What aircraft (any side) would you develope further

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

Dogwalker said:
Ok, there are vibrations. I expect to read some pilot's report that say they were so severe. I didn't read it yet. I read this for many others aircraft instead, included the FW-190.
Click to expand...

No there are vibrations in any aircraft and all aircraft. I dont think I never said there wasn't. I just said it would suck sitting on a drive shaft and I think I have a bit more experience in that matter than you do! (since you obviously seem to discredit everything I say because you seem to take this personal!)


Dogwalker said:
Another time, it's your opinion and I respect it, other experts worked on it and flown with it. Many pilots appreciated this aircraft, and the difference is that they flown with it, and you not. So I repeat, they were all incompetents, except you?

DogW
Click to expand...

And have you flown it? I doubt it. So again it is your opinion and nothing more either. There you go, I can do the same. :lol:

And by the way you might want to look up the definition of incompetents because this is the definitions and you are saying that all those people that worked on it and flew it were:

Main Entry: in·com·pe·tent
Pronunciation: (")in-'käm-p-t&nt
Function: adjective
Etymology: Middle French incompétent, from in- + compétent competent
1 : not legally qualified
2 : inadequate to or unsuitable for a particular purpose
3 a : lacking the qualities needed for effective action b : unable to function properly <incompetent heart valves>
- incompetent noun
- in·com·pe·tent·ly adverb

Nextly I am not saying that I am the formost expert on this topic becuase I am not. I have never worked on a WW2 aircraft, but I know a thing or 2 about aircraft and aircraft maintenance. I fly and work on aircraft every damnd ay, So please dont talk down to me like you think I dont know anything.

If this is not your intent then I apologize, but it sure is how it sounds with the way you post things.
 
DerAdlerIstGelandet said:
No there are vibrations in any aircraft and all aircraft. I dont think I never said there wasn't. I just said it would suck sitting on a drive shaft and I think I have a bit more experience in that matter than you do! (since you obviously seem to discredit everything I say because you seem to take this personal!)
Click to expand...
I'm not taking this personal, but, since we are speaking of the structural defects of that type of aircraft, that can prevent further developements of it, I think that there must be some document, some statement of pilots that flown with P39 or P63, that said that vibrations are a main problem of these fighters. If no one ever reported it (instead of many other celebrated fighters), I think that the problem is a secondary one.

Dogwalker said:
And by the way you might want to look up the definition of incompetents because this is the definitions and you are saying that all those people that worked on it and flew it were...
Click to expand...
I respect those people, respect them so much, that I think that they knew their work enough to recognize a defect if there were. I know what's the definition and, since it was a question that I asked to you, I never said that those people were...

DogW
 
I am not saying that the drive shaft vibrations could not be corrected, if you read my post again you will see that I said the shaft was probably balanced so as to reduce the vibrations. I am just saying that as in all aircraft you would still feel vibrations and in my opinion I would not like to sit on a drive shaft turning several thousand times a minute and feel the vibrations up my butt hole and letting them tickle my prostate! :lol:

I personally dont feel that this aircraft could be developed further. If the idea could have been, more aircraft would have been developed that way. Plus with the age of the Jet nearing it was not going to go anywhere quick anyhow.
 
Ok, but if we begin to talk about jets, all these 7 pages of topic were completely useless. There were only 3 aircrafts of WW2 that could have been developed further.
However, the future was of the aircrafts with the engine behind the pilot ;)

DogW
 
Negative the future was the Jets. When it came to piston engine aircraft the future was not behind the pilot. Look at just about all the advanced aircraft designed by the Germans, US, and England and they were just about all with the engines in the front. Now I will conced that many German projects were similar to the Do-335 that had an engine in the front and the bad in the push pull design.
 
Negative the future was the Jets. When it came to piston engine aircraft the future was not behind the pilot. Look at just about all the advanced aircraft designed by the Germans, US, and England and they were just about all with the engines in the front. Now I will conced that many German projects were similar to the Do-335 that had an engine in the front and the bad in the push pull design.
 
The main problems with Hs-129 were not actually its wings but its engines. It had crappy Argus As 410A-1's rated at 495hp or Gnome-Rhône 14M 04/05 rated at 690hp. It was so heavily armoured that the engines did not provide eneogh power.
 
I remember watching a program many year's ago saying that if they took those big rads of the Griffon Spits (F-22, F-24's) the plane would with ease do over 500m.p.h. Put a Contra-Rotating Prop on as the Seafire F-47 and a bit more horsepower and........... 8)
 
It's true that the P-39 coundn't have been developed farther at the time of its production, but it could have been developed better. The prototype had a turbocharger but it was removed in the production model resulting in an underpowered plane with poor altitude performance. The reason for the removal was to allow export (as turbochargers were not allowed) and instead of doing like the P-38 exports (production for US had turbos, exports did not) they just left the turbos out entirely. The british modified many of their airacobras with turbochargers wich raised the top speed to 390mph and raised altitude performance to acceptable levels.
 
As far as I am aware the British didn't modify any of their Airacobras as there were to many fundamental problems with the aircraft and we had better planes in production and development.

If I had to pick some aricraft for further development / production then the following would be on the list.

British
Whirlwind a remarkable aircraft for its time and one that had considerable promise.
MB3 - Another sound design that may well have been the ideal Hurricane replacement in production.
MB5 - Ready for production but not due to a variety of reasons none of which had anything to do with the aircraft or its performance.

German
He100 - with its range, better undercarridge and performance it was a worthy contender.
He177 - it had potential but was held back by politics and insane design requirements. Had they left the designers to get on with it then they may easily have come up with a classic similar to the He277 when it might have been of some use in the USSR. As it was, the He277 was of no use being too late.

Japanese
Ki44 - why they continued with the Ki43 for so long is something I never understood. The Ki44 was a capable aircraft and would have been a much better machine to hold the line until the Ki84

USA - Nothing
Its hard to think of an American aircraft that wasn't developed as far as technology allowed. PLanes such as the P40/P39 had fundamental design issues that limited their development and the USA rightly put its development into new aircraft. No other country developed so many first class new designs in such a short period of time.

Italy
Machi 202 - Why didn't they give it a couple of cannon? At a critical time of the airwar in the Med, this fairly small change could have made a big difference.
 
IMHO the only aircraft that could have really done something and built in the thousands and had an effect on the war was the He 100.

That was certainly a very good aircraft that went nowhere.

The rear engine thing is interesting. During WW1 RFC had some pushers called the DH2 fighters. If the aircraft crash landed, the engine could rip free and smash the pilot...maybe. But it also would be a nice lump between a bullet and the pilot.

A crash landing which caused the engine in a P39 to come loose is going to be a nasty crash landing in anything. I would consider the location of the engine unimportant as any violent crash landing is going to hurt in any plane.
 
To Glider
"..Italy
Machi 202 - Why didn't they give it a couple of cannon? At a critical time of the airwar in the Med, this fairly small change could have made a big difference."

The MC 202 was actually developed in the way you foresee: the MC205V was exactly a MC202 with 2 x MG151 and the DB605 engine. Wing cannon was tested on a couple of 202 (unofficially MC202C) before production switched to MC205.

Already covered in other threads, but the 'series 5' - Fiat G55, Macchi 205N (that was a different design from 205V) , Reggiane 2005 - could have been interesting if developed after early 1943 (i.e. with the updated DB605 with MW50 etc.)
 
Parmigiano said:
To Glider
"..Italy
Machi 202 - Why didn't they give it a couple of cannon? At a critical time of the airwar in the Med, this fairly small change could have made a big difference."

The MC 202 was actually developed in the way you foresee: the MC205V was exactly a MC202 with 2 x MG151 and the DB605 engine. Wing cannon was tested on a couple of 202 (unofficially MC202C) before production switched to MC205.

Already covered in other threads, but the 'series 5' - Fiat G55, Macchi 205N (that was a different design from 205V) , Reggiane 2005 - could have been interesting if developed after early 1943 (i.e. with the updated DB605 with MW50 etc.)
Click to expand...

Thanks for the info. I was aware of the development of the '5' series but the point I was trying to make is that they were too late. No one would deny that the MC202 was an excellent little fighter but why didn't they give the 202 the guns from the start. Almost every other nation on earth gave their fighters 20mm guns by that stage and it could have made a huge difference.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

M
How Would You Like To Ride Here?
Replies
8
Views
410
Snautzer01
Snautzer01
BarnOwlLover
What (or what would) make a good tactical recon aircraft in World War II
Replies
10
Views
1K
ColFord
ColFord
N
Can you ID this wrecked aircraft?
Replies
7
Views
1K
fire-fox
F
CHen10
Any Japanese claims on 10 July 1945?
Replies
0
Views
627
CHen10
CHen10
G
What are reliable YouTube sources?
2 3
Replies
57
Views
5K
ian_
I
Back