And every American life that was saved by dropping them makes the bomb worth it in my opinion.
Last edited:
Best World War II Aircraft? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Aggie08
- Start date
And every American life that was saved by dropping them makes the bomb worth it in my opinion.
tail end charlie
Senior Airman
- 615
- Aug 24, 2010
I agree completely, if the bomb was available in 1944 the British would have dropped it on Germany in a heartbeat. I dont understand the present day hand wringing about Dresden, which was a deadly as Hiroshima or Nagasaki depending on the estimates you believe. However no one ever says that Dresden was bombed to save German lives.
At the end of the war there were 5000 B29s on order no one was thinking of saving Japanese lives. The nuclear bomb may well have saved millions of Japanese lives but it was only the allied lives that were considered. My father was a Pacific veteran and believed they should have dropped more.
renrich
Chief Master Sergeant
The bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was worth the human loss if it saved any American lives. I feel sure that some American leaders at least gave thought to the fact it would save Japanese lives also. It was discussed by the Americans to do a demonstration drop instead of on the cities but that idea was discarded because it was thought it would not cause Japan to surrender unconditionally. There were many Japanese leaders who wanted to fight on in spite of H and N. Another reason to drop the bombs was to forestall Soviet designs in the Far East.
To me, it is silly to argue that saving lives by surrendering to aggression is an intelligent choice. Some things are absolutely worth the cost of death. Many Chinese civilians as well as soldiers were murdered by the Japanese after the Chinese Army either surrendered or retreated. The successes of German Arms gave Hitler a free hand with his plans to exterminate what he perceived to be enemies of the Reich. Closer to my home the sacrifises of the several hundreds of Texan revolutionaries at the Alamo and at Goliad(where after surrendering, the Texans were murdered) and the several thousand US Military who lost their lives later in 1846-48 in the Mexican War led to the completion of Manifest Destiny and the extension of the United States to the Pacific. How many lives were ultimately saved in the new area claimed by the US who did not have to live under the capricious tyranny of Mexico? And how many lives were saved in WW2 because of the natural resources that were available in what became the states of New Mexico, Arizona and California, not to mention Texas?
To me, it is silly to argue that saving lives by surrendering to aggression is an intelligent choice. Some things are absolutely worth the cost of death. Many Chinese civilians as well as soldiers were murdered by the Japanese after the Chinese Army either surrendered or retreated. The successes of German Arms gave Hitler a free hand with his plans to exterminate what he perceived to be enemies of the Reich. Closer to my home the sacrifises of the several hundreds of Texan revolutionaries at the Alamo and at Goliad(where after surrendering, the Texans were murdered) and the several thousand US Military who lost their lives later in 1846-48 in the Mexican War led to the completion of Manifest Destiny and the extension of the United States to the Pacific. How many lives were ultimately saved in the new area claimed by the US who did not have to live under the capricious tyranny of Mexico? And how many lives were saved in WW2 because of the natural resources that were available in what became the states of New Mexico, Arizona and California, not to mention Texas?
renrich
Chief Master Sergeant
It would have been extremely hazardous if not impossible for a Lanc to drop the A bombs because it's slow speed and poor altitude capabilities would have probably resulted in the sacrifise of the crew and bomber. In other words, it would have been har pressed to get out of the way of the bomb blast.
Last edited:
Personally, I think its a tie for first (for fighters anyways).. the Bf/Me 109 and the P-40 WarHawk.
Civettone
Tech Sergeant
As much tempted to jump on the A-bomb discussion ...
It is your favourite aircraft but I wonder why exactly it would be the best aircraft of WW2 ...
Kris
P-40??
It is your favourite aircraft but I wonder why exactly it would be the best aircraft of WW2 ...
Kris
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
the P-40 is my favorite for sure.. but has little to do with my statement.
it was USAAF's primary fighter in North Africa, CBI, and PTO. where it
achieved an excellent kill ratio in all three theaters. Northern Europe
was mostly High alltitude where the P-40 was not at its best. if it
wasn't for the P-40 in the first 3 years of the war, it would have
been a much more LW dominated skys. China would have been
lost, and most likely Burma and parts of India. New Zeland (air
anyways), would have been lost too.
it was proven that the P-40 could outgun, outdive, outrun, out roll,
and outturn (mind you, only at higher air speeds turns) the infamouse
"zero". the P-40 also had the durabillity and armour advantage. It could
definatly outturn/outroll/ the 109.. its debatable whether or not it could
outgun it. I think between the 6 50cals and the 109's cannon twin 12.7's
it was a pretty even match. durability and pilot protection was on par with
the P-40 with later variants of the 109.
after studying the P-40 for 25+ years, I'm begining to understand it
a little better.
~Greg
tail end charlie
Senior Airman
- 615
- Aug 24, 2010
Fortunately for those in P40s, the Avro Anson was on the same side.
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
The P-40 was a great fighter and probably one of the most under rated fighters of WW2. With that said, many of the places where it saw success were to tactics and pilot skill. If you want to ride on its mission accomplishments, you might have somewhat of an argument, but looking at its technical aspects, it was obsolete as a front line air to air fighter by 1942-43.
by mid to late 43 yes, there where better aircraft. same with the 109. but both were
there in the begining right until the end and a few years more. and both had remarkable
succeses during the war.
~Greg
Civettone
Tech Sergeant
Excellent? Compared to what?
iI always hear that statement but I wonder what the truth is behind it. Most fights that I have read about are low and medium altitude. Only the B-17 and escort fighters flew at high altitude.
Take away those hundreds of operational P-40s and for sure it is true what you say. But if it wasn't for the P-40 another fighter would have been produced, probably the P-38 or P-39. Or maybe P-43. I don't see why the P-40 was better than any of them, let alone better than the Spitfire or Bf 109.
New Zealand? NEW ZEALAND????
And how would vast countries like China be lost because of no P-40s. You aren't really saying that the P-40 decided over the fate of China right?
Reminds me of the Spitfire first combat with the Zeros. They had all the advantages you mentioned but got a bloody nose from them.
It seems most 1939-1941 fighters could outturn the 109. But all of them got beaten by the Bf 109. It's speed and power which matter.
I think the first scientific report on structural durability of allied and German fighters still has to be written. All American fighters were considered stronger and more durable than a Spitfire or Bf 109 but I have some serious doubts about that. I wonder what the truth is behind it. (I can accept it for the carier aircraft though.)
It's not a matter of studying ONE aircraft, it's a matter of studying other aircraft to understand your aircraft.
I can understand if you would say the P-40 was the best the US had in 1941-1942 - though I prefer the P-39 - but to say it is better than any other fighter aircraft??
Would you be so kind to give some data on the P-40 compared to some other fighters?
Kris
tail end charlie
Senior Airman
- 615
- Aug 24, 2010
Flyboy
I agree with your point about the C-47 the unsung work horses are just as vital as the combat planes approximately 12,000 ansons were built and many were still flying when the combat planes were scrapped, similarly over 11,000 wellingtons were made, many more than the lancaster.
I suppose today the AWACs and Herculese are the same type of plane but kids dont dream about flying a hercules.
I agree with your point about the C-47 the unsung work horses are just as vital as the combat planes approximately 12,000 ansons were built and many were still flying when the combat planes were scrapped, similarly over 11,000 wellingtons were made, many more than the lancaster.
I suppose today the AWACs and Herculese are the same type of plane but kids dont dream about flying a hercules.
Glider
Major
My son did, but eyesight let him down
tail end charlie
Senior Airman
- 615
- Aug 24, 2010
I always wanted to be a F-4 phantom pilot they used to beat up the North York Moors when I was a kid before the 200ft limit, sometimes it was more like 50ft.
North Eastern/Russian front. sorry should have been more specific.
the hump. read "God is my co-pilot"
becouse brit pilots at the time chose to fight the zero's game. "zoom boom" was considered
cowardly and court martial could occur. they later followed the techniques pioneered by
the Flying Tigers.
think: North Africa. the P-40's main advasary was Bf 109F/G's. they got a shalacking. yes I
know 1 German ace said P-40 were liking picking grapes. pitty those other german aces
where the ones who got picked.
actually best from 1940-43 1/2. and the question was BEST, not BETTER. the P-40
had a lot of little things it was very good at making it a very effective fighter. kinda
trumps a fighter with the best this or that, but some major flaws. ie: the zero. hard to
find a flaw with most 109's cept' for the main gear arrangement I suspose. P-40's
was climb rate.. obviously. as for data, I'm writing a book. you can see it in there.
Last edited:
tail end charlie
Senior Airman
- 615
- Aug 24, 2010
P-40K-5
It makes me wonder why those fools in procurement bothered with the Thunderbolt hellcat corsair tempest and spitfire
It makes me wonder why those fools in procurement bothered with the Thunderbolt hellcat corsair tempest and spitfire
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
Actually the C-130 is slowly closing in however I don't believe it will ever reach the C-47's greatness as it never really influenced civilian aviation.
Every kid want to be a fighter pilot but it can be a rough life. I know many C-130 drivers who had a pretty charmed career without the danger and stress of participating in combat.
