Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
So what are you talking about? If you have an airframe that could go at +900 km/h without problems, how could you say that the formula has reached it's limits at an horizontal speed of about 600 km/h? It seems illogical.I'm not talking about the performances of these airplanes,
The tests showed all the problems of the Ba.88. So that it's production was stopped. It was resumed only for political decision.And very often tests in the Experimental branches of Air Forces were in those times not the best way to judge a plane, lets think to the Ba 88, just to stay in Italy......
The known performances of the SAI 207, climb rate included, would make it a top-class fighter in 1939-40. It was outdated in 1943, as a Bf109e was.Of course, if these machines had been produced in late '20 early '30 they would have been the world skies dominators.
So Soviet fighters were bad airplanes, intended to be slaughtered in droves, cause they had wooden wings, when a little metal could have saved thousands of trained pilot's lives?That some Soviet fighters had wooden wings do not necessarily imply that these fighters were "good" airplanes:
Apart from the bias, that doesn't make sense. Since the Red Army was evil, all of it's equipement was bad? I guess you'd rather spend the winter 1941-42 dressed as a German.It is well known with what respect the Red Army treated his soldiers.
So what are you talking about? If you have an airframe that could go at +900 km/h without problems, how could you say that the formula has reached it's limits at an horizontal speed of about 600 km/h? It seems illogical.
..............
I do not think there are much possibilities to have your a*s inside a plane in 1939/40. However, if the aircraft in question has done it, it has done.At the threshold of compressibility with a plane with wooden wings?
Not with my a*s inside.......
It was "in vain" cause you failed to explain what this "much more" is. What prevent the "Ambrosini 7" series to be a fighter?As I tried, in vain , tried to explain, an aeroplane in much much more than sheer speed.
It was "in vain" cause you failed to explain what this "much more" is. What prevent the "Ambrosini 7" series to be a fighter?
Interesting...If you...
I am very sorry to have you to deal with concepts beyond your reach, but estabilish the quality of a piece of wood only watching and touching it is much simpler than estabilish the quality of a piece of light alloy. This way you can make a stradivarius back in the 17th century, while a hairline fracture in an alloy part is difficult to detect even today. In WWII I heard of several problems caused by defective batch of metal parts (even the fixing of the tail section of the Re.2005 was needed firstly cause the metal supplied to the factory was substandard), while I never heard of an accident caused by a defective batch of wood (and there were several wooden aircrafts in Italian inventory).1 st - could in those days (about 1940), the Ambrosini factory to establish a serious quality control for the woods...
Like that one in which stationed the wooden wings of the SM.79s? Or wet as the surface from which took off the CANT Z.506s (you know? Sea is a wet thing)? Do you think Russia is cold enough to test if a wooden wing can whitstand the ice of northern Italy (oh, forget, Soviet pilots were trained only for the joy to see them go to certain death in their wooden aircrafts)? Is there fog in England? As I said, wood was not extraordinary in Italian aircraft inventory of WWII. Strange as it may seems to you, wood was a known thing.After one or two weeks of desert climate...
Inability to understand simple things... known habit...Quality control.... strange words......
Infact the SAI 207's wing had 5 spars and no space for internal wing tanks.Wood has its downsides, the primary one being that a wooden structure, especially within a wing, means that more of the wing's volume is lost to structural elements.
That is a myth. Glue problem was fixed, but the Ta 154 was a failed design. Later, the He 162 used the glue. Worked fine, but poor quality control led to problems.Germany seems to have had more problems with aviation glues than any other country; this was, I seem to remember reading, one of the causes of the failure of the Ta154.