carpenoctem1689
Airman 1st Class
- 285
- Sep 10, 2005
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
carpenoctem1689 said:and the Ju-87C, a carrier equipped, stuka with jettisonable landing gear and attachments for bombs or torpedoes.
I'd agree with that. It's narrow undercarriage was bad enough on land (and killed/injured many pilots). I would imagine that on a carrier which was riding even light seas would have been a nightmare, if not impossible. I think it would have been an absolute death trap to land a 109 on a carrier.Lightning Guy said:Personally, I think landing a 109 on a carrier would have been an absolute nightmare.
Seafires had the narrow gear too. They had their share of prangs, although they weren't all due to the landing gear. A few were though.Gnomey said:I'd agree with that. It's narrow undercarriage was bad enough on land (and killed/injured many pilots).Lightning Guy said:Personally, I think landing a 109 on a carrier would have been an absolute nightmare.
Good point Glider, bail rather than land. You might as well of just ditched in the sea if you were landing a 109 on a carrier it would be likely you would end up in the 'drink' anyway.Glider said:Call me a coward but I would have a mechanical defect and jump. Better odds of living than shooting myself or landing a 109.