B-17, B-24, or Lancaster

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

ppfftt, Bomber command didn't need women we're far more refined than you savages "woman, ug ug" no we're much more advanced









that being said, we did have some women, far more tastefull than yours however



all sources on right click........
 
as far as I've be told the Brits were very consevative and 6gp (RCAF) Bomber Command wanted to be different so we kinda flaunted RAF discipline after all we were just colonials
 
ppfftt, face it you're loosing this one

and yes pb's right, you must be aware of the stiff upper-lipped, very posh and pompus image of your typical pre-war RAF pilot "what what", "tally ho", "chocks away" and all that jazz, well whilst most of bomber command was made up of younger, less experienced men that wouldn't mind a woman on their planes, the older pompus types were in positions of greater power, and could stop such indecent exposure, as they were much more traditional and gentlemanly, baisically it comes down to respect and being true english gentlemen, naming aircraft however was almost encouraged, naming her made the crews feel closer to their 'craft, many crews even said they treated "their" lanc as their girlfriends, each crew member felt they had a connection with their aircraft and they never had to fight with other crew members for her, then of course the canuks came along, and as pb said, being mere deminions they weren't as refined as us and allowed scantily clad women, like the savages they were
 
as i recall that B-24 was only used as a formation aircraft? and who the hell puts nose art on the starboard side?

you know i think the Americans used women so much to cover up an insecurity, they know their English skills are so lacking they just use women instead, the British, more specifically the English nose art uses a huge range of literary devices, including alliteration, simily and quotations, when it comes down to it i believe the RAF nose art had a far greater educational value, not only destroying germany but teaching jerry correct grammar at the same time, why else would they use spot lights other than to try and read the literary genius that is RAF nose are this of course leads me onto my favourite of all the lancaster nose art, Nick the Nazi Neutralizer, very clever stuff...

but anyway why'm i arguing about nose art and why're you arguing about the B-24 this's supposed to be an argument about the lanc's cammo against the B-29's which the lanc wins hands down........

picture source- our albums......

edit- why the frigging hell aint the picture showing?
 

Attachments

  • Mk.I, JO-N, (LM130) 'Nick the nazi Neutralizer', of No.463 Sqd, RAAF, based at Waddington, winter 19
    78.4 KB · Views: 52

Oh what a bunch of crap! It showed what we were ultimetly fighting for! God, country, apple pie and a 38C!

I agree about the cammo - probably the only thing the lac had over the B-29
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

A
How did B-17 and B-24 formations avoid shooting each other?
2 3 4
Replies
61
Views
3K
Peter Gunn
K
B-25G and B-25H information on spent 75mm cartridges - through hatch or port?
Replies
14
Views
1K
ThomasP
T
N
How does Ural bombers(Ju-89/Do-19) compared to stuff luke B-17 or Lancaster?
Replies
1
Views
834
GregP
B-17E in Europe
Replies
17
Views
2K
Big Jake
B
B-17 Pathfinder Memorial, Brome, Suffolk.
Replies
7
Views
1K
Snautzer01
Menu
Log in
Register