Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Where is my $1000$See the replies in red above.
The preferred method in head on attack against bombers was to fly inverted which shows how little aiming actually countedI do bring facts to the table but you don't even dispute them! Such as your argument about the Head on Pass Scenario above.
The major stumbling block in your argument, which you have done very well mind you, is that the Tempies gun should be Zeroed at 250 yards, or 230 meters! Then recalculate and allow for the trajectory rise from the gun's position 4-5' below the line of sight through the Reticle so two drawings, one for top view and one from the side will knock your socks off! While dispersion from the guns will spread the bullets around some, it is doubtful that there would be any significant chance to get even one hit from the Tempies guns while the German pilot could expect ALL of his shells to hit!
There were no spits they all crashed on take off you said,where is my $1000?All true! But not really relevant! Re calculate for the Spit at 250 as above, but the 109 is going 300 MPH and is only 300 meters behind and has just opened fire. Then take into account the early Spits horrendous rate of roll AND the displacement of the centers of the two plane's circles due to the initial range. Then tell me the finished range, angle off and number of seconds the 109 has continuously tracked the target? This was, with one minor variation, a real live problem given to real live AF Pilots at the Colorado Springs Academy!
Frontal area is wing span x thickness have you seen the difference in wing thickness between a typhoon and tempest ? 250 mm at wing rootAll true! But how it works is that the plane with the higher loading is, all other things being equal, going to have the smaller wing, with both less frontal area and less surface area and thus, less drag because of it! That means for any given power the plane with the smallest wing goes the fastest. But the corollary is the plane with the smaller wing will take much longer to take off and land. That requires either high lift devices to compensate, or a much larger air field. Take your pick.
You challenged me on spit losses in fact you said more spits crashed than were shot down, I claim my $1000 or call you a B S merchantWhy do I owe you $1000.00?
The. Typhoons an tempest had similar wing loading but different frontal area the mustang wing was thicker than the spit but much less drag. Where is my $1000?Great, but we are not comping Typhoons and Tempies. We are comping a Tempy with the standard wing and a similar in all respects Tempy, except wing planform/area!
Yes I did you are full of B SRead the exact post! I stated that more Spits, (and Messers by the way) crashed on take off, or landing than were destroyed in combat! There was one other proviso in that you had to provide the proof in current publications, or post war research based on the now current best knowledge in the public domain.
You have not proved me wrong, so I do not owe you the money!
Read the exact post! I stated that more Spits, (and Messers by the way) crashed on take off, or landing than were destroyed in combat! There was one other proviso in that you had to provide the proof in current publications, or post war research based on the now current best knowledge in the public domain.
You have not proved me wrong, so I do not owe you the money!
So how come Britain won the BoB, if they had such inferior aircraft (mostly they weren't even using Spitfires, but Hurricanes)?All true! But not really relevant! Re calculate for the Spit at 250 as above, but the 109 is going 300 MPH and is only 300 meters behind and has just opened fire. Then take into account the early Spits horrendous rate of roll AND the displacement of the centers of the two plane's circles due to the initial range. Then tell me the finished range, angle off and number of seconds the 109 has continuously tracked the target? This was, with one minor variation, a real live problem given to real live AF Pilots at the Colorado Springs Academy!
I have posted them you look them up,you made the bet you fool now pay. UPYou have not proved anything either.
What are the numbers?
He claimed he's flown at every aero club, if anyone has every done it, they'll remember it.Quote Flyboy ''So I'll ask you again, what's the arrival/ departure procedure for flying in and out of EDW?!?!?''
Be fair, give the lad a chance. If we include Rogers lake bed, he only has 24 runways to choose from.
You were proved wrong in countless replies, especially in this regard.Read the exact post! I stated that more Spits, (and Messers by the way) crashed on take off, or landing than were destroyed in combat! There was one other proviso in that you had to provide the proof in current publications, or post war research based on the now current best knowledge in the public domain.
You have not proved me wrong, so I do not owe you the money!
Again, you bring bullsh!t and repeatedly get corrected by facts - facts that have been well researched and documented.I do bring facts to the table but you don't even dispute them! Such as your argument about the Head on Pass Scenario above.
I have posted them you look them up,you made the bet you fool now pay. UP
He claimed he's flown at every aero club, if anyone has every done it, they'll remember it.
Shooter, 2 Mods have asked for a reply, if you want to participate here you'll answer.
Better still, Joe...how about him telling us what's unique about approach/departure at a certain Island in the southland.He claimed he's flown at every aero club, if anyone has every done it, they'll remember it.
Shooter, 2 Mods have asked for a reply, if you want to participate here you'll answer.
SorryAgh? I was asking Shooter for his numbers to back up his statement.