How great we were, I would never like to compare current country standards to previous. Although, our military is still the best trained, and most well organised. The equipment does somewhat let us down though (Infantry Gear mainly), the aircraft are all good except the Tornado, and the Armour is now adequete.
Aces
- Thread starter GermansRGeniuses
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
the lancaster kicks ass
Major General
- 19,937
- Dec 20, 2003
how is the tornado a bad plane?...........
Where do I start?
When the Tornado was first ordered it was going to be the only plane in the world with first pass first strike capablility, even the Americans were interested. For a while it was, until the F-15 and other American planes came into service.
When the Tornado was getting tested by the RAF they realised many problems, one was the RADAR alt deflected off the under carriage giving the reading of 7ft when you were 200ft. Some of the systems on the Tornado can be affected by certain frequencies of radio.
The Tornado has to put afterburners on to TAKE OFF! It is slow, sluggish and poorly armed. The EE Lightning beat it on everything except armament, and range. In the first Gulf War, old RAF Bucaneers (Very good, but very old aircraft) had to laser pin point the targets for the Tornados because they couldn't do it, so much for first pass first strike.
For the price of a Tornado you can buy three fully armed, and fully fueled F-15s, when the Tornado would not be armed or fueled. The many mistakes in manufacture meant that it would be mothballed as soon as it was delivered because it basically could not fly safely.
The plane is crap.
When the Tornado was first ordered it was going to be the only plane in the world with first pass first strike capablility, even the Americans were interested. For a while it was, until the F-15 and other American planes came into service.
When the Tornado was getting tested by the RAF they realised many problems, one was the RADAR alt deflected off the under carriage giving the reading of 7ft when you were 200ft. Some of the systems on the Tornado can be affected by certain frequencies of radio.
The Tornado has to put afterburners on to TAKE OFF! It is slow, sluggish and poorly armed. The EE Lightning beat it on everything except armament, and range. In the first Gulf War, old RAF Bucaneers (Very good, but very old aircraft) had to laser pin point the targets for the Tornados because they couldn't do it, so much for first pass first strike.
For the price of a Tornado you can buy three fully armed, and fully fueled F-15s, when the Tornado would not be armed or fueled. The many mistakes in manufacture meant that it would be mothballed as soon as it was delivered because it basically could not fly safely.
The plane is crap.
Erich
the old Sage
Gentlemen :
After reading the many pages in this thread it has come to the conclusion that the a/c is as good as it's pilot and the determination of even a fledgling can take on an ace of note.
Friend and fellow Sturmgruppe pilot Oskar Bösch flew the Fw 190A during his career finally finishing on the Ost front meeting a Soviet Jak head-on in april of 45 for the dfensive battles for Berlin. He has told me on many an occasion of his 14th staffel and the whole gruppe being ovewrwhelmed during the fall/winter of 44-45 by US P-51's but his staffel did what they must and that was to take on the multitudes of American heavy bombers and later the P-51's if the US escorts had not 'mixed it up' before the German rear attacks. Oskar and his staffel mates all felt they could take on the P-51 on a one to one basis, but if there were two or more, which there ususally were the only tactic that would save them would be to hit the deck and then elevate back up to 500 feet, if hit by .50's, turn over on their backs and bale out ............
E ~
After reading the many pages in this thread it has come to the conclusion that the a/c is as good as it's pilot and the determination of even a fledgling can take on an ace of note.
Friend and fellow Sturmgruppe pilot Oskar Bösch flew the Fw 190A during his career finally finishing on the Ost front meeting a Soviet Jak head-on in april of 45 for the dfensive battles for Berlin. He has told me on many an occasion of his 14th staffel and the whole gruppe being ovewrwhelmed during the fall/winter of 44-45 by US P-51's but his staffel did what they must and that was to take on the multitudes of American heavy bombers and later the P-51's if the US escorts had not 'mixed it up' before the German rear attacks. Oskar and his staffel mates all felt they could take on the P-51 on a one to one basis, but if there were two or more, which there ususally were the only tactic that would save them would be to hit the deck and then elevate back up to 500 feet, if hit by .50's, turn over on their backs and bale out ............
E ~
Lightning Guy
Master Sergeant
- 2,511
- Apr 29, 2004
Are you saying that the plane is more important than the pilot? Because I don't think that is the case. Some of the late war Japanese planes (N1K2-J, Ki-84, Ki-100) were very comparable to the best American planes yet their pilots were regularly routed.
Erich
the old Sage
no I did not stare that. The machine is nothing compared to human life.........
They are both as important as one another. If the pilot is of brilliant skill but is in, lets say, a B-25 Roc, he doesn't stand a chance. But a poor pilot in a brilliant plane, lets say P-51, he could get himself killed quite easily.
The Pilot has to know what he's doing, but the plane has to be able to do it.
The Pilot has to know what he's doing, but the plane has to be able to do it.
Lightning Guy
Master Sergeant
- 2,511
- Apr 29, 2004
It depends. A pilot that knows what he is doing, in an inferior (note inferior NOT obsolete) plane will probably beat an novice pilot in a more modern aircraft. Was it the British ace Pattle that scored his early kills in a Gladiator? Good pilot, inferior plane, but stil produced success.
the lancaster kicks ass
Major General
- 19,937
- Dec 20, 2003
but bader, a good pilot, lost both his legs in a bulldog, a bad plane, i realise he was trying to show off, but if his plane was more manourverable, he might not have crashed...............
Lightning Guy
Master Sergeant
- 2,511
- Apr 29, 2004
I agree. Bader's accident was the result of his showing off rather than any fault of the plane.
the lancaster kicks ass
Major General
- 19,937
- Dec 20, 2003
but like i say, if the plane was more menouverable, he might not have crashed, he could have pulled up............
cheddar cheese
Major General
the gladiator was possibly the best biplane of the war
the lancaster kicks ass
Major General
- 19,937
- Dec 20, 2003
that's because there were pitifully few biplanes used in WWII...............
cheddar cheese
Major General
the russians had the U2V-S, that was a biplane with a rear gunner 
the lancaster kicks ass
Major General
- 19,937
- Dec 20, 2003
was it a biplane fighter, because many of the hawker biplanes had rear gunners.............
cheddar cheese
Major General
i think so, though it could carry a couple of bombs
the lancaster kicks ass
Major General
- 19,937
- Dec 20, 2003
so could many of the hawker biplanes.................
cheddar cheese
Major General
hmmm, i just thought it was unorthodox to have a rear gunner in a biplane, but once again, im wrong...
the lancaster kicks ass
Major General
- 19,937
- Dec 20, 2003
don't worry, all but brad are here to learn................
