What have you learned or had affirmed on this site?

[WARSPITER]

thereby also requiring from myself to un-learn many, many things.

That says it all for me.

 

[Mustangtmg]

I tried looking up a similar recent thread in a similar vein, but the most recent I found was like 2013 or so. So not to necropost back that far, I'm starting this thread.

Things that I've learned/or had affirmed in my time here is mostly about the P-51 Mustang, namely:

1: The standard Merlin P-51s (B/D type models) were underrated in performance. Between WEP/combat power, they would've been capable interceptors if maybe a bit better armed.

2: NAA themselves looked at cannon armament for the P-51 and maybe P-82 as late as the NA-117 (pre-production mock up P-51H), and even envisioned 4x37mm cannons for the A-36.

3: The Allison Mustangs, while not that great at speed at altitude (due to the Allison V-1710 having a single stage, single speed supercharger), is almost criminally underrated in history as far as low alt. performance. The RAF wanted more for tactical recon work and the A-36 was probably the best dive bomber/pure fighter-bomber of the war in terms of performance and capability where used.

4: The lightweight Mustangs were simply phenomenal aircraft. I think when drgondog gets his second volume on the P-51 out, we'll get a more detailed explanation than I can come up with here.

Anyone want to discuss these points, or add some of their own about stuff they learned or found out or got added to here, about any aircraft from the World War II period.

I tried to contact you via the email address on the email you've sent me...and it bounced back...can you email an email address that I can send emails too.

I have a reply about the book you asked me about.

Thanks.


Tom

 

[BarnOwlLover]

Message sent last evening. I hope you got it

 

[rtbrd]

I fall back on my dad's quoting of Mark Twain: "'Tis better to remain silent and look like a fool, than open your mouth and remove all doubt." That's what I do here. Another Dad quote (this one, I think, original to him) that serves me well: "You have two ears and one mouth for a reason. Use them in that order."

Dad was pretty smart by the time I hit 21.

That last one that you attributed to him shows to me he was/is a pretty smart fellow. Words to live by.

 

[Thumpalumpacus]

That last one that you attributed to him shows to me he was/is a pretty smart fellow. Words to live by.

Yes indeed, he was.

 

[GregP]

I certainly learned a lot about the P-39.

I never realized it could have been a fast, long-range, air superiority interceptor capable of doing all other missions, too, except for all that pesky nose armor to prevent tumbling at any second.

Seriously, there is a lot of knowledge in here, and it is appreciated repeatedly.

 

[fubar57]

You get a "Rob" for that one

 

[BarnOwlLover]

Circling back around to the Mustang topic, for the "lightweight" P-51s, they (especially the H and the P-82, which was built to the same load standards) were the strongest as far as structural strength per pound other than maybe the early Allison Mustangs (and IMO, that's iffy). That's due all the pre-XP-51F models being designed to 8/12G at 8000 lbs and weight went up with time and development. The F/G/J/H/P-82 family were designed for 7.33/11G at clean gross take off weight (approx 95-9600 lbs for the P-51H).

Also shows that British aircraft structural standards weren't inferior to US standards, since it's all about what weights you design the G-limits around.

 

[Thumpalumpacus]

You get a "Rob" for that one View attachment 870694

Hold the mayo if you please.

 

[Steamed_Banana]

First, about a ton of great books I hadn't heard of which are super helpful in figuring out what the air war was all about, that I've now gotten hold of. Everything from operational histories to tomes like America's 100,000.

The existence of hundreds of WW2 documents with tests, evaluations, a million other things.

The ephemeral nature of excellent online resources for WW2 aircraft data.

How grouchy and opinionated very smart knowledgeable people can be about any subject related to this subject.

The many types of tropes and fantasies people get welded to while developing expertise in these areas.

How much more complex and interesting WW2 engines, and especially superchargers, were than I'd ever realized.

The vital importance of different types of fuel.

How much more tricky and difficult the real histories of almost every aircraft was as bugs were ironed out.

How almost every military aircraft design had major tradeoffs and flaws, even the best ones.

How guns on aircraft often didn't work.

How many aircraft were essentially using WW I guns.

The importance of special aluminum alloys.

How many aircraft that supposedly had protected fuel tanks actually had unprotected ones too.

That the Ki-43 was a lot more badass than I thought.

That the Typhoon was kind of a death-trap.

That the P-38 and F4U struggled more than I realized before they became really dominant.

How important humble early-war planes like Hudsons and Wirraways and Wellingtons were.

How good some of the early war French designs were.

(related) The surprising reach and major influence of Hispano-Suiza

That contra-rotating propellers were almost always a death-knell.

Evaporative cooling systems even more so.

How important seaplanes were.

Lots of other stuff.

 

[tomo pauk]

How grouchy and opinionated very smart knowledgeable people can be about any subject related to this subject.

Even the normies, like myself, are often grouchy and opinionated.

 

[Steamed_Banana]

Even the normies, like myself, are often grouchy and opinionated.

me too! It's probably a virus...

 

[BarnOwlLover]

That's me right now when it's 80 one day and 35 the very next...

But on subject, how about this one: World War II aircraft are cool (as cool to me as racing cars though history, in my case chiefly from 1965-present, and especially 2000-2008 since I'm a big Audi at Le Mans fan). Even better that talking/posting here has furthered my aviation interest and found all kinds of info, photos and documents thanks to that.

 

[Airborne2001]

The sheer importance of propeller efficiency when it comes to speed. I always knew that certain propeller designs could be better with climbrate and what not, but the chosen design could make or break an aircrafts ability to compete with another aircraft in speed.