Most Dangerous Position on a Bomber....? (1 Viewer)

Whats the most dangerous position on an Allied Bomber during WW2?

  • Nose

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Cockpit

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Top Turret Gunner

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Radio Operator

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Waist Gunner(s)

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Ball Turret Gunner

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Tail Gunner

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Total voters
    0

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

Status
Not open for further replies.
A group in Germany creates parts for 109s and I think they might be working on a 109. They also make replicant Fw-190s if any one is interested.

As for the Spitfire IXe a good pick and better then the P-51D, but I would take one of the Italian fighters say the Re 2002 or the 205V if it was built to the same quality as the US plane.
 
Those may have been the best fighters the Italians had to offer, but there were plenty of other fighters that were better.
 
Yes I will give you that, but if they could have been produced in the same numbers and crewed with the same leavel of pilot is what I was thinking. As it was the Italians were out of the war before these plane really got rolling.

They would have made being in a bomber in Italy much more difficult.
 
They also make replicant Fw-190s if any one is interested.
Click to expand...

i've read about them, they look really realistic, you'd never tell they were fake without a close up inspection, they're planning to make 12 in total...................
 
But they are not "fake" they are reall airworthy planes. If you use Fake to say they are not aircaft built from 1935 to 1945, then yes, they are "fake". I like the turm repicates, and why not build new airfrimes. I would rather see one of these go racing in Reno or on a BoB flight, then a bird with real war history that should be presurved. WE have few aircraft who flew in the war and can tell that story.
 
how can you say that, any original aircraft that can fly should do just that, look at PA474, it does allot of flying, doesn't mean it's not being preserved, the RAF maintain her to an unbelievable standard, all parts are original, the only part that's not original is the addition of a secondary controll system..............................
 
Lanc, yes they should be preserved! What I want you to understand is that if we make replicas of say a bf 209 or a Spitfire then they can be flown more, harder and under war conditions for say the airraces or Living History stuff. The planes with cobat can still and should still be flown and maintained, but we could really see how a spitfire stood up to a bf 109, or an A6M. With this thought we could preserve these planes for future generations.

We might not be able to recreate all the types but some of the fighters maybe yes.
 
I agree with you all, but if say at an air race we could race a P-51 and Ki-84 both that are replicas then they can be pushed in nearly war like condiditions. If they were to crash or the pilots have to bail we would not be lossing an ireplaceable plane, but just a coppy. what do you think of that?
 

I think I should love to own a racing replica P-51 8)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)

Similar threads

M
  • Poll
Which one is overall better between Ta-152H and P-47M/N?
2
Replies
30
Views
2K
_PabloSniper_
  • Poll
German multiengine jet bomber best immune to Allied interception
Replies
0
Views
891
Vahe Demirjian
A
Best British single engined radial aircraft in WW2?
2
Replies
23
Views
2K
nuuumannn
  • Poll
AH-4 Apache vs black hawk
2 3 4
Replies
76
Views
6K
Thumpalumpacus
  • Locked
  • Poll
best ww2 bomber
Replies
9
Views
2K
Admiral Beez
A
Menu
Log in
Register