fastmongrel
1st Sergeant
The B24 had a lower ceiling it was usually flown about 25,000ft on a bombing mission, the B17 usually about 28,000ft
Greatest aviation myth this site “de-bunked”.
- Thread starter SaparotRob
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
The B24 had a lower ceiling it was usually flown about 25,000ft on a bombing mission, the B17 usually about 28,000ft
we've missed one of the big ones i think ?
during the BoB Hurricanes were intentionally vectored onto the bombers whilst Spitfires vectored onto the fighter escort !
during the BoB Hurricanes were intentionally vectored onto the bombers whilst Spitfires vectored onto the fighter escort !
Spitfire MkII pilots were court martialled for attacking bombers ... FACT
- Thread starter
- #244
SaparotRob
Unter Gemeine Geschwader Murmeltier XIII
Say what? Wow. If it wasn't you posting that I never would've believed it
On the internet anything with "FACT" after it, never is. Its a joke.
You are correct. Thanks for pointing out my error.
Point taken the Davis wing good for speed and not lift, having read more.
The B17 was much easier to fly, too, but the B24 did more of the Pacific bombing and work against U boats.
- Thread starter
- #247
SaparotRob
Unter Gemeine Geschwader Murmeltier XIII
D'OH!!
GrauGeist
Generalfeldmarschall zur Luftschiff Abteilung
The P-47 was called the "Jug" by it's pilots because it looked like a milk jug.
To understand what they meant by milk jug, you have to go back to the 30's and 40's, when milk was transported in fat metal cylinders and transferred to glass bottles. The P-47 looked like a big, fat metal cylinder.
So while some might think it was short for "Juggernaught", it wasn't.
To understand what they meant by milk jug, you have to go back to the 30's and 40's, when milk was transported in fat metal cylinders and transferred to glass bottles. The P-47 looked like a big, fat metal cylinder.
So while some might think it was short for "Juggernaught", it wasn't.
- Thread starter
- #249
SaparotRob
Unter Gemeine Geschwader Murmeltier XIII
And that's what I thought. Unlike some of the youngsters here I do remember milk jugs.
Well that would confuse the Brits who call them milk churns.
- Thread starter
- #251
SaparotRob
Unter Gemeine Geschwader Murmeltier XIII
Okay pbehn, I ain't buying that. Fool me once....
A milk churn was originally used to make butter from milk, when they started transporting milk by rail it was found that the "churn" was more stable than the "pail". So they started using churns to transport milk and the name stuck. They were common around the countryside when I was young, and we called them churns. Note I didn't use "FACT" so it is in fact, a fact. Milk churn - Wikipedia
- Thread starter
- #253
SaparotRob
Unter Gemeine Geschwader Murmeltier XIII
I knew I should have added "Fact" to my post. I was going to write "the Churns taxied on the wrong side of the runway.
GrauGeist
Generalfeldmarschall zur Luftschiff Abteilung
Late 30's era 10 gallon milk jug.
Lay it on it's side, slap a couple wings on it, stick a prop in it's nose and Voila! a P-47...
Lay it on it's side, slap a couple wings on it, stick a prop in it's nose and Voila! a P-47...
- Thread starter
- #255
SaparotRob
Unter Gemeine Geschwader Murmeltier XIII
It would have better performance if you put a balkenkreuz on it. FACT!
GrauGeist
Generalfeldmarschall zur Luftschiff Abteilung
Or stick a "meatball" on the side and call it a KI-87...
swampyankee
Chief Master Sergeant
- 3,977
- Jun 25, 2013
...actually,I haven't been here in a few days and come back to find you guys have let me down. I saw the discussion about RR vs Packard and couldn't wait to find the TRUTH about the two versions of the Merlin.
1) The US version used imperial measurements while the Brit version used metric.
2) The RR had all the bolts reverse threaded compared to the Packards, so they had to be turned the "wrong way" to be installed.
3) Because all the bolts were backward, the propeller shaft spun the other way, so planes with the RR engines had to have their propellers put on backward.
4) Planes with the RR Merlins had to drive on the wrong side of the runway.
(Sorry, that's all I could think of on such short notice. I'm sure some of you guys will help me out with the rest.)
-Irish
1) Rolls-Royce didn't use machined screws and bolts; each was individually carved by a skilled craftsman. It was usually assigned as punishment duty, hence getting a "screw job."
2) Packard, because of union rules, couldn't assign workers to this punishment, so they had to use standard fasteners. The engineers at Rolls, finding this out, were astounded and redesigned the engine to use fasteners bought from a catalogue.
3) Because of different drawing standards, Packard's engine were actually running backward. Luckily, they weren't also flipped upside down, which would have made them German.
4) Airplanes don't drive, they taxi.
Last edited:
The actual production process was to fire an ironing board at it at 600MPH (crosses were applied later).
TheMadPenguin
Senior Airman
I'm trembling at the thought that you guys were actually involved in aircraft design & development for several nations for the last several decades! SO MUCH IS EXPLAINED! FACT!
Once you have mastered the basics of milk storage and transportation the rest is pretty much cruising downhill.