Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Fanboyism strikes again! While I hold Naval Aviators in high regard, I've seen too many of their foibles to hold with the mythology of supermen. USN Wildcat drivers got their noses bloodied and their tails waxed when they first met the Zero and discovered they had been trained wrong for that adversary. The survivability of their mount allowed enough of them to live long enough to work out new tactics and teamwork and begin to even the score.Navy fighter pilots are a superior breed, ha ha, like Eric Brown.
WOW.. Welcome Home !!
Hired a lot of Vietnam Vets .. and even a few former WW2 and KW Vets too that were all in technical and engineering fields.
Was interesting reading their resumes who worked on the early Curtis.
Some of VN guys were dangerous Alcoholics, especially after drinking at a bar or Disco.
Pot smokers were ok but along with the alcohol were the serious druggies.
Back then PCP was easily available.. ever hit a person on PCP or Cocaine...they do not go down !
Heroin users are either half asleep or on a withdrawal hangover. Mean but not violent.
Two incidents dealing with a swinging bat another a pistol.
Bat swinger wore himself out quickly but the gun one got interesting when he put it to his neck.
For some reason yelled out before you do that .. do you want a beer?
Not kidding he put the gun down, gave him the beer and got him some breakfast !
Got hurt getting them to calm down, or put them down, bail out of jail or hospital, got them some food, get them into a motel before police arrested them.
Learned quite quickly who fought or seriously exposed to the field like a Medic and who those that boasted they went to Vietnam.
Things I learned... do not patronize, do not talk about the war, let them talk.
When they drink do not take your eye off them !
Most of the VN Combat guys are dead from Agent Orange and other chem/bio war crap.
Few were my close friends an one shot himself after playing Tennis.
New guys from Iraq and Afghanistan I never say "thank you for your service. !"
To some that is Cringe Worthy and just want to walk away quietly.
Just better to just say welcome home !
Dan
Passenger but eventually both. For the extra it could carry it still wasn't as cost effective as the C-47/DC-3. I've also read somewhere that Douglas had better product support and a better supply chain.
Getting back to the C-47/C-46 and were there any competitors.
Well, the post war period covers a few years
Convair delivered their 100th Convair 240 in Jan 1949.
According to one source they could cruise at 291mph at 16,000ft using 67% power (178 gallons an hour)
The ex C-46s were cruising at 215-225mph at 10,000ft using 180-190 gallons an hour (60-67% power).
They could obviously cruise a bit slower and burn less fuel but the Convair was going to go over 25% further on the same fuel.
A converted C-54 or new build DC-4 was supposed to cruise at 239mph (75% power) at 10,000ft using 225 gallons an hour.
A pre war DC-3 with P & W GR-1830 S1CG engines (1200hp for take-off and 1050hp max continuous at 7500ft) was supposed to cruise at 204mph at 7500ft and burn 105 gallons and hour doing it at 75% power.
I would note that Douglas did a lot of refurbishing of the C-54s themselves while it seems independent companies did most of the conversion/recertifying work on the Curtiss aircraft.
What was available when and what prices could influence things but the C-46 didn't have good operating economics unless fully loaded.
figures are from Joseph Juptner's series "U.S. Civil aircraft and could well disagree with what is in manuals.
It's really amazing, the lifespan of the C47/Dc3. Still occasionally see one used for transport to this day. I'll be watching a show on something off the beaten path in say Alaska of Africa and there's a C47 moving people and equipment.At the end of the day, the DC-3 out lasted all of them and I think your number solidify that. The DC-3 had it's niche, almost like the way the 737 is today.
Really?You're ranting like a delusional idiot, please stay on topic or go away
Okay, our Admiral Somerville knew that we would be licked in a daytime confrontation, but hey if you're intercepting incoming bombers its firepower and dive speed that matters, even the Fulmar had that. IIRC navy pilots do get a lot more training than their land based contemporaries.Fanboyism strikes again! While I hold Naval Aviators in high regard, I've seen too many of their foibles to hold with the mythology of supermen. USN Wildcat drivers got their noses bloodied and their tails waxed when they first met the Zero and discovered they had been trained wrong for that adversary. The survivability of their mount allowed enough of them to live long enough to work out new tactics and teamwork and begin to even the score.
Sea Hurricane pilots, fresh from the Atlantic/Med, despite their superior flying skills and their successes "back home" are likely to discover the tactics they're used to and comfortable with leave them vulnerable to this new opponent. AND, their kite is NOT a product of the Grumman Iron Works, and has the shortest legs on the sea, just about guaranteeing they'll enter most fights at a disadvantage.
Maybe if you bring enough of them to the fight to absorb the losses and still put up a credible force you can slow the melting of the snow. Brit CVs were noted for having large air wings, right?
Cheers,
Wes
Really?
REALLY!Really?
WOW.. Welcome Home !!
Hired a lot of Vietnam Vets .. and even a few former WW2 and KW Vets too that were all in technical and engineering fields.
Was interesting reading their resumes who worked on the early Curtis.
Some of VN guys were dangerous Alcoholics, especially after drinking at a bar or Disco.
Pot smokers were ok but along with the alcohol were the serious druggies.
Back then PCP was easily available.. ever hit a person on PCP or Cocaine...they do not go down !
Heroin users are either half asleep or on a withdrawal hangover. Mean but not violent.
Two incidents dealing with a swinging bat another a pistol.
Bat swinger wore himself out quickly but the gun one got interesting when he put it to his neck.
For some reason yelled out before you do that .. do you want a beer?
Not kidding he put the gun down, gave him the beer and got him some breakfast !
Got hurt getting them to calm down, or put them down, bail out of jail or hospital, got them some food, get them into a motel before police arrested them.
Learned quite quickly who fought or seriously exposed to the field like a Medic and who those that boasted they went to Vietnam.
Things I learned... do not patronize, do not talk about the war, let them talk.
When they drink do not take your eye off them !
Most of the VN Combat guys are dead from Agent Orange and other chem/bio war crap.
Few were my close friends an one shot himself after playing Tennis.
New guys from Iraq and Afghanistan I never say "thank you for your service. !"
To some that is Cringe Worthy and just want to walk away quietly.
Just better to just say welcome home !
Dan
What was available when and what prices could influence things but the C-46 didn't have good operating economics unless fully loaded.
That sounds pretty decisive, even without considering that the Three was a sweetheart to fly and maintain, devoid of quirks and weirdnesses, while the Commando I've heard described, by some who've flown both, as "a cantankerous bastard".A British source from the late 50's lists the typical total operating cost for the DC-3 at £85 per hour and £145 per hour for the C-46.
In analysing Midway, the important things to remember are the vastly contrasting limitations affecting the USN and the IJN
For the USN the critical constraint affecting their ability for force projection was their carrier fleetin 1942. After 1943, this was no longer a constraint, but in 1942, it was the number of sea billets that affected US capabilities, particularly thir offensive capabilities. They simply did not have enough of them and replacements were some distance away. Moreover the worldwide commitments at the end of 1942 made this situation even more problematic.
Aircraft losses were not really a problem for the US. They could afford to lose aircraft and replace them very quickly. But without carriers the options available to the Allies were very limited. If the US could not launch successful attacks into the Pacific they would give the Japanese time to fortify, and more importantly stockpile resources and war materiel, USN subs held at arms length would be less effective at sinking ships. The Japanese reasoned that keeping the USN off balance would give their forces a fighting chance of blunting the inevitable US counterattack. It was an unrealistic strategy, but may have worked had the germans been able to bring Russia to its knees, thus forcing a greater allocation of resources by the US to the ETO and more importantly a greater diversion of manpower away from US production bases to increased military manpower. A german victory in the east would likely cause more steel allocations and dockyard capacity to merchant shipping and away from naval construction. A greater proportion of new tonnage would have to be diverted to the Atlantic, which would tend to slow and restrict deployments into the PTO. The americans might have their 100000 a/c, but they would not be able to deploy them as easily to foreign fields. Since the shipping demands in the PTO were roughly 10x that per man in the ETO it would be the PTO that would suffer cutbacks well before the ETO.
Ive said this before, and it has proven to be intensely unpopular, but the loss of the four IJN flat tops at Midway was not a critical setback for them. Their main constraint was fully trained air crew, a problem which they were never able to solve. For the Japanese to win at midway, they had to destroy at least two enemy carriers and lose less than 100 aircrew doing that…..and probably less than that even. The Number of IJN carriers that could be lost could be as many as four fleet carriers and still not materially affect their force projection abilities
Midway was a defeat for the Japanese because they lost four flat tops, 107 highly trained aircrew and failed to neutralise the USN carriers . They lost stuff for nothing in other words.
No, the defense of island strongholds would depend on fast carrier forces to attack the invading armada.The American capture of Ulithi without a fight showed how problematic it was for Japan to attempt to defend the Pacific using static defenses on island strongholds.
Of course not, with their carrier forces intact and ours gone, they would be able to interdict supplies to Australia, take New Guinea, neutralize Hawaii, and push our forward bases back to California. A few strategically placed bombs on the Gatun Locks would make interocean transfers into lengthy hazardous endeavors. This makes submarine ops against the Empire's shipping problematical, and where you going to launch your B29s from now? With the Japanese in Dutch Harbor, Alaska is out, and China was always a shaky proposition, especially if the Japanese get themselves established on the Indian subcontinent.I'm not sure Japan would have been sitting on their hands for two years if the US had been beaten back during Midway.