I'll see your assorted British aircraft and raise you the Vickers Wellesley which saw active service in The East African Campaign (against the Italians)
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
I'll see your assorted British aircraft and raise you the Vickers Wellesley which saw active service in The East African Campaign (against the Italians)I'll take your Bristol Beaufort, Short Stirling, Vickers Warwick and Wellington and raise you an Armstrong Whitworth Albemarle... Or perhaps a Bristol Bombay for good measure!
Armstrong Whitworth Albemarle - Wikipedia
Bristol Bombay - Wikipedia
Glider,
Today test pilots who fly fighters also come from combat oriented fighter background. Their time away from combat flying / training puts them at, in my opine, a serious disadvantage. They get little to no combat training, and atrophy on tactics as well as currency. To stay good you need to stay proficient. While Brown did fly occasional combat sorties I would doubt his proficiency was at the level of someone doing it day in and day out. I would have been embarrassed if I couldn't beat a test pilot in identical jets. Six weeks off makes a difference. How about a year off, or more.
All my opine based on what I've seen.
Cheers,
Biff
Eeeek, Jets again!
I overheard a fellow at the Udvar Hazy NASM who suggested to his prospective son-in-law that he should read this book.
I requested a copy from my local public library and it does make pretty good reading as do some of Col. Boyd's actual writings.
As a comment here, I believe a little more detail about Col. Boyd might be useful here.
John Boyd was THE F-100 Driver. He probably knew more about the flight characteristics about that particular aeroplane than anyone else INCLUDING the test pilots.
His tactic when fighting with the F-100 was to pull up into a very high AoA and "Flat Plate" the aeroplane. The drag and deceleration was tremendous and the pursuing aircraft would overshoot quickly. Then he would go back to normal flight attitude and shoot the fellow that was now in front of him.
Unless you are very familiar with the peculiar instability of the F-100 at high AoA, this is a very dangerous thing to do.
More on this in a bit....
Using Rudder instead of Ailerons for lateral control at low speed is actually the correct approach as I understand it.
Using Ailerons may stall the wing that you are attempting to raise.
As mentioned earlier, the F-100 had serious directional stability issues at high AoA. Part of this was corrected from the prototypes by increasing the size of the Fin/Rudder, but not before another rather famous NAA test pilot, George Welch got killed while flying it. The situation was never entirely corrected and the "Sabre Dance" is a great illustration of that high AoA directional control issue coupled with being behind the power curve.
The book about Col. Boyd was not very complimentary on Schwarzkopf at all. I believe you are misinterpreting the conclusion.
Yes, the Gulf War was fought using the principles and strategies of Col. Boyd, but the original strategy of Schwarzkopf was "Hey diddle diddle, right up the middle" (strength against strength) which is the complete opposite approach.
The now standard "Energy - Maneuverability Theory" was apparently the creation of Col. Boyd and his group that called themselves "The Fighter Mafia". The interesting thing here was that he was certain that this theory did not completely capture the differences between aircraft and was working on a follow-on theory toward the end of his life.
The concept of "OODA Loop" (Observe, Orient, Decide, Act) and the idea that whoever can execute this cycle faster will have the advantage can also be credited to this fellow.
- Ivan.
.
With the advent of drones now being a major factor into the battle scene, I wonder what Boyd's thoughts would be.
the Vickers Wellesley
That's a very good pick. I've never read a word about it in any book and with over 2000 made it's not like it was some experimental type that never really got going.The japanese army light support bomber Ki-51 (2,300 made) is virtually unmentioned in western books on WW2, a kind of unique liason & light attack plane developed from war experience in China, but very conventional design.
View attachment 513890
Its probably negelcted due to it looking like the better known navy's D3A Val dive bomber.
I nominate the Martin Baltimore and Maryland as the most ignored WW2 Aircraft
Eagledad
That's another great pick. I've never read a word about it.( Heading for Wikipedia now)The Sonia (KI-51) gets it's share of press, but not being a fighter, tends to get overlooked unless a person is specifically looking at the CBI theater, where the bulk of it's operations happened.
What's nearly absent from the books, however, is the KI-102 - a latewar twin engined heavy fighter.
Some Fokker types to look up, would be the T.VIII, G.I, D.XXI and the C.XThat's another great pick. I've never read a word about it.( Heading for Wikipedia now)
Cool thanks. I love learning about new stuff of which I was previously un-aware. I was just reading about that ki-102 and it sounds like it would have been a formidable weapon with that guided air to surface misile they had plans to couple it with. Fortunately they chose to hold it in reserve for what they thought would be the comming invasion of the home islandsSome Fokker types to look up, would be the T.VIII, G.I, D.XXI and the C.X