Best Fighter

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

Allied planes rock,y did we win the war then!!!
 
I have sometimes wondered why the Germans did not equip the ME-109 with drop tanks. It seems to me if they had done so, extending the plane's range and time over the target area, they very likely could have prevailed against the RAF in 1941. Anyone have any thoughts about that?
 

If they use them in 1940 they might of won the Battle of Britain as well

Hot Space
 
Hot Space: yes, thank you. I was referring to the Battle of Britain, and I mistakenly gave the year as 1941. You are correct, it was 1940 to which I referred. Do you know if there was some technical reason for not equipping the ME-109 with drop tanks? Perhaps the wings weren't structurally able to handle the increased drag? Was the P-51 the first to be so equipped? Do you know?
 
It just never crossed the Germans minds to put Drop Tanks on the 109E ...........although in the Winter of 1940 they started doing so. But it was the Japanese who were the REAL pioneer's of Drop Tanks. When the A6M Zero was designed in the later 30's, the Japanese knew at some point that a war with the U.S wouldn't be to far away. So when when the Zero was in it's Design Stage, this was one of it's requirements for it, so when the Zero came into Service in late '39 early 1940 the Japanese knew that they could strike at most U.S and British interests with ease.

The P-51 (and the P-38, P-47) just took the concept to another level

Hot Space
 
why did the allies win the air war then?,cuz our planes were the best!!!!
 
the lancaster kicks ass said:
best photo recon, the mosquito easily
Click to expand...
the mossy kicks a$$ in every role it plays,its my favortite britesh fighter next to the spit
 
Hot Space: thank you for the information on the drop tanks. The finest fighter aircraft of that war was, I think, unquestionably the Supermarine Spitfire.
This is for you and your Lanc fan pal: I have seen a B-17 bomber up close, and I was impressed with the elegance of its design. Those four big radial engines all idling at once is an expression of real power. Very impressive. "Aluminum Overcast" is the name of the plane. It's a touring exhibition. Perhaps you have seen it. My question is, how does the Lancaster compare in size to the Flying Fortress? The Lancaster is kind of an ugly plane, really. Don't you think? A real dog.
 
Here is the link to the "Aluminum Overcast" tour schedule for 2004. http://www.b17.org/schedule.html
Back on the subject of drop tanks and range, I am reminded of a documentary I saw on television regarding the P-38 Lightning. Charles Lindbergh was touring the frontline combat air bases in the Pacific theater, as an advisor to President Roosevelt. He was particularly interested in the P-38. Given the vast distances involved in the Pacific, the P-38 was not being used to its full potential; its effectiveness being limited by its range. Lindbergh was able to convince the chief of flight engineers that by adjusting the carburetor setting, having the engines run significantly leaner, the range of the planes could be safely extended. In fact, the P-38's range was effectively doubled. The fomidable Japanese Zeros were swept from the skies, shortening the war.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

L
  • Locked
What Criteria should be used for determining the best land based piston fighter
9 10 11
Replies
218
Views
25K
Lighthunmust
L
N
Best Aircrafts
Replies
4
Views
2K
TheMustangRider
O
Poor Aircraft, Best Pilot
Replies
4
Views
2K
net_sailor
  • Locked
Best Piston Engined Fighter Ever
8 9 10
Replies
187
Views
28K
lesofprimus
  • Locked
Ju-87 Stuka vulnerability to fighter attack
7 8 9
Replies
176
Views
35K
HoHun
H
Menu
Log in
Register