# What Was the worst Aircraft of WWII?



## plan_D (May 14, 2004)

Yes, but C.C this is interesting. We would have been a lot better off on the beaches had the Tallboy been in active service, it could have taken out those bunkers on the beaches, and maybe a few artillery batteries.


----------



## Lightning Guy (May 14, 2004)

I don't think they would have used Tallboy against the beach fortifications while our (meaning American, British, and Canadian) were on the ground. So Tallboy would have needed to be operational (with the Lancs modified as well) a couple weeks, at least, prior to D-Day. But they would have been very useful against the Atlantic wall and probably would have saved alot of Allied lives.


----------



## plan_D (May 14, 2004)

Not a couple of weeks, a few days and even hours before the first troops landed. We needed surprise.


----------



## Lightning Guy (May 14, 2004)

So you drop them at several points along the coast, especially at Calais. They were doing it with ordinary raids. A few scattered Tallboy strikes along the coast would have kept Jerry totally guessing.


----------



## plan_D (May 14, 2004)

Yes. We in a good agreement they would have saved lives. Plus the Todt battery and other artillery batteries were not on the coast line which was attacked, so those Tallboys could have made short work of the 4 metre thick walls.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (May 15, 2004)

> I don't think they would have used Tallboy against the beach fortifications while our (meaning American, British, and Canadian) were on the ground



i don't think that was the plan, we are, after all, not american, we wouldn't bomb our own people..............


----------



## brad (May 15, 2004)

yhea hallifax good manchester stunc


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (May 15, 2004)

the manchester wasn't that bad aslong as the engines didn't explode..............


----------



## Lightning Guy (May 15, 2004)

Didn't I say they wouldn't have used Tallboy while Allied troops were on the beachhead?


----------



## brad (May 15, 2004)

manchester bad halifax good


----------



## cheddar cheese (May 16, 2004)

i believe you said that before brad...


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (May 16, 2004)

but the manchers wasn't that bad, it just had crap engines............


----------



## cheddar cheese (May 16, 2004)

Crap is an understatement, more like bloody s**t! Anyway, I like both the Manchester and the Halifax. 8)


----------



## Lightning Guy (May 17, 2004)

The basic design of the Manchester was fine. When (which was rarely) the Vultures performed it was the best aircraft Bomber Command had at the time.


----------



## plan_D (May 17, 2004)

It definately wasn't the worst aircraft of the war, the B-25 Roc was.


----------



## cheddar cheese (May 17, 2004)

im sure i can find a worse plane 8)


----------



## plan_D (May 17, 2004)

Go forth C.C and bring me the crappest plane from World War 2, for this you will be rewarded.


----------



## cheddar cheese (May 17, 2004)

will do 8) my search starts with italian planes...


----------



## plan_D (May 17, 2004)

If I were you I'd start on Chinese, French, Italian and possibly Romanian.


----------



## cheddar cheese (May 17, 2004)

but youre not me, are you


----------



## plan_D (May 17, 2004)

Thank God.


----------



## cheddar cheese (May 17, 2004)

im tempeted to say that was cheap but it was funny, so i wont


----------



## plan_D (May 17, 2004)

It was cheap, and funny.


----------



## cheddar cheese (May 17, 2004)

Bargain!


----------



## plan_D (May 17, 2004)

With those diplomatic skills, I should be in U.N. I'd do a better job than those bums.


----------



## cheddar cheese (May 17, 2004)




----------



## plan_D (May 17, 2004)

Those stupid blue helmets would go for a start, I mean, c'mon you're there to keep the peace, that doesn't mean you're there to get your head blown off. 
Bright blue helmet, really smart, nice bright target.


----------



## cheddar cheese (May 17, 2004)

Sounds like just the sort of thing a frenchman would do...


----------



## plan_D (May 17, 2004)

That's a cheap shot, but the French deserve it.


----------



## cheddar cheese (May 17, 2004)

lots of cheap shots going on recently...


----------



## plan_D (May 17, 2004)

They've been going on all the time, it's just I've started pointing them out.


----------



## cheddar cheese (May 17, 2004)

8)


----------



## plan_D (May 17, 2004)

Couldn't think of a reply, eh?


----------



## cheddar cheese (May 17, 2004)

nope  im going back to my spamming roots


----------



## plan_D (May 17, 2004)

Couldn't escape them...


----------



## cheddar cheese (May 17, 2004)

true


----------



## plan_D (May 17, 2004)

The spam net almost got me too, but I think I escaped it


----------



## cheddar cheese (May 17, 2004)




----------



## plan_D (May 17, 2004)

I think your roots are getting longer


----------



## cheddar cheese (May 17, 2004)

yup, im embedding myself deep  though i must say, this last 90 mins or so yours are beginning to grow a bit too


----------



## cheddar cheese (May 17, 2004)

yup, im embedding myself deep  though i must say, this last 90 mins or so yours are beginning to grow a bit too


----------



## plan_D (May 17, 2004)

I don't keep doing doubles though.


----------



## cheddar cheese (May 17, 2004)

you should try it, work wonders for your amount of posts


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (May 17, 2004)

yes Plan_D, you're ours now, you can't escape, we will get u ..........


----------



## cheddar cheese (May 17, 2004)




----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (May 17, 2004)

you're ours!!!!!!!!

if you have a teddy, we'll mail him to you in small pieces...........


----------



## plan_D (May 17, 2004)

17 and with a teddy? Now that would be sad.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (May 17, 2004)

no, that would just be copying C.C..............


----------



## plan_D (May 17, 2004)

That was cruel.


----------



## cheddar cheese (May 17, 2004)

hey that was cheap considering i dont even own any teddies, do your research!


----------



## plan_D (May 18, 2004)

Did Lanc already mail you your teddy in pieces? That's why you don't own one...


----------



## cheddar cheese (May 18, 2004)

nope  i go to bed cuddling a propshaft and half a gallon of petrol, thats my idea of security in the night


----------



## plan_D (May 19, 2004)

I wouldn't think that to be security, a match, petrol...you're on fire.


----------



## cheddar cheese (May 19, 2004)

thats where the propshaft comes is, one whack around the head to the person with the match and theyre out


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (May 19, 2004)

you feel safe with petrol, i wouldn't trust petrol................


----------



## cheddar cheese (May 19, 2004)

oh, and what would you trust, diesel?


----------



## GermansRGeniuses (May 19, 2004)

From what I hear about you guys and Cornwall, being a farmer is normal there. What type of engines do farmers use? Diesel!


----------



## plan_D (May 20, 2004)

I'm not from Cornwall.


----------



## cheddar cheese (May 20, 2004)

me neiether, i just happen to live there.


----------



## plan_D (May 21, 2004)

I don't live there either.


----------



## cheddar cheese (May 21, 2004)

lucky


----------



## plan_D (May 21, 2004)

I wouldn't say getting to live here is lucky.


----------



## cheddar cheese (May 21, 2004)

fine


----------



## plan_D (May 21, 2004)

That's good, I was expecting the usual 'why?'. In which I always reply, try living here for 14 years and you'll know what I mean.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (May 21, 2004)

1) where do you live.................
2) saying it's normal to be a farmer from cornwall's a bit steroetypical don't you think??


----------



## cheddar cheese (May 21, 2004)

sorry, i wasnt in a good mood earlier


----------



## plan_D (May 22, 2004)

I live in Doncaster, South Yorkshire. Awful place, the race course is as old as the United States - 1776. I used to work in the race course as well, I hated the place (It's a horse race course for people that don't know). 

Who said you were all farmers!?!


----------



## cheddar cheese (May 22, 2004)

yesh, come on tell us


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (May 22, 2004)

if you'd been bothered to go backa page, you would have read this..............



> From what I hear about you guys and Cornwall, being a farmer is normal there


----------



## brad (May 23, 2004)

ok maby not i dont no anyway how can we say it was the worst plane of the war when it didn't even see action did it


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (May 23, 2004)

what plane you we talking about brad?


----------



## brad (May 23, 2004)

manchester


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (May 23, 2004)

it did see service and it was by no means the worst plane of the war...............


----------



## brad (May 23, 2004)

ok


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (May 23, 2004)

it was just the engines, if it had better engines it would be a better plane...............


----------



## plan_D (May 23, 2004)

Did anyone say the Manchester was the worst plane of the war? I think it was brad that came up with that, most of us are in agreement I think on the B-25 Roc being the worst.


----------



## spiteful21 (May 24, 2004)

The Breda Ba.65 would get my vote for the worst. A lot of units in the Regia Aeronautica flew and everybody hated it. Underpowered and and the flight caracteristics of a brick.


----------



## cheddar cheese (May 24, 2004)

the breda 88 wasnt that great either 8)


----------



## Lightning Guy (May 24, 2004)

Nothing the Italians produced en mass was really that outstanding. They had some good designs coming online but most of them only made it to a prototype or testing stage.


----------



## plan_D (May 24, 2004)

How do you think the Breda Ba.65 compares to the B-25 Roc? I mean the Roc wasn't exactly liked, it was just a stupidly poor plane. Little tactical value, and a failure all round.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (May 25, 2004)

i don't think anyone has ever produced a truely effective turret fighter have they??


----------



## Lightning Guy (May 25, 2004)

The Defiant was probably as close as anyone got, and that's not saying much. The turrets were just too bulky to keep decent performance and maneuvaerability.


----------



## plan_D (May 26, 2004)

The idea was flawed, and I think it came from the WW1 idea of moving fortresses, only these would be in the air. They weren't really big enough for that, therefore poor. Well even the big ones weren't very good, on their own, but at least they were bombers.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (May 26, 2004)

i think they could have been improved with a couple of forward firing guns.................


----------



## Lightning Guy (May 26, 2004)

The guns on the Defiant could be positioned to fire forwards. But I don't think the lack of forward firing guns is what hurt the turret-armed fighters. Their performance was just pathetic. It is interesting to look at the fighter concepts that developed between the world wars. I think the Bell Airacuda is one of the most interesting ideas for a turret armed fighter ever (pathetic but interesting).


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (May 26, 2004)

> The guns on the Defiant could be positioned to fire forwards



yes but it was difficult to do, in the event of a front al attack the gunnt isn't gonna be able to turn the turret in time...................


----------



## Lightning Guy (May 26, 2004)

True, but how often was a Defiant going to get onto the tail of a 109 in the first place? A dogfight between a Defiant and a 110 might have been interesting though.


----------



## plan_D (May 27, 2004)

I think that would have been victory to the Bf-110, it was very heavily armed, and could get on the tail of a Defiant. If the Defiant got on the tail of the 110 it had its own rear defence.


----------



## Lightning Guy (May 27, 2004)

I was just wondering. The 110 was the only Luftwaffe fighter that the Defiant might have had half a chance against.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (May 27, 2004)

it think if the 110 got on the tail of the defaint not realising it was a turret fighter the 110 would go down.............


----------



## Lightning Guy (May 27, 2004)

Most likely. That's how the Defiant intially had success against the 109 (it did shoot down 17 without loss on one of its early missions). Once the Germans realized the Defiant had guns covering its tail it wasn't nearly as effective.


----------



## plan_D (May 27, 2004)

The Defiant never really had much chance of shooting down the Bf-110 any other way. The 110 had rear defence as well, so the Defiant was screwed. 
The 110 had heavier armament than the 109 so I think the Defiant would be ripped apart before the turret would rip the 110 apart.


----------



## cheddar cheese (May 28, 2004)

defiants were regularly mistaken for hurricanes im informed


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (May 28, 2004)

yes they were, to begin with, that's why they had initaial sucess, but they soon learnt to attack them from the front or side...................


----------



## plan_D (May 29, 2004)

I still believe the Bf-110 would have been quite safe against a Defiant, although anything can happen in war. I'd say the Bf-110 would have a higher success rate against the Defiant, than the Defiant against the 110.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (May 29, 2004)

even though the defaint did have a chance, i'm gonna have to agree that in most cases the 110 would win...............


----------



## cheddar cheese (May 30, 2004)

me too 8)


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (May 30, 2004)

unless like i say the 110 get behind the defaint for to long............


----------



## cheddar cheese (May 30, 2004)

yeah but as soon as the defiant started shooting behind it surely the 110 pilot would realise it was a turret fighter and move away 8)


----------



## plan_D (May 30, 2004)

Even then the Defiant would be in deep trouble. The Bf-110 having twin engines gave it a higher survival rate, naturally. And the heavy armament on the Bf-110 would be much more destructive. 
This being said, if the 110 was wavering over the tail of the Defiant without actually opening up for a hit. The Defiant would probably score a kill.


----------



## cheddar cheese (May 30, 2004)

why are some messerschmitts called BF's and some called ME's? cos with planes like the '108, '109 and '110 ive heard both the BF and them ME prefix used, where as with planes such as the '262 and '323, they are just ME's?


----------



## plan_D (May 30, 2004)

I used to know. Obviously the 'Me' is for Messerchmitt, I think the Bf is for Bomber-Fighter. I don't fully know though.


----------



## cheddar cheese (May 30, 2004)

im not sure if Bf is for bomber fighter, because if seen places where they referred to the '108 as a Bf-108, and it aint a bomber fighter


----------



## plan_D (May 30, 2004)

If not that, it's probably another company building them. But I don't know.


----------



## cheddar cheese (May 30, 2004)

ah well 8)


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (May 30, 2004)

could it be to do with their manufacture??


----------



## plan_D (May 30, 2004)

Bavarian or Bremen Flugwerken? Maybe...


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (May 30, 2004)

yeah, that..................


----------



## plan_D (May 30, 2004)

Do not take my word for it, honestly I do not know. That is only a guess, Erich or LG will probably shoot me down on the subject.


----------



## Lightning Guy (May 30, 2004)

The Bf in Bf-109 and Bf-110 stood for Bayerische Flugzeugwerke (Bavarian Aircraft Works), which was the company name. Later designs bore the 'Me' prefix to honor Willie Messerschmitt much like the later versions of the Fw-190 became the Ta-152 to honor Kurt Tank.


----------



## plan_D (May 31, 2004)

I was half right since I did get the Bavarian Aicraft Works right.


----------



## Lightning Guy (May 31, 2004)

Yes you were. The whole 'Bf' or 'Me' thing is very confusing.


----------



## cheddar cheese (May 31, 2004)

yes.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (May 31, 2004)

> The Bf in Bf-109 and Bf-110 stood for Bayerische Flugzeugwerke (Bavarian Aircraft Works),



so the place that made them??


----------



## Lightning Guy (May 31, 2004)

It was the name of the company.


----------



## plan_D (Jun 1, 2004)

Now that's out of the way, and everyone still agrees the Roc was pretty bad, and maybe the worst...we're done here.


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jun 1, 2004)

yeah i suppose.....spam away


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jun 1, 2004)

ah, no, i shall stop the spam by throwing the Fairey Battle into, well, the battle................


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jun 1, 2004)

no, im the mod here, what i say goes, and i order you to spam


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jun 2, 2004)

i'm sure erich wouldn't be very happy to hear you say that.............


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jun 2, 2004)

[whimpers gently in the corner whilst eating out of date yoghurt]


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jun 3, 2004)

erich's got you scared??


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jun 3, 2004)

i dunno, probably, if could be bothered to have a look at the previous page i could tell you


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jun 3, 2004)




----------



## cheddar cheese (Jun 3, 2004)

im tempted to do an "8)" but i wont....


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jun 3, 2004)

good...............


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jun 3, 2004)

8)


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jun 4, 2004)




----------



## cheddar cheese (Jun 5, 2004)

anyway, worst plane was the roc  im sure i can find an italian plane that was worse though 8)


----------



## Lightning Guy (Jun 5, 2004)

That might prove difficult since the Roc was just built to such a bad specification. At least the Italians never tried to fit a turret to a fighter.


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jun 5, 2004)

now that would have been something to laugh about


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jun 6, 2004)

and the Roc wasn't??

the russians did it after all...............


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jun 7, 2004)

i found out thats a recon plane, not a fighter. its still got a turret though


----------



## Lightning Guy (Jun 7, 2004)

A turret on a recon plane isn't such a bad idea since that is a defensive use of the guns. Turrets for offensive firepower, like on a fighter, were just stupid, novel, but stupid.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jun 8, 2004)

strange thing, i've never seen a model of a defaint, no suprise really............


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jun 8, 2004)

you'd think there would be one in the BoB nmodel kit


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jun 8, 2004)

well there would have to be one in the BBMF before they could put it in the BBMF model kit.................


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jun 8, 2004)

there probably is, they're just too ashamed to use it


----------



## plan_D (Jun 9, 2004)

I have a BBMF model kit, from a long time ago. I never actually built the models, it's still in the box. One Lancaster, one Spitfire and one Hurricane.


----------



## Tom (Jun 9, 2004)

Maybe I should lurk for a little longer, but I wanted to throw another airframe into the fray-- the Me163 Comet.
"Flight Journal" made a pretty good case for the "worst fighter" prize, given the unstable nature of the peroxide fuel, diversion of resources from other projects, low kill rate, difficulty in landing/take-off, and problems with ground handling.
Still, must have been fun while the fuel lasted, even if you were tempted to bail on short final if the landing didn't shape up well.


----------



## kiwimac (Jun 9, 2004)

Airfix used to make a 1:72 Defiant. The Roc was pretty awful but I have to give pride of place to the Fairey Battle. Normally I can find something good to say about an aircraft but I'm afraid the Battle (hehe) is too much for me.

Kiwimac


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jun 9, 2004)

it looked good


----------



## Lightning Guy (Jun 9, 2004)

Tom, the Me-163 was a very novel idea (a bit of a stretch for the techonology available perhaps, but a novel idea). 

Kiwi, I can say some good things about the crews that flew the Battle. That required a special kind of bravery, but of course I feel the same way about the crews flying the TBD.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jun 9, 2004)

i think thew 163 was juat ahead of it's time, like many of the german ideas....................


----------



## SKIBC (Jun 27, 2004)

Lightning Guy said:


> So you drop them at several points along the coast, especially at Calais. They were doing it with ordinary raids. A few scattered Tallboy strikes along the coast would have kept Jerry totally guessing.



they didnt have enuf tallboys to waste them like that. 617 was under direct instructiongs NOT to jettison their tallboys unless it was life or death.

never mind thats an old topic i got mixed up


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jun 27, 2004)

it wasn't just 617 that dropped tallboys, No.9 did it too, but i think that on the morning of the 6th of june 1944 they should have been put in some of the batteries that the paratroopers had to take with high casualties.......................


----------



## Lightning Guy (Jun 27, 2004)

That wouldn't have been that easy. Alot of the guns (like the ones attacked by US Army Rangers at Point du Hoc) had been moved. In order to attack them, but air or by ground, you have to know where they are.


----------



## plan_D (Jun 27, 2004)

The Tallboys would be dropped on those in imobile batteries like the Todt battery. A lot of the artillery was silenced by the counter-artillery in Dover but those ones in the huge concrete by bunkers would have been better dealt with by Tallboys instead of American, British and Canadian ground forces who had just come off the beach. Or in the 6th Airbornes case just landed in the middle of the night (Merville Battery).


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jun 27, 2004)

they were a bit late in coming though, the first tallboys were used on the night 8/9th june 1944, i think....................


----------



## plan_D (Jun 27, 2004)

I know, I'm saying IF they could have been used.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jun 28, 2004)

> 617 was under direct instructiongs NOT to jettison their tallboys unless it was life or death



what, so they would be using them in a defensive capibility, like if they didn't drop them they would die??


----------



## toffi (Jul 23, 2004)

The worst was in my opinion the French Cauldron C.714 Cyclone. It was slow, turned awfully and had bad climb rate. Its' weapon was really weak. And very often it had lost its' horizontal stab when max speed was gained (especially in diving). Sounds enough for me.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jul 24, 2004)

all of that true for the fairey battle, anouther contender.......................


----------



## toffi (Jul 24, 2004)

There can also be one more worst aircraft. It's Russian LaGG-3. The Lavochkin-Gudkov-Gorbunov got a nickname Lakirovannyj-Gvarantovannyj-Grob (Varnished-Guaranteed-Grave) given because of its' tendency to crash often. It was wooden made mostly, ussualy very bad quality.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jul 24, 2004)

but many of the designs the russains were using were considered outdated.......................


----------



## Lightning Guy (Jul 24, 2004)

The LaGG-3 was a very bad plane. But it was better than the I-15s and I-16s the Russians were still using at the time.


----------



## toffi (Jul 24, 2004)

Sure it was much better, but the quality of production was horrible. These planes were "able" to fall apart while flying! 
That is why pilots sometimes prefered I-16 or I-153 (or MiG-1/3 when it was possible) than LaGG-3. The LaGGs' only good point was it quite nice overlook.


----------



## NightHawk (Aug 3, 2004)

the sowrdfish they where WW1 carrier based planes only bye luck they took down the rader of the DKM bismark. if there was a bf-109 near bye there would have goten sloughterd.


----------



## plan_D (Aug 3, 2004)

They didn't take down the RADAR on the Bismarck. They hit the rudder, under heavy AA coming up from the Bismarck. It wasn't luck at all, it was a very daring and skillful attack. 
That's the thing, the Swordfish didn't have to meet any 109s, so it was perfect for the job of taking on the Kriegsmarine. And it did its job very well.


----------



## lesofprimus (Aug 3, 2004)

I second that...


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Aug 4, 2004)

and the swordfish wasn't a WWI plane at all, and to give you some idea of the skill involved, at some points they were flying so low that the AA guns COULDN'T be depressed far enough to hit them, and no planes were lost during the attack, however 4 chrased on landing...................


----------



## lesofprimus (Aug 4, 2004)

And is one of the best lessons in what Aircover can prevent in Maritime situations...


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Aug 4, 2004)

a single 109 could have taken down all the stringbags, assuming it had enough ammo and fuel......................


----------



## lesofprimus (Aug 4, 2004)

Would the attack have happened if the Brits knew there was going to be fighter opposition??? Sacrifice a few men to destroy a BB???


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Aug 4, 2004)

i doubt it, that's not our style, we would wait for another opertunity..............


----------



## lesofprimus (Aug 4, 2004)

Not many oppourtunities like that come along tho....


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Aug 4, 2004)

if we were worried about fighters we'd wait for it to come into rane of land based beauforts or beaufighters..........................


----------



## lesofprimus (Aug 4, 2004)

k...


----------



## Lightning Guy (Aug 4, 2004)

The FAA tried to use Swordfish to oppose the Channel Dash with zero success.


----------



## GermansRGeniuses (Aug 4, 2004)

Well, what do you expect, even their Spitfire escorts got mauled by Dolfo's gang of 109's and 190's!


----------



## plan_D (Aug 5, 2004)

109s and 190s both being very good aircraft, so you can't blame the Spitfires for having a hard time.


----------



## Lightning Guy (Aug 5, 2004)

I think the point was, in the face of fighter oposition, the Swordfish wasn't nearly as effective.


----------



## plan_D (Aug 5, 2004)

We all know that, so it was in effect a pointless point


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Aug 5, 2004)

> what do you expect, even their Spitfire escorts got mauled by Dolfo's gang of 109's and 190's!



that's becuase the spits were flying as escort, when you have to stick to whatever it is you're escorting you loose everything important in winning a dogfight, just look at the 109s that had to stick to the bombers during the BoB...................


----------



## plan_D (Aug 5, 2004)

The 109s were in a stupid escort position on their escorts, they couldn't save the bombers. On top of that, Spitfires are better.


----------



## GermansRGeniuses (Aug 5, 2004)

Naaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah....


----------



## Lightning Guy (Aug 5, 2004)

The idea behind the close escort the 109s flew during the BoB (and that the 8th AF used initially) was that you forced the enemy fighters to fly through your fighters to get to your bombers. However, it also prevented your fighters from acting agressively as they were shields and not swords.


----------



## plan_D (Aug 6, 2004)

Thank you, for pointing out the obvious. The dogfights happened around the bomber formations so the bombers were still in the firing line. Have you got any idea why the 8th AF did it, even though the Germans had failed so horribly? 

GrG, the Spitfire was better than the 109. It's like the nice curves were better than the flat.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Aug 6, 2004)

> It's like the nice curves were better than the flat



not with most stealth aircraft 8)....................


----------



## plan_D (Aug 6, 2004)

I was refering to the Spitfire and 109, along with women. It must have flew straight over you.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Aug 6, 2004)

that was a bad pun.....................


----------



## plan_D (Aug 6, 2004)

There is no other way of saying it though.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Aug 6, 2004)

"that went straight over your head"........................


----------



## plan_D (Aug 6, 2004)

Well, it did.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Aug 6, 2004)

i know, i'm mearly suggesting other ways of saying it..................


----------



## plan_D (Aug 6, 2004)

I didn't say it like that? Oh well, who cares..


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Aug 6, 2004)

you made a bad pun out of it..................


----------



## plan_D (Aug 6, 2004)

Is that getting you down?


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Aug 6, 2004)

no i just need reasons to post so i'm making a big deal of it.................


----------



## plan_D (Aug 6, 2004)

You're doing a good job.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Aug 6, 2004)

thanks....................


----------



## plan_D (Aug 7, 2004)

No problem...Dave <snigger>  Is that really your name!?! 8)


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Aug 7, 2004)

it's david, not dave......................


----------



## plan_D (Aug 7, 2004)

I'll call you Dave then...'cos it obviously annoys you.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Aug 8, 2004)

i prefer lanc.........................


----------



## plan_D (Aug 8, 2004)

In person...


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Aug 8, 2004)

well it beats some of my other nicnames.................


----------



## GermansRGeniuses (Aug 8, 2004)

Beat this!


An old nickname of mine in elementary school was Beano!


----------



## plan_D (Aug 8, 2004)

My nickname was Horse 'n' Cart...don't ask.


----------



## GermansRGeniuses (Aug 8, 2004)

Don't worry...


I will.


Please tell!


----------



## plan_D (Aug 9, 2004)

No.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Aug 9, 2004)

literally the only one of my nicnames suitable to put on this website is "gayboy", don't worry, i don't bat for the other side.................


----------



## plan_D (Aug 10, 2004)

How did the name come about then!?!


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Aug 10, 2004)

long story.......................


----------



## plan_D (Aug 10, 2004)

Cut it short.


----------



## lesofprimus (Aug 10, 2004)

Under no circumstance EVER should u tell people that one of ur nicknames is Gayboy... 

None...

Nada...

Zip...


----------



## Lightning Guy (Aug 10, 2004)

I've got to agree with les on this one.


----------



## plan_D (Aug 11, 2004)

I agree with Les too.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Aug 11, 2004)

but i'm not gay!! basically people think it's fun to take the piss out of me and i have so pretty weird friends, who thought it'd be funny to call me gayboy......................


----------



## lesofprimus (Aug 11, 2004)

If that is the nickname that they applied to u, i would never reply to it...


----------



## Lightning Guy (Aug 12, 2004)

And certainly not tell it to a bunch of virtual strangers scattered around the world.


----------



## plan_D (Aug 12, 2004)

I agree with Les and LG, again.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Aug 12, 2004)

scary thing is, so do i.........................

like the new siggy Plan_D.....................


----------



## plan_D (Aug 12, 2004)

Thank you. 8)


----------



## lesofprimus (Aug 12, 2004)

It is a nice picture... Very clear...


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Aug 13, 2004)

it's better than the other pic of a 262 you had....................


----------



## NightHawk (Aug 13, 2004)

hay dont forget the others that have me-262 pictures ok ?
8)


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Aug 13, 2004)

your one sucks because it's not a photo.....................


----------



## NightHawk (Aug 13, 2004)

but still you try to drew something like that.i think its buteful.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Aug 13, 2004)

that would be good if it was a picture........................


----------



## NightHawk (Aug 15, 2004)

i hope it dose not offend you that the lancaster is burning.(the picture)


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Aug 15, 2004)

what?? if you're talking about your picture i'm sorry to have to break this to you, but that's a B-24..................


----------



## lesofprimus (Aug 15, 2004)




----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Aug 15, 2004)

do you think that's what he thought??


----------



## lesofprimus (Aug 15, 2004)

Most definatly..


----------



## NightHawk (Aug 15, 2004)

dont worry the lancaster is only lost an engine it still has some chanses of survivel.


----------



## lesofprimus (Aug 15, 2004)

Man this kid really doesnt have a clue.....


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Aug 15, 2004)

NH, the plane in your picture IS NOT a lancaster, it's a B-24.................


----------



## NightHawk (Aug 16, 2004)

dont mind me i was in a hangover


----------



## lesofprimus (Aug 16, 2004)

I dont think drinking, even if ur 13, had any effect on the simple fact that u thought a B-24 was a Lancaster....

And what are u doin having a hangover at 13???


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Aug 16, 2004)

i don't recon you had a hangover, you're just making excuses................


----------



## NightHawk (Aug 17, 2004)

ok ok just a little joke dont take it to hard.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Aug 17, 2004)

we're not, it just makes you look stupid .......................


----------



## NightHawk (Aug 18, 2004)

you think im stupid ?                hhhhhhhhhhhh.....................hhhhhhh.h........hhhhhhh.......hhhhh


----------



## lesofprimus (Aug 18, 2004)

I'm at a loss for words....


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Aug 18, 2004)

> you think im stupid



the fact that you thought a B-24 was a lancaster would suggest that yes..............


----------



## lesofprimus (Aug 18, 2004)

I dond tink he reed anglish to gud...


----------



## NightHawk (Aug 19, 2004)

i would probarly say in this situation ****.****.****-****. and a bunch of other things. but i will not..........


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Aug 19, 2004)

you walked into it....................


----------



## cheddar cheese (Aug 20, 2004)

*stretches and looks at watch* I make that 2 months and 13 days 8) and thats 2 months and 13 days of spamming to make up for


----------



## GermansRGeniuses (Aug 20, 2004)

This should be fun...


----------



## lesofprimus (Aug 21, 2004)

or not...


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Aug 21, 2004)

so you're here to stay this time......................


----------



## cheddar cheese (Aug 21, 2004)

Maybe, maybe not.....


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Aug 21, 2004)

i know which i'd prefer...............


----------



## cheddar cheese (Aug 21, 2004)

fine, if thats how you want it to be


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Aug 21, 2004)

i prefered u as sagaris.............


----------



## cheddar cheese (Aug 21, 2004)

Sagaris was funny  if i was actually like that in real life i would have to shoot myself


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Aug 21, 2004)

what, a brummy??


----------



## cheddar cheese (Aug 21, 2004)

no, a 36 year old family man that doesnt talk about anything but his wife and kids and gets touchy about everything


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Aug 21, 2004)

i liked sagaris...................


----------



## cheddar cheese (Aug 21, 2004)

why?


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Aug 21, 2004)

i just liked his personality, cant we have him back..................


----------



## lesofprimus (Aug 21, 2004)

I dont approve of the whole dual poster thing...


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Aug 21, 2004)

i wouldn't have minded if he stayed as sag, i prefered sagaris..........


----------



## cheddar cheese (Aug 21, 2004)

sorry mate 8) im not gonna use sagaris anymore anyway  the next time i leave the site (believe me its bound to happen in a month or 2) i will probably wait a few weeks and create another bogus user


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Aug 21, 2004)

i'm gonna miss sag .............


----------



## cheddar cheese (Aug 21, 2004)

no you wont, you barely knew the guy...would you like to meet him some time?


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Aug 21, 2004)

sure, he sounds tons better than that CC kid.............


----------



## cheddar cheese (Aug 21, 2004)

everyone sounds better than CC...


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Aug 21, 2004)




----------



## lesofprimus (Aug 21, 2004)

never really knew him....


----------



## cheddar cheese (Aug 21, 2004)

youll get to...


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Aug 21, 2004)

unfortunatly..................


----------



## lesofprimus (Aug 21, 2004)

Unfortunatly.... Great song by the band PRONG...


----------



## cheddar cheese (Aug 21, 2004)

never 'eard of 'em


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Aug 21, 2004)

"you wouldn't"

nor have i.............


----------



## lesofprimus (Aug 21, 2004)

Prong is a great band from NYC... Listen to some of their old stuff... Industrial punk is close....


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Aug 21, 2004)

that explains it.................


----------



## cheddar cheese (Aug 21, 2004)

hmmmmmmmmmm...


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Aug 23, 2004)

well that was pointless...............


----------



## lesofprimus (Aug 23, 2004)

What was pointless???


----------



## GermansRGeniuses (Aug 24, 2004)

Punk is crap.


I prefer Metal in the form of Iron Maiden and dlow to fast rock in the form of the Red Hot Chili Peppers. (Under the Bridge is slow, but Suck My Kiss is fast)


----------



## lesofprimus (Aug 24, 2004)

It aint even close to punk.. I was trying to give the impression that it really cant be labeled...


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Aug 24, 2004)

the thing with me is that i don't like one particular group or music style i just like any song i like...................


----------



## johnny (Sep 22, 2004)

It has to be the Me163.If the plane didnt explode on the ground , took off properly then the poor pilot only had 50miles worth of fuel and 50 cannon shells to do something.He then had to land the bloody thing on a skid without breaking his back or blowing the plane up.Not for me , much rather have a Defiant.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Sep 22, 2004)

the defiant wasn't to bad compared to the B-25 Roc.....................


----------



## Lightning Guy (Sep 22, 2004)

I think his point would still apply. As bad as the Roc might have been, you had least had a pretty good chance of not killing yourself on takeoff (or just fueling it up for that matter).


----------



## weirdguy (Sep 27, 2004)

The worst aircraft was probably one that never got out of the testing phase. The Me 163 at least had a chance of getting off the ground.


----------



## lesofprimus (Sep 27, 2004)

Thats not an airplane then, thats a prototype....


----------



## johnny (Sep 28, 2004)

There si always the He162 jet fighter.It was built out of balsa wood and loloked like a V1 with a pilot.It handled terribly and was difficult even for a experienced pilot to handle.Hitler expected his hitler youth to fly them in early '45.


----------



## plan_D (Sep 28, 2004)

A prototype is still a plane. So we change this to aircraft that served. The He-162 looked sweet though. I'd say that or the Me-163 'Komet'.


----------



## cheddar cheese (Sep 28, 2004)

the He-162 probably could have been pretty good though.


----------



## plan_D (Sep 28, 2004)

However, it wasn't.


----------



## cheddar cheese (Sep 28, 2004)

It had more potential than the ME-163


----------



## Lightning Guy (Sep 28, 2004)

I'm not sure about that. The Me-163 had the potential to be completely uncatchable. The He-162 had serious stability issues and would have been a handful for even experienced pilots.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Sep 29, 2004)

i think if i had 2 choose between the two, i'd go for the komet...........


----------



## Lightning Guy (Sep 29, 2004)

I think I'd hate to have to choose between the two.


----------



## cheddar cheese (Sep 29, 2004)

no i'd definately go for the He-162, Then people can say you died in the fastest fighter of the war


----------



## GermansRGeniuses (Sep 29, 2004)

But...

It wasn't...

The P-80 and Me-262 were faster, excludigin the Go-229 since it was a prototype...


----------



## Lightning Guy (Sep 30, 2004)

There were several piston-engined fighters that were faster than the He-162! And of course the Me-163 was far faster still.


----------



## cheddar cheese (Sep 30, 2004)

the He- 162 had a top of 522mph  i dont know of any piston fighters that could top 500  and the Me-262 wasnt strictly a fighter was it, and the Komet was an interceptor.
The P-80 never actually saw combat.


----------



## plan_D (Sep 30, 2004)

The Me-262A-1a not a fighter? Since when?


----------



## cheddar cheese (Sep 30, 2004)

Ok my mistake, i forgot about the A-1a. But the role of the 262 was changed over time.


----------



## plan_D (Sep 30, 2004)

It was always a fighter. The A-2a was a bomber/ground attack and the U/3 (If I remember correctly) was a Recce.


----------



## cheddar cheese (Sep 30, 2004)

Ive read several sources saying the He-162 was the fastest fighter of the war.


----------



## plan_D (Sep 30, 2004)

I don't know. I'm just saying the Me-262 was a fighter.


----------



## cheddar cheese (Sep 30, 2004)

I always thought it was an interceptor?


----------



## plan_D (Sep 30, 2004)

It was a fighter that was excellent of intercepting. The Me-163 is an interceptor because all it could do was attack bombers. The Me-262 could dogfight as well, so it's a fighter in my books.


----------



## cheddar cheese (Sep 30, 2004)

Ive always seen it the other way round...an interceptor that was excellent at fighting  perhaps we should agree to disagree...


----------



## plan_D (Sep 30, 2004)

Eh...


----------



## cheddar cheese (Sep 30, 2004)

either you didnt read the post properly or you're astoundingly rat-arsed...


----------



## plan_D (Sep 30, 2004)

I was agreeing with you. We agree to disagree, but I was distracted when about to type the message. So it was just 'Eh...' as a lazy, yeah.


----------



## cheddar cheese (Sep 30, 2004)

oh ok


----------



## plan_D (Sep 30, 2004)

I do that often...another I do often is pee...

...some would say I'm diabetic, I would say...I drink a lot.


----------



## cheddar cheese (Sep 30, 2004)

You're almost as bad as Hot Space


----------



## plan_D (Sep 30, 2004)

Almost...<Timothy we're nearly there old chap>


----------



## cheddar cheese (Sep 30, 2004)

Ok, Im beginning to wonder if youve had youre medication


----------



## plan_D (Sep 30, 2004)

The doctor said it was ok for me to stop taking it...or was that my parrot. I haven't taken my medication in a few days actually, I have to go take some this weekend and throw up on my brothers carpet for good measure.


----------



## cheddar cheese (Sep 30, 2004)

Thankgod I have to go for tea in a few minutes  You're beginning to scare me


----------



## plan_D (Sep 30, 2004)

My medication is alcohol, or have you not picked up on that. I'd be an alcoholic but I'm not rich enough.


----------



## cheddar cheese (Sep 30, 2004)

I think i have picked up on that


----------



## plan_D (Sep 30, 2004)

So you know your enemy...


----------



## cheddar cheese (Sep 30, 2004)

Yup, advantage CC


----------



## plan_D (Sep 30, 2004)

When I drink the advantage will be handed over to me. The moral of the story being, abusing alcohol has absolutely no negative consequences.


----------



## cheddar cheese (Sep 30, 2004)

youre fogetting the mornings hangover...


----------



## plan_D (Sep 30, 2004)

You see that's why you have a can of beer in the morning, it stops the hangover. Or alternatively you throw up the night before.


----------



## cheddar cheese (Sep 30, 2004)

you dont drink beer in the morning do you?


----------



## plan_D (Sep 30, 2004)

Yes. I drink whenever and where ever drink is available.


----------



## cheddar cheese (Sep 30, 2004)

You're a bad influence on me you know


----------



## plan_D (Sep 30, 2004)

It's your own fault, you should not be influenced by a border-line alcoholic. 

You should at least get drunk once in your life though. Just to see what it's like. IT'S GREAT!


----------



## cheddar cheese (Sep 30, 2004)

Nah, I dont like alcohol 8)


----------



## plan_D (Sep 30, 2004)

So, just gulp half a litre of Vodka straight down and you'll be drunk. 

Or drink Bacardi Breezers, you can't even taste the alcohol. That's why they suck, but you could get drunk on them!


----------



## cheddar cheese (Sep 30, 2004)

I like bacardi breezers though....


----------



## plan_D (Sep 30, 2004)

Drink about 30 or so of them.


----------



## cheddar cheese (Sep 30, 2004)

I couldnt  I can easily drink a few gallons of iced tea though, is iced tea good?


----------



## plan_D (Sep 30, 2004)

Are you putting vodka in it?


----------



## cheddar cheese (Sep 30, 2004)

No, but if you pee in it no-one can tell 

You sure you're not Russian? You seem to have a Vodka fetish


----------



## plan_D (Sep 30, 2004)

Until the day I pour vodka on a chicks stomach and lick it off, it's not a fetish. Now there's an idea...<memo to self - New life goal - lick vodka off womans stomach> 

Beer and vodka...are both good. 

So I'll get drunk then pee in your ice tea, second hand alcohol!


----------



## cheddar cheese (Sep 30, 2004)

Does your doctor get worried when he finds blood in your alcohol stream?


----------



## plan_D (Sep 30, 2004)

That's a good one...how long did that take?


----------



## cheddar cheese (Sep 30, 2004)

Thats an old joke  i thought youd have known that one...


----------



## plan_D (Sep 30, 2004)

Do I look like the kind of person that would know a joke about alcohol?


----------



## cheddar cheese (Sep 30, 2004)

...


----------



## plan_D (Sep 30, 2004)

It's obviously YOU that is the bad influence on me. With your alcohol jokes, your tempting me to drink me.


----------



## cheddar cheese (Sep 30, 2004)

If anything you're the sort of person who influences alcohol jokes  and im only 14! you're poisoning my mind  The schools propaganda works well though


----------



## plan_D (Sep 30, 2004)

Don't tell me they are actually getting to you with that crap!?! I've always wondered why they still tell us not to go out drinking, and you're WHY!!! You know by letting it work, you are ruining it for everyone! 

I don't poison your mind. The alcohol does, and it's sooooo good.


----------



## cheddar cheese (Sep 30, 2004)

No im not letting it get to me, I just dont like alcohol really


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Oct 1, 2004)

i can't stand wine.............


----------



## plan_D (Oct 1, 2004)

I don't really like it, but when that is all that is available..you have ot make do.


----------



## cheddar cheese (Oct 1, 2004)

I will drink all alcohol if necessary, except beer. I cannot stand beer.


----------



## lesofprimus (Oct 1, 2004)

Pussy...


----------



## plan_D (Oct 2, 2004)

Les is right. Anyway, how can you generilise beer. It all tastes so different. Anywho, YOU will like it some day.


----------



## lesofprimus (Oct 2, 2004)




----------



## cheddar cheese (Oct 2, 2004)

All beer tastes the same to me


----------



## plan_D (Oct 2, 2004)

That's because your taste buds haven't developed my young virginator.


----------



## cheddar cheese (Oct 2, 2004)




----------



## lesofprimus (Oct 2, 2004)

> All beer tastes the same to me


Somethings medically wrong if u can say that..... Maybe go see your doctor and get yourself checked out....


----------



## cheddar cheese (Oct 2, 2004)

I know i have medical problems, but i just keep eating the medication like its a bar snack


----------



## lesofprimus (Oct 2, 2004)

That'll be good for you liver in say, ohhh, 5 years....


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Oct 2, 2004)

> virginator



is that what we call CC now, cool!!


----------



## lesofprimus (Oct 2, 2004)

I think the term "Virginator" would refer to someone that deflowers virgins....


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Oct 2, 2004)

wow i've never heard that definition before.............


----------



## lesofprimus (Oct 2, 2004)

Consider urself enlightend then....


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Oct 2, 2004)

i will.............


----------



## lesofprimus (Oct 2, 2004)

You better...


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Oct 2, 2004)

congrats on the 1000 posts les...........


----------



## lesofprimus (Oct 2, 2004)

Thanks but I had no idea.. I dont pay attention to that...


----------



## cheddar cheese (Oct 2, 2004)

the lancaster kicks ass said:


> > virginator
> 
> 
> 
> is that what we call CC now, cool!!





lesofprimus said:


> I think the term "Virginator" would refer to someone that deflowers virgins....



 The Virginator, "I'll be back"


----------



## plan_D (Oct 2, 2004)

Well, in my neck of the woods virginator is a virgin.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Oct 3, 2004)

that's what i thought to, i just though it was a slightly cooler way to be called a vergin............


----------



## cheddar cheese (Oct 3, 2004)

ive never heard of the word before


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Oct 3, 2004)

nor have i but the same principal has applied to the ones i have............


----------



## plan_D (Oct 3, 2004)

I've just started using it. 8)


----------



## Hot Space (Oct 4, 2004)

I was a virgin once....................but that was many, many year's ago now  

Hot Space


----------



## lesofprimus (Oct 4, 2004)

I certainly hope so old man....


----------



## Hot Space (Oct 4, 2004)

In my case, a very old man  

Hot Space


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Oct 4, 2004)

just how many years??


----------



## Hot Space (Oct 4, 2004)

457  

Hot Space


----------



## lesofprimus (Oct 4, 2004)

I dont think ur older than me HS....


----------



## cheddar cheese (Oct 4, 2004)

No-one is older than i. I am 647 years old, i died 601 years ago and was reincarnated in the late 1980's


----------



## lesofprimus (Oct 4, 2004)

Dont kid urself... We all know ur gonna be 15 soon.....


----------



## Hot Space (Oct 4, 2004)

lesofprimus said:


> I dont think ur older than me HS....



45 going on 7,165..................and a bit...

Hot Space


----------



## lesofprimus (Oct 4, 2004)

If ur 45 then u got me beat....


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Oct 5, 2004)

i thing now brad's gone GrGs is the youngest on the site, i think i'm second..............


----------



## cheddar cheese (Oct 5, 2004)

Im 15 in 2 weeks


----------



## Hot Space (Oct 5, 2004)

cheddar cheese said:


> Im 15 in 2 weeks



I know I shouldn't say this, but f*ck me, I'm 3 times older then you  

Hot Space


----------



## lesofprimus (Oct 5, 2004)

Makes u feel old dont it??? I know I feel old when my son brings home these hot little girls.. I cant look too close at em cause i feel like a dirty old man.... 

He's now seeing Miss Teen Mississippi.....


----------



## Hot Space (Oct 6, 2004)

Got her phone number?

I'm not ashamed  

Hot Space


----------



## lesofprimus (Oct 6, 2004)

How do I know ur not really an undercover cop trying to bust me for underage flirtations......


----------



## Hot Space (Oct 6, 2004)

Because I can spell  

Hot Space


----------



## cheddar cheese (Oct 6, 2004)




----------



## kiwimac (Oct 6, 2004)

Hmmm,

I wonder what happened to _What was the worst plane of WW2_ it was around here somewhere.   

Ah well...

Brewster Buffalo -- Worst
Fairey Battle -- First equal
Roc / Defiant/ Skua, all sodding awful!

Kiwimac


----------



## plan_D (Oct 6, 2004)

The Buffalo managed to shoot things down. How can it be the worst?


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Oct 6, 2004)

and compared to a Roc, the defaint was pretty dam good, it shot down quite a bit early in it's carear and really started our night fighter campain..........


----------



## cheddar cheese (Oct 6, 2004)

The Finnish Utilised the Buffalo EXTEMELY effectively.


----------



## plan_D (Oct 6, 2004)

And they managed to claim 7 Spitfires.


----------



## cheddar cheese (Oct 6, 2004)

Exactly. So i dont really see How he can call the the worst plane.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Oct 8, 2004)

it was far from the worst plane, i mean how many planes could you hold a board meeting in the cockpit of.....................


----------



## cheddar cheese (Oct 8, 2004)

Exactly  It was pretty manoeverable too 8)


----------



## lesofprimus (Oct 8, 2004)

Everyone always points to Wake Island and how the Buffs there were slaughtered in the beginning of the War... I am of the mind that just about any fighter, with an extremely exceptional pilot, can have some success in combat...

If Barkhorn had flown a Buff would he have surpassed 300 kills???


----------



## cheddar cheese (Oct 9, 2004)

No idea, i've no idea who Barkhorn is


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Oct 9, 2004)

> i mean how many planes could you hold a board meeting in the cockpit of.....................



talking about doing strange things with planes (tedious link there), there's quite a funny story of a time a pilot jumped out the cockpit of his swardfish, untied his bike from the torpedo rack and just cycled away, his CO wasn't best pleased...........


----------



## cheddar cheese (Oct 9, 2004)

Why the hell would he have his bike with him?


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Oct 9, 2004)

because airfields are huge, just thought that was pretty funny............


----------



## cheddar cheese (Oct 9, 2004)

It is funny  Was it during the war?


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Oct 9, 2004)

yup, just checked in one of my books, it doesn't give a name or squadron, it just says "a neatly dressed naval officer" which narrows it down a bit i suppose................


----------



## cheddar cheese (Oct 9, 2004)




----------



## lesofprimus (Oct 9, 2004)

Gerhard Barkhorn became the first fighter pilot to have completed 1,000 combat missions. He achieved his 250th victory on 13 February, the second to do so. He was awarded the Schwertern on 2 March 1944 for 251 victories. He achieved his 300th victory in January 1945. 
His success had not come without some cost. He was shot down nine times in his combat career. He baled out once and was wounded twice. On 31 May 1944, Barkhorn was flying his sixth mission of the day and, being fatigued, was not concentrating on keeping a good look-out when he was bounced by a Russian Airacobra and was shot down in Bf 109 G-6 (WNr 163195) “Black 5”. He received severe wounds to his right arm and leg which put him out of action for four months. He returned to combat duty at the end of October. He claimed his 275th victim on 14 November. He recorded his 301st, and last, victory on 5 January 1945. 

On 16 January 1945, Major Barkhorn was transferred to take command of JG 6 serving on Reichsverteidigung duties based at Posen. He led the unit until 10 April 1945 but was still suffering the effects of his wounds and eventually relinquished command for another spell in hospital. On recovery he joined JV 44. On 21 April 1945, on the last of only two operational missions flying the Me 262 jet fighter, Barkhorn’s starboard engine failed. He was obliged to break off an attack on an American bomber formation and return to his base at Riem. He was chased by the Mustang fighter escort so set about landing his crippled machine in a clearing in some woods. In the resulting crash-landing the cockpit canopy, which he had opened to enable a quick escape, slammed shut on his neck. The incident put him back in hospital and out of the war. 
Post-war Barkhorn became a Generalleutnant in the Bundesluftwaffe. He retired in 1976. He lost his life, with that of his wife Christl, in an automobile accident on 6 January 1983. 
Gerhard Barkhorn was credited with 301 victories gained in 1,104 missions. All his victories were gained while flying over the Eastern Front.


----------



## cheddar cheese (Oct 9, 2004)

Wow, pretty good pilot then 8) If he was that successful I have no idea how ive never heard of him before now


----------



## lesofprimus (Oct 9, 2004)

Me neither....


----------



## cheddar cheese (Oct 9, 2004)

I probably have heard of him, but because my brain is from the same evolutionary species as the common sieve things just dont linger round in there too long


----------



## lesofprimus (Oct 9, 2004)

Seeing how only He and Erich Hartmann have scored over 300 victories, Im sure u have heard of him before...


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Oct 9, 2004)

i hadn't................


----------



## lesofprimus (Oct 9, 2004)

Jeez.....


----------



## cheddar cheese (Oct 10, 2004)

Us Brits arent bright you know


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Oct 10, 2004)

uh yes we are...............


----------



## cheddar cheese (Oct 10, 2004)

No we are not  Well im not then...


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Oct 10, 2004)

yes we are, how many really important things can you thing of that aren't british, and compare it to things that are................


----------



## cheddar cheese (Oct 10, 2004)

Well the romans invented a hell of a lot more necessary stuff than us.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Oct 10, 2004)

the telephone?? the computer?? the jet engine??


----------



## cheddar cheese (Oct 10, 2004)

Sanitation? Schools? Roads?

And the Germans invented the car...

But the Americans invented condensed milk so they must be the most innovative nation in the world.


----------



## lesofprimus (Oct 10, 2004)

Americans invented the telephone, the telegraph, and powered FLIGHT....

Oh and lets not forget FREAKIN ELECTRICITY.....

England invented what??? Monarchy?? Tea??? Dental Care??? Double Decker Buses???

Ah, thats right, Cornish Patry..... Now theres a valuable addition to the World Society...


----------



## cheddar cheese (Oct 10, 2004)

Go LES!  

Ok that was slightly camp...

Anyway i thought the Americans invented the telephone, its just that Bell got his patent there first.

America invented the reusable space shuttle too 8)


----------



## GermansRGeniuses (Oct 10, 2004)

lesofprimus said:


> Americans invented the telephone, the telegraph, and powered FLIGHT....
> 
> Oh and lets not forget FREAKIN ELECTRICITY.....
> 
> ...



France invented powered flight, in the form of a dirigible...

The DuPoint Brothers or something...


----------



## cheddar cheese (Oct 10, 2004)

No i think some chinese guy did a very long time ago, strapped fireworks to his chair. He died but at least he was on the right track


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Oct 10, 2004)

actually there's a place in summerset, can't remember what it's called, that is internationally known as the home of powered flight.................


----------



## lesofprimus (Oct 10, 2004)

Let me rephrase my statement...

America is the home of the first powered airplane... The Wright Brothers at Kitty Hawk, North Carolina....


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Oct 10, 2004)

we had a project that could have flown in the 1800s, but the government withdrew funding, there's been a reconstruction of the plane to the exact same specifications and it worked................


----------



## cheddar cheese (Oct 10, 2004)

Could have, but didnt.


----------



## evangilder (Oct 10, 2004)

Actually Les, the British company, BSR invented the compact disc. And the first patent for a jet engine was indeed English.

I have to admit the dentistry bit was funny. 

But why the heck did every sandwich in England I ever ate had butter on it?!


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Oct 11, 2004)

because we always have butter on our sandwidches...........


----------



## cheddar cheese (Oct 11, 2004)

Whereas I Dont have sandwiches.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Oct 12, 2004)

you wouldn't............


----------



## cheddar cheese (Oct 12, 2004)

Unless the filling is in a French stick, this i have sandwiches.


----------



## lesofprimus (Oct 12, 2004)

I didnt like the butter on a sandwich thing either Evan.... Just like i cant stand WATCHING someone dip french fries in Mayonaise, let alone actually doing it....


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Oct 13, 2004)

but we've always had butter in a sandwich, they were inveted with butter on...........


----------



## cheddar cheese (Oct 13, 2004)

Too true...


----------



## evangilder (Oct 13, 2004)

Les, that gives me the willies just thinking about it. Mayo on french fries? EWWWWWWWWWW!


----------



## cheddar cheese (Oct 13, 2004)

Gets worse. I had a friend who mixed tomato ketchup with mayo and _then_ dipped fries in it


----------



## JCS (Oct 13, 2004)

I knew this kid that used to put mayonaise on everything; fries, chips, pizza, spaghetti, tacos...anything you can think of, he'd put mayonaise on it.


----------



## cheddar cheese (Oct 13, 2004)

Ugh  Mayo is ing


----------



## lesofprimus (Oct 13, 2004)

I was in Zebrugge, Belgium, at a McDonalds, and people were sitting there dippin their fries in Mayo... 

And the looks of  and amazement I got when I started dippin mine in Ketchup..... They all thought I was the idiot.... How wrong they were....

I like butter on my toast and butter on bread with spaghetti and all, but not on coldcuts.. Thats just sick.....

And I find it enormously hard to believe that the sandwich was first made in Britian....


----------



## cheddar cheese (Oct 14, 2004)

Hey has anyone here ever put vinegar on rice? If not you should try it, it tastes good 8)


----------



## lesofprimus (Oct 14, 2004)

UGH......


----------



## GermansRGeniuses (Oct 14, 2004)

Les, ever had Sushi?

When not done in traditional style, the rice is kept together with vinegar, and that tastes mighty good!


----------



## lesofprimus (Oct 15, 2004)

Actually I love Sushi... And probably had more non-traditional than traditional...

Are u tryin to tell me that there is actually something i dont know about??? Vinegar in my Sushi??? 
I take back my previous statement then....

YUM.....


----------



## cheddar cheese (Oct 15, 2004)

Vinegar in rice makes my mouth water...


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Oct 15, 2004)

> And I find it enormously hard to believe that the sandwich was first made in Britian....



it was invented by a englishman called the Earl of Sandwich............................


----------



## lesofprimus (Oct 15, 2004)

Man its gettin pretty deep in here... Better put on my hip waders....


----------



## cheddar cheese (Oct 15, 2004)

Doesnt it worry you that the lanc knows such things?


----------



## lesofprimus (Oct 15, 2004)

If it was a true statement it would...


----------



## cheddar cheese (Oct 15, 2004)

You know im pretty sure it is actually a true statement, i've heard it mentioned before.


----------



## lesofprimus (Oct 15, 2004)

Im sure that Romans were taking 2 pieces of bread and putting meat between the slices..... Or Ancient Egyptians for that matter...


----------



## cheddar cheese (Oct 15, 2004)

Dont tell me that wasnt said with any sexual inuendo


----------



## lesofprimus (Oct 15, 2004)

Nope....


----------



## cheddar cheese (Oct 15, 2004)

Yeah...RIGHT!


----------



## lesofprimus (Oct 15, 2004)

If I had said Greeks, I could see u questioning my sincerity....


----------



## cheddar cheese (Oct 15, 2004)

I can edit your post to say greeks if i want to...


----------



## lesofprimus (Oct 15, 2004)

So could I, but then my statement wouldnt be taken seriously....


----------



## cheddar cheese (Oct 15, 2004)

Im not taking it seriously anyway


----------



## lesofprimus (Oct 15, 2004)

*sniffles*


----------



## cheddar cheese (Oct 15, 2004)

I dont take much seriously...I oppose people frequently, even when i know im wrong


----------



## lesofprimus (Oct 15, 2004)

That'll get u far in life.....


----------



## cheddar cheese (Oct 15, 2004)

hell yeah, it wastes precious time


----------



## lesofprimus (Oct 15, 2004)

It'll also probably get ur ass kicked by someone far bigger and badder than u are....


----------



## cheddar cheese (Oct 15, 2004)

Its hard to get bigger than me...


----------



## lesofprimus (Oct 15, 2004)

Dude, I'm bigger than u.... It wasnt that hard...


----------



## cheddar cheese (Oct 15, 2004)

How tall are you?


----------



## lesofprimus (Oct 15, 2004)

6'6".. U???


----------



## cheddar cheese (Oct 15, 2004)

6'3"....I gots another few years of growing left though, I will more than likely end up bigger than you...


----------



## lesofprimus (Oct 15, 2004)

Those are the years that your growth slows down..... I was 6'4" when I was 15....


----------



## cheddar cheese (Oct 15, 2004)

but im not 15 until wednesday, i gotta week to grow an inch...


----------



## lesofprimus (Oct 15, 2004)

Good Luck....


----------



## cheddar cheese (Oct 15, 2004)

Thanks


----------



## lesofprimus (Oct 15, 2004)

Ur a meatball....


----------



## cheddar cheese (Oct 15, 2004)

Wtf are you on about?


----------



## lesofprimus (Oct 15, 2004)

I said good luck to you to grow an inch in a week.... U said thanks.... Thats funny...... Thats silly... Thats goofy.... Ur a meatball....

Got it now??


----------



## cheddar cheese (Oct 15, 2004)

Hey dude i wasnt joking...


----------



## lesofprimus (Oct 15, 2004)

Man, you got a better chance of seeing Osama Bin Laden walk into your house with an early Christmas present for u, than growing an inch in a week.....


----------



## Dan (Oct 16, 2004)

i'm not quite sure what you guys are talking about but i'm only 13 and i'm like 6' 5"


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Oct 16, 2004)

bloddy hell, i thought i was pretty big.............


----------



## cheddar cheese (Oct 16, 2004)

thats cheap lanc  you thought you were big, you aint even 6 foot (i dont think) Yet im like 3 inches bigger than you and you say you thought _you_ were big 

By the way Dan, thats pretty amazing, congratulations


----------



## lesofprimus (Oct 16, 2004)

13 and 6'5"???? I call bullshixit on that one....


----------



## cheddar cheese (Oct 16, 2004)

Its just about believable...


----------



## lesofprimus (Oct 16, 2004)

Not to me it isnt.....


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Oct 17, 2004)

i'm not sure..............


----------



## cheddar cheese (Oct 17, 2004)

If he lives in the countryside then its believable, cos the shit helps growth - look at me and the lanc. But if hes a townie, then no way


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Oct 18, 2004)

so you're admiting your a country folk??


----------



## cheddar cheese (Oct 18, 2004)

No, Im saying that because I happen to live in the countryside i grow quicker  (I dont actually believe thats the reason, its kinda tongue-in-cheek) Im not country folk...


----------



## HealzDevo (Oct 26, 2004)

I forget the exact designation but the He- Something Grief had a remarkably bad reputation as a flying coffin, so did one of the allied seaplanes. There was one that was nicknamed the flying gascan because of its habit of exploding in midair. The He- Something Grief was not a really good aircraft. Hope this helps in your quest.


----------



## cheddar cheese (Oct 26, 2004)

You're right, The He-177 Greif was pretty bad  It was the Axis' first real heavy bomber and it followed much the same layout as the similarly ill-fated Avro Manchester, which instead of having 4 engines, they had 2 conjoined engines on each wing. I've read sources as well that they tried to use the Grief as a Dive-Bomber 

By the way, welcome to the site


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Oct 26, 2004)

on paper it was pretty good though..................


----------



## cheddar cheese (Oct 26, 2004)

Hell yeah. 3,400 miles range, 304mph top speed, 13,200lb payload...

Didnt work out though did it 

I would also lay claim to it being the best looking bomber of the war...


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Oct 27, 2004)

na the lancaster's the best looking bomber of the war easily.................


----------



## Lightning Guy (Oct 27, 2004)

The He-177 was a pretty ugly bomber in my opinion. There were numerous bombers that looked much better.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Oct 27, 2004)

including the lancaster...................


----------



## cheddar cheese (Oct 27, 2004)

IMO the Lancaster was one of the ugliest planes in the sky...


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Oct 28, 2004)

it was beautiful...............


----------



## cheddar cheese (Oct 28, 2004)

Nah. The nose looked hideous. The rest is ok but the the nose section totally ruins it for me.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Oct 29, 2004)

the nose is one of the best parts.............


----------



## cheddar cheese (Oct 29, 2004)

I disagree, with passion 8) And with the landing gear down, It looks even worse.


----------



## Maestro (Oct 29, 2004)

In term of look, I always prefered the B-25 to any other bombers. The B-17 looks cool too.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Oct 30, 2004)

the B-24 looks better than the B-17.................


----------



## cheddar cheese (Oct 30, 2004)

I disagree. I think the B-24 was the ugliest of American bombers.

The B-29 looks cool. 8)


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Oct 30, 2004)

i like the looks of the B-24, it was allot better than the B-17, not sure about the B-29 though................


----------



## cheddar cheese (Oct 30, 2004)

The B-29 looks long and slender (because it is  ), The B-17 looks cool, and the B-24 looks a bit like its British, which is why you like it I reckon


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Oct 31, 2004)

i like the B-24 because it looks big mean and beefy, and i also can't stand the fact that the B-17's a low wing, it doesn't look right.....................


----------



## cheddar cheese (Oct 31, 2004)

Looks fine to me. I like low-wing planes


----------



## uruk-hai (Nov 3, 2004)

LaGG-3


----------



## cheddar cheese (Nov 3, 2004)

The LaGG 3 wasnt actually that bad, from what ive heard. It certainly wasnt great but planes such as the Blackburn B-25 Roc, Fairey Battle and Messerschmitt Me-163 Komet were far worse.

On a personal note, I happen to like the LaGG-3 


Welcome to the site, BTW 8)


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Nov 5, 2004)

the thing about the -163 is that it was also one of the war's most advanced planes, and the worse..............


----------



## cheddar cheese (Nov 5, 2004)

Potentially a good plane as well.


----------



## Medvedya (Nov 9, 2004)

I think the Short Stirling has to be up there - if only because it was designed to fit the hangers, rather than the other way around.


----------



## cheddar cheese (Nov 9, 2004)

The Short Stirling was a fine plane - not as good as the Halifax or Lancaster but it had its uses.


----------



## Medvedya (Nov 9, 2004)

Well, the ceiling on the earlier models was only a pitiful 16,500 feet. Admittedly it was fast at low altitude - but it's losses were far higher than those in Halifax or Lancaster squadrons.


----------



## cheddar cheese (Nov 9, 2004)

British bombers had low ceilings for a reason, mainly to evade any compressibility problems.


----------



## Medvedya (Nov 9, 2004)

The Lanc had a ceiling of 24,500 and the Halifax around 22,000 - somewhat lower than the U.S.A.F bombers admittedly, but 17,000 is really too low for a raid into Germany. (hense the losses) The Stirling was changed to other duties very successfully such as glider-towing, mine-laying, and dropping paratroops, but performing in the role it was originaly designed for, that is, long range heavy bombing - it was a flop.

Also, it was not the easiest of planes to maintain - the high undercarrage meant that ground crew working on the engines and wings had a nasty drop down to the unforgiving concrete. There were quite a few broken legs suffered by ground crews from falling off Stirlings.


----------



## cheddar cheese (Nov 9, 2004)

Hmmmmm I agree actually, but there were actually several other planes that were far worse.

Messerschmitt Me-163 Komet - Killed more Axis than Allies

Blackburn B-25 Roc - Similar to the Boulton-Paul Defiant, but about 10 times worse.

Fairey Battle - Only one .303 for defence, and it wasnt even the best when there was air superiority.

And the list goes on...But the Stirling was not the worst.


----------



## redcoat (Nov 25, 2004)

My pick

Me 163, even refuelling it was dangerous


----------



## cheddar cheese (Nov 25, 2004)

Good choice 8) I wouldnt use the term "refuelling" as I doubt many even made it back from the original "fuelling"


----------



## germanace (Nov 25, 2004)

Id go with the 163 and the swordfish


----------



## Hot Space (Nov 25, 2004)

cheddar cheese said:


> The Short Stirling was a fine plane - not as good as the Halifax or Lancaster but it had its uses.



The Stirling was a really good turner though. If a German Nighterfighter got on it's tail and the crew knew of this, it would have a hard time getting a kill.

Hot Space


----------



## Medvedya (Nov 25, 2004)

I wonder what it would have been like if they had extended its wings in later models? 

Bit of trivia - the Airfix kit for the Stirling is the only one to have a tractor and bomb trollies with the main kit. Come to think of it, I haven't made a model in years, but I'd quite like to build one again, and do it justice this time round!

Here's a nice cut away drawing anyway.....
I got it from this excellent site....

http://www.stirling.box.nl/home.htm


----------



## Hot Space (Nov 26, 2004)

Nice 8) 

Hot Space


----------



## cheddar cheese (Nov 26, 2004)

Indeed 8)



> Id go with the 163 and the swordfish



163 yes; Swordfish? A BIG FAT NO. The Swordfish was extremely successful.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Nov 26, 2004)

the most successfull torpedo bomber of the war.................


----------



## GermansRGeniuses (Nov 26, 2004)

germanace said:


> Id go with the 163 and the swordfish




Statistics don't make a plane bad, if this was true, the Komet would have been the best plane of the war... 


The Swordfish was slow and vulnerable, but had INCREDIBLE battle success...


----------



## Udet (Nov 26, 2004)

Just like the question on what aircraft was the best of WWII, telling which machine was the worst of the war, is an extremely difficult, if not impossible, question to answer with accuracy.

What of the parameters applied to answer the question? There can be as many as there are individuals thinking about it.

I would narrow my search to those machines who saw action in important numbers, leaving aside those which saw service in such small numbers they can even be considered as prototypes. (Still, I would never ever consider the Komet Me 163 as the worst, not at all; it was so revolutionary it still had to solve its problems, however, that would never place the Komet nowhere near amongst the "worst".)

Let the show begin:

For instance, the PZL polish fighters which faced the Luftwaffe during the invasion of Poland in September, 1939, strictly as machines were not that bad.

The problem was they were TOO OLD to still remain in service. Even worst, to see service against an extremely modern and tactically advanced foe such as the Luftwaffe equipped with cannon armed, radio equipped single-engined Bf109´s.

Still, a few Polish pilots, very few, made it airborne and shot down a small number of German planes, bombers mainly.

The same can be told about the soviet Polikarpovs, the I-15 biplane, the I-153 and the I-16 (Ishak). I repeat: strictly the machine, they made excellent planes when they were conceived. Likewise, they suffered the same fate of the Polish fighters when they met the very modern Bf109´s. 

Those old soviet types had excellent maneuvering capabilities, but were very miserable at both climbing and diving, their speed was low.

Those 3 tiny soviet fighters were TOO OLD to be in service. Obsolete. Outclassed. Outpowered by the Luftwaffe´s single engine fighters.

Still a few Soviet pilots managed to score victories against the Luftwaffe flying those 3 planes. However, the bulk of the Polikarpovs got effectively blown out of the skies or destroyed at their bases by the superior planes and tactics of the Germans, still a few of those remained in service until 1943.

The soviet LaGG´s, which were far more modern than the Polikarpovs, were extremely mediocre and unreliable, and the Germans as well sent countless of those plummeting down to the earth.

PARTIAL CONCLUSION: (STRICTLY THE MACHINES) the Polish PZL´s the Soviet Polikarpovs while being very good planes, should have had an earlier retirement. WWII as it started, was not the business of such aging and obsolete types and their losses were frightful.

The LaGG´s, while including very interesting features made very bad planes. Totally unreliable. As a whole it can be said the LaGG-3 was a failure.

The RAF with the turret equipped Defiant made a contribution for nurturing the "worst plane" thread. Yes, it scored a few victories during the initial stages of the Battle of Britain, but it got immediatly outclassed in combat by the Bf109´s and losses were very high.

The USAAF with the Brewster Bufalo also is awarded a medal. It had nothing to do against the Japanese Zeros.

I do not think any of the German planes deployed in signifcant numbers to front units qualifies at all in the "worst aircraft" category.

Some obsolete types like the Henschel He123 biplane, were deployed in very small numbers for night harrasment missions, but in very small numbers, and such attackes were frequently succesful.

If you think of the Me210, which failed, it was a prototype being tested, which eventually lead to the excellent Me410 which brought the Luftwaffe back over England in 1944.


----------



## Yeomanz (Nov 26, 2004)

Ju-87 was the worst plane , it was easily blown to smitheriens and was as fast as a snail , even though it could carry a hefty load


----------



## cheddar cheese (Nov 26, 2004)

Although it was deadly effective when air superiority was achieved...


----------



## Yeomanz (Nov 26, 2004)

Well ok i'll give you that , but without air superiority it was quite vunerable id say


----------



## cheddar cheese (Nov 26, 2004)

Me too, absolutely hopeless


----------



## Udet (Nov 26, 2004)

Hi Yeomanz:

I will argue your argument the Stuka was the worst plane.

I assume you know the Ju87 Stuka was designed for the specific role of highly accurate dive bombing.

*It was not conceived to engage enemy aircraft.* 

You say it was as fast as a snail. Then you would have to use the same argument against the IL-2M "shturmovik", which had virtually the very same speed of the Stuka.

Since the Stuka was not designed to engage enemy fighters, it certainly provided a relatively comfortable target for allied fighters, still, shooting down aircraft is never easy. 

In my guncamera footage collection I have a shot of rear gun camera action of a Stuka rear gunner setting a Spitfire ablaze with its 7.92 mm MG, the British pilot disengaging in a cloud of smoke dissapearing from the camera sight.

The Stuka is not only the "worst" plane. It happens to be quite the opposite. It is one of the most sucessful military machines ever made.
The Stuka´s dive attack destroyed far more enemy resources than the ground attack missions of the P-47s and Typhoons ever achieved over Normandy in preparation for the D-Day.

The Stuka gutted the ground positions and mechanized formations of the armies of Poland, France, Low Countries, USSR (until late 1943), the Balkans and sank a real hellish number of allied military and merchant shipping. 

Read about "Operation Merkur" and see the treatment the Royal Navy received from Wolfram von Richtofen´s stukas off Crete.

From 1944 until the end of the war, in view of the numerical superiority of the allied air forces in the west, the Stuka virtually saw no action, except for some night harrasment missions.

If one should take many of the arguments used to affirm the Stuka was obsolete or the worst plane, then perhaps the B-17 Flying Fortress is obsolote as well.  

The doctrine of the USAAF which saw the massive boxes of B-17´s penetrating deep into enemy territory, relying on the soundness of the construction of the big four engine B-17, packed with up to 12 defensive machine guns, accomplishing its bombing mission and being more than able to defend themselves from German interceptors and getting back for dinner, was proved a complete failure: it was a disaster. A disaster far superior to that of the Bf110 Zerstörer during the Battle of Britain.

Dozens of thousands of USAAF crews simply took off to never be seen again.

The large B-17, with its indeed sound construction, with its numerous defensive machine guns, without fighter escorts, lose to German fighters.

They could manage to shoot down some of the interceptors, yet the German fighters destroy more bombers than the bombers destroy fighters.

So, what do you think? Was the Stuka so bad? Was the B-17 obsolete?


----------



## cheddar cheese (Nov 26, 2004)

You just contradicted yourself there mate. You say the Stuka cannot be the worst because it was not designed to engage other planes, well to be honest neither was the B-17.


----------



## Udet (Nov 26, 2004)

Hey "mate", no contradiction whatsoever there, at all.

When or where did I affirm the B-17 was designed for the specific role of enganging enemy planes? I said the Stuka was specifically designed for highly accurate dive bombing.

Please look for sources, *part of the USSAF doctrine* on the heavy bomber boxes of B-17s and B-24s, was *infact* those heavy bombers could indeed take care of the German interceptors with their 10-12 defensive machine guns.

While not specifically desgined to engage fighters, *it was implicit in the design of the USAAF heavy bombers*: we are bombers but are able enough to destroy an enemy fighter interceptor force attempting to stop us; we do not need fighter escorts.

And in that doctrine, I insist, they failed.


----------



## cheddar cheese (Nov 26, 2004)

Well the Stuka had a machine gun on the rear, you could argue the same for that...


----------



## Hot Space (Nov 26, 2004)

Yeomanz said:


> Ju-87 was the worst plane , it was easily blown to smitheriens and was as fast as a snail , even though it could carry a hefty load



A snail can go pretty fast if you set light to it, you know  

Hot Space


----------



## cheddar cheese (Nov 26, 2004)

Or feed it GM crops


----------



## Hot Space (Nov 26, 2004)

Or set it alight when it's eating the GM Food  

Hot Space


----------



## cheddar cheese (Nov 26, 2004)

Ah, the best of both worlds!


----------



## Yeomanz (Nov 26, 2004)

Thanx for the info Udet 8) 

Btw a snail moves fast when its drunk ya know


----------



## cheddar cheese (Nov 26, 2004)

You must have been really bored


----------



## Hot Space (Nov 26, 2004)

That's not fair having that as your sig - funny though, but not fair   

Hot Space


----------



## Yeomanz (Nov 26, 2004)

you shouldnt have said it then


----------



## cheddar cheese (Nov 26, 2004)

I'll rid of it tomorrow mate 8)

Ill be bored then


----------



## Hot Space (Nov 26, 2004)

You're a hard man, you  

Hot Space


----------



## Hot Space (Nov 26, 2004)

Again, you could use that one  

Hot Space


----------



## cheddar cheese (Nov 26, 2004)

Im starting to worry  I know several good counsellors, they're friends of the family


----------



## Yeomanz (Nov 26, 2004)

I'm going to steal HS's keyboard


----------



## Yeomanz (Nov 26, 2004)

......but whips and chains excite me


----------



## Hot Space (Nov 26, 2004)

Boom-boom  

Hot Space


----------



## Udet (Nov 26, 2004)

Hello Cheddar and Yeomanz!

Well, Cheddar, the rear gun on the Stuka was for the sole purpose of providing the plane with a minimun level of self defense capability against enemy interceptors.

It of course suffered high losses at the hands of the RAF interceptors and was withdrawn from the skies of England.

Just do not get confused, the Stuka inflicted heavy damage to the British during the Battle of Britain. It hit radar stations, dockyards, airfields and sank ships. Its accuracy and destructive power was proved over England as well.

The Stuka took heavy losses since there were times when no Bf109 E´s were available to protect it from the Hurricanes and Spitfires. Had the Emil had a superior range, history might well have been different.

Hey guys! At least half of the speace on this thread is being filled with off-topic issues  

I now agree when you told me you are quite relaxed with rules in here.  


Cheers!


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Nov 27, 2004)

yeah as long as it's not really insulitng and moderatly funny it's ok..............


----------



## cheddar cheese (Nov 27, 2004)

As long as its NOT moderately funny?


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Nov 27, 2004)

it ceems that way at times but you obviously missread it...............


----------



## cheddar cheese (Nov 27, 2004)

No I know what you meant, I was just spamming


----------



## Yeomanz (Nov 27, 2004)

cheddar cheese said:


> No I know what you meant, I was just spamming



*slaps his wrists*


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Nov 27, 2004)

and so the span ensues..................


----------



## cheddar cheese (Nov 27, 2004)

Ow, the handcuff marks made them sore enough


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Nov 27, 2004)

wow even for you that was random...............


----------



## cheddar cheese (Nov 27, 2004)

I was replying to the wrist slapping comment by Yeomanz...


----------



## Yeomanz (Nov 27, 2004)

Please call me Yeoman , i registered before but that account expired or something so i have to be Yeomanz but call me Yeo , or Yeoman


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Nov 27, 2004)

yeo it is, you may cal me the lanc or the ass, whichever you feel's more appropriate.................


----------



## Yeomanz (Nov 27, 2004)

Ok Lanc 8)


----------



## cheddar cheese (Nov 27, 2004)

Or man....can I call you man?


----------



## Yeomanz (Nov 27, 2004)




----------



## cheddar cheese (Nov 27, 2004)

to you too then


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Nov 28, 2004)

no you cannot................


----------



## cheddar cheese (Nov 28, 2004)

Wasnay asking you


----------



## Yeomanz (Nov 29, 2004)

You to arn't going to have a scrap again are you ?


----------



## cheddar cheese (Nov 29, 2004)

Nah he learnt a long time ago that taking me on is pointless...


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Nov 29, 2004)

yeah i get so little resistance there's no point..............


----------



## cheddar cheese (Nov 29, 2004)

Whoosh!


----------



## Yeomanz (Nov 29, 2004)

Calm down ders


----------



## cheddar cheese (Nov 30, 2004)




----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Nov 30, 2004)

it's ok, he loves me really...............


----------



## cheddar cheese (Nov 30, 2004)

In your dreams...


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Dec 1, 2004)

how did you know ...............


----------



## cheddar cheese (Dec 1, 2004)

I know all


----------



## Yeomanz (Dec 2, 2004)

arrrr *they made up and kissed*


----------



## cheddar cheese (Dec 2, 2004)

Hell no, I got up and slapped


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Dec 3, 2004)

like your new siggy CC...................


----------



## cheddar cheese (Dec 3, 2004)

Ta, Its good aint it? 8)


----------



## Der Mensch (Dec 19, 2004)

I think the worst aircaft would have to be the Natter, very crazy idea and certain death for the pilot.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Dec 19, 2004)

but the germans were desparate, it never really became opperational though so i dunno if it can be counted............


----------



## cheddar cheese (Dec 19, 2004)

The Natter?


----------



## wmaxt (Dec 19, 2004)

The Brewster Buffalo has to be in here somewhere!


----------



## cheddar cheese (Dec 19, 2004)

Yeah the Buffalo was VERy bad, however becuase the Finns used it (although now called a B-239) to great effect and the highest kill ratio of the war I think it just manages to escape being a contender.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Dec 20, 2004)

the battle was the worst...........


----------



## cheddar cheese (Dec 20, 2004)

Nah the Roc...


----------



## Archangel (Dec 28, 2004)

im not shure if its the worst, but the Messersmidt Me-163 was/is really bad... half the planes exploded on the ground while rfueling,.. and yes.. the pilot what on board then >.<
and it had only for about 4 minutes fuel. and with only a few shots, they blew up in the air.

ok, its a damn good looking aircraft. fast to... but at these risks ? i wouldnt like to fly that one in real life >.<


----------



## evangilder (Dec 28, 2004)

Good point. How many poor suckers...er, pilots were vaporized by a fuel leak I don't know, but I did see a special on the Me-163 a while back on the Discovery Channel. It took some real bravado to get into that thing and fly it into combat! Thte fuel was extremely volatile, but when it worked, it was pretty amazing, especially considering it was 1945!


----------



## cheddar cheese (Dec 28, 2004)

I agree. the Komet was a dreadful aircraft. An interesting concept nonetheless.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Dec 28, 2004)

it's all the more interesting that it was advanced and crap, most crap planes were old and crap................


----------



## wmaxt (Dec 28, 2004)

Only slightly off track - A Finnish Brewster Buffalo has been recovered from a lake in fair condition and will be refurbished.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Dec 28, 2004)

glad to hear it.............


----------



## cheddar cheese (Dec 28, 2004)

Me too, the B-239 is one of my favourite planes...Not many of em got shot down so to unearth one in a lake is a real good find.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Dec 28, 2004)

but why is it all wrecks are found in lakes in norway??


----------



## cheddar cheese (Dec 28, 2004)

Why would a Finnish plane be in Norway...Its probably southern Finland or one of the eastern block countries...Estonia or something...


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Dec 28, 2004)

at a guess it was shot down over norway.......


----------



## cheddar cheese (Dec 28, 2004)

Why...Norway is nowhere near Russia really...


----------



## Nonskimmer (Dec 28, 2004)

Do you have a map close by?


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Dec 28, 2004)

why does it have to be near russia??


----------



## Medvedya (Dec 28, 2004)

The lakes in Norway are deep, clean and cold. Things stay nicely preserved down in those fjords.


----------



## Nonskimmer (Dec 28, 2004)

It _does_ border Finland.


----------



## wmaxt (Dec 28, 2004)

It was found in a lake in the Karelyia region near the Finnish border. The tires made in Finnland were still inflated! The reason they find so many planes there is that cold fresh water (especialy if it's just a little acidic) preserves aircraft the best. In lake Taho a high mountain lake on the borders of Nevada and California a B-25 was found that was in such good condition the skelotins of the pilots were still in their seats after 40 years.


----------



## cheddar cheese (Dec 28, 2004)

Only in a small area, its more Sweden that borders Finland, is it not?


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Dec 28, 2004)

and CC i take it you know that the finnish flew their buffalos in combat with the norwegians over norway??


----------



## wmaxt (Dec 28, 2004)

cheddar cheese said:


> Only in a small area, its more Sweden that borders Finland, is it not?



I think so but part of the Russian/Russian satelite contries (Lithuania?) do to.

I would have to get a map out to know for sure, my knowledge of that area is cursuery and some of the names may have changed recently after the breakup of the USSR.


----------



## Nonskimmer (Dec 28, 2004)

There is a _teensy, tiny_ area in the north where Norway, Sweden, and Finland all connect.


----------



## cheddar cheese (Dec 28, 2004)

Indeed there is...


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Dec 29, 2004)

what's with the winking??


----------



## Nonskimmer (Dec 29, 2004)

I dunno, but he's making me nervous!


----------



## cheddar cheese (Dec 29, 2004)

Editied for your sanity...happy?


----------



## Nonskimmer (Dec 29, 2004)

Now I'm _really_ nervous!


----------



## cheddar cheese (Dec 29, 2004)

Why?


----------



## HealzDevo (Jan 13, 2005)

That is sometimes the trouble with things on paper, in paper it is possible to fly a car, in practice however, natural laws get in the way, such as gravity, energy law, which states that an engine produces heat at the same time as thrust, wind conditions, etc which may erode the ability of a design to fly in the real world. It is unknown whether any of Germany's flying Saucers ever got off the ground in the real world. They were designed on paper to but whether they did or not is another matter entirely.


----------

