than the plane. They just finished up a test at the end of the war which would have made the ME-163 extremely deadly. Vertical cannon which were triggered automatically by the shadow of a plane above it. Just fly under a B-17 at 650 MPH, and the cannon automatically trigger by the shadow of the plane above. Almost guaranteed kill and no defense. Rockets were regularly blowing up on launch pads into the 1960's. Long way to go before a rocket powered plane would be reasonably safe for it's pilot.


But only on mid summers day in the parts of Germany close to the equator.


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Dec 13, 2017)

drewwizard said:


> Vertical cannon which were triggered automatically by the shadow of a plane above it. Just fly under a B-17 at 650 MPH, and the cannon automatically trigger by the shadow of the plane above. Almost guaranteed kill and no defense.


And you find you can't get to the bombers without flying under a cloud. "Ooopps, what happened to my ammunition?" How many clouds included in the kill tally painted below the cockpit?
Cheers,
Wes

Reactions: Funny Funny:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## drewwizard (Dec 28, 2017)

How about the De Havilland Hornet? This was an aircraft that seemed to have many advantages and was just entering into service in late 1945. Essentially a fighter version (reduced airframe [lower frontal area] for a single pilot, but same engines as the Mosquito). Four 20mm in the nose and very good visability. All with the advantage of two engines.


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Dec 28, 2017)

Merlin Power said:


> most Spitfire pilots suggest that you dont sit on a Spitfire but that you sit IN a Spitfire, shrinks around you if you will.


RAF veteran I met at Oshkosh 30 years ago said "You don't sit in a Spit, you strap it on and wear it like a backpack 'chute." (looks up at me) "And don't you even bother trying, son, you're too bloody big!"
Cheers,
Wes


----------



## billrunnels (Jun 20, 2018)

Xdominick97 said:


> What plane do would want to fly into combat with


The P-51

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jun 20, 2018)

Meanwhile me and Joe are still cruising around the Carribean on U-Boot Patrol in our PBY Catalina...

Reactions: Funny Funny:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Jun 20, 2018)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> Meanwhile me and Joe are still cruising around the Carribean on U-Boot Patrol in our PBY Catalina...


And I'm your E-2 (non flying - you've got an AMMC flight engineer) flightline mechanic waiting on the ground back at NAS Key West Seaplane Annex, hoping you don't find any surfaced U-boats and don't bring my baby back with holes in her hide!
If her hull is punctured you've got to put your wheels down and go land over at Boca Chica, and I've got to go over there and endure the razzing from the Blimp and Wildcat and Avenger mechs while I make my baby seaworthy again.
And do you think I might get any help or even sympathy from my boss (your flight engineer)? Hell no, he's going to be whupped and short tempered after 18 hours of listening to those Pratts and he'll be logging racktime before you young whippersnapper boat drivers can catch a shuttle to the BOQ!
Cheers,
Wes

Reactions: Bacon Bacon:
1 | Like Like:
1 | Funny Funny:
2 | Like List reactions


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jun 20, 2018)

XBe02Drvr said:


> And I'm your E-2 (non flying - you've got an AMMC flight engineer) flightline mechanic waiting on the ground back at NAS Key West Seaplane Annex, hoping you don't find any surfaced U-boats and don't bring my baby back with holes in her hide!
> If her hull is punctured you've got to put your wheels down and go land over at Boca Chica, and I've got to go over there and endure the razzing from the Blimp and Wildcat and Avenger mechs while I make my baby seaworthy again.
> And do you think I might get any help or even sympathy from my boss (your flight engineer)? Hell no, he's going to be whupped and short tempered after 18 hours of listening to those Pratts and he'll be logging racktime before you young whippersnapper boat drivers can catch a shuttle to the BOQ!
> Cheers,
> Wes



And I’ll enjoy my cocktail and bikini clad babes while you fix the aircraft.


----------



## michaelmaltby (Jun 20, 2018)

... the Bikini wasn't "invented" yet


----------



## michaelmaltby (Jun 20, 2018)

Fw-190


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jun 20, 2018)

michaelmaltby said:


> ... the Bikini wasn't "invented" yet



Fair enough, since this is my story, they are naked then...

Reactions: Funny Funny:
3 | Like List reactions


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Jun 20, 2018)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> And I’ll enjoy my cocktail and bikini clad babes while you fix the aircraft.


"Don't think so, Lieutenant, Sir. Shuttle driver told me she had to wake you guys up when she got you to the BOQ after yesterday's hop. Said VP pilots aren't any fun, just a bunch of sleepyheads and grouches. She prefers fighter pilots. Now that's where the fun is according to her. With all due respect, Sir."
Cheers,
Wes

Reactions: Agree Agree:
1 | Funny Funny:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jun 20, 2018)

XBe02Drvr said:


> "Don't think so, Lieutenant, Sir. Shuttle driver told me she had to wake you guys up when she got you to the BOQ after yesterday's hop. Said VP pilots aren't any fun, just a bunch of sleepyheads and grouches. She prefers fighter pilots. Now that's where the fun is according to her. With all due respect, Sir."
> Cheers,
> Wes



She is transferred to Bangladesh. 

Next up...

Reactions: Funny Funny:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Peter Gunn (Jun 20, 2018)

Strange, that's not what the girls told me, they said while the fighter pilots certainly were fun, they were too fast, something about in and out in the blink of an eye.

Now bombardiers... well apparently they know _all_ the right spots to hit accurately...

Reactions: Funny Funny:
3 | Like List reactions


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Jun 20, 2018)

Peter Gunn said:


> Now bombardiers... well apparently they know _all_ the right spots to hit accurately...


Well for a WAVE, that could be enhanced by the cachet of scarcity, as there just aren't that many bombardiers in the Nav. And such as there are, are overseas or on the Atlantic and Pacific coasts doing ASW in Liberators or bombing the Kuriles from the Aleutians.
Cheers,
Wes


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Jun 20, 2018)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> She is transferred to Bangladesh.
> 
> Next up...


"Don't think so, Lieutenant, Sir. She happens to be ComFairKeyWest's niece. How do you think she got that plum job instead of busting her knuckles turning a wrench? In case you didn't know, prewar she was a world class orchestra harpist. Now do you think the Admiral would allow his niece to be transferred to Bangladesh, which is under Japanese attack right now, no matter how badly some young JG in his command wants it to happen? Now really, Sir, how would you like to be an Ensign again? Maybe in some garden spot like Tulagi, or Dutch Harbor or how about Tierra Del Fuego? I'm sure any of those could be arranged for you, Sir."

Reactions: Funny Funny:
2 | Like List reactions


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jun 20, 2018)

Fair enough, I just hired a local maid...


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Jun 20, 2018)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> Fair enough, I just hired a local maid...


"On a JG's pay, Sir? With all due respect, Sir, get real! Sir, you're always bumming Luckies off me and everyone else on the ramp, how you gonna afford a private driver? You know none of us are allowed POVs down here unless you're LCDR or above, and the civilians are all on gas rationing anyhow. Good luck, Sir!"

Reactions: Funny Funny:
3 | Like List reactions


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jun 20, 2018)

XBe02Drvr said:


> "On a JG's pay, Sir? With all due respect, Sir, get real! Sir, you're always bumming Luckies off me and everyone else on the ramp, how you gonna afford a private driver? You know none of us are allowed POVs down here unless you're LCDR or above, and the civilians are all on gas rationing anyhow. Good luck, Sir!"



Maybe, I’m a rum runner when I’m out flying around...

Reactions: Funny Funny:
2 | Like List reactions


----------



## Peter Gunn (Jun 20, 2018)

Sheesh, you Navy types and your shoestring budgets, hell, in the Air Corps we got planes made of money...

Reactions: Winner Winner:
3 | Like List reactions


----------



## Peter Gunn (Jun 20, 2018)

And next year we start getting the new jet jobs...

Reactions: Funny Funny:
2 | Like List reactions


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Jun 20, 2018)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> Maybe, I’m a rum runner when I’m out flying around...


"Sir, I respectfully request transfer to another crew. I don't want to be anywhere near when ONI comes sniffing around, or even worse, the Cuban Mafia. Just between you and me Sir I can't afford to have ONI looking at me very closely. My mother was born and grew up in Japan as did my paternal grandfather and all my great aunts and uncles. One of my great aunts is in prison in Connecticut for sedition because of her ties to the Nisei community, who are all in detention camps out west. One of my great uncles was 'invited' to an 'interview' with ONI and never came home. I think they had discovered that he and Admiral Yamamoto and Admiral Onishi and General Houma had been playmates and gone to school together when they were kids in Tokyo. Sir, I think you can understand why I don't want ONI looking at me too closely. So Sir, if you're going to fool around with bootlegging, please let me outta here!"

Reactions: Funny Funny:
2 | Like List reactions


----------



## Peter Gunn (Jun 20, 2018)

XBe02Drvr said:


> "Sir, I respectfully request transfer to another crew. I don't want to be anywhere near when ONI comes sniffing around, or even worse, the Cuban Mafia. Just between you and me Sir I can't afford to have ON I looking at me very closely. My mother was born and grew up in Japan as did my paternal grandfather and all my great aunts and uncles. One of my great aunts is in prison in Connecticut for sedition because of her ties to the Nisei community, who are all in detention camps out west. One of my great uncles was 'invited' to an 'interview' with ONI and never came home. I think they had discovered that he and Admiral Yamamoto and Admiral Onishi and General Houma had been playmates and gone to school together when they were kids in Tokyo. Sir, I think you can understand why I don't want ONI looking at me too closely. So Sir, if you're going to fool around with bootlegging, please let me outta here!"



Strange... you don't look Irish...

Reactions: Funny Funny:
2 | Like List reactions


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Jun 20, 2018)

Peter Gunn said:


> And next year we start getting the new jet jobs...
> 
> View attachment 498482


"Hey, where'd you hear that? As far as you know, there ain't no such thing, soldier! Got it??"


----------



## Peter Gunn (Jun 20, 2018)

XBe02Drvr said:


> "Hey, where'd you hear that? As far as you know, there ain't no such thing, soldier! Got it??"



Aye Aye Sir!

Geez, so touchy, next you'll be telling me we can't talk about our super secret mechanical bread slicer...


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Jun 20, 2018)

Peter Gunn said:


> Strange... you don't look Irish...


"Them's fightin' words, Suh!!"


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Jun 20, 2018)

Peter Gunn said:


> Aye Aye Sir!
> 
> Geez, so touchy, next you'll be telling me we can't talk about our super secret mechanical bread slicer...


Best not, or it might be slicing something else besides bread!


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jun 20, 2018)

XBe02Drvr said:


> "Sir, I respectfully request transfer to another crew. I don't want to be anywhere near when ONI comes sniffing around, or even worse, the Cuban Mafia. Just between you and me Sir I can't afford to have ONI looking at me very closely. My mother was born and grew up in Japan as did my paternal grandfather and all my great aunts and uncles. One of my great aunts is in prison in Connecticut for sedition because of her ties to the Nisei community, who are all in detention camps out west. One of my great uncles was 'invited' to an 'interview' with ONI and never came home. I think they had discovered that he and Admiral Yamamoto and Admiral Onishi and General Houma had been playmates and gone to school together when they were kids in Tokyo. Sir, I think you can understand why I don't want ONI looking at me too closely. So Sir, if you're going to fool around with bootlegging, please let me outta here!"



Can’t let you do that. We are going to take a lil fishing trip off-shore...

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Jun 20, 2018)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> Can’t let you do that. We are going to take a lil fishing trip off-shore...


"You haven't inspected your fishing boat yet have you, Sir?"
Bravo Yankee Echo
Bravo Yankee Echo

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jun 20, 2018)

XBe02Drvr said:


> "You haven't inspected your fishing boat yet have you, Sir?"
> Bravo Yankee Echo
> Bravo Yankee Echo



Aren’t there latrine burn barrels you should be stirring?

Reactions: Winner Winner:
2 | Like List reactions


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Jun 20, 2018)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> Aren’t there latrine burn barrels you should be stirring?


Aren't there forums you should be moderating?
Funny that you should mention; I'm elbows deep in plumbing as we speak!

Reactions: Funny Funny:
3 | Like List reactions


----------



## GrauGeist (Jun 20, 2018)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> Aren’t there latrine burn barrels you should be stirring?

Reactions: Agree Agree:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jun 20, 2018)

XBe02Drvr said:


> Aren't there forums you should be moderating?
> Funny that you should mention; I'm elbows deep in plumbing as we speak!



I’m about to moderate you...

Reactions: Disagree Disagree:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## mikewint (Jun 20, 2018)




----------



## GrauGeist (Jun 20, 2018)




----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jun 20, 2018)

Well Wes, you are safe from moderation. Michaelmaltby disagrees with me...


----------



## Peter Gunn (Jun 20, 2018)

mikewint said:


> View attachment 498496



So Mike, is that a picture of you sterilizing your medic instruments between missions?

Reactions: Funny Funny:
1 | Winner Winner:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## mikewint (Jun 20, 2018)

NOBODY!!! screwed with the medic...you never knew when you might need 6 million units of penicillin sub rosa

Reactions: Agree Agree:
1 | Funny Funny:
2 | Like List reactions


----------



## michaelmaltby (Jun 20, 2018)

"... Michaelmaltby disagrees with me"
Yes ..._ I've_ faced many a reprimand from _you _and never a green smiley face .... seems unfair and there's no button for _that_


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jun 20, 2018)

michaelmaltby said:


> "... Michaelmaltby disagrees with me"
> Yes ..._ I've_ faced many a reprimand from _you _and never a green smiley face .... seems unfair and there's no button for _that_



Well, you deserve the moderation...

There is your green smiley face. Happy?

Reactions: Funny Funny:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Greg Boeser (Jun 20, 2018)

XBe02Drvr said:


> "You haven't inspected your fishing boat yet have you, Sir?"
> Bravo Yankee Echo
> Bravo Yankee Echo


I'll just sidle over to the SPs and mention that a suspicious character in an enlisted man's uniform is talking in some strange foreign sounding code to a flying officer.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jun 20, 2018)

Greg Boeser said:


> I'll just sidle over to the SPs and mention that a suspicious character in an enlisted man's uniform is talking in some strange foreign sounding code to a flying officer.



You sir have just been invited to the clubhouse with the rum and naked ladies.


----------



## Zipper730 (Jun 20, 2018)

For Day-Fighter

Supermarine Spitfire: Late Merlin & Griffon Variants
Advantages
Fast by the standard of the time with a good/excellent climb-rate, and the best top-end dive-speed
Able to out-maneuver most all enemy aircraft
The late-Merlins variants could fly real high, and achieve decent ranges
Looks really cool

Disadvantages
Hard to land with it's skinny landing-gears
I'd have to learn to speak British, and all it's slang (J/K)


Grumman F6F Hellcat
Advantages
Docile, with good handling characteristics
Good rate of climb (better than the earlier Corsairs), better rate of turn than the F4U (and possibly F4F), with performance allowing it to fight against land-based planes and have a prospect of living to tell about it.
Nice wide-landing gears to make the already difficult job of landing a plane on a carrier deck at least a bit easier
Tough & rugged
I'm more knowledgeable about the Navy then the Army and think I'd probably look cooler in a Navy Uniform (J/K)

Disadvantage
Roll-rate seemed a bit slow


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Jun 20, 2018)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> You sir have just been invited to the clubhouse with the rum and naked ladies.


Otherwise known as the "0 Club". Enlisted forbidden. Y'all have fun now, hear?


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Jun 20, 2018)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> Well Wes, you are safe from moderation. Michaelmaltby disagrees with me...


You can always pull rank on him.


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Jun 20, 2018)

Greg Boeser said:


> I'll just sidle over to the SPs and mention that a suspicious character in an enlisted man's uniform is talking in some strange foreign sounding code to a flying officer.


You never saw the movie, "The Last Detail" did you? It's an interesting evening's diversion. Think standard signal flags or hand semaphore signals:
B Y E B Y E


----------



## Greg Boeser (Jun 20, 2018)

Yes, you were just using anachronistic code.
Shoulda been: Baker Yoke Easy. That's how I knew you were a spy.
Get 'im boys! He looks dangerous!


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jun 20, 2018)

XBe02Drvr said:


> You can always pull rank on him.



Naw I'm too busy with the local girls and the rum.

Reactions: Funny Funny:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Jun 20, 2018)

Greg Boeser said:


> Yes, you were just using anachronistic code.
> Shoulda been: Baker Yoke Easy. That's how I knew you were a spy.
> Get 'im boys! He looks dangerous!


You're right. I used the current rather than the historic code because I thought it more recognizable to modern readers and make a direct reference to the episode in the movie. I wasn't expecting a backlash of the rivet counters. How silly of me in this "theater of operations".
Cheers,
Wes

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Jun 25, 2018)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> Naw I'm too busy with the local girls and the rum.


Good thing you didn't piss off the medic! You're going to need him and his penicillin after you're done with the local girls and the rum.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jun 25, 2018)

XBe02Drvr said:


> Good thing you didn't piss off the medic! You're going to need him and his penicillin after you're done with the local girls and the rum.



He is here with us...


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Jun 25, 2018)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> He is here with us...


You sneaked an enlisted medic into the 0 Club, and a "snake eater" to boot? Hnmm....let me consult my UCMJ. There must be a chargeable offense in here somewhere. I don't think the Skipper will be pleased. I'll call the JAG.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jun 25, 2018)

XBe02Drvr said:


> You sneaked an enlisted medic into the 0 Club, and a "snake eater" to boot? Hnmm....let me consult my UCMJ. There must be a chargeable offense in here somewhere. I don't think the Skipper will be pleased. I'll call the JAG.



Not when the CO is involved, and he has dirt on the admiral. 

You really want to swim with fish...


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Jun 25, 2018)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> You really want to swim with fish...


Better than "sleeping with the fishes",
Sir! (OMG! The half-breed offspring that could result in! Miscegenation is punishable by lynching in FL!)

Reactions: Funny Funny:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Jun 25, 2018)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> he has dirt on the admiral.


Everyone has dirt on the Admiral, but he's Teflon coated. His dad is Senate majority leader!


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jun 25, 2018)

XBe02Drvr said:


> Everyone has dirt on the Admiral, but he's Teflon coated. His dad is Senate majority leader!



I’m glad he is at the club, and with one if the ladies then...


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Jun 25, 2018)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> I’m glad he is at the club, and with one if the ladies then...


And what will they say when they discover that the suave, charming "doctor" in civvies is actually an enlisted "snake eater"? Those OSS types and their military accessories aren't generally welcome in polite society.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jun 25, 2018)

XBe02Drvr said:


> And what will they say when they discover that the suave, charming "doctor" in civvies is actually an enlisted "snake eater"? Those OSS types and their military accessories aren't generally welcome in polite society.



That guy is getting taken on boat ride this very moment. He was given every oportunity to partake in the good life. Nobody likes a party pooping snitch.


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Jun 25, 2018)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> That guy is getting taken on boat ride this very moment. He was given every oportunity to partake in the good life. Nobody likes a party pooping snitch.


Hope you've got insurance on your boat, Sir. I'm told it won't be returning from this mission.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jun 25, 2018)

XBe02Drvr said:


> Hope you've got insurance on your boat, Sir. I'm told it won't be returning from this mission.



Good luck dealing with the fellow OSS guys who are part of the club...


----------



## parsifal (Jun 26, 2018)

wtf!!!!!!


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jun 26, 2018)

parsifal said:


> wtf!!!!!!



We are living out a Hollywood movie script...

My character will be played out by Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Jun 26, 2018)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> We are living out a Hollywood movie script...
> 
> My character will be played out by Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson.


Mickey Rooney here.

Reactions: Winner Winner:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Peter Gunn (Jun 26, 2018)

I worry about you guys...

Reactions: Agree Agree:
1 | Funny Funny:
2 | Winner Winner:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Smokey Stover (Jun 26, 2018)

Not quite sure why it's not on the list, but i've always had a soft spot for the Hurricane. I would have liked to have piloted a Hurri during the bob. But for the ultimate thrill i'd have to say a Tempest V or a Mossie FB. Flying intruder missions across the channel 50 feet above the water at 300+ knots. What an experience that must have been.....

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Like List reactions


----------



## Peter Gunn (Jun 26, 2018)

XBe02Drvr said:


> Mickey Rooney here.



Which one of you is Rita Hayworth?


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jun 26, 2018)

Peter Gunn said:


> Which one of you is Rita Hayworth?



I thought you were...


----------



## Peter Gunn (Jun 26, 2018)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> I thought you were...



Only on Saturyday nights...

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Funny Funny:
3 | Like List reactions


----------



## parsifal (Jun 26, 2018)

Peter Gunn said:


> I worry about you guys...


your not the only one

Reactions: Agree Agree:
2 | Like List reactions


----------



## Greg Boeser (Jun 26, 2018)

Smokey Stover said:


> Not quite sure why it's not on the list, but i've always had a soft spot for the Hurricane. I would have liked to have piloted a Hurri during the bob. But for the ultimate thrill i'd have to say a Tempest V or a Mossie FB. Flying intruder missions across the channel 50 feet above the water at 300+ knots. What an experience that must have been.....


Ron Pottinger,_ A Soldier in the Cockpit,_ has some harrowing tales of flying low over water in Typhoons. Not much room for recovery if your engine quits.
I read an article by a RAF Marauder squadron CO, who related that a lot of Marauders were going missing on routine sea patrols. Then one came back with bent props. Apparently the pilots liked to get right down on the deck, and some got too low.

Reactions: Agree Agree:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Smokey Stover (Jun 26, 2018)

Greg Boeser said:


> Ron Pottinger,_ A Soldier in the Cockpit,_ has some harrowing tales of flying low over water in Typhoons. Not much room for recovery if your engine quits.
> I read an article by a RAF Marauder squadron CO, who related that a lot of Marauders were going missing on routine sea patrols. Then one came back with bent props. Apparently the pilots liked to get right down on the deck, and some got too low.



Yes quite. I've heard accounts of Mosquito pilots that brought back tree branches attached to their aircraft that were not planted in England. One fb pilot described hitting the French coast as "going over the top". I guess you cant blame them for wanting to avoid radar until the very last minute by flying "on the deck". Unfortunately mistakes were made and men/machines were lost. But those low level daylight intruder missions were a constant thorn in the side of the German armed forces, especially the luftwaffe. And once the reputation and problems had been resolved with the B-26, it became a very effective fast bomber. But the Mossie was born for combat/intruder and night fighter missions right from day one. Everyone talks about the Spitfire, P-51 and Fw -190 to name just a few. But the Mosquito was simply a design genuis. A wooden airframe with two merlin engines slung underneath each wing meant it could really get up and go. Especially at full throttle. And right up until late 42, early 43 there was nothing in the air fast enough to catch it. And with x4 20mm cannon and x4 .303's all in or around the nose meant just a short burst on the trigger and the enemy is going down in flames.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Admiral Beez (Dec 14, 2019)

Bearcat. Nothing can touch me, and I’m flying for the winning side.


----------



## fubar57 (Dec 14, 2019)

Nothing can touch you because WW2 is over

Reactions: Funny Funny:
8 | Winner Winner:
2 | Like List reactions


----------



## wingnuts (Dec 14, 2019)

Personally I'd pick the Tigermoth.  ... but if I actually had to go and fight I'd pick the PR Mossie. :O


----------



## Mainly28s (Dec 15, 2019)

Choices! Choices!

I'd have to say it's a toss-up between the Ta 152 H / FW 190 D-9 or Me 109 F / Me 109 G-14 if talking about fighters, the Ju 188 or Ju 388 if bombers.


----------



## swampyankee (Dec 15, 2019)

While far up the stream for this thread, I selected the Bearcat -- a selection which I won't change (I'm about 30 years too young to have been involved in WW2 ) -- I do have a question.

Why are so many people picking the aircraft of the losers? While the Luftwaffe fielded some fine aircraft, many of the "advantages" held by the Luftwaffe, especially in the early stages of the war, were because of better fighter tactics and training and because they were dictating the time and place of the engagements, not because of the superiority of their hardware.

Reactions: Agree Agree:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Mainly28s (Dec 15, 2019)

swampyankee said:


> Why are so many people picking the aircraft of the losers? While the Luftwaffe fielded some fine aircraft, many of the "advantages" held by the Luftwaffe, especially in the early stages of the war, were because of better fighter tactics and training and because they were dictating the time and place of the engagements, not because of the superiority of their hardware.



I don't care about winner or loser, but rather about the aesthetics of the aeroplane. To me, they are better looking, so I chose them. I've had the pleasure of sitting in the seats of a Spitfire, Mustang, Vampire, Messerschmitt 109 F, Focke-Wulf 190 A, Messerschmitt 262 B-1a/U1, Fieseler Storch, Harvard, DC-3, Shackleton MR3, Viscount, Tiger Moth, Aermacchi MB-326, Aermacchi AM.3, Aermacchi AL-60, and a few more. Each has its own attraction, but, to me, the German aircraft are just more interesting, aesthetically. They look menacing, designed for combat.


----------



## michael rauls (Dec 15, 2019)

This is a thread title I was just thinking about starting but obviously it's already been done. If I had my choice of which plane to fly there are several that stand out for me, the F6f,p47, Hurricane, and SBD,all for the same reason. That reason being good handling characteristics.
Realistically if I get to choose I'm going to be at least as worried about being a danger to myself in a touchy plane that will turn around and " bite" if not handled just right than I am about being shot down be the enemy.
If I could choose to be one of the few USMC pilots that flew the F6f from land bases I think that would be my first choice.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Dec 15, 2019)

swampyankee said:


> because of better fighter tactics and training and because they were dictating the time and place of the engagements, not because of the superiority of their hardware.


Aww, c'mon man, you know in your heart, (even if you won't admit it) any product of the master race has to be better! 😉


----------



## Dan Fahey (Jan 3, 2020)

Mustang would be first choice. 
Did everything very well. 
Second equal between all these planes
Late Model P-38, P-40 Prefer Late Model, Hellcat, Corsair land based only, P-47 Top Cover Only..


----------



## PAT303 (Jan 4, 2020)

Smokey Stover said:


> Flying intruder missions across the channel 50 feet above the water at 300+ knots. What an experience that must have been.....



I think it was Kieth Miller, a Mozzie intruder pilot that played cricket for Australia that is best remembered when he withstood the English bowling attack for a full day allowing us to keep the ashes that said it best when the English presenters asked how he handled the pressure from the day long bowling assault, ''pressure pressure, pressure is doing 300 on the deck with a Messerschmitt up your arse''

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Dan Fahey (Jan 7, 2020)

renrich said:


> The best all around fighter-fighter bomber in the war; The F4U Corsair.



Disagree...
Mustang !!


----------



## fubar57 (Jan 7, 2020)

Dan Fahey said:


> Disagree...
> Mustang !!


You do realize you are arguing with someone who has passed on?


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jan 7, 2020)

Dan Fahey said:


> Disagree...
> Mustang !!



Meh, we have been down this road with you...

But yeah, way to argue with someone who has unfortunately passed. Look at his avatar.


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Jan 8, 2020)

Dan Fahey said:


> Disagree...
> Mustang !!


Disagree again! If it can't handle catapults and arresting gear, it's not an "all around" fighter. On a planet covered 70% by water, a "feet dry" only fighter is at best only half the picture.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Dan Fahey (Jan 10, 2020)

XBe02Drvr said:


> Disagree again! If it can't handle catapults and arresting gear, it's not an "all around" fighter. On a planet covered 70% by water, a "feet dry" only fighter is at best only half the picture.





XBe02Drvr said:


> Disagree again! If it can't handle catapults and arresting gear, it's not an "all around" fighter. On a planet covered 70% by water, a "feet dry" only fighter is at best only half the picture.



In WW2 there were no Catapults on Carriers !
Cannot believe you even mentioned that !

The Navy tested the D-Mustang and had no real issues landing or taking off.
Though it did need more Rudder Authority.
In fact took off easier than the Ensign Eliminator Corsair.
The Navy lost a heck of a lot of pilots, especially in training...hence the Term !

The US had a larger variety of combat planes than the British.
Which is why they adapted the Spitfire and did well in the Mediterranean and Pacific in 1945

The Mustang would have been adapted had there not been Grumman Aircraft.
The tests showed the Mustang needed minor refinements to be an effective Carrier Plane.

In fact the Navy tried a second time with the the P-51-H.
They liked its attributes but did not need them so late in the war.

One more shot here...third time is a charm !
The NA FJ-1 Fury was basically a P-51 with Mustang Wings and Jet Engine.
It was a very successful eventually developing into a more capable FJ-2/3/4 Series.
Basically using the same wings except now Swept.


----------



## pbehn (Jan 10, 2020)

If Grumman had no aircraft I hope the USA wouldn't wait for the P-51 to start fighting in the Pacific.

Reactions: Bacon Bacon:
1 | Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Jan 10, 2020)

Dan Fahey said:


> In WW2 there were no Catapults on Carriers !
> Cannot believe you even mentioned that!


Better check your history, son. My uncle flew TBMs off jeep carriers in the U-boat war, and a fully loaded bird REQUIRED a cat launch on a dead calm day, as the boat couldn't generate enough wind over the deck, even at full speed, for a deck run takeoff. Now, the big Essex class CVs, with their high speeds and huge flight decks didn't require catapult launches unless launching from a packed deck, but the option was there. The cats were hydraulic, not like today's steamers, and put some pretty hard shocks on the airframes. They could wear a plane out pretty quickly. Uncle Ned joked that his plane was called a "turkey", not because of its profile (the official version), but because it's wings flapped!
I've ridden through a deck run takeoff (the Lex, in an ancient, overloaded C1), and with the boat at flank speed we used most of that 900 foot deck. "I think I can, I think I can, I think I can....", as those 1820s rattle and clatter and vibrate like they're fixing to come apart at the seams. A whole body experience.
Cheers,
Wes

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Funny Funny:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Jan 10, 2020)

pbehn said:


> If Grumman had no aircraft I hope the USA wouldn't wait for the P-51 to start fighting in the Pacific.


"Greetings! Welcome to the Empire of the Sun! You are entering the Imperial Province of California, and must pay homage to The Emperor before proceeding. As a foreigner within The Empire, you must understand that you can no longer have any allegiance to any foreign power, but are not, and cannot be a Japanese citizen, and thus have not the rights and privileges thereof. Permission to leave can only be achieved by applying in person to the Imperial Foreign Office in Tokyo. Meanwhile, you can be accommodated here in a Foreigners Residential Camp provided for your convenience. This squad of soldiers will graciously escort you to The Commandant for enrollment.
Cheers,
Wes

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Like List reactions


----------



## pbehn (Jan 10, 2020)

XBe02Drvr said:


> "Greetings! Welcome to the Empire of the Sun! You are entering the Imperial Province of California, and must pay homage to The Emperor before proceeding. As a foreigner within The Empire, you must understand that you no longer have any allegiance to any foreign power, but are not, and cannot be a Japanese citizen, and thus have not the rights and privileges thereof. Permission to leave can only be achieved by applying in person to the Imperial Foreign Office in Tokyo. Meanwhile, you can be accommodated here in a Foreigners Residential Camp provided for your convenience. This squad of soldiers will graciously escort you to The Commandant for enrollment.
> Cheers,
> Wes


Well Grumman had the F4F flying from 1937, if they didn't have any aircraft then I presume the USA was big enough and smart enough to find someone to attach a carrier capable air frame to an engine before 1942-3


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jan 10, 2020)

Dan Fahey said:


> In WW2 there were no Catapults on Carriers !
> Cannot believe you even mentioned that !
> .



WRONG!!!!

Cannot believe you call someone out when you don’t have a clue what you are talking about.

Aircraft catapults existed on WW2 carriers. Take the Yorktown class for instance. It had two flight deck catapults.

If you are going to talk shit, then at least have a clue first.

Follow these steps to redeem yourself:

1. Insert foot in mouth.
2. After removing foot, proceed to apologize to Wes for the arrogance you displayed to him.
3. Do the same to the rest of the forum for all the other times.


----------



## Dan Fahey (Jan 10, 2020)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> WRONG!!!!
> 
> Cannot believe you call someone out when you don’t have a clue what you are talking about.
> 
> ...



Show me...
I am looking at the picture of the Yorktown now and see no Catapults !


----------



## pbehn (Jan 10, 2020)

Dan Fahey said:


> Show me...
> I am looking at the picture of the Yorktown now and see no Catapults !


from wiki "The _Yorktown_s carried a seldom-used catapult on the hangar deck. This catapult was subsequently eliminated from U.S. carriers as it was relatively useless in operation. The hangar-deck catapult was removed from _Enterprise_ and _Hornet_ in late June 1942. "

Catapult launching of aircraft pre dates powered flight.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jan 10, 2020)

Dan Fahey said:


> Show me...
> I am looking at the picture of the Yorktown now and see no Catapults !



We are awaiting your apology. After that read a book and actually learn something.

Hydraulic catapults enter Navy service 1934 - Patriots Point News & Events

Catapult Type H, Mark 8

Home Page

Below is a pic of a catapult launch from the Yorktown. The catapult can clearly be seen. Below it is the Enterprise, clearly showing the catapult.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Jan 10, 2020)

Dan Fahey said:


> In WW2 there were no Catapults on Carriers !
> Cannot believe you even mentioned that!






DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> WRONG!!!!
> 
> Cannot believe you call someone out when you don’t have a clue what you are talking about.


Hey, no hard feelings here, guys. We all occasionally suffer from attacks of "hoof-in-mouth" disease. The taste of toe jam usually straightens us out for awhile. Then the memory grows dim and we do it again.
Cheers,
Wes


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jan 10, 2020)

XBe02Drvr said:


> Hey, no hard feelings here, guys. We all occasionally suffer from attacks of "hoof-in-mouth" disease. The taste of toe jam usually straightens us out for awhile. Then the memory grows dim and we do it again.
> Cheers,
> Wes



It’s growing old with some.

Reactions: Agree Agree:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jan 10, 2020)

Hmmm, 
D
 Dan Fahey
what is this?

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## michael rauls (Jan 10, 2020)

XBe02Drvr said:


> Better check your history, son. My uncle flew TBMs off jeep carriers in the U-boat war, and a fully loaded bird REQUIRED a cat launch on a dead calm day, as the boat couldn't generate enough wind over the deck, even at full speed, for a deck run takeoff. Now, the big Essex class CVs, with their high speeds and huge flight decks didn't require catapult launches unless launching from a packed deck, but the option was there. The cats were hydraulic, not like today's steamers, and put some pretty hard shocks on the airframes. They could wear a plane out pretty quickly. Uncle Ned joked that his plane was called a "turkey", not because of its profile (the official version), but because it's wings flapped!
> I've ridden through a deck run takeoff (the Lex, in an ancient, overloaded C1), and with the boat at flank speed we used most of that 900 foot deck. "I think I can, I think I can, I think I can....", as those 1820s rattle and clatter and vibrate like they're fixing to come apart at the seams. A whole body experience.
> Cheers,
> Wes


Very cool. I had always thought the ww2 catapults were also steam, I guess I just thought that by default as ive seen so many more modern launches by steam and never stopped to think ww2 era might have been different.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Jan 10, 2020)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> Hmmm,
> D
> Dan Fahey
> what is this?



Gawd, those CVEs are tiny! That fat merchant ship hull with its puny powerplant is throwing quite a wake and still can't get enough wind over the deck.
And that skipper looks like an elderly reservist, probably a lawyer, doctor, or engineer before the war, not an Annapolis type. Typical tin can Navy. Betcha this ship's screen is a single DD and a bunch of DEs.
Heaven preserve me from ever being assigned chockman duty! Sounds like a sure ticket to a burial at sea. When I was in, the loss rate for deck apes on Yankee Station was greater than for flight crews over NVN.
Cheers,
Wes


----------



## GrauGeist (Jan 10, 2020)

Even the DKM Graf Zeppelin had catapaults, FFS.

Classic photo of a Bf109T (TK+HM) being launched from a test catapault.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jan 11, 2020)

D
 Dan Fahey


I am not an asshole. I will apologize for the way I came down on you, but I highly recommend that you tone back your arrogance. Also I suggest start listening to some of the folks around here. There are some serious aviation historians around here, and they know what they are talking about.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Like List reactions


----------



## Nickkyboy99 (Jan 28, 2020)

The beautiful long-nose, high altitude fighter...

Fw 190 Dora.


----------



## Dan Fahey (Jan 30, 2020)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> We are awaiting your apology. After that read a book and actually learn something.
> 
> Hydraulic catapults enter Navy service 1934 - Patriots Point News & Events
> 
> ...


Ok what year was this...?


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jan 31, 2020)

Dan Fahey said:


> Ok what year was this...?



Irrelevant. You said they had no catapult’s in WW2. You have been proven wrong. You cannot move the tables at a whim of your choosing.

Reactions: Agree Agree:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Dan Fahey (Jan 31, 2020)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> Irrelevant. You said they had no catapult’s in WW2. You have been proven wrong. You cannot move the tables at a whim of your choosing.


WHAT YEAR...!!
Or you are Full of crap !


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Jan 31, 2020)

Dan Fahey said:


> Or you are Full of crap!


People in glass houses should refrain from casting stones.

Reactions: Agree Agree:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jan 31, 2020)

Dan Fahey said:


> WHAT YEAR...!!
> Or you are Full of crap !



Excuse me? I'm full of crap? You sir have it coming out of your ears. If you were not so fricken lazy, would open up the links that I provided, you would see all the information is there. Numerous other members have corrected as you well, and just like in all the other threads you continue to ignore them. Learn to stop being a stuck up, know it all, snob. 

Thank you Dan. The forum is done wasting its time with you.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jan 31, 2020)

My apologies everyone for my outburst.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## fubar57 (Jan 31, 2020)

Damn....Yorktown drawing dated Feb. 1940

Reactions: Bacon Bacon:
2 | Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jan 31, 2020)

fubar57 said:


> Damn....Yorktown drawing dated Feb. 1940
> 
> View attachment 568319​



I believe they were removed in 1942. This I am not sure of however.


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Jan 31, 2020)

Dan Fahey said:


> Or you are Full of crap!


"Got a rocket,
in your pocket?
Keep coolie
cool, boy!
Real cool...
Reeall coool!"


----------



## michael rauls (Jan 31, 2020)

Dan Fahey said:


> WHAT YEAR...!!
> Or you are Full of crap !


Just a polite suggestion. If you feel that Alder or anyone else for that matter are mistaken about something why don't you research it and present your findings here instead of proclaiming those who present there research to you are " full of crap".

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Winner Winner:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Zipper730 (Feb 3, 2020)

XBe02Drvr said:


> Aww, c'mon man, you know in your heart, (even if you won't admit it) any product of the master race has to be better! 😉


I'm not touching that with a ten foot pole, Wes


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Feb 4, 2020)

Zipper730 said:


> I'm not touching that with a ten foot pole, Wes


Good thing! Your ten foot pole is actually a spar torpedo. With a contact fuse. Could get kinda messy! 😨

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## syscom3 (Feb 16, 2020)

A C-54 Skymaster. Gets lots of flight time shuffling passengers and stay mostly at developed bases far from harm.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## oldcolt357 (Feb 29, 2020)

ccheese said:


> One man's opinion....
> 
> Charles


P47 in Europe P38 in the Pacific


----------



## lomcovak (Mar 29, 2020)

YAK-9


----------



## Reluctant Poster (Mar 29, 2020)

michael rauls said:


> Very cool. I had always thought the ww2 catapults were also steam, I guess I just thought that by default as ive seen so many more modern launches by steam and never stopped to think ww2 era might have been different.


I posted this brief history a few months ago. The steam catapult was post WWII.
The Steam Catapult, Its History and Operation


----------



## Freebird (Mar 29, 2020)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> We are awaiting your apology. After that read a book and actually learn something.
> 
> Hydraulic catapults enter Navy service 1934 - Patriots Point News & Events
> 
> ...



Wait, what?
They put aircraft on ships?
Who knew? 

(And catapults?)



What's with 14 American and TWO British aircraft?

What if I think the Lancaster kicks Ass?


----------



## Freebird (Mar 29, 2020)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> My apologies everyone for my outburst.


Calling a Moderator full of crap - usually means getting jettisoned faster than a cockpit eject button.

Just a thought...


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Mar 29, 2020)

Freebird said:


> Calling a Moderator full of crap - usually means getting jettisoned faster than a cockpit eject button.
> 
> Just a thought...



No one in this forum, regardless of position should be called full of crap. We are all in this together.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Freebird (Mar 29, 2020)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> No one in this forum, regardless of position should be called full of crap. We are all in this together.


Quite so!


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Mar 30, 2020)

Freebird said:


> Wait, what?
> They put aircraft on ships?
> Who knew?


SSHH! Don't tell anybody! The experiment failed and the government doesn't want to be embarrassed by the public finding out.


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Mar 30, 2020)

Freebird said:


> Calling a Moderator full of crap - usually means getting jettisoned faster than a cockpit eject button.


Ol' Dan's been yanking on the Normal (face curtain) ejection handle ever since he got here. Didn't work. So in desperation, he went for the Emergency (seat pan) handle, and all that smoke in the cockpit got Adler's attention.

Reactions: Funny Funny:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## GrauGeist (Mar 30, 2020)

Still shaking my head over that "no catapault on WWII carriers" thing.

It they could put catapults on Battlewagons and Cruisers, surely they could figure out how to put a few (or more) on a flat-top...

Reactions: Winner Winner:
2 | Like List reactions


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Mar 30, 2020)

GrauGeist said:


> Still shaking my head over that "no catapault on WWII carriers" thing.


Wouldn't it be great to be young, all-knowing, immortal, and invincible again? "No patience or tolerance for ignorant old farts!"

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Acheron (Oct 4, 2020)

davebender said:


> F8F would be better still as it was a post-war aircraft. But picking an aircraft that didn't see WWII combat is cheating.


I assume that simply flying so high-up that the enemy cannot reach you is also against the spirit of the question ("into COMBAT")? Otherwise, I'd change my vote to B-29.

I am surprised how popular the P-47 is in the poll and how little the P-51 and the Spitfire, how come?


----------



## Snautzer01 (Oct 4, 2020)

Keep wondering why there are no soviet planes in the poll. Yikes a Yak..., lol a La. They had good planes too.


----------



## oldcolt357 (Oct 4, 2020)

Snautzer01 said:


> Keep wondering why there are no soviet planes in the poll. Yikes a Yak..., lol a La. They had good planes too.


The P47 wins the pole among those who understand the combat data, not by those judging by some other criteria. The Thunderbolt was the best fighter of the war in Europe. You can make a case for the P38 and Corsair in the Pacific. The P38 because of its 2 engines over long distances of ocean and the Corsair because of its carrier capability and the fact that Japanese aircraft were lightly built and didn't fly as high as the German ME109 so the P47's 8 guns and high altitude weren't as important. As an aside, I believe the use of P51s from Iwo Jima to escort B29s was another one of the stupid command decisions along with not using drop tanked equipped fighter escorts in Europe in 1943 bomber raids. Iwo should have been a P38L or P47N base. Either would have been preferable to P51Ds. For all its fame the P51 arrived late in the war and really was a single purpose aircraft only excelling at long range escort over land and nothing else. The P51 replaced the P47 in the spring of 1944 because of its range over the P47, not because it was a better air to air fighter.

Reactions: Funny Funny:
1 | Winner Winner:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Acheron (Oct 4, 2020)

oldcolt357 said:


> The P51 replaced the P47 in the spring of 1944 because of its range over the P47, not because it was a better air to air fighter.


Sounds like a controversial statement, I am curious what will be brought up in favor of the P-51.

Reactions: Friendly Friendly:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## michaelmaltby (Oct 4, 2020)

Fair ... but we both know $$$ talks  and the P-51 - even with a licensed engine - was way less expensive to produce than either the P-38 or the the P-47, IIRC - and more basic to maintain in the field. Engineers' thinking, haha.

P-47s deployed in_ Korea _in place of P-51s would have made a difference in CAS mission _losses_. The new Airforce, IMO, would have possessed their Corsair or Douglas SkyRaider, by deploying the P-47.

The Soviets weren't/aren't fools. They showed no interest in receiving P-51s thru LL - it didn't offer them anything they needed or already had - whereas they used the few dozen P-47s they received to provide high altitude CAP over Moscow and other strategic centres, IIRC.

Reactions: Informative Informative:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## fastmongrel (Oct 4, 2020)

michaelmaltby said:


> even with a licensed engine



Rolls Royce did not charge Packard any license fees to build the engine, neither was the assistance RR gave to Packard setting up production and development charged for. Even post war when they were offered the chance to claim back dated fees worth probably millions they didnt take up the offer.

Reactions: Agree Agree:
1 | Informative Informative:
2 | Like List reactions


----------



## michaelmaltby (Oct 4, 2020)

... interesting. So i guess the insistence on using the Alison engine in the Twin Mustang was more 'buy America' than economics ...?


----------



## fastmongrel (Oct 4, 2020)

michaelmaltby said:


> ... interesting. So i guess the insistence on using the Alison engine in the Twin Mustang was more 'buy America' than economics ...?



As I understand it any production after wars end would have accrued license fees. So using the Merlin/V1650 in the P82 would have cost extra.

Reactions: Informative Informative:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Stig1207 (Oct 5, 2020)

oldcolt357 said:


> The P47 wins the pole among those who understand the combat data, not by those judging by some other criteria.



Pretty bold statement; could you clarify how *you* understand the combat data?

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## nuuumannn (Oct 5, 2020)

oldcolt357 said:


> For all its fame the P51 arrived late in the war and really was a single purpose aircraft only excelling at long range escort over land and nothing else.



Umm, Let's start with the fact that Mustangs arrived with the RAF well before the USAAF got them, remembering the type was built to a British requirement, and used them as tac recon platforms throughout the war - 16 RAF squadrons operated Allison engined Mustangs alone in this role right until the end of the war. Many of those pretty pre and post-raid recon images of US 8th AF daylight missions were taken by British Mustangs, as well as the majority of images for planning of Operations Jubilee and Overlord. Then there were the Mustang IIIs and IVs, equivalent to P-51B, C and D models that were not just used for bomber escort but also fighter sweeps into enemy territory, air-to-ground operations pre and post-Overlord, V 1 interceptors etc... And it could even be said they excelled at these things, too.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Informative Informative:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Peter Gunn (Oct 5, 2020)

oldcolt357 said:


> The P47 wins the pole among those who understand the combat data, not by those judging by some other criteria. The Thunderbolt was the best fighter of the war in Europe. You can make a case for the P38 and Corsair in the Pacific. The P38 because of its 2 engines over long distances of ocean and the Corsair because of its carrier capability and the fact that Japanese aircraft were lightly built and didn't fly as high as the German ME109 so the P47's 8 guns and high altitude weren't as important. As an aside, I believe the use of P51s from Iwo Jima to escort B29s was another one of the stupid command decisions along with not using drop tanked equipped fighter escorts in Europe in 1943 bomber raids. Iwo should have been a P38L or P47N base. Either would have been preferable to P51Ds. For all its fame the P51 arrived late in the war and really was a single purpose aircraft only excelling at long range escort over land and nothing else. The P51 replaced the P47 in the spring of 1944 because of its range over the P47, not because it was a better air to air fighter.


I don't think you fully understand the air war of 1939-1945, nor "combat data" for the same time period.

Might I suggest starting here: P-51B Mustang - The Bastard Stepchild that Saved the 8th AF has been sent by Osprey Publications for Print.

You might want to look up posts by this guy --> 

 drgondog
he knows a thing or two about this issue.

Reactions: Agree Agree:
1 | Friendly Friendly:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## drgondog (Oct 5, 2020)

michaelmaltby said:


> Fair ... but we both know $$$ talks  and the P-51 - even with a licensed engine - was way less expensive to produce than either the P-38 or the the P-47, IIRC - and more basic to maintain in the field. Engineers' thinking, haha.
> 
> P-47s deployed in_ Korea _in place of P-51s would have made a difference in CAS mission _losses_. The new Airforce, IMO, would have possessed their Corsair or Douglas SkyRaider, by deploying the P-47.



*To argue a point - To postulate that the P-47 would have made a difference in mission losses, shouldn't one prove that losses would be significantly less for P-47 than F4U? F4U losses were only very slightly less per sortie than P-51 in Korea*



michaelmaltby said:


> The Soviets weren't/aren't fools. They showed no interest in receiving P-51s thru LL - it didn't offer them anything they needed or already had - whereas they used the few dozen P-47s they received to provide high altitude CAP over Moscow and other strategic centres, IIRC.



* Well, the original purpose of the P-47 was high altitude interceptor. As to the 'importance', no Merlin Mustangs were offered for LL due to extreme priority for AAF and only a few were in hand due to maintenance/damage issues arising during the FRANTIC/Shuttle Missions of summer, 1944.*


----------



## michaelmaltby (Oct 5, 2020)

... The Soviets were flying Merlin Spitfires ... so they were very familiar with both it and the Allison P-39.

I am interested in the P-51 - Corsair losses in Korea. If those are mission losses TAC, or, groundfire inflicted? Many of the F4U missions were launched and recovered from_ flight-decks _- not ground strips, for the Mustangs.

You seen to dismiss the most fundamental point in my post "... $$$ talks  and the P-51 - even with a licensed engine - was way less expensive to produce than either the P-38 or the the P-47, IIRC - and more basic to maintain in the field. Engineers' thinking."

You have not convinced me that cost-all-in per unit was not decisive in the outcome of the P-51 vs P-47. Hot-Rod vs Cruiser.

P-38 - $97,147 per unit
P-47 - $85,578 per unit
P-51 - $51,572 per unit
[Source: WWII Aircraft]

"....The AAF's worst accident rate was recorded by the A-36 Invader (Appache) version of the P-51: a staggering 274 accidents per 100,000 flying hours. Next worst were the P-39 at 245, the P-40 at 188, and the P-38 at 139. All were Allison powered."


----------



## drgondog (Oct 5, 2020)

michaelmaltby said:


> ... The Soviets were flying Merlin Spitfires ... so they were very familiar with both it and the Alison P-39.
> 
> I am interested in the P-51 - Corsair losses in Korea. If those are mission losses TAC, or, groundfire inflicted? Many of the F4U missions were launched and recovered from_ flight-decks _- not ground strips, for the Mustangs.
> 
> ...



I don't think I tried to 'convince you of anything' - I asked questions regarding tour assumptions. Make your own decisions.

Reactions: Agree Agree:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## pbehn (Oct 5, 2020)

oldcolt357 said:


> The P47 wins the pole among those who understand the combat data, not by those judging by some other criteria. .


I want to fly something pretty, not a milk jug mated to an ironing board with a fan hidden somewhere.

Reactions: Funny Funny:
3 | Like List reactions


----------



## Acheron (Oct 6, 2020)

pbehn said:


> I want to fly something pretty, not a milk jug mated to an ironing board with a fan hidden somewhere.


Hardly anyone would call the P-47 NOT pretty. At least not to its face.

Reactions: Bacon Bacon:
1 | Funny Funny:
2 | Like List reactions


----------



## Zipper730 (Oct 6, 2020)

I'd want to fly something that gets me home in one piece.

Reactions: Bacon Bacon:
1 | Agree Agree:
2 | Like List reactions


----------



## michaelmaltby (Oct 6, 2020)

The Brits were a pretty good judge of 'horseflesh' IMHO  -- I'd like to know the impressions of RAF pilots and crew who transitioned to the P-47 late in the war and operated in Burma and thereabouts.





Republic P-47 Thunderbolt in RAF Service


----------



## Peter Gunn (Oct 6, 2020)

michaelmaltby said:


> The Brits were a pretty good judge of 'horseflesh' IMHO  -- I'd like to know the impressions of RAF pilots and crew who transitioned to the P-47 late in the war and operated in Burma and thereabouts.
> View attachment 597279
> 
> Republic P-47 Thunderbolt in RAF Service



I'd wager it would depend on what they transitioned _from_.

If Spitfires, well...

I think a Tiffy pilot would be more interesting considering it's more of a contemporary/compatible aircraft.


----------



## Acheron (Oct 6, 2020)

michaelmaltby said:


> The Brits were a pretty good judge of 'horseflesh' IMHO  -- I'd like to know the impressions of RAF pilots and crew who transitioned to the P-47 late in the war and operated in Burma and thereabouts.
> View attachment 597279
> 
> Republic P-47 Thunderbolt in RAF Service


Wow, I read that the Thunderbolt was larger than other aircraft, but I never visualized it.


----------



## fastmongrel (Oct 6, 2020)

Acheron said:


> Wow, I read that the Thunderbolt was larger than other aircraft, but I never visualized it.



If you were being shot at you just ran around the cockpit dodging the bullets.

Reactions: Funny Funny:
4 | Like List reactions


----------



## Acheron (Oct 6, 2020)

"Give me your lunch money!"

Reactions: Bacon Bacon:
1 | Funny Funny:
5 | Winner Winner:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Snautzer01 (Oct 6, 2020)

P-47: Give me a real fight. Puny war god.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## michaelmaltby (Oct 6, 2020)

".... it would depend on what they transitioned _from_."
Blenhiems >> Hurricanes
No. 30 Squadron (RAF) during the Second World War

Reactions: Bacon Bacon:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## michaelmaltby (Oct 7, 2020)

".... I think a Tiffy pilot would be more interesting considering it's more of a contemporary/compatible aircraft."
now there's a question worth examining ...
"If you were a fighter-bomber pilot during WW2 would you rather fly a Jug or a Typhoon? European theater.


----------



## Peter Gunn (Oct 7, 2020)

michaelmaltby said:


> ".... I think a Tiffy pilot would be more interesting considering it's more of a contemporary/compatible aircraft."
> now there's a question worth examining ...
> "If you were a fighter-bomber pilot during WW2 would you rather fly a Jug or a Typhoon? European theater.



"Tough" question...

See what I did there?

Reactions: Funny Funny:
2 | Like List reactions


----------



## fastmongrel (Oct 7, 2020)

michaelmaltby said:


> ".... I think a Tiffy pilot would be more interesting considering it's more of a contemporary/compatible aircraft."
> now there's a question worth examining ...
> "If you were a fighter-bomber pilot during WW2 would you rather fly a Jug or a Typhoon? European theater.



Going from fading memory you were more likely to make it home safely flying a Typhoon than a P47, though the difference was pretty small. I believe it was something to do with the Typhoon had all its radiator, oil and engine in a small compact block giving a smaller more easily armoured target. The P47 had a bit more plumbing spread out along the fuselage possibly making a bigger target.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Informative Informative:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## GrauGeist (Oct 7, 2020)

fastmongrel said:


> Going from fading memory you were more likely to make it home safely flying a Typhoon than a P47, though the difference was pretty small. I believe it was something to do with the Typhoon had all its radiator, oil and engine in a small compact block giving a smaller more easily armoured target. The P47 had a bit more plumbing spread out along the fuselage possibly making a bigger target.


There's several cases where the P-47 had portions of it's engine shot away and they still flew back across the channel.
There was even one P-47 that flew through an Olive orchard after strafing German positions in Italy. The pilot managed to keep it under control and flew over 100 miles back to base - with damaged wings, engine cowling and all four props bent back.

Reactions: Winner Winner:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## fastmongrel (Oct 7, 2020)

I am sure there's lots of anecdotes of P47s returning with bits missing but it's like a boxer better not to be hit in the first place. I don't know the exact figures but more pilots made it back intact per sortie flying a Typhoon which is the important bit.


----------



## SaparotRob (Oct 7, 2020)

Both planes are pretty awesome.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## michaelmaltby (Oct 7, 2020)

Does anyone have a deep longing to fly a Sturmovik?

Reactions: Agree Agree:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Husky (Oct 7, 2020)

I may have chosen the Bristol Beaufighter as well but wasn't on the list.


----------



## GrauGeist (Oct 7, 2020)

fastmongrel said:


> I am sure there's lots of anecdotes of P47s returning with bits missing but it's like a boxer better not to be hit in the first place. I don't know the exact figures but more pilots made it back intact per sortie flying a Typhoon which is the important bit.


From the forum's "Tree Trimming" thread.

This particular P-47 struck a chimney and still made it safely back to base.
Granted, it's not flak or 30mm cannon-fire, but still pretty impressive.

Reactions: Agree Agree:
1 | Winner Winner:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Peter Gunn (Oct 8, 2020)

michaelmaltby said:


> Does anyone have a deep longing to fly a Sturmovik?




No.

Reactions: Funny Funny:
1 | Informative Informative:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## rob23 (Oct 18, 2020)

I have to go with the F4U. Good solid airplane, tough, fast, fairly agile and good armament. But please let it be a shore based squadron!

Reactions: Agree Agree:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## DBII (Oct 18, 2020)

Looks like I am the only one to choose the B25. It is the family's favorite. For all arounf fighter, I would grab the P47. I met a man that flew P47s and then A36s. He shot down 2 planes but many close air support missions. He perfered the flying characterists of the A36 to the firepower od the P47.


----------



## swampyankee (Oct 18, 2020)

michaelmaltby said:


> Does anyone have a deep longing to fly a Sturmovik?



_I _certainly don't. Neglecting the general downsides of flying for the Soviet Union, there's the problem that the Il-2 was also performing extremely risky flying in general.

Reactions: Agree Agree:
2 | Like List reactions


----------



## Maachi (Feb 6, 2021)

Mine aren't on the list... Reggiane Re.2005 or Bristol Beaufighter.

Reactions: Agree Agree:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Thumpalumpacus (Feb 7, 2021)

Fighter: P-47

Twin-engine: B-25 with the 8-gun nose

Heavy: B-17


----------



## lomcovak (Feb 7, 2021)

i-16 polikarpov


----------



## Zippythehog (Feb 13, 2021)

There seem to be many who grew up watching Blacksheep Squadron...

Reactions: Agree Agree:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Wurger (Feb 13, 2021)

P-11c


----------



## SaparotRob (Feb 13, 2021)

Zippythehog said:


> There seem to be many who grew up watching Blacksheep Squadron...


Did you mute the sound when the actors were talking too?

Reactions: Funny Funny:
2 | Like List reactions


----------



## pops-paolo (May 27, 2021)

WHERE ARE THE ITALIAN PLANES


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (May 27, 2021)

pops-paolo said:


> WHERE ARE THE ITALIAN PLANES



At the bottom of the Adriatic.

Reactions: Agree Agree:
1 | Funny Funny:
5 | Winner Winner:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (May 27, 2021)

What are you a grammar Nazi now too?


----------



## pops-paolo (May 27, 2021)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> At the bottom of the Adriatic.


Nah jit tripping I don't even have a response


----------



## Peter Gunn (May 27, 2021)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> What are you a grammar Nazi now too?


Should be "What*,* are you a grammar Nazi now too?"

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Funny Funny:
2 | Like List reactions


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (May 27, 2021)

pops-paolo said:


> Nah jit tripping I don't even have a response



Considering I spelled it correctly that must be the case.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (May 27, 2021)

Peter Gunn said:


> Should be "What*,* are you a grammar Nazi now too?"



Jawohl Mein Herr!

Reactions: Funny Funny:
2 | Like List reactions


----------



## pops-paolo (May 27, 2021)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> What are you a grammar Nazi now too?


no just was saying those words are tyrannical
so you must have misspelled


----------



## GrauGeist (May 27, 2021)

pops-paolo said:


> WHERE ARE THE ITALIAN PLANES


Don't feel bad, there aren't any Soviet types, either.

(or a P-39...)

Reactions: Funny Funny:
2 | Like List reactions


----------



## pops-paolo (May 27, 2021)

GrauGeist said:


> Don't feel bad, there aren't any Soviet types, either.
> 
> (or a P-39...)


rip


----------



## Peter Gunn (May 27, 2021)

GrauGeist said:


> Don't feel bad, there aren't any Soviet types, either.
> 
> (or a P-39...)


WHISTLE!!! Two minutes in the penalty box for ground hogging in the wrong thread!

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Agree Agree:
1 | Funny Funny:
2 | Like List reactions


----------



## pops-paolo (May 27, 2021)

Peter Gunn said:


> WHISTLE!!! Two minutes in the penalty box for ground hogging in the wrong thread!


what do you mean?


----------



## Peter Gunn (May 27, 2021)

pops-paolo said:


> what do you mean?


There is a fellow poster who loves the P-39, there is a thread with over 1,700 posts about it, somewhere along the line we got on the tangent of calling it a ground hog instead of a airacobra. So now, when a P-39 is mentioned outside of that thread it's a groundhog penalty. BTW, I just made up the last part about the penalty.

Reactions: Bacon Bacon:
3 | Like Like:
2 | Like List reactions


----------



## SaparotRob (May 27, 2021)

I second that motion.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Agree Agree:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## SaparotRob (May 27, 2021)

Peter Gunn said:


> There is a fellow poster who loves the P-39, there is a thread with over 1,700 posts about it, somewhere along the line we got on the tangent of calling it a ground hog instead of a airacobra. So now, when a P-39 is mentioned outside of that thread it's a groundhog penalty. BTW, I just made up the last part about the penalty.


There is “a thread“? Just one thread?

Reactions: Bacon Bacon:
1 | Funny Funny:
2 | Winner Winner:
2 | Like List reactions


----------



## pops-paolo (May 27, 2021)

Peter Gunn said:


> There is a fellow poster who loves the P-39, there is a thread with over 1,700 posts about it, somewhere along the line we got on the tangent of calling it a ground hog instead of a airacobra. So now, when a P-39 is mentioned outside of that thread it's a groundhog penalty. BTW, I just made up the last part about the penalty.


lamo that went over my head


----------



## Thumpalumpacus (May 27, 2021)



Reactions: Funny Funny:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## XBe02Drvr (May 27, 2021)

Thumpalumpacus said:


> View attachment 624959


Hey Stumpalumpacas, your true identity comes out! Looks like you've been masquerading under a false callsign all along.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Thumpalumpacus (May 27, 2021)

XBe02Drvr said:


> Hey Stumpalumpacas, your true identity comes out! Looks like you've been masquerading under a false callsign all along.



Be vewy, vewy quiet ... we're hunting gwoundhogs!

Reactions: Agree Agree:
1 | Funny Funny:
2 | Like List reactions


----------



## XBe02Drvr (May 27, 2021)

Thumpalumpacus said:


> Be vewy, vewy quiet ... we're hunting groudhogs!


Nah, they're deafened by 12.7 and 37 MM fire with no hearing protection, plus they're high on cordite fumes. We can walk right up behind and execute them with our Makarovs. What's the challenge in that?


----------



## Thumpalumpacus (May 27, 2021)

XBe02Drvr said:


> Nah, they're deafened by 12.7 and 37 MM fire with no hearing protection, plus they're high on cordite fumes. We can walk right up behind and execute them with our Makarovs. What's the challenge in that?



... until they spin right down out of your sight-picture!

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Like List reactions


----------



## AdamR (May 28, 2021)

The question forces one to pick an airplane that’s either a compromise (P-51) between low and high altitude performance, superior at neither, or superior at one and inferior at the other (P-47 high; F-4u low, for me). I took the P-47 for its combination of ruggedness, firepower, and speed at high altitude.
Sheer coolness choice? P-38.

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Like List reactions


----------



## Peter Gunn (May 28, 2021)

Thumpalumpacus said:


> Be vewy, vewy quiet ... we're hunting *gwoundhogs*!


*WARNING!* You're close to time in the box kid, watch what you type...

Reactions: Agree Agree:
1 | Funny Funny:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## rochie (May 28, 2021)

Probably a P-51, nearly as pretty and nearly as good as a Spitfire but it could be nearly as good for 5 times as long on a full tank of fuel

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Agree Agree:
1 | Winner Winner:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## SaparotRob (May 28, 2021)

I had chosen the Mosquito so I could bravely run away.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Like List reactions


----------



## Marcel (May 29, 2021)

Peter Gunn said:


> There is a fellow poster who loves the P-39, there is a thread with over 1,700 posts about it, somewhere along the line we got on the tangent of calling it a ground hog instead of a airacobra. So now, when a P-39 is mentioned outside of that thread it's a groundhog penalty. BTW, I just made up the last part about the penalty.


P-39, P-39, P-39, P-39, P-39, P-39, P-39, P-39, P-39, P-39, P-39, P-39, P-39, P-39, P-39, P-39, P-39, P-39, P-39, P-39, P-39, P-39, P-39, P-39, P-39, P-39


----------



## GrauGeist (May 29, 2021)

Marcel said:


> P-39, P-39, P-39, P-39, P-39, P-39, P-39, P-39, P-39, P-39, P-39, P-39, P-39, P-39, P-39, P-39, P-39, P-39, P-39, P-39, P-39, P-39, P-39, P-39, P-39, P-39


Oh now you've done it...


----------



## Marcel (May 29, 2021)

GrauGeist said:


> Oh now you've done it...


You think the circus will move here?


----------



## GrauGeist (May 29, 2021)

Marcel said:


> You think the circus will move here?


Dunno, but you're likely to get a timeout from the Sarge for mentioning that Bell product!


----------



## Thumpalumpacus (May 29, 2021)



Reactions: Funny Funny:
1 | Winner Winner:
2 | Like List reactions


----------



## XBe02Drvr (May 29, 2021)

Marcel said:


> P-39, P-39, P-39, P-39, P-39, P-39, P-39, P-39, P-39, P-39, P-39, P-39, P-39, P-39, P-39, P-39, P-39, P-39, P-39, P-39, P-39, P-39, P-39, P-39, P-39, P-39


FOUL! He's flaunting his privileged Mod status! If any of us Rocker peons did that we'd be incarcerated in a flash!

Reactions: Agree Agree:
2 | Funny Funny:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Marcel (May 29, 2021)

XBe02Drvr said:


> FOUL! He's flaunting his privileged Mod status! If any of us Rocker peons did that we'd be incarcerated in a flash!


Absolutely true

Reactions: Funny Funny:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Peter Gunn (May 30, 2021)

Marcel said:


> P-39, P-39, P-39, P-39, P-39, P-39, P-39, P-39, P-39, P-39, P-39, P-39, P-39, P-39, P-39, P-39, P-39, P-39, P-39, P-39, P-39, P-39, P-39, P-39, P-39, P-39


The only thing I can say is that you're EXTREMELY lucky I don't generally visit the forum on weekends, however...

A penalty this flagrant might get you a season long suspension with attending *monetary fines!!!*

Reactions: Agree Agree:
1 | Winner Winner:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## FLYBOYJ (May 30, 2021)

Bumping my original response....

ASW Patrol, SAR, Key West NAS flying a JRF-5 "Grumman Goose."

Debrief at "Sloppy Joe's."

Reactions: Bacon Bacon:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Thumpalumpacus (May 30, 2021)

FLYBOYJ said:


> Bumping my original response....
> 
> ASW Patrol, SAR, Key West NAS flying a JRF-5 "Grumman Goose."
> 
> ...



I don't see an airplane in that picture, bud.

Reactions: Agree Agree:
3 | Funny Funny:
3 | Like List reactions


----------



## XBe02Drvr (May 30, 2021)

FLYBOYJ said:


> Bumping my original response....
> 
> ASW Patrol, SAR, Key West NAS flying a JRF-5 "Grumman Goose."
> 
> ...





Thumpalumpacus said:


> I don't see an airplane in that picture, bud.


Of course not, silly, NAS Key West was a blimp base back then. Don't get fooled by the publicity shot with the imported Goose and her chicks. When I was there in the 70s, the hurricane-proof blimp hangars were still there. They kept VF101's and VX1's hangar queens high and dry when Agnes dropped in to say hi.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Informative Informative:
2 | Like List reactions


----------



## Thumpalumpacus (Jun 1, 2021)

XBe02Drvr said:


> Of course not, silly, NAS Key West was a blimp base back then. Don't get fooled by the publicity shot with the imported Goose and her chicks. When I was there in the 70s, the hurricane-proof blimp hangars were still there. They kept VF101's and VX1's hangar queens high and dry when Agnes dropped in to say hi.



All I see in GJ's pic is a lot of cheesecake. 

Of course, that's not a complaint.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## R Leonard (Jun 1, 2021)

How about a nice slow R4D running a regularly scheduled route from, oh say, NAS Olathe to MCAS Mountain Lake and return, twice a week. Sounds good to me.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Winner Winner:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Jun 1, 2021)

R Leonard said:


> How about a nice slow R4D running a regularly scheduled route from, oh say, NAS Olathe to MCAS Mountain Lake and return, twice a week. Sounds good to me.


Do you one better. When they were based at NAS Boca Chica (Key West), VX1 (Air Test and Evalution Squadron One) used to fly an almost daily commuter run to all the East Coast ASW air stations, known in the vernacular as "Conch Airways" in an elderly P3B with a conch shell painted on its side. Boca Chica, JAX, Norfolk, (sometimes, PAX), NADC Warminster, (occasionally, South Weymouth), (and always) Brunswick, ME. Any serving or retired service member who wanted to go for the ride was welcome, as they would relieve a squadron member at one of the required midships observer stations, allowing said squadron person to get caught up on their other work. All you had to do was report any unusual occurrences regarding the wing and engines, as the old tired airframe was particularly prone to liquid leaks of all kinds. Warminster was always an interesting stop, as that was where a lot of R&D work on new ASW equipment occurred, and there was lots of back and forth with the test and evaluation squadron. Lots of black boxes and classified documents back and forth. Some pretty amazing stuff they were working on, even back then. I went along for the ride from time to time, a fascinating opportunity for a geographer like me.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Informative Informative:
2 | Like List reactions


----------



## R Leonard (Jun 2, 2021)

Sounds like almost as much fun, results wise, as the Brunswick Lobster Runs. You just had to know somebody.


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Jun 2, 2021)

R Leonard said:


> Sounds like almost as much fun, results wise, as the Brunswick Lobster Runs. You just had to know somebody.


Sometimes there would be a "lobster exchange", tropical spiny "goosters" for Maine Atlantic lobsters. They had sealable waterproof cylindrical containers that would fit in sonobuoy launch tubes and could hold enough seawater to keep several lobsters alive for the duration. There were several launch tubes aboard, IIRC they could hide 20-30 lobsters in the tubes.
Those tubes also came in handy when returning from any overseas trips and Customs came aboard searching for booze and other undeclared contraband. Gitmo, RNAS Bermuda, and Keflavic were frequent destinations.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Informative Informative:
2 | Like List reactions


----------



## Thumpalumpacus (Jun 2, 2021)

XBe02Drvr said:


> Sometimes there would be a "lobster exchange", tropical spiny "goosters" for Maine Atlantic lobsters. They had sealable waterproof cylindrical containers that would fit in sonobuoy launch tubes and could hold enough seawater to keep several lobsters alive for the duration. There were several launch tubes aboard, IIRC they could hide 20-30 lobsters in the tubes.
> Those tubes also came in handy when returning from any overseas trips and Customs came aboard searching for booze and other undeclared contraband. Gitmo, RNAS Bermuda, and Keflavic were frequent destinations.



_Never _underestimate the ingenuity of a GI.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Agree Agree:
3 | Like List reactions


----------



## soulezoo (Jun 4, 2021)

XBe02Drvr said:


> Sometimes there would be a "lobster exchange", tropical spiny "goosters" for Maine Atlantic lobsters. They had sealable waterproof cylindrical containers that would fit in sonobuoy launch tubes and could hold enough seawater to keep several lobsters alive for the duration. There were several launch tubes aboard, IIRC they could hide 20-30 lobsters in the tubes.
> Those tubes also came in handy when returning from any overseas trips and Customs came aboard searching for booze and other undeclared contraband. Gitmo, RNAS Bermuda, and Keflavic were frequent destinations.



Slightly off topic, but on one occasion leaving Melbourne, I was trying to procure some Cuban cigars and the lady at the counter wouldn't let me have them (I was in my flight suit, so readily identifiable as American). "You blokes can't have them in your country" she prattled on. The manager came over and just said to her, "let him have them, they have their own special customs people". And that huge locked tool box in the back of a KC-10 was exactly that... our own customs.

Reactions: Bacon Bacon:
1 | Like Like:
1 | Winner Winner:
2 | Like List reactions


----------



## Guchi (Apr 22, 2022)

I would just LOVE to fly a 109.

It’s sleek, rakish
And sitting (slightly hunched) it just makes me feel like a hunter - a bad boy - just out looking for trouble


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Apr 22, 2022)

Guchi said:


> I would just LOVE to fly a 109.
> 
> It’s sleek, rakish
> And sitting (slightly hunched) it just makes me feel like a hunter - a bad boy - just out looking for trouble


...which you'll find when you groundloop it on landing and bang your head on that infernal canopy.

Reactions: Funny Funny:
4 | Like List reactions


----------



## Peter Gunn (Apr 22, 2022)

XBe02Drvr said:


> Sometimes there would be a "lobster exchange", tropical spiny "goosters" for Maine Atlantic lobsters. They had sealable waterproof cylindrical containers that would fit in sonobuoy launch tubes and could hold enough seawater to keep several lobsters alive for the duration. There were several launch tubes aboard, IIRC they could hide 20-30 lobsters in the tubes.
> Those tubes also came in handy when returning from any overseas trips and Customs came aboard searching for booze and other undeclared contraband. Gitmo, RNAS Bermuda, and Keflavic were frequent destinations.


I think I posted this before but can't remember but, I ran into an F-86 jock many years ago and going from memory, at one time he was stationed I think at Barksdale. He and three others did some TDY up to Maine or Vermont in F-86Ds. Did the similar thing, they weren't carrying rockets in the under nose tray so each Sabre Dog got as many lobsters as they could stuff in the rocket tubes when they left. As memory served most of them were still alive when they got home, I guess they hauled ass to altitude to keep them chilled or something, damn, now I wish I could remember the whole story.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Like List reactions


----------



## Guchi (Apr 22, 2022)

XBe02Drvr said:


> ...which you'll find when you groundloop it on landing and bang your head on that infernal canopy.


And I could be shot down and die in a flaming comet coming up against all those “better” British and American planes.

But I would still just _love_ to fly a 109.

I thought this was _my_ choice?

You don’t see me trying to dissuade others from their choice?

Guchi

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Like List reactions


----------



## SaparotRob (Apr 22, 2022)

I think I would want to fly the C-54 if I was a pilot in WW II. I prefer not being shot at.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Agree Agree:
1 | Winner Winner:
2 | Like List reactions


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Apr 22, 2022)

I’ll stick to flying a Catalina on U-Boot patrols in the Caribbean. 

Ahhh, the good life…

Reactions: Funny Funny:
4 | Winner Winner:
3 | Like List reactions


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Apr 22, 2022)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> I’ll stick to flying a Catalina on U-Boot patrols in the Caribbean.
> 
> Ahhh, the good life…


Yep - and remember, de-brief at Sloppy Joe's!

Reactions: Bacon Bacon:
3 | Funny Funny:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Apr 22, 2022)

FLYBOYJ said:


> Yep - and remember, de-brief at Sloppy Joe's!
> 
> View attachment 665451



Joe, you are dangerous! 

But you can be my wingman anytime.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Funny Funny:
1 | Winner Winner:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## SaparotRob (Apr 22, 2022)

FLYBOYJ said:


> Yep - and remember, de-brief at Sloppy Joe's!
> 
> View attachment 665451


Go Grumman!

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Like List reactions


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Apr 22, 2022)

Guchi said:


> I thought this was _my_ choice?
> 
> You don’t see me trying to dissuade others from their choice?
> 
> Guchi


Sorry, I'm just a kid with a BB gun in a world full of party balloons.

Reactions: Funny Funny:
3 | Like List reactions


----------



## SaparotRob (Apr 22, 2022)

XBe02Drvr said:


> Sorry, I'm just a kid with a BB gun in a world full of party balloons.


I like the cut of your jib, Mister!

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Funny Funny:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Apr 22, 2022)

Aww, the jib's just eye candy, mate. On the this cutter, it's the stays'l that's the driver.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Peter Gunn (Apr 25, 2022)

XBe02Drvr said:


> Aww, the jib's just eye candy, mate. On the this cutter, it's the stays'l that's the driver.


Huh?


----------



## GrauGeist (Apr 25, 2022)

Peter Gunn said:


> Huh?


He's talking "Navy speak"

Reactions: Agree Agree:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Apr 25, 2022)

GrauGeist said:


> He's talking "Navy speak"


The navies "of wooden ships and iron men". But I turned my 24 ft sloop into a cutter by adding a staysail. Raised her speed on a reach by a knot.


----------



## SaparotRob (Apr 25, 2022)

XBe02Drvr said:


> The navies "of wooden ships and iron men". But I turned my 24 ft sloop into a cutter by adding a staysail. Raised her speed on a reach by a knot.


I knew exactly what you were talking about. Being a rag picker myself.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Apr 25, 2022)

SaparotRob said:


> I knew exactly what you were talking about. Being a rag picker myself.


Fie on all stinkpot drivers!

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Agree Agree:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Peter Gunn (Apr 25, 2022)

Ah... I see, sailboats... how... quaint.

Reactions: Funny Funny:
3 | Like List reactions


----------



## Shortround6 (Apr 25, 2022)

Internal combustion engines....................how quaint

Reactions: Bacon Bacon:
1 | Winner Winner:
3 | Like List reactions


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Apr 25, 2022)

Peter Gunn said:


> Ah... I see, sailboats... how... quaint.
> 
> View attachment 665778





XBe02Drvr said:


> Fie on all stinkpot drivers!


Especially drunken midnight cigarette drivers! Been on the receiving end of their marauding.


----------



## wlewisiii (Apr 25, 2022)

Motor boats? Nah.

Now, Bogie's yacht, the schooner Santata? That's the real deal.

Reactions: Bacon Bacon:
1 | Like Like:
2 | Like List reactions


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Apr 26, 2022)

wlewisiii said:


> Motor boats? Nah.
> 
> Now, Bogie's yacht, the schooner Santata? That's the real deal.
> 
> View attachment 665815


Symphony in motion!

Reactions: Agree Agree:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## GrauGeist (Apr 26, 2022)

wlewisiii said:


> Motor boats? Nah.
> 
> Now, Bogie's yacht, the schooner Santata? That's the real deal.
> 
> View attachment 665815


(said with a Crocodile Dundee accent)
That's not a boat, mate.

This, is a boat...

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Funny Funny:
1 | Winner Winner:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## SaparotRob (Apr 26, 2022)

Actually, it’s a ship.


----------



## Shortround6 (Apr 26, 2022)

SaparotRob said:


> Actually, it’s a ship.


Yep, it is carrying "boats".

Reactions: Agree Agree:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Peter Gunn (Apr 26, 2022)

SaparotRob said:


> Actually, it’s a ship.


Potaatoe, Potahtoe...

Worked at Donzi in the mid 80's for a while, got more than one ride in some pretty mean ass boats I can tell you. One I remember was a smallish cigarette style with twin BIG BLOCK CHEVYS... Holy Mother of God...

Talk about sound and fury significant of a perma-grin, and a sore back.

Ended up with a 22 footer with a single 454 big block Chevrolet, more than enough to get into trouble with. I miss that boat.

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Like List reactions


----------



## SaparotRob (Apr 26, 2022)

Those things are COOL.


----------



## special ed (Apr 26, 2022)

In the early 60s, my first manager after USAF was a WW2 Navy vet who loved talking about sailing. He had a sailboat and after a few hints, I went out with him. No engine, only the wind. That day I learned how to sail against the wind and that power boaters have no knowledge of or respect for sailcraft. They apparently think all sail boats have aux engines and should give way to any thing larger. We left the slip in the dock and sailed through all the people coming at us tooting whatever horns they had. Had a wonderful time in the lake and may still be able to sail on open water today. Sailors don't curse, but the other boaters do.

sorry for thread drift.

Reactions: Bacon Bacon:
1 | Like Like:
2 | Like List reactions


----------



## GrauGeist (Apr 26, 2022)

Years ago, we were heading out of Newport jetty (towards Catalina Island) when I heard a familiar engine sound.
I scanned the skies as the sound grew louder, but saw nothing.

It was then, I realized it was coming from a boat out past the breakwater - about 30 feet long and moving along.

About that time, they opened the throttle and that twin-seater streaked away, heading toward Laguna to the tune of an Allison V-12 singing the song of it's people.

'Twas a gorgeous sound.

Reactions: Like Like:
4 | Like List reactions


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Apr 26, 2022)

special ed said:


> power boaters have no knowledge of or respect for sailcraft. They apparently think all sail boats have aux engines and should give way to any thing larger.


"In the last analysis, in any right-of-way confrontation,...TONNAGE ALWAYS WINS!"

Reactions: Agree Agree:
2 | Like List reactions


----------



## soulezoo (Apr 27, 2022)

XBe02Drvr said:


> "In the last analysis, in any right-of-way confrontation,...TONNAGE ALWAYS WINS!"


Says the Nimitz to the SS Minnow. Now we know what really happened to Gilligan.

Reactions: Funny Funny:
3 | Like List reactions


----------



## Christopher Tarana (Apr 27, 2022)

I like the Vought Corsair the most!

Christopher Tarana

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Thumpalumpacus (Apr 27, 2022)

XBe02Drvr said:


> "In the last analysis, in any right-of-way confrontation,...TONNAGE ALWAYS WINS!"



On land or at sea, it's all about the bragging rights.

Reactions: Agree Agree:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Shortround6 (Apr 27, 2022)

XBe02Drvr said:


> "In the last analysis, in any right-of-way confrontation,...TONNAGE ALWAYS WINS!"


The Rules can't fix stupid.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Funny Funny:
5 | Like List reactions


----------



## drgondog (Apr 28, 2022)

Peter Gunn said:


> Potaatoe, Potahtoe...
> 
> Worked at Donzi in the mid 80's for a while, got more than one ride in some pretty mean ass boats I can tell you. One I remember was a smallish cigarette style with twin BIG BLOCK CHEVYS... Holy Mother of God...
> 
> ...


Cocaine/Cartel dream boat in 80s.

Reactions: Agree Agree:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## drgondog (Apr 28, 2022)

Shortround6 said:


> The Rules can't fix stupid.
> View attachment 666063


Some need reminding of 'Big Boat Rule'

Reactions: Agree Agree:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Peter Gunn (Apr 28, 2022)

drgondog said:


> Cocaine/Cartel dream boat in 80s.


To be sure, when we tested some of the hotter builds, we always posed the question whether or not it would be outrunning the Coast Guard (or perhaps rival "entrepreneurs") on some dark and starry night.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Funny Funny:
1 | Like List reactions


----------

