Viking1066
Major
You are correct. It is a replica. I just didn't bother writing the two paragraphs that came with the picture.
Picture of the Day - Miscellaneous
- Thread starter Shinpachi
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Viking1066
Major
Kawasaki Ki-I Tei '3294' 2nd chutai 56 Sentai 1945 HIKO
Viking1066
Major
Friedrichshafen FF33E type 20-22 Swedish service FLYN
Viking1066
Major
Mitsubishi Ki-46 of the 17th Hikodan Shireibu Teisatsu Chutai undergoing maintenance 1942 DEKI
Viking1066
Major
Junkers Ju-87s Escorted back from a mission BERT (ASBIZ)
MIflyer
Captain
They did not build the full fledged Flying Flapjack until after WW2, but a fabric covered prototype was flown early in WW2. It was supposed to be almost VTOL. Of course, as we all know VTOL is a German acronym for "Von't Take Off Loaded."
Last edited:
Viking1066
Major
Fiat BR-42AS Falco NSG20 'Red 86' Strassboug France 1943 ASBIZ
MIflyer
Captain
Okay, so tell me this P-66 (top photo) does not look a lot like a Zero.
Viking1066
Major
interesting.
SaparotRob
Unter Gemeine Geschwader Murmeltier XIII
The one in the bottom picture sure does.
Viking1066
Major
Nakajima J5N1 Tenrai MHBO. One of the did not make its they were working on.
MiTasol
Captain
Looks exactly like a Zero except for the cowls, cowl flaps, carb scoop, oil cooler scoop. windscreen and the area in front of it, gear doors, lack of wheel flipper doors, pitot mast, razorback, fin, complete tail gear, elevators, DF loop instead of drop tank, etc.
special ed
1st Lieutenant
- 6,587
- May 13, 2018
It's obvious Vultee copied the Zero. The Zero flew well and the P-66 not so well.
Honestly I can't say say the first a/c looks very much like the second one in the above photos.
The Vanguard always looks to me like an odd early Corsair:
Interestingly, the Soviets considered the P-66 better than the Bf.109 and Spitfire - aerodynamically only the P-39 was superior according to TsAGI (CAHI, Central Aerohydrodynamic Institute in Moscow) calculations in 1940.
Viking1066
Major
Mitsubishi Ki-51 BURI
Viking1066
Major
SBD Dauntless VS 41 41S7 from CV 4 USS Ranger Operation Torch Oct 1942 ASBIZ
MIflyer
Captain
Jiro Horikoshi stated: "...I will state that the undercarriage retraction on the Zero was inspired by the Vought 143..."
And I recall reading many years ago that studies showed that when asked to compare two objects, non-engineers tended to describe them in term of their differences while engineers tended to describe them in terms of their similarities.
Last edited:
MiTasol
Captain
In the case of the A6M and Vought 143 the total similarities are low wing single engine, single seat, monoplane fighters with radial engines and the similar undercarriage retraction systems. Note that Horikoshi said INSPIRED BY not COPIED FROM.
The Vought used separate wings and fuselage the A6M used a single unit for wing and cockpit with the engine and rear fuselage attached. The armament is different. The Vought did not have drop tanks or folding wingtips or a tailwheel assy that retracted flush with the fuselage etc, etc, etc. No other aircraft had wing spars like those on the A6M. The internal wing structure follows British practice of the time like in the Spitfire and the landing gear strut inflation fittings are again very British just like on all the Brit aircraft of the time.
Like every other designer Horikoshi was keeping up to date on what other countries were doing and, like every other smart designer, incorporating the best of what they had learned.
Voughts claim is as spurious as Howard Hughes claim that it was a reworked Hughes Racer.
The Vought used separate wings and fuselage the A6M used a single unit for wing and cockpit with the engine and rear fuselage attached. The armament is different. The Vought did not have drop tanks or folding wingtips or a tailwheel assy that retracted flush with the fuselage etc, etc, etc. No other aircraft had wing spars like those on the A6M. The internal wing structure follows British practice of the time like in the Spitfire and the landing gear strut inflation fittings are again very British just like on all the Brit aircraft of the time.
Like every other designer Horikoshi was keeping up to date on what other countries were doing and, like every other smart designer, incorporating the best of what they had learned.
Voughts claim is as spurious as Howard Hughes claim that it was a reworked Hughes Racer.
Viking1066
Major
P-35 shows the Kartveli design in its first major form PLDA
