PDA

View Full Version : "Outdated" Designs?



Pages : [1] 2

XyZspineZyX
10-10-2003, 09:12 PM
I've been thinking about this notion that the 109 was outdated by the middle of the war.

It seems to be commonly accepted and ranges from "showing it's age, and competitive but not superior" at it's kindest, to "hopelessley outdated by '44" at it's nastiest.

On the other hand, it was still getting kills up to the end, and even at the very end, in spite of all the problems the design, and Germany, faced, it still had some advantages over it's adversaries.

Furthermore, I know that people love to hate WWII Germany, afterall, they are all taught to in school, and nearly all obey, like the faithful mindless drones they are, but, the fact is that they were not stupid. Certainly not the scientists and engineers, but even the RLM wasn't. (Granted, the top of the top of the Nazi party - Hitler, Goering and crew - no more than 10 or so, were, but I'm not talking about them) If the 109 was as bad as most make it out to be, it would have been useless and horribly ineffective. It would have been a guanrenteed coffin (hey, I've heard that about a certain plane series in FB - to bad it doesn't reflect realisticly here. lol) to even the experten. Again, that's *if* it was as bad as so many suggest.

It seems that these notions are based on 3 ideas -

1 is that the victor must be superior. Basic human nature, and not totally off base, nor something to be erradicated, however, not entirely accurate either as it doesn't take enough into account.

Another is the myth that "good" always triumphs over "evil". Combine this with the notion that superior equipment will truimph over inferior equipment, and ego (our stuff can't be inferior....it's our's - as well as, we must be the "good guys" afterall)

And the final is that we changed equipment designs throughout the course of the war, using newer and newer designs that weren't just updated revisions, but rather totally seperate designs (F4F to F6F to F8F for example). It's the American way really, improve something to a point, then start over.

We seem to conveniently forget that the P-47 and Spitfire were both really pre-war designs that were modified and improved during the course of the war and were never "outdated". I think that remembering that would put too much of a kink in peoples pre-concieved notions.

I think a good example of the American design/engineering philosophy is cars. Look at the Corvette and F-Bodies (Firebird and it's lesser twin, Camaro). There are 6 generations of Corvette, and 4 Generations of F-Bodies. Each generation is totally distinct from each other, sharing only some basic styling and engineeering elements. Essentially, they are different cars with the same name.

I really think this pervades our society quite deeply, and combined with the other things is a very potent force and makes it a bit easier to see why we'd think such things about something like the 109.



Porsche 911



I had to leave it by itself because it really is "'nuff said". That's an example of the opposite design philosophy. The one that says, take a solid design and continue to refine it until it is perfect. Since nothing can be perfect, there are always improvements to be made. This, combined with the general German obsession with detail has lead to a car that has been around for, what, 35 years? And is still basically the same car. And I doubt that anyone would argue that the Porsche 911 is not a world class performance car.

I think the same can be applied to the 109 really. Why bother going through the mess invovled with brand new designs (designing, prototyping, testing, manufacturing, equipping, reparing, infrastructure, etc - and still have to improve it over time), when you could just improve what you have?

I can't understand why the He100 wasn't chosen, though I think I have some insight to the desicion - one of those "it was a good idea at the time" things, and by the time they could have used it - it might have been more trouble than it was worth to try to switch to it for the reasons I mentioned above.


Anyway - if we have to complain about aircraft, then let's complain about the commie planes, ok? The list is too big to even mention here. lol /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif

XyZspineZyX
10-10-2003, 09:12 PM
I've been thinking about this notion that the 109 was outdated by the middle of the war.

It seems to be commonly accepted and ranges from "showing it's age, and competitive but not superior" at it's kindest, to "hopelessley outdated by '44" at it's nastiest.

On the other hand, it was still getting kills up to the end, and even at the very end, in spite of all the problems the design, and Germany, faced, it still had some advantages over it's adversaries.

Furthermore, I know that people love to hate WWII Germany, afterall, they are all taught to in school, and nearly all obey, like the faithful mindless drones they are, but, the fact is that they were not stupid. Certainly not the scientists and engineers, but even the RLM wasn't. (Granted, the top of the top of the Nazi party - Hitler, Goering and crew - no more than 10 or so, were, but I'm not talking about them) If the 109 was as bad as most make it out to be, it would have been useless and horribly ineffective. It would have been a guanrenteed coffin (hey, I've heard that about a certain plane series in FB - to bad it doesn't reflect realisticly here. lol) to even the experten. Again, that's *if* it was as bad as so many suggest.

It seems that these notions are based on 3 ideas -

1 is that the victor must be superior. Basic human nature, and not totally off base, nor something to be erradicated, however, not entirely accurate either as it doesn't take enough into account.

Another is the myth that "good" always triumphs over "evil". Combine this with the notion that superior equipment will truimph over inferior equipment, and ego (our stuff can't be inferior....it's our's - as well as, we must be the "good guys" afterall)

And the final is that we changed equipment designs throughout the course of the war, using newer and newer designs that weren't just updated revisions, but rather totally seperate designs (F4F to F6F to F8F for example). It's the American way really, improve something to a point, then start over.

We seem to conveniently forget that the P-47 and Spitfire were both really pre-war designs that were modified and improved during the course of the war and were never "outdated". I think that remembering that would put too much of a kink in peoples pre-concieved notions.

I think a good example of the American design/engineering philosophy is cars. Look at the Corvette and F-Bodies (Firebird and it's lesser twin, Camaro). There are 6 generations of Corvette, and 4 Generations of F-Bodies. Each generation is totally distinct from each other, sharing only some basic styling and engineeering elements. Essentially, they are different cars with the same name.

I really think this pervades our society quite deeply, and combined with the other things is a very potent force and makes it a bit easier to see why we'd think such things about something like the 109.



Porsche 911



I had to leave it by itself because it really is "'nuff said". That's an example of the opposite design philosophy. The one that says, take a solid design and continue to refine it until it is perfect. Since nothing can be perfect, there are always improvements to be made. This, combined with the general German obsession with detail has lead to a car that has been around for, what, 35 years? And is still basically the same car. And I doubt that anyone would argue that the Porsche 911 is not a world class performance car.

I think the same can be applied to the 109 really. Why bother going through the mess invovled with brand new designs (designing, prototyping, testing, manufacturing, equipping, reparing, infrastructure, etc - and still have to improve it over time), when you could just improve what you have?

I can't understand why the He100 wasn't chosen, though I think I have some insight to the desicion - one of those "it was a good idea at the time" things, and by the time they could have used it - it might have been more trouble than it was worth to try to switch to it for the reasons I mentioned above.


Anyway - if we have to complain about aircraft, then let's complain about the commie planes, ok? The list is too big to even mention here. lol /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif

XyZspineZyX
10-10-2003, 09:16 PM
er.. do you really not have anything else to do bub?

-Thanks to Freddie; i'm a sexual spastic.

XyZspineZyX
10-10-2003, 09:26 PM
Are you often such an asshat? lol

XyZspineZyX
10-10-2003, 09:28 PM
"Furthermore, I know that people love to hate WWII Germany, afterall, they are all taught to in school, and nearly all obey, like the faithful mindless drones they are, but, the fact is that they were not stupid."

Are you for real? I don't ever recall being taught that the Germans were "stupid", however loathing the murder of millions isn't something that needs to be taught, nor does understanding right from wrong. What does need to be taught is how to clearly communicate, and if these are your true feelings then you need to head back to school.

Buzz_25th
10-10-2003, 09:31 PM
"Furthermore, I know that people love to hate WWII Germany, afterall, they are all taught to in school, and nearly all obey, like the faithful mindless drones"

You sure have a way with words DDT. It's not hard to hate a country that's trying to kill you for no other reason than they're gready.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
25th_Buzz
<center>
http://www.elknet.pl/acestory/foto1/drew2.jpg

XyZspineZyX
10-10-2003, 09:32 PM
/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

"Doctor Fact is knocking at the door. Someone, please, let the man in!"
Chris Morris

XyZspineZyX
10-10-2003, 09:37 PM
Ooo. I think you meant to use the venerable volkswagen bug as an analogy.

Barfly
Executive Officer
7. Staffel, JG 77 "Black Eagles"

http://www.7jg77.com

XyZspineZyX
10-10-2003, 09:38 PM
Buzz_25th wrote:
-
- You sure have a way with words DDT. It's not hard
- to hate a country that's trying to kill you for no
- other reason than they're gready.


Do you see that very same thing happening at the very moment of writing this somewhere in the world? Who are doing it?


Come on Buzz, don't swallow the bait & prove his point! /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif



-jippo

XyZspineZyX
10-10-2003, 09:40 PM
Panelboy wrote:
- Ooo. I think you meant to use the venerable
- volkswagen bug as an analogy.

I'm sure that somebody said 1970 that it was outdated design. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif


-jippo

XyZspineZyX
10-10-2003, 09:40 PM
BlitzPig_DDT wrote:

the fact is that they were not
- stupid. Certainly not the scientists and engineers,
- but even the RLM wasn't. (Granted, the top of the
- top of the Nazi party - Hitler, Goering and crew -
- no more than 10 or so, were

Er.. so The military/political masterminds who seduced the heart of a nation and brought europe to it's knees were "stupid"?

Damn, I must've been reading the wrong history books. Or are you calling hitler stupid (i.e. lacking intelligence) because of his mr.nasty image that you think you'll be appaulded for berrating?

His politics were pretty f*cked up but the man was not stupid (although i did hear he was gay.. ! ..But isn't everyone these days? /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif )

-Thanks to Freddie; i'm a sexual spastic.

XyZspineZyX
10-10-2003, 09:40 PM
Good post actually DDT
It's only funny til someone loses an eye....then it's hilarious

http://www.angelfire.com/falcon/nightschpanker/hurricat.jpg


Message Edited on 10/10/0301:41PM by Dubbo2

Buzz_25th
10-10-2003, 09:44 PM
Jippo,

I grew up during WW2. i remember my dad going to war, and returning fecked up. I did grow up hating the Germans and Japs. We all did, because we had good reason.

I don't anymore now, and have stated one of my best friends in German born.

However, what DDT said is just lame as usual.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
25th_Buzz
<center>
http://www.elknet.pl/acestory/foto1/drew2.jpg

XyZspineZyX
10-10-2003, 09:48 PM
Buzz_25th wrote:
- Jippo,
-
- I grew up during WW2. i remember my dad going to
- war, and returning fecked up. I did grow up hating
- the Germans and Japs. We all did, because we had
- good reason.
-
-
- I don't anymore now, and have stated one of my best
- friends in German born.
-
-
- However, what DDT said is just lame as usual.

Well both of my Grandaddies got wounded and suffered much too much because of the Stalin and Russians who attacked our country because of greed.

And here I am, helping Russians to make computer games... Funny world, eh? /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

I don't know if his post was lame or not, but really there is no point getting sucked into it. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif This forum has too much flame wars anyway. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif


-jippo

XyZspineZyX
10-10-2003, 09:50 PM
But in 1970 it was still a valid design - good fuel economy, affordable, easy to maintain. It was outdated in many ways, but overall it was still a very practical design. Why mess with success?

So wartime Germany decided at the time it couldn't cut back production of the 109 to transition to untested types - it was obviously still a very useful design, despite some shortcomings to slightly more modern adversaries. Of course we all know that those shortcomings - high speed handling, range, durability, occasionally questionable workmanship - weren't really cosmic shortcomings. Those 'differences' are minimized with a properly trained and motivated pilot who's adept at employing team tactics with his peers. Lack of training and fuel appear to me to be of far greater significance that any strengths or weaknessess of the type.

Barfly
Executive Officer
7. Staffel, JG 77 "Black Eagles"

http://www.7jg77.com

Buzz_25th
10-10-2003, 09:51 PM
I know your right Jippo. Some things rub me the wrong way, and it's hard to hold back. I'll have a peach now.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
25th_Buzz
<center>
http://www.elknet.pl/acestory/foto1/drew2.jpg

XyZspineZyX
10-10-2003, 09:51 PM
What BlitzPig is trying to say is that it was a Good Thing for the world that Germany failed to replace the ok-for-1930s Fb109 with the WAR winning Fw190. By 1941, the best war fighting advantage the Fb109 had was pilot tactics and training, but the so-called "Allies" caught up with that advantage. Good for them they didn't face a fighter force of entirely Fw190s.

The Fb109 landing gear, short range, and poor weather capability were beuracratic tactical jokes that the Spitfire engineers were able to solve. Fw190 was the real competitor to the Spit and was the real German fighter once the "Allies" paid attention to pilot training and tactics.

XyZspineZyX
10-10-2003, 09:54 PM
Howdy

-BlitzPig_DDT wrote:
-(Firebird and it's lesser - twin, Camaro)

/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

S!
Wease

XyZspineZyX
10-10-2003, 10:00 PM
johnmilner wrote:
- Are you for real? I don't ever recall being taught
- that the Germans were "stupid", however loathing the
- murder of millions isn't something that needs to be
- taught, nor does understanding right from wrong.
- What does need to be taught is how to clearly
- communicate, and if these are your true feelings
- then you need to head back to school.

/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif LOL!

Case in point. Thank you very much.

One is led to conclude 1 of 2 things from your post, either you don't know much about history, or, you are indeed a victim of the programming.

XyZspineZyX
10-10-2003, 10:01 PM
The problem with the 109 was of size and wingloading. Willy Messerschmitt was very successful in creating the smallest possible airframe that could be built around a big engine, pilot, weapons, etc, but the downside was once the performance race got underway, the airframe reached it's limits pretty quickly. (generally agreed that 109F series was the peak) As they uprated the engines, increased the firepower, armour, etc, past that point the weight and therefore the wingloading went up and up, and the 109's handling was degraded and it became somewhat over-powered and tricky to fly.

The Spitfire was also a 1935 design but....its airframe was far more capable of handling increases in power and weight than was that of the 109. Consequently, it was still a cutting-edge air superiority interceptor by the end of the war.

The whole design philosophy behind the FW190 was to rectify the faults of the 109.

The 109 was a great plane, one of the greatest, but as time went on, they asked too much of it.

"If I had all the money I've spent on drink....I'd spend it on drink!"

XyZspineZyX
10-10-2003, 10:02 PM
Buzz_25th wrote:
- You sure have a way with words DDT. It's not hard
- to hate a country that's trying to kill you for no
- other reason than they're gready.

Yup. See my previous post. lol Spend a little time actually studying history Buzz. With a mind set like that you'll have every nation in the world in very short order. lol




Message Edited on 10/10/0309:02PM by BlitzPig_DDT

XyZspineZyX
10-10-2003, 10:05 PM
A victim of what #%$&ing programming?
And I proved just which of your points, that you are an *** who spots garbage in his posts or that you feel Hitler was short changed in how people viewed him as vile and dispicable?
You feel the holocaust never took place as well?
I was never taught to hate the Germans, I was presented information and came to my own conclusions about the events. That and I am a Canadian of German background with great uncles that fought in WWII as Canadian pilots.
SO *** monkey, you have proved my point in the fact that you are a waste of time and of skin.

XyZspineZyX
10-10-2003, 10:05 PM
http://blitzpigs.com/forum/images/smiles/fcinema.gif

<center>http://www.blitzpigs.com/forum/images/avatars/bp_geminiCombined.gif

<center><table style="filter:glow[color=red,strength=1)">Warning: My intense sense of humor may tug at the stick crammed in your shaded spot.</table style></center> <center><table style="filter:glow[color=red,strength=1)">If you treasure your lack of humor please refrain from reading my posts as they may cause laughter.</table style></center> <center><table style="filter:glow[color=red,strength=1)">Heaven Forbid.</table style></center>
<center><table style="filter:glow[color=black,strength=4)"> P-39 Vet since the original IL-2 Sturmovik </table style></center> <center><table style="filter:glow[color=black,strength=4)"> Soon to be P-63 Vet </table style></center>

/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-mad.gif
<table style="filter:glow[color=green,strength=4)">www.blitzpigs.com</center> </table style>

XyZspineZyX
10-10-2003, 10:07 PM
Sorry this isn't about planes.

I love the 911, but they had some pretty viscious handling characteristics until the early to mid 90's models. There was many an eager 911 driver who lifted off in a corner and wasn't prepared for the snap oversteer. That being said, there isn't a lot on the road that can make one feel as satisfied taking a corner well as a 911, The early 911s (originally model 901) were pretty tame machines with @130 HP but as the power increased the handling foibles became more noticable. I have driven a few different 911s but I simply can't imagine trying to put the 260-300 HP of the late-70's turbos on the road. The changes to the 911 over the years have been quite substantial but at heart it is still the 911. Like the 109, the 911 requires a pilot of supreme skill to make it really sing but little compares to a 73 Carerra powering through a hard corner to make one appreciate German engineering.


Year Model Kg HP Top Speed 0-100 Km/h
1963 901 (2.0) 1080 130 210 8.5
2002 996 Targa 1415 320 285 5.2

Performance data from http://www.adelgigs.com/911evolution.shtml
The linked site has a cool series of 911 photos from 63-98.

XyZspineZyX
10-10-2003, 10:16 PM
criticisms of the 109 are by & large reasonable critiques of the machine, not the politics that DDT brings up . Also many if not most who think the 109 was worn out are in many ways comparing it to the 190. That ruins the whole argument about anti- german brainwashing which only he & folks who agree with him are free from.
;0)



Message Edited on 10/10/0311:46PM by Saburo_0

Buzz_25th
10-10-2003, 10:18 PM
I'm running out of peaches fast. Someone hold me back.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
25th_Buzz
<center>
http://www.elknet.pl/acestory/foto1/drew2.jpg

XyZspineZyX
10-10-2003, 10:33 PM
Same argument can be had for VVS planes as well. Were they really as bad and inferior as many make them out to be? Just a guess but the truth probably lies somewhere in the middle....

XyZspineZyX
10-10-2003, 10:46 PM
rummyrum::
-- Same argument can be had for VVS planes as well. Were
-- they really as bad and inferior as many make them out to be?

Well we can't talk about the history of pilot training or tactics, and its easy to see why. The last thing the computer FB simmer desires is a discussion of the ability, or more worrisome, lack of ability, to fly in frontline combat. So we Debate history through the fine filter of Oleg's computer FM, thus we try to translate the German air victories against the French or Soviets in terms of FM.

XyZspineZyX
10-10-2003, 10:50 PM
Good post DDT,

i would really like to know whether the last german 109 modells were still competitive with contemporary alllied fighters...
This is hard to determine...as you said, 109s scored kills till the end if flown by good pilots, but were they really up to a La7 or P51 or Spit MK IX (is this the correct number ?? dont know) ??
I read recently the diary of Hauptmann Lipfert from the east front and he has some La7 on his account. I am sure other german aces have too, but that doesnt proove anything. Surprise attack, inferior pilots, general tactical disadvantages do count for that, as its clear that german pilots in the last two years did basically hit and run tactics and attacked only from superior positions...

Its interesting though that Germany used epecially 109s still for dogfighting against P51 in great heights or as airfield protection fighters of the 262 fields while heavily armed FW or 262 attacked the bomberstreams....one should think for real Dogfighting and occupying allied fighters the 109 was deemed still suitable...but well, what else should they have used...
I would like to add: What we have in FB now is the K4 to compare with the late allied modells. But the epitome of 109 building was the K14 which we dont have here (i know, only two planes of it still came into action..).
Also it should be noted: there were many better versions of the 109 under construction which simply were not massbuilt because Germany was so under pressure to continuously produce...
have you ever heard of the Me 109L,Me 109 H (for great heights, they really flew and were used as high altitude reconnaissance aircraft and acheived heights of 14000 to 15000 m !!!!, no allied machine whatsoever could reach them there !!) Me 109S (was three month from being finished when the war ended, Me209 ( it flew 44 !! The engineers were really excited with its performance which was deemed much better then even Ta152 or FW190D but wasnot produced as those modells just started coming from the factorys) ???

In conclusion: I think the 109 was a great design which could have easily stayed on top of the fighter rank until the end of the war if Germany would have had the production capabilities of USA or SovietUnion. How good the really built modells were compared to contemporary allied fighters is hard to determine but i think they were at least competitive even if maybe slightly inferior but under no circumstances really outclassed.

Does anybody know the book of Martin Caidin about the 109 ?
He is writing (my own simplified translation from german): "In most books about 109 or FW 190 there is unavoidably the statement that they were outdated designs long before 45. I cannot comprehend this because according to this view every fighter of of WW2 was too old. Only as an example: Every american fighter actively used except the Grumman F6 Hellcat was designed/planned or even built before the beginning of the war (means December 41 for USA).
The most important american fighters - Lockheed P38, P39, P40, P 47, P51, P 61 (Black Widow), F4F (wildcat), F7F (Tigercat), F4U (corsair) were all prewar designs or builts.

Yours,

II/JG54_Zent

XyZspineZyX
10-10-2003, 10:52 PM
The Curtiss P40 was CLEARLY an outdated design by the end of 1942. But it remained in production and in service till the end. It got kills till the end. It was loved by many of the men (boys really) who flew her.

Why?

Because like the 109, Curtiss got so many things so right to begin with. It was a very stout aircraft that didn't wilt under horrible field conditions. It could absorb damage quite well. And above all it was a pilot's aircraft.

True, it was lacking in climb performance, but with the right tactical doctrine it stayed a force to be respected till the end.

A good design ages well...

The Bf 109, Curtiss P40, Supermarine Spitfire, North American P51, Porsche 911, 12 cylinder Ferrari engines...Jaguar E Type, all timeless...


BE SURE!!!

<center><FONT color="red">[b]BlitzPig_EL</FONT>[B]<CENTER> http://old.jccc.net/~droberts/p40/images/p40home.gif
</img>.
"All men dream, but not equally. Those who dream by night in the dusty recesses of their minds, wake in the day that it was vanity:
but the dreamers of the day are dangerous men, for they may act on their dreams with open eyes, to make them possible. "
--T.E. Lawrence

XyZspineZyX
10-10-2003, 10:53 PM
Aiii...

I'd encourage people to hold back on commenting on this particular thread. Whatever valid points DDT is able to mash out on the keyboard are obscured almost entirely by the smarmy invective. There's bound to be another thread where similar issues are expressed, but without an infant attempting an "everything you know is wrong" speech from his high chair along with it.



http://home.iprimus.com.au/djgwen/fb/worker_parasite.jpg

Need help with NewView? Read this thread. (http://forums.ubi.com/messages/message_view-topic.asp?name=us_il2sturmovik_gd&id=yzbcj)

XyZspineZyX
10-10-2003, 10:57 PM
You know, I still haven't found my car keys


http://www.jw-design.net/SIGGINEW.jpg


The world will change when you are ready to pronounce this oath:
I swear by my Life and my love of it that I will never live for the sake of another man,
nor ask another man to live for the sake of mine.

Miss A. R.

XyZspineZyX
10-10-2003, 11:05 PM
galingula wrote:
- You know, I still haven't found my car keys
-
-
I bet that they are in the oven. Why? Would you ever think of looking there? Bound to be the place.
Cheers!

<CENTER>


<IMG SRC="http://www.apqa16.dsl.pipex.com/airplane1.3.jpg"


Ladies & gentlemen, this is the captain speaking. Thankyou for choosing to fly Mandarin Airlines. Those passengers sitting on the left-hand side of the aeroplane please make yourselves comfortable. Those sitting on the right... please look to your left!

XyZspineZyX
10-10-2003, 11:07 PM
http://christpuncher.jerkcity.com/jerkcity1420.gif

http://home.iprimus.com.au/djgwen/fb/worker_parasite.jpg

Need help with NewView? Read this thread. (http://forums.ubi.com/messages/message_view-topic.asp?name=us_il2sturmovik_gd&id=yzbcj)

XyZspineZyX
10-10-2003, 11:18 PM
johnmilner wrote:
- A victim of what #%$&ing programming?
- And I proved just which of your points, that you are
- an *** who spots garbage in his posts or that you
- feel Hitler was short changed in how people viewed
- him as vile and dispicable?
- You feel the holocaust never took place as well?
- I was never taught to hate the Germans, I was
- presented information and came to my own conclusions
- about the events. That and I am a Canadian of German
- background with great uncles that fought in WWII as
- Canadian pilots.
- SO *** monkey, you have proved my point in the fact
- that you are a waste of time and of skin.

/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Once again, proving you know nothing about history, or are selectively hating. Hmm, wonder why that might be. lol

Be as hostile as you want, doesn't make you any less a victim. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Message Edited on 10/10/0310:20PM by BlitzPig_DDT

XyZspineZyX
10-10-2003, 11:44 PM
ElAurens wrote:
- The Curtiss P40 was CLEARLY an outdated design by
- the end of 1942. But it remained in production and
- in service till the end. It got kills till the end.
- It was loved by many of the men (boys really) who
- flew her.

Did Curtiss have anything on hand to replace it? Just curious.


- Because like the 109, Curtiss got so many things so
- right to begin with. It was a very stout aircraft
- that didn't wilt under horrible field conditions.
- It could absorb damage quite well. And above all it
- was a pilot's aircraft.

"Like the 109". http://www.blitzpigs.com/forum/images/smiles/Thumbsup2.gif Too bad so few realize that.


- A good design ages well...
-
- The Bf 109, Curtiss P40, Supermarine Spitfire,
- North American P51, Porsche 911, 12 cylinder Ferrari
- engines...Jaguar E Type, all timeless...
-
-
- BE SURE!!!

Deusenberg, Packards of the same era, '63 Split Window Coupe Sting Rays.......the list is too big to post. http://www.blitzpigs.com/forum/images/smiles/Thumbsup2.gif

XyZspineZyX
10-10-2003, 11:51 PM
I can say that the person who still thinks that Bf-109 was "outdated", after reading this forum for some time, is completely brainwashed.


<center> http://www.stormbirds.com/images/discussion-main.jpg </center>

XyZspineZyX
10-10-2003, 11:53 PM
Zentaurus wrote:
- i would really like to know whether the last german
- 109 modells were still competitive with contemporary
- alllied fighters...
- This is hard to determine...as you said, 109s scored
- kills till the end if flown by good pilots, but were
- they really up to a La7 or P51 or Spit MK IX (is
- this the correct number ?? dont know) ??
- I read recently the diary of Hauptmann Lipfert from
- the east front and he has some La7 on his account. I
- am sure other german aces have too, but that doesnt
- proove anything. Surprise attack, inferior pilots,
- general tactical disadvantages do count for that, as
- its clear that german pilots in the last two years
- did basically hit and run tactics and attacked only
- from superior positions...

All true. One is left to wonder just why Messerschmitt didn't upscale the plane to hide all the bumps, or increase the wing span, or remove the slats, or add trim to all axes, or increase control leverage. All those are criticisms of the design. All would have been relatively easy to do (save maybe upscaling, the assembly line interruption would be significan with that, more so than just the wings). Perhaps none of that was done because it really wasn't a problem.


- Its interesting though that Germany used epecially
- 109s still for dogfighting against P51 in great
- heights or as airfield protection fighters of the
- 262 fields while heavily armed FW or 262 attacked
- the bomberstreams....one should think for real
- Dogfighting and occupying allied fighters the 109
- was deemed still suitable...

Good points as well.


- but well, what else should they have used...

Well, as I said above, either frame could have been improved with minimal impact on manufacturing, over and above the ways in which they were. Yet, they weren't. I do find it hard to believe that they would shy away from basic and small improvements if they were as necessary as the criticisms seem to imply.

Also, they could have bitten the bullet and brought the He100 into production, or pressed the Do-335 into service sooner, or any number of other things.


- I would like to add: What we have in FB now is the
- K4 to compare with the late allied modells. But the
- epitome of 109 building was the K14 which we dont
- have here (i know, only two planes of it still came
- into action..).

I've heard the K-14 never made it into the air. I've even heard it wasn't a real design. Still though, the K-4 is a good counter to the P-51D, chronologically speaking. The real question is going to be how accurate each will be modeled.


- Also it should be noted: there were many better
- versions of the 109 under construction which simply
- were not massbuilt because Germany was so under
- pressure to continuously produce...
- have you ever heard of the Me 109L,Me 109 H (for
- great heights, they really flew and were used as
- high altitude reconnaissance aircraft and acheived
- heights of 14000 to 15000 m !!!!, no allied machine
- whatsoever could reach them there !!) Me 109S (was
- three month from being finished when the war ended,
- Me209 ( it flew 44 !! The engineers were really
- excited with its performance which was deemed much
- better then even Ta152 or FW190D but wasnot produced
- as those modells just started coming from the
- factorys) ???

Interesting, can you point the way to more info on those?


- The most important american fighters - Lockheed P38,
- P39, P40, P 47, P51, P 61 (Black Widow), F4F
- (wildcat), F7F (Tigercat), F4U (corsair) were all
- prewar designs or builts.

And the F4U ran on into Korea. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

Buzz_25th
10-10-2003, 11:57 PM
"All true. One is left to wonder just why Messerschmitt didn't upscale the plane to hide all the bumps, or increase the wing span, or remove the slats, or add trim to all axes, or increase control leverage. All those are criticisms of the design. All would have been relatively easy to do (save maybe upscaling, the assembly line interruption would be significan with that, more so than just the wings). Perhaps none of that was done because it really wasn't a problem."



Gunther Rall was one of the ones saying some of those things were wrong. He should know a little better than you.


------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
25th_Buzz
<center>
http://www.elknet.pl/acestory/foto1/drew2.jpg

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 12:00 AM
Buzz_25th wrote:
- Gunther Rall was one of the ones saying some of
- those things were wrong. He should know a little
- better than you.

/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Still trying to find ways to boost your ego huh? Too bad you blew it here too.

"weren't really a problem" means not the severe problem people make them out to be, you know, minor - just a faster way to say it. But then, you'll grasp at anything to try to take a shot at me. So sad. lol

Buzz_25th
10-11-2003, 12:07 AM
What does my ego have to do with what Rall said? Nice side slip on the topic.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
25th_Buzz
<center>
http://www.elknet.pl/acestory/foto1/drew2.jpg

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 12:21 AM
Buzz, Rall was a high ranked NATO official, what would you expect him to say "all allied planes were underpowered dogs, my 109 owned them all"? Get real Buzz.


<center> http://www.stormbirds.com/images/discussion-main.jpg </center>

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 12:22 AM
Even Bismarck didn't last till the end.....

It had a 1:1 kill-ratio though/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

rgds

Buzz_25th
10-11-2003, 12:24 AM
Huck,

You get real. This is what he's saying now,not during WW2. Ever hear what he says about Hitler now? Why don't you think he wouldn't be honest about the 109?

You can't stand the fact that a German plane wasn't perfect.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
25th_Buzz
<center>
http://www.elknet.pl/acestory/foto1/drew2.jpg


Message Edited on 10/10/0304:29PM by Buzz_25th

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 12:28 AM
Buzz_25th wrote:
- Huck,
-
- You get real. This is what he's saying now,not
- during WW2.

Of course now. Because during ww2 he didn't seem at all inpressed by the allied planes. Otherways how in the world did he scored 275 times?


<center> http://www.stormbirds.com/images/discussion-main.jpg </center>

Buzz_25th
10-11-2003, 12:30 AM
Nobody said he wasn't a great pilot. He probably would have done just as well flying an La5.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
25th_Buzz
<center>
http://www.elknet.pl/acestory/foto1/drew2.jpg

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 12:37 AM
- have you ever heard of the Me 109L,Me 109 H (for
- great heights, they really flew and were used as
- high altitude reconnaissance aircraft and acheived
- heights of 14000 to 15000 m !!!!, no allied machine
- whatsoever could reach them there !!)

Except the Westland Welkin high- altitude fighter which first flew in November 1942 and climbed to 50,000ft.

EDIT (and the pressurised Mig 7- first flew in 1944)

Message Edited on 10/10/0311:45PM by BerkshireHunt

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 12:56 AM
You know, the Fb109 could be seen as the best choice for a strategically retreating, weakened air force. Fw190 is more an offensive aircraft, able to do more than just fight other aircraft. BlitzPig has a point about the German industry keeping the Fb109 later in the WAR. The Germans got themselves in a defensive war situation in which they were forced to depend on a cheap day dogfighter to defend themselves, a hot dogfighter that was the favorite of many a great ace, although possibly at the expense of Newbie pilots facing their first combat. That is an interesting question.

With more war preperation, they could have dumped the Fb109 after 1942 for a more offensive fighter less crippled by short range and capable of dealing with more determined "allied" air defenses than found in Poland, France, and 1941 Russia.

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 01:02 AM
What Gemini said


/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 01:07 AM
LEXX_Luthor wrote:
- You know, the Fb109 could be seen as the best choice
- for a strategically retreating, weakened air force.
- Fw190 is more an offensive aircraft, able to do more
- than just fight other aircraft. BlitzPig has a point
- about the German industry keeping the Fb109 later in
- the WAR. The Germans got themselves in a defensive
- war situation in which they were forced to depend on
- a cheap day dogfighter to defend themselves, a hot
- dogfighter that was the favorite of many a great
- ace, although possibly at the expense of Newbie
- pilots facing their first combat. That is an
- interesting question.
-
- With more war preperation, they could have dumped
- the Fb109 after 1942 for a more offensive fighter
- less crippled by short range and capable of dealing
- with more determined "allied" air defenses than
- found in Poland, France, and 1941 Russia.



Bf-109 is not a "defensive aircraft" whatever you wanted to say by that. It was an air superiority fighter, a dogfighter. All the disadvantages Bf-109 had were common among all dogfighters. Fw-190 was a multirole fighter. They were not overlapping in roles. And even if they did, there was no reason to take one out of production, because two competing designs means, beside the competition between manufacturers, also a competition among squadrons fitted with different planes. You can see even today the remnants of this competition: there are few people who say both were very good planes, they usualy pick one and slander the other.


<center> http://www.stormbirds.com/images/discussion-main.jpg </center>

Message Edited on 10/10/0307:14PM by Huckebein_FW

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 01:29 AM
-- It was an air superiority fighter, a dogfighter.
-- Fw-190 was a multirole fighter.

Good point Huck! That's the issue I was hoping to see in this thread, an issue extending far into the jet age with even more intensity.

PS:: What about the range comparison between late WAR dogfighter Spits and dogfighter Fb109s? I know little about Spit. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif I do know Yak~3 was as crippled as the Fb109 in offensive range.

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 04:16 AM
Rall also said he prefered the 109 over any other fighter, and he flew captured P-51 Mustangs.

The very best fighter pilots in history all flew the 109, it's a simple fact - including the only two pilots in the history of arial warfare to exceed 300 victories, Eric Hartmann and Gerhard Barkhorn.

Not to mention HJM, the "Star of Africa" and possibly the greatest fighter pilot to ever fly.

Yes it's true, they all flew the 109.

Eric Hartman treated the P-51 Mustang savagely while flying an unboosted "outdated" G-6. Actually, it can be said that Hartman dominated the Mustangs he encountered in combat.

Not bad for an "obsolete" fighter, huh?


<center><img src= "http://www.luftwaffepics.com/LCBW4/FW190-A0-52.jpg" height=215 width=365>

<center>"We are now in a position of inferiority...There is no doubt in my mind, nor in the minds of my fighter pilots, that the FW190 is the best all-round fighter in the world today."

Sholto Douglas, 17 July 1942

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 04:26 AM
I think the 109 designed had reached it's limits for four reasons (one was a flaw even on early model 109s).

1. Range it was a major flaw even during BoB
2. Extremely fragile. Especially considering the better armament of most planes, the 109 had become a very fragile plane. Especially compared to the very sturdy 190
3. Armament: the main task of the LW (at least in the west) was to destroy heavy/medium bombers 1 cannon armament was definately not enough anymore compared to the multiple cannon armament of the 190s. The underwing gondolas added much punch, but when using them the performance of the 109 was sub par, and made it an easy prey for ennemy fighters.
4. Also the single cannon weapons worked pretty well with very good pilots with great gunnery, but later in the war most pilots were noobs and weren't up to the task. The 109 was a hard plane to master and didn't fit the poorly trained LW recruits.

Performance wise and manoeuvrability wise it was certainly up to date, but those factors make me think that the design had reached some unsurmountable limits. If you compare it to the 190, which led to the Ta 152, the 109 has major flaws and no progession margin.

Nic




Message Edited on 10/11/0305:27AM by nicolas10

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 04:27 AM
LEXX_Luthor wrote:
--- It was an air superiority fighter, a dogfighter.
--- Fw-190 was a multirole fighter.
-
- Good point Huck! That's the issue I was hoping to
- see in this thread, an issue extending far into the
- jet age with even more intensity.
-
- PS:: What about the range comparison between late
- WAR dogfighter Spits and dogfighter Fb109s? I know
- little about Spit. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif I do know Yak~3 was as crippled
- as the Fb109 in offensive range.


Spits, 109, Yaks, La and Laggs they all have aprox the same range. This was the constraint for building a great dogfighter.

Even today light jet fighters have better maneuvrability, nobody can cheat physics.


<center> http://www.stormbirds.com/images/discussion-main.jpg </center>

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 04:50 AM
I will point out that the Poshe 911 has gone through several complete, ground up redesigns. I think the current 911 is actually model number 993, but I haven't been well keeping up on them.

If you take a look at the models from differenet years, side by side, you will *quickly* notice how different they are. I think they actually have had four different designs for that car, counting the current model.

So, the 911 to 109 analogy doesn't really hold water.

Most of the poblems the 109 had were from requirements to continue the production line uninterupted. If you look at the US fighters used during the war, you will notice similare problems occuring when the production line could not be interupted.

The P-40 is, acutally a very good example of that. While it had incrimental improvements over the course of its development, after the changing to the P-40D modle, I think, there were no significant chaged to the overall design. However, Curtis engineers made a prototype, later in the war, featuring a very large number of advancements, including a very closely cowled engine, bubble canopy, clipped wings, and a lightened airframe.

Despite having no significant changes to the core fuselage, aside form the bubble canopy, and only slightly more horsepower than the previous model, the aircraft gained around 40 mph in top speed, and had a noticable increase in agility.

However, putting it into production would have required a retooling of the Curtiss production floor, and it was decided that the type did not offer a significant performance increase over other types to warrent interupting production for retooling.

The P-47 also had similare problems. On the XP-47J model, among other things, they tested a revised engine cowling, with the supercharger air intake moved farther after under the chin, and revised oil coolers. The cowling was both lighter and more aerodynamic, resulting in a small but significant increase in speed and climb rate, even when applied to standard P-47D models. Republic wanted to implement it in all production P-47's, however the Air Force would not accept the delay required for the retooling.

The P-38 also got hit by requirements to not interrupt production. There was a version tested equiped with Merlin engines, paddel bladed propellers, and a completely revised engine cooling system. The aircraft showed significnat speed and climb rate improvements over the Allison engined version, but the modifications required a major redesign of the engine nacelles, wing leading edges, and I think the landing gear as well. The Air Force, again, considered the production delay completely unacceptable, and cancled the project.

Any time an aircraft is required to be produced, in a nonstop swarm fassion, the design suffers, because it becomes impossible to make significant changes to the design.

Harry Voyager

Addendum: Um, Huckbein, by definition, an air superiority fighter *is* a defensive aircraft. The only *offensive* aircraft are bombers and attack planes. Pure fighters *cannot* damage an enemy on the ground. All they can do is prevent hostile air power from intruding into an airspace. That is it.

Battles may be fought in the air, but at the end of the day, all that matters is whose troops are on the ground. All aircraft can do is assist, or impede, that.

http://groups.msn.com/_Secure/0YQDLAswcqmIpvWP9dLzZVayPXOmo6IJ16aURujNfs4dDETH84 Q6eIkCbWQemjqF6O8ZfvzlsvUUauJyy9GYnKM6!o3fu!kBnWVh BgMt3q2T3BUQ8yjBBqECLxFaqXVV5U2kWiSIlq1s6VoaVvRqBy Q/Avatar%202%20500x500%20[final).jpg?dc=4675409848259594077

Message Edited on 10/10/0310:56PM by HarryVoyager

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 05:14 AM
Hmm, I don't see what this thread is about. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

The only things I've seen regarding the 109s are "learn to fly" or "quit your whining", not "it was a outdated fighter".

I tell ya, it's not outdated if Crazyivan is flying it! Or a multitude of other 109 jocks out there!

I think it's just that, the pilots flying the 109s were highly skilled elites, one-of-a-kind pilots. The same can be said to a even higher degree for the VVS aces, because they faced pilots who flew alongside these deadly elites.

http://www.mechmodels.com/images/klv_ubisig1a.jpg


Oh yeah, I'm a P-63 whiner too! /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 05:19 AM
HarryVoyager wrote:
- Addendum: Um, Huckbein, by definition, an air
- superiority fighter *is* a defensive aircraft. The
- only *offensive* aircraft are bombers and attack
- planes. Pure fighters *cannot* damage an enemy on
- the ground. All they can do is prevent hostile air
- power from intruding into an airspace. That is it.

For the attack planes to operate they needed air superiority insured. Bf-109 did that. It was a purely "offensive" role. Range did not matter. LW doctrine was tactical, support of the ground troups.

What we see today is that basically bombers dissapeared from most of the airforces. There remained only multirole fighters doing attack missions. Capability to do surprise surgical strikes of today is what dive bombers and fighter-bombers did once in ww2.
Everybody is tactical nowadays. Only the capability to move this force around the globe is strategical. Of course there is a strategical deterrence insured by ICBMs.


<center> http://www.stormbirds.com/images/discussion-main.jpg </center>

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 05:19 AM
109 was a great plane.

Even in 45.

That doesn't mean there weren't better planes. American, British, Japanese or Russian ones.



<Center>



http://www.wingman-fr.net/fzg/forum/images/smiles/sm167.gif

1.5/10 Troll Rating from USAFHelos
(but working on it /i/smilies/16x16_robot-tongue.gif - Woot! 7.25 points awarded make 8.75/10)

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 05:22 AM
Koro stop bringing me into this mess /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Yeah i still fly it.. love the damn thing. All russians are weird /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif

Regards,
VFC*Crazyivan
http://www.rmutt.netfirms.com/ivan-reaper.gif

"No matter how good the violin may be, much depends on the violinist. I always felt respect for an enemy pilot whose plane I failed to down." Ivan Kozhedub

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 05:23 AM
BlitzPig_DDT wrote:
-
- Did Curtiss have anything on hand to replace it?
- Just curious.

Curtiss kept trying to keep the P40 current, but all their attempts never bettered the more modern P51, so no contracts ever materialized.


http://www.afwing.com/images/p40/xp40q.jpg
</img.>
The XP 40 Q

<center><FONT color="red">[b]BlitzPig_EL</FONT>[B]<CENTER> http://old.jccc.net/~droberts/p40/images/p40home.gif
</img>.
"All men dream, but not equally. Those who dream by night in the dusty recesses of their minds, wake in the day that it was vanity:
but the dreamers of the day are dangerous men, for they may act on their dreams with open eyes, to make them possible. "
--T.E. Lawrence

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 05:24 AM
clint-ruin wrote:
- Aiii...
-
- I'd encourage people to hold back on commenting on
- this particular thread. Whatever valid points DDT
- is able to mash out on the keyboard are obscured
- almost entirely by the smarmy invective. There's
- bound to be another thread where similar issues are
- expressed, but without an infant attempting an
- "everything you know is wrong" speech from his high
- chair along with it.


Wanna talk about pickles, then?

Tell you the truth, like Jerry Sienfeld, I've never had a really good pickle. Hell, I don't even know if there is such a thing.

Regards,

SkyChimp

http://members.cox.net/rowlandparks/NAA_logo.jpg

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 05:33 AM
Korolov wrote:
- Hmm, I don't see what this thread is about. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif
-
- The only things I've seen regarding the 109s are
- "learn to fly" or "quit your whining", not "it was a
- outdated fighter".

You must not have read this whole thread then. It brought out a lot of the "it was outdated" types, both before and after your post. lol /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 05:37 AM
I still don't see "it was a outdated fighter" in every thread that comes around here saying "how to defeat La7 with Bf-109?"

http://www.mechmodels.com/images/klv_ubisig1a.jpg


Oh yeah, I'm a P-63 whiner too! /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 05:39 AM
ElAurens wrote:
- BlitzPig_DDT wrote:
--
-- Did Curtiss have anything on hand to replace it?
-- Just curious.
-
- Curtiss kept trying to keep the P40 current, but all
- their attempts never bettered the more modern P51,
- so no contracts ever materialized.
-
-
http://www.afwing.com/images/p40/xp40q.jpg - </img> -
- The XP 40 Q
-
- <center><FONT
- color="red">[b]BlitzPig_EL</font>[B]<CENTER> <img
- src="http://old.jccc.net/~droberts/p40/images/p40h
- ome.gif"> - </img>.
-
-

Well we can forget anything DDT says about a/c since his aviation knowledge is next to nil./i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

DDT, do you and the "uber twins" have shaved heads?/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif




http://www.thundercycle.com/photos/dropdead2.gif



"Only a dead 'chamber pot' is a good 'chamber pot'!"

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 05:40 AM
Korolov wrote:
- I still don't see "it was a outdated fighter" in
- every thread that comes around here saying "how to
- defeat La7 with Bf-109?"

Umm...'k.

Why does that matter? This notion has been going around for a long time and a thread like this was kinda just smoldering. A recent post by Milo reminded me and the conditions just happened to be right.

What about you? What's your pupose in here? Serious question.

Buzz_25th
10-11-2003, 05:40 AM
Just because Rall thought the 109 was the best plane, and had one of the highest scores. Doesn't mean he didn't think the 109 couldn't be improved, and didn't have problems. Nothing is perfect.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
25th_Buzz
<center>
http://www.elknet.pl/acestory/foto1/drew2.jpg

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 05:44 AM
Buzz_25th wrote:
- Just because Rall thought the 109 was the best
- plane, and had one of the highest scores. Doesn't
- mean he didn't think the 109 couldn't be improved,
- and didn't have problems. Nothing is perfect.


Nobody said 109 is perfect. Just that it happens to be the best/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif


<center> http://www.stormbirds.com/images/discussion-main.jpg </center>

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 05:47 AM
Huckebein_FW wrote:
-
-
-
- Nobody said 109 is perfect. Just that it happens to
- be the best
-
-


/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif
/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif
/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif
/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif
/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif



http://www.thundercycle.com/photos/dropdead2.gif



"Only a dead 'chamber pot' is a good 'chamber pot'!"

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 05:48 AM
FW190fan::
-- The very best fighter pilots in history all flew the
-- 109, it's a simple fact - including the only two pilots
-- in the history of arial warfare to exceed 300 victories,
-- Eric Hartmann and Gerhard Barkhorn.

-- Not to mention HJM, the "Star of Africa" and possibly
-- the greatest fighter pilot to ever fly.

-- Yes it's true, they all flew the 109.

We agree! When flown by the most experienced warriors, the lack of war fighting ability of the hot Fb109 dogfighter was concealed, at the sacrifice of Germany's Newbie pilots facing their first combat late in the war. I am reminded of the bloody sacrifice of Germany's army of instructor pilots to fly Ju~52 transports into the Stalingrad bag. The Luftwaffe under Goering consumed its precious nest eggs to the end. I can't blame the 109 for that though.


-- Spits, 109, Yak9DDs, La and Laggs they all have aprox the same range.

Early or late 109s and Spits? Help me here.

The lack of specifics allows me to assume you mean "DD" inside your "Yak9." /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif You must forgive me! (for those in the New, the DD was double-extended range escort fighter and not a dogfighter.

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 05:48 AM
MiloMorai wrote:
- Well we can forget anything DDT says about a/c since
- his aviation knowledge is next to nil./i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif
-
- DDT, do you and the "uber twins" have shaved
- heads?<img

WTF?!

What the fuc|< is your problem?! Just decided it was a bit too long since you were a total a$$hole toward me or something?

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 05:49 AM
Is this above an argument supporting your opinion Milo?
Should I count the smileys?


<center> http://www.stormbirds.com/images/discussion-main.jpg </center>

Buzz_25th
10-11-2003, 05:50 AM
Best planes. Best pilots. How did they ever get shot down?

Strange huh?

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
25th_Buzz
<center>
http://www.elknet.pl/acestory/foto1/drew2.jpg

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 05:52 AM
Buzz_25th wrote:
- Best planes. Best pilots. How did they ever get shot
- down?
-
- Strange huh?

I KNOW I KNOW!! A guy told me once! See eveyone thinks that "Lw" is short for Luftwaffe.. it's NOT! It is short for..

Lw = Lost War

<div style="background:#222222;color:#e0e0e0;font-size:24px;font-weight:bold;font-face:courier;"> TAGERT
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?
</div>
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=forum
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=discussion

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 05:58 AM
BlitzPig_DDT wrote:
- Why does that matter? This notion has been going
- around for a long time and a thread like this was
- kinda just smoldering. A recent post by Milo
- reminded me and the conditions just happened to be
- right.
-
- What about you? What's your pupose in here? Serious
- question.

I just don't see, specifically "it was a outdated airplane" argument brought up in a lot of threads regarding the Bf-109.

Come to think of it, with most threads regarding aircraft performance, you just get tons of opinions and thousands of different charts. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

My purpose in here - why all the fuss? I just don't see the "outdated airplane" argument enough to justify a thread talking about the advanced german tech, etc.

Heres something to chew on - DDT, we all know you're a big fan of the P-47 and P-51. If this game featured just the Bf-109, Fw-190, P-47 and P-51, and the P-47 was modelled as it currently is; as well as the P-51 being about the same - would you still complain about performance issues over the Fw-190 and Bf-109? Or would you only ask that the P-47 and P-51 be brought up to spec to be able to offer opposition to the Bf-109 and Fw-190?

We know the Bf-109 will clean the P-47s clock one on one, same for the Fw-190, but their flight modelling issues - which you claim to be so knowledgable about - if they are the slightest bit incorrect, would you complain about them?

Remember, we have to treat this as a game, nothing more or less. You can call it a simulator all you want, but it's still a computer game.

http://www.mechmodels.com/images/klv_ubisig1a.jpg


Oh yeah, I'm a P-63 whiner too! /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 06:00 AM
LEXX_Luthor wrote:
-
--- Spits, 109, Yak9DDs, La and Laggs they all have aprox the same range.
-
- Early or late 109s and Spits? Help me here.

They had very similar fuel capacities, 106, 97 US gal respectively, from early to late versions. Also the economic fuel consumtions was similar. Only at military or combat power DB605 was much more fuel efficient, with 50% more than Merlin. Higher compression ratio, direct fuel injection and a larger displacement of the DB605 played a role in this.



- The lack of specifics allows me to assume you mean
- "DD" inside your "Yak9." /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif You must forgive me! (for
- those in the New, the DD was double-extended range
- escort fighter and not a dogfighter.

Yep, you found the answer yourself, D and DD versions were escort fighters not dogfighters.



<center> http://www.stormbirds.com/images/discussion-main.jpg </center>

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 06:00 AM
A big SIEG HEIL!!! to you and the "uber twin" DDT.

/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif


http://www.cartoonstock.com/lowres/cfu0033l.jpg


http://www.thundercycle.com/photos/dropdead2.gif



"Only a dead 'chamber pot' is a good 'chamber pot'!"

Message Edited on 10/11/0301:04AM by MiloMorai

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 06:01 AM
Buzz_U
-- Best planes. Best pilots. How did they ever get shot down?
-- Strange huh?

Very strange indeed.

Actually, surprisingly the Fb109 aces seemed to usually survive repeated shootdowns, sometimes getting shot down more than once a day, and live to fight another day. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

BAD joke:: The LW Great Aces seem like those dudes you hear about in science fiction who live for thousands of years, fighting in all the WARs since the Romans or Assyrians and in the late 1930s they converged in Germany to choose the Luftwaffe as the best place to be warrior in this era.

Bad joke, I know some have died over the years. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

Or the media "say" they have died. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

Just think, it would take the average man 2000 years to get a score of 300 enemy aircraft. FB simmers, about 8000 years.


/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 06:02 AM
Panelboy wrote:
- Ooo. I think you meant to use the venerable
- volkswagen bug as an analogy.
-
- Barfly
- Executive Officer
- 7. Staffel, JG 77 "Black Eagles"
-
- http://www.7jg77.com

Change your sig Barfly, you da man now.

DDT. To use your car theory against you, the Model T still gets you from point A to point B but even a Honda Civic does it better.

<center>http://www.acompletewasteofspace.com/pics/cb.jpg </center>

<center>We are recruiting: www.92ndfg.com</center> (http://www.92ndfg.com</center>)

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 06:03 AM
Buzz_25th wrote:
- Best planes. Best pilots. How did they ever get shot
- down?
-
- Strange huh?

Most were shut down when attacking bombers. In those missions they were vulnerable to both bombers and escort fighters. Ace skills do not help in this particular situation, only luck.


<center> http://www.stormbirds.com/images/discussion-main.jpg </center>

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 06:03 AM
FYI

Kills acheived by soviet pilots HAVE to be confirmed by ground units.

Kills acheived by german pilots have to be confirmed...by pilots themselfs...


Just a thought.


I still have doubts about 300+ kills by Hartmann and Rall.. even that i admire them as a pilots. Those doubts are not something i came up with ... they are coming from various sources... and actualy number of air to air kills mentioned for Hartmann was around 130-150 .. I am sure that i am going to take alot of flak for this... but read Blond Knight of Germany carefully... you will see with your own eyes that german air kills confirmation system was more then relaxed /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif comparing to russian.

Fire away

Regards,
VFC*Crazyivan
http://www.rmutt.netfirms.com/ivan-reaper.gif

"No matter how good the violin may be, much depends on the violinist. I always felt respect for an enemy pilot whose plane I failed to down." Ivan Kozhedub

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 06:05 AM
Korolov wrote:
- My purpose in here - why all the fuss? I just don't
- see the "outdated airplane" argument enough to
- justify a thread talking about the advanced german
- tech, etc.

Ok. Legitimate. My question though, was, given that you don't see the point to it, (I could swear you've claimed something similar to other topics of complain w/r/t this game) why bother coming in to try to stifle conversation? What's the point to *that*? lol


- Heres something to chew on - DDT, we all know you're
- a big fan of the P-47 and P-51. If this game
- featured just the Bf-109, Fw-190, P-47 and P-51, and
- the P-47 was modelled as it currently is; as well as
- the P-51 being about the same - would you still
- complain about performance issues over the Fw-190
- and Bf-109? Or would you only ask that the P-47 and
- P-51 be brought up to spec to be able to offer
- opposition to the Bf-109 and Fw-190?
-
- We know the Bf-109 will clean the P-47s clock one on
- one, same for the Fw-190, but their flight modelling
- issues - which you claim to be so knowledgable about
- - if they are the slightest bit incorrect, would you
- complain about them?

Once again with the snide remarks. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

In a word, yes. But, this question is totally out of place because this isn't about FMs, and it isn't about IL2 or FB. This is just a discussion about something that has been on my mind and relates to the subject matter that the games relate to. That is what forums are for, isnt' it?


- Remember, we have to treat this as a game, nothing
- more or less. You can call it a simulator all you
- want, but it's still a computer game.

You can ignore it all you want, but like I pointed out to you before, a game can be anything, even a simulator. It's all about what you do with it/use it for.

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 06:06 AM
crazyivan1970 wrote:
- FYI
-
- Kills acheived by soviet pilots HAVE to be confirmed
- by ground units.
-
- Kills acheived by german pilots have to be
- confirmed...by pilots themselfs...
-
-
- Just a thought.

No kidding? WOW.. Did Not Know That! I thought they all used the method the US used? Defintlly food for thought! Explaines alot IMHO!



<div style="background:#222222;color:#e0e0e0;font-size:24px;font-weight:bold;font-face:courier;"> TAGERT
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?
</div>
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=forum
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=discussion

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 06:06 AM
crazyivan1970 wrote:
- FYI
-
- Kills acheived by soviet pilots HAVE to be confirmed
- by ground units.
-
- Kills acheived by german pilots have to be
- confirmed...by pilots themselfs...


Again this splendid piece of sovietic propaganda?
crazyivan, I expected more from you.


<center> http://www.stormbirds.com/images/discussion-main.jpg </center>

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 06:07 AM
Huckebein_FW wrote:
- Buzz_25th wrote:
-- Best planes. Best pilots. How did they ever get shot
-- down?
--
-- Strange huh?
-
- Most were shut down when attacking bombers. In those
- missions they were vulnerable to both bombers and
- escort fighters. Ace skills do not help in this
- particular situation, only luck.
-
-

Most were shot down BEFORE they got to the bombers.


http://www.thundercycle.com/photos/dropdead2.gif



"Only a dead 'chamber pot' is a good 'chamber pot'!"

Buzz_25th
10-11-2003, 06:09 AM
Huck,

You might want to add up all the aces that shot dowm 109's. They were all flying fighters..;(

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
25th_Buzz
<center>
http://www.elknet.pl/acestory/foto1/drew2.jpg

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 06:09 AM
crazyivan1970 wrote:
-
- I still have doubts about 300+ kills by Hartmann and
- Rall.. even that i admire them as a pilots. Those
- doubts are not something i came up with ... they are
- coming from various sources... and actualy number of
- air to air kills mentioned for Hartmann was around
- 130-150 .. I am sure that i am going to take alot of
- flak for this... but read Blond Knight of Germany
- carefully... you will see with your own eyes that
- german air kills confirmation system was more then
- relaxed /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif comparing to russian.


More relaxed than russian scoring system? Is there such a thing?

They shot the fin airforce 10 times at least if you believe sovietic propaganda. Jippo can give much better details about this.


<center> http://www.stormbirds.com/images/discussion-main.jpg </center>

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 06:10 AM
No Huck, no propaganda this time... It is true. Did you know that all planes that were shut down by soviets behind enemy lines were not acounted for all the way till late 1943. Then situation changed. But as i said before...i should stay away from discussions like this... who`s gonna beleive me anyways /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Regards,
VFC*Crazyivan
http://www.rmutt.netfirms.com/ivan-reaper.gif

"No matter how good the violin may be, much depends on the violinist. I always felt respect for an enemy pilot whose plane I failed to down." Ivan Kozhedub

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 06:10 AM
crazyivan1970 wrote:
- I still have doubts about 300+ kills by Hartmann and
- Rall.. even that i admire them as a pilots. Those
- doubts are not something i came up with ... they are
- coming from various sources... and actualy number of
- air to air kills mentioned for Hartmann was around
- 130-150 .. I am sure that i am going to take alot of
- flak for this... but read Blond Knight of Germany
- carefully... you will see with your own eyes that
- german air kills confirmation system was more then
- relaxed /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif comparing to russian.
-
- Fire away
-
- Regards,
- VFC*Crazyivan

I think it's "victories" and that the LW used a system where differnt planes were worth different points, kinda like FB. So it's not saying that he had 300 kills necessarily.

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 06:12 AM
MiloMorai wrote:
- Most were shot down BEFORE they got to the bombers.


Maybe you can come with an argument for this opinion of yours?



<center> http://www.stormbirds.com/images/discussion-main.jpg </center>

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 06:12 AM
Milo - pi$$ off troll. That was low and uncalled for, even for you. Not to mention obviously stupid to anyone who bothers to read much around here.

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 06:13 AM
Finnish campaign i am not familiar with it at all...i`m sure both sides lied. It doesn`t matter. There is not much to argue about IMO, neither of was there.

Regards,
VFC*Crazyivan
http://www.rmutt.netfirms.com/ivan-reaper.gif

"No matter how good the violin may be, much depends on the violinist. I always felt respect for an enemy pilot whose plane I failed to down." Ivan Kozhedub

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 06:17 AM
DDT, the 109 was getting "long in the tooth".

"Me262" Vol 1 pg 32

Willy tried to make the Me209 speed record a/c into a fighter >> was a dud.

"Still determined to produce a replacement for the Me109, Messerschmitt began work on a new Me209 based on the P1091 project during the spring of 1943."

Seems Willey thought the 109G was the end of the line.


http://www.thundercycle.com/photos/dropdead2.gif



"Only a dead 'chamber pot' is a good 'chamber pot'!"

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 06:17 AM
BlitzPig_DDT wrote:
- Milo - pi$$ off troll. That was low and uncalled
- for, even for you. Not to mention obviously stupid
- to anyone who bothers to read much around here.


When you opened this thread didn't you expected it?
Not to mention that we are in weekend, trolls are set loose.


<center> http://www.stormbirds.com/images/discussion-main.jpg </center>

Buzz_25th
10-11-2003, 06:19 AM
Huck,

You don't think your a troll too?

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
25th_Buzz
<center>
http://www.elknet.pl/acestory/foto1/drew2.jpg

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 06:20 AM
Huckebein_FW wrote:
- MiloMorai wrote:
-- Most were shot down BEFORE they got to the bombers.
-
-
- Maybe you can come with an argument for this opinion
- of yours?
-

Did the bombers shootdown 10,000 plus a/c? Fighters did./i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif


http://www.thundercycle.com/photos/dropdead2.gif



"Only a dead 'chamber pot' is a good 'chamber pot'!"

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 06:20 AM
Buzz_25th wrote:
- Huck,
-
- You don't think your a troll too?


I think he is.

Regards,

SkyChimp

http://members.cox.net/rowlandparks/NAA_logo.jpg

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 06:20 AM
MiloMorai wrote:
- DDT, the 109 was getting "long in the tooth".
-
- "Me262" Vol 1 pg 32
-
- Willy tried to make the Me209 speed record a/c into
- a fighter >> was a dud.
-
- "Still determined to produce a replacement for the
- Me109, Messerschmitt began work on a new Me209 based
- on the P1091 project during the spring of 1943."

That's the author opinion based on thin air. Me-209 was not a replacement for Bf-109, by any means. A dud nevertheless.



- Seems Willey thought the 109G was the end of the
- line.

And this is your contribution. Priceless, like always.



<center> http://www.stormbirds.com/images/discussion-main.jpg </center>

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 06:22 AM
Huckebein_FW wrote:

- That's the author opinion based on thin air. Me-209
- was not a replacement for Bf-109, by any means. A
- dud nevertheless.


You don't believe the Me-209 was develo0ped to replace the Bf-109?

Regards,

SkyChimp

http://members.cox.net/rowlandparks/NAA_logo.jpg

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 06:22 AM
crazyivan:
-- Fire away

BAM

Wait up, there was the story of a German twin engine fighter unit doing naval stuff over the atlantic. They wanted a transfer cos they could not get their kills confirmed. And they got the transfer too. Don't know much else about the story though.

Also, I would guess the German aces fought longer than most, and the LW had the most professional fighter culture ever since the 1930s, unlike everybody else and I am not forgettig the Japanese. Plus there was that 1941 Feast in the East. 300+ aces is only 3.5 times WW1 Richtofen's score which may have been undercounted and occured in less than 2 years. (how long did Richtofen fight?)

Right on Milo. The USA bombers took bad losses until the escort fighters helped them. Huck I will leave it to you and SkyChamp to disscuss the range of late war Spits vs late war 109s. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 06:24 AM
Luthor mate...when did Hartmann started his flying career /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Regards,
VFC*Crazyivan
http://www.rmutt.netfirms.com/ivan-reaper.gif

"No matter how good the violin may be, much depends on the violinist. I always felt respect for an enemy pilot whose plane I failed to down." Ivan Kozhedub

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 06:25 AM
Huckebein_FW wrote:
- That's the author opinion based on thin air. Me-209
- was not a replacement for Bf-109, by any means.

If not the 109...than what? Or at least tell us what *ROLE* the Me209 was to fill? In a nut shell the 109 went from a fighter vs fighter to a fighter chasing bombers.. what or where did the 209 fit into this evolution? Was it to carry the banner behind that said "SALE AT JC PENNYS" /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

- dud nevertheless.

Agreed.

- And this is your contribution. Priceless, like always.

Agreed 100%, quick to the point and hard to argue with... no fluf just facts.


<div style="background:#222222;color:#e0e0e0;font-size:24px;font-weight:bold;font-face:courier;"> TAGERT
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?
</div>
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=forum
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=discussion

Buzz_25th
10-11-2003, 06:26 AM
Oct 42.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
25th_Buzz
<center>
http://www.elknet.pl/acestory/foto1/drew2.jpg

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 06:26 AM
Thanks Buzz /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

Regards,
VFC*Crazyivan
http://www.rmutt.netfirms.com/ivan-reaper.gif

"No matter how good the violin may be, much depends on the violinist. I always felt respect for an enemy pilot whose plane I failed to down." Ivan Kozhedub

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 06:26 AM
MiloMorai wrote:
-
- Huckebein_FW wrote:
-- MiloMorai wrote:
--- Most were shot down BEFORE they got to the bombers.
--
--
-- Maybe you can come with an argument for this opinion
-- of yours?
--
-
- Did the bombers shootdown 10,000 plus a/c?


Nobody knows for sure how many victories bomber gunners had. They switched the victories back and forth from gunners to fighters several times. And anyway bomber gunners claims were huge. Nevertheless 8000 fighters lost to bomber gunners and fighters for 20000 british and american bombers destroyed by fighters and flak is quite an accomplishment, though at a heavy price.


<center> http://www.stormbirds.com/images/discussion-main.jpg </center>

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 06:26 AM
Right crazy, Hartmann started out in 1942/3 or something. I see the problem now. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 06:27 AM
Huckebein_FW wrote:

- Maybe you can come with an argument for this opinion
- of yours?


You have difficulty believing this, too? You do live in a strange and twisted world.

Regards,

SkyChimp

http://members.cox.net/rowlandparks/NAA_logo.jpg

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 06:28 AM
Huckebein_FW wrote:
- MiloMorai wrote:
-- DDT, the 109 was getting "long in the tooth".
--
-- "Me262" Vol 1 pg 32
--
-- Willy tried to make the Me209 speed record a/c into
-- a fighter >> was a dud.
--
-- "Still determined to produce a replacement for the
-- Me109, Messerschmitt began work on a new Me209 based
-- on the P1091 project during the spring of 1943."
-
- That's the author opinion based on thin air. Me-209
- was not a replacement for Bf-109, by any means. A
- dud nevertheless.
-

Yup a dud, like all of Willey's prop jobs after the 109.

I'll believe anything J. Richard Smith abd Eddie Smith say before I would believe anything you say.

-
-
-- Seems Willey thought the 109G was the end of the
-- line.
-
- And this is your contribution. Priceless, like
- always.
-

More gum flapping from one of the "uber twins". Logical conclusion Huckie, but then that is something you lack, logic.





http://www.thundercycle.com/photos/dropdead2.gif



"Only a dead 'chamber pot' is a good 'chamber pot'!"

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 06:29 AM
I see someone with the big key lurking on the background...is that Snoop or Veg? /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Regards,
VFC*Crazyivan
http://www.rmutt.netfirms.com/ivan-reaper.gif

"No matter how good the violin may be, much depends on the violinist. I always felt respect for an enemy pilot whose plane I failed to down." Ivan Kozhedub

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 06:33 AM
BlitzPig_DDT wrote:
- Ok. Legitimate. My question though, was, given that
- you don't see the point to it, (I could swear you've
- claimed something similar to other topics of
- complain w/r/t this game) why bother coming in to
- try to stifle conversation? What's the point to
- *that*? lol

Stifle the conversation? Just trying to understand. Can you point me out several people and threads where people have claimed the Bf-109 as a outdated fighter?

- Once again with the snide remarks.

Sorry you took it that way. I guess unless anyone believes your point of view, they're just scum of the earth, just dirt. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

- In a word, yes. But, this question is totally out of
- place because this isn't about FMs, and it isn't
- about IL2 or FB. This is just a discussion about
- something that has been on my mind and relates to
- the subject matter that the games relate to. That is
- what forums are for, isnt' it?

If its not about IL2FB, then it wouldn't be on topic. I somehow don't believe you'd complain about them if they were off; in fact, I'd hazard to say that if you tried to post proof of the P-47 or P-51 having better specs than in game, you'd probably be flamed x10 by many luftwaffe pilots.

- You can ignore it all you want, but like I pointed
- out to you before, a game can be anything, even a
- simulator. It's all about what you do with it/use it
- for.

Except we're using it for entertainment, thus it becomes a game. We're not trying to plan the third world war here, are we? /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif


http://www.mechmodels.com/images/klv_ubisig1a.jpg


Oh yeah, I'm a P-63 whiner too! /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 06:37 AM
Huckebein_FW wrote:

-
-
- Nobody knows for sure how many victories bomber
- gunners had. They switched the victories back and
- forth from gunners to fighters several times. And
- anyway bomber gunners claims were huge. Nevertheless
- 8000 fighters lost to bomber gunners and fighters
- for 20000 british and american bombers destroyed by
- fighters and flak is quite an accomplishment, though
- at a heavy price.
-

So now you believe what you and your bud Issy say are hurendous over claiming by bomber gunners./i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif We should re-name you Waffler./i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Flak had the greater number of bomber kills. In fact Hitler asked Goering why he needed the LW when he had Flak.


http://www.thundercycle.com/photos/dropdead2.gif



"Only a dead 'chamber pot' is a good 'chamber pot'!"

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 06:39 AM
Who couldn't love a German WWII fighter? I mean, they were hand crafted for Pete's sake!

http://www.earthstation1.com/HolocaustFiles/Pics/AllachBMWAircraftPlantUsingConcentrationCampLaborW WII.jpg




Regards,

SkyChimp

http://members.cox.net/rowlandparks/NAA_logo.jpg


Message Edited on 10/11/0309:40AM by SkyChimp

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 06:39 AM
Huck...where do you get those crazy numbers... i`m scared now /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

Regards,
VFC*Crazyivan
http://www.rmutt.netfirms.com/ivan-reaper.gif

"No matter how good the violin may be, much depends on the violinist. I always felt respect for an enemy pilot whose plane I failed to down." Ivan Kozhedub

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 06:40 AM
SkyChimp wrote:
-
- Huckebein_FW wrote:
-
-- That's the author opinion based on thin air. Me-209
-- was not a replacement for Bf-109, by any means. A
-- dud nevertheless.
-
-
- You don't believe the Me-209 was develo0ped to
- replace the Bf-109?


No, of course, Me-209 and it's competition Fw-190D were developed as a replacement for Fw-190A in bomber interceptor role. Have you ever believed that Dora was built to replace 109??
This subject was discussed at lenght just a day ago, and maybe I'll resurect it after the weekend.



-
- Huckebein_FW wrote:
-
-- Maybe you can come with an argument for this opinion
-- of yours?
-
-
- You have difficulty believing this, too? You do
- live in a strange and twisted world.

I have difficulties in believing anything not properly argumented. I'm not blinded by preconceptions like you are Skychimp. I do understand though why you are considering it strange.


<center> http://www.stormbirds.com/images/discussion-main.jpg </center>

Message Edited on 10/11/0312:44AM by Huckebein_FW

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 06:44 AM
Huckebein_FW wrote:
-

- I'm not blinded by
- preconceptions
-
-
-

Another joke by Huckie.

/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif :


http://www.thundercycle.com/photos/dropdead2.gif



"Only a dead 'chamber pot' is a good 'chamber pot'!"

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 06:48 AM
Milo...what`s that bike? Wow... one of those custom made 30k wonders?

Regards,
VFC*Crazyivan
http://www.rmutt.netfirms.com/ivan-reaper.gif

"No matter how good the violin may be, much depends on the violinist. I always felt respect for an enemy pilot whose plane I failed to down." Ivan Kozhedub

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 06:49 AM
MiloMorai wrote:
-
- Huckebein_FW wrote:
-
-- I'm not blinded by preconceptions
-
- Another joke by Huckie.

Is what I was thinking! Not blinded by BIAS.. MY A!

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=preconceptions

<div style="background:#222222;color:#e0e0e0;font-size:24px;font-weight:bold;font-face:courier;"> TAGERT
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?
</div>
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=forum
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=discussion

Buzz_25th
10-11-2003, 06:51 AM
30k would be a down payment Ivan../i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
25th_Buzz
<center>
http://www.elknet.pl/acestory/foto1/drew2.jpg

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 06:52 AM
LMAO! umm 70k?

Regards,
VFC*Crazyivan
http://www.rmutt.netfirms.com/ivan-reaper.gif

"No matter how good the violin may be, much depends on the violinist. I always felt respect for an enemy pilot whose plane I failed to down." Ivan Kozhedub

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 06:53 AM
Huckebein_FW wrote:

- No, of course, Me-209 and it's competition Fw-190D
- were developed as a replacement for Fw-190A in
- bomber interceptor role.


Amazing, Huck has single handedly changed history. I suppose we should just now ignore:

Reichminister der Luftfahrt GL/C-E2/Festigkeitsprufstelle
Minutes from the Me-209 structrual soundness requirements.
Conference on 2/23/43 at Ausburg. Berlin-Adlershof 3/5/43

"1. Role.
The type is primarily to be employed as a standard fighter.
...
Furthermore, there are planes to use it as a fighter-bomber, long-range fighter-bomber, reconnaissance aircraft and high altitude fighter."


Huck, "bomber interceptor role" isn't even mentioned.







- I have difficulties in believing anything not
- properly argumented.

Me too. That's why I flush 99.9% of everything you say.



- I'm not blinded by
- preconceptions like you are Skychimp. I do
- understand though why are you considering it
- strange.

Oh please, you're spell-bound. You actually believe the party line.

Regards,

SkyChimp

http://members.cox.net/rowlandparks/NAA_logo.jpg

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 06:53 AM
crazyivan1970 wrote:
- LMAO! umm 70k?

Warmer /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

<div style="background:#222222;color:#e0e0e0;font-size:24px;font-weight:bold;font-face:courier;"> TAGERT
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?
</div>
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=forum
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=discussion

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 06:55 AM
Oh come on...it`s not damn ferrari lol

Regards,
VFC*Crazyivan
http://www.rmutt.netfirms.com/ivan-reaper.gif

"No matter how good the violin may be, much depends on the violinist. I always felt respect for an enemy pilot whose plane I failed to down." Ivan Kozhedub

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 06:56 AM
SkyChimp wrote:
- Me too. That's why I flush 99.9% of everything you say.

Only 99.9%?


<div style="background:#222222;color:#e0e0e0;font-size:24px;font-weight:bold;font-face:courier;"> TAGERT
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?
</div>
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=forum
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=discussion

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 06:57 AM
crazyivan1970 wrote:
- Oh come on...it`s not damn ferrari lol
-
- Regards,
- VFC*Crazyivan

I think that is one of Billy the Kids creations aint it? Him being a decended ups it a bit! /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif


<div style="background:#222222;color:#e0e0e0;font-size:24px;font-weight:bold;font-face:courier;"> TAGERT
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?
</div>
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=forum
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=discussion

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 06:58 AM
350k.

If its worth anything more, I'm just gonna buy me one of them new Fw-190s from Germany!

/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

http://www.mechmodels.com/images/klv_ubisig1a.jpg


Oh yeah, I'm a P-63 whiner too! /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Buzz_25th
10-11-2003, 06:59 AM
It took longer to build than a Ferrari Ivan.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
25th_Buzz
<center>
http://www.elknet.pl/acestory/foto1/drew2.jpg

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 07:01 AM
i remember..there was a show on Discovery...father and son building custom bikes... one was like F-22 type of design...awesome looking thing..

Regards,
VFC*Crazyivan
http://www.rmutt.netfirms.com/ivan-reaper.gif

"No matter how good the violin may be, much depends on the violinist. I always felt respect for an enemy pilot whose plane I failed to down." Ivan Kozhedub

Buzz_25th
10-11-2003, 07:04 AM
They get crazy money for custom choppers. It's more like art than a bike.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
25th_Buzz
<center>
http://www.elknet.pl/acestory/foto1/drew2.jpg

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 07:05 AM
crazyivan1970 wrote:
- i remember..there was a show on Discovery...father
- and son building custom bikes... one was like F-22
- type of design...awesome looking thing..
-
- Regards,
- VFC*Crazyivan


"American Chopper"! That show is great!

http://a1672.g.akamaitech.net/7/1672/34/e7c07627dd1b70/dsc.discovery.com/fansites/amchopper/photogalleries/comanche/gallery/comancheclose2_hzoom.jpg


http://a1672.g.akamaitech.net/7/1672/34/23a0c900508599/dsc.discovery.com/fansites/amchopper/photogalleries/comanche/gallery/comancheclose3_hzoom.jpg


http://a1672.g.akamaitech.net/7/1672/34/190ff1422e2c76/dsc.discovery.com/fansites/amchopper/photogalleries/comanche/gallery/comancheclose5_hzoom.jpg


http://a1672.g.akamaitech.net/7/1672/34/b55bee03027c2e/dsc.discovery.com/fansites/amchopper/photogalleries/comanche/gallery/comancheclose9_hzoom.jpg


http://a1672.g.akamaitech.net/7/1672/34/83a8e0f6baefa8/dsc.discovery.com/fansites/amchopper/photogalleries/comanche/gallery/comanche1_hzoom.jpg


Regards,

SkyChimp

http://members.cox.net/rowlandparks/NAA_logo.jpg

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 07:06 AM
Korolov wrote:
- Stifle the conversation? Just trying to understand.
- Can you point me out several people and threads
- where people have claimed the Bf-109 as a outdated
- fighter?

You could take an approach that indicated that, if that were the case.

As for the threads, this goes back to when I came on board in the IL2 days. And as a somewhat late comer (by about a year) it probably goes back further. So no, I can't point out the specific threads. Even the recent one that finally triggered this escapes memory at this time after the day I've had.


- Sorry you took it that way. I guess unless anyone
- believes your point of view, they're just scum of
- the earth, just dirt.

I took it that way because of how it was worded and the context it was in.

I'm not sure what your angle is, but, I disagree peaceably with many people. So you are way off base here.


- If its not about IL2FB, then it wouldn't be on
- topic.

This forum allows for tangental topics. You know that.


- I somehow don't believe you'd complain about
- them if they were off;

You continue with this. Ok, why? On what do you base that statement?


- in fact, I'd hazard to say
- that if you tried to post proof of the P-47 or P-51
- having better specs than in game, you'd probably be
- flamed x10 by many luftwaffe pilots.

Maybe, but so what? Doing that isn't a case of campaigning in a popularity contest.


- Except we're using it for entertainment, thus it
- becomes a game. We're not trying to plan the third
- world war here, are we?

That's my point. The fact that we are using it for entertainment means it's a game. That does not preclude it from also being a simulator however.

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 07:06 AM
In context of the original post,of course the 109 was outdated by 43/44,but I don't think this made it "utterly bad". It was getting kills right up to the end. But considering the 109's role,the Germans could've done a LOT better. Plenty of projects were in the works for a replacement but the RLM's idiotic beauracracy stalled most of the good ones. Oh,sure you have the Ta-152 and Fw-190D but they never saw combat in the numbers the 109s did. In short the 109 was outdated(but sufficient) and it's silly to say otherwise...

47|FC
http://rangerring.com/wwii/p-47.jpg

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 07:07 AM
SkyChimp wrote:
- "American Chopper"! That show is great!

http://a1672.g.akamaitech.net/7/1672/34/e7c07627dd1b70/dsc.discovery.com/fansites/amchopper/photogalleries/comanche/gallery/comancheclose2_hzoom.jpg


Is that a... Nah.. Thought I saw a flettner tab on that fender /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

<div style="background:#222222;color:#e0e0e0;font-size:24px;font-weight:bold;font-face:courier;"> TAGERT
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?
</div>
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=forum
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=discussion

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 07:09 AM
Thanks Chimp... this one i meanthttp://a2028.g.akamaitech.net/7/2028/34/ef9358c46360b1/dsc.discovery.com/fansites/amchopper/photogalleries/jetbike/gallery/jetbike1_hzoom.jpg


Regards,
VFC*Crazyivan
http://www.rmutt.netfirms.com/ivan-reaper.gif

"No matter how good the violin may be, much depends on the violinist. I always felt respect for an enemy pilot whose plane I failed to down." Ivan Kozhedub

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 07:09 AM
necrobaron wrote:
- In context of the original post,of course the 109
- was outdated by 43/44,but I don't think this made it
- "utterly bad". It was getting kills right up to the
- end. But considering the 109's role,the Germans
- could've done a LOT better. Plenty of projects were
- in the works for a replacement but the RLM's idiotic
- beauracracy stalled most of the good ones. Oh,sure
- you have the Ta-152 and Fw-190D but they never saw
- combat in the numbers the 109s did. In short the 109
- was outdated(but sufficient) and it's silly to say
- otherwise...

Agreed 100%

THAT and I think Hitler agreed with Stalin where he realised that

"Quanity has a Quality all it's own"

Alot of things where NOT imporoved, because if it ment taking down the production lines for just a DAY for re-tooling that was a DAY they could not spare!


<div style="background:#222222;color:#e0e0e0;font-size:24px;font-weight:bold;font-face:courier;"> TAGERT
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?
</div>
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=forum
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=discussion

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 07:11 AM
SkyChimp wrote:
-
- Huckebein_FW wrote:
-
-- No, of course, Me-209 and it's competition Fw-190D
-- were developed as a replacement for Fw-190A in
-- bomber interceptor role.
-
-
- Amazing, Huck has single handedly changed history.
- I suppose we should just now ignore:
-
- Reichminister der Luftfahrt
- GL/C-E2/Festigkeitsprufstelle
- Minutes from the Me-209 structrual soundness
- requirements.
- Conference on 2/23/43 at Ausburg. Berlin-Adlershof
- 3/5/43
-
- "1. Role.
- The type is primarily to be employed as a standard
- fighter.
- ...
- Furthermore, there are planes to use it as a
- fighter-bomber, long-range fighter-bomber,
- reconnaissance aircraft and high altitude fighter."



If you say that Me-209 was made to replace Bf-109 meant that Bf-109 indeed had those roles in LW. Let me remaind you what you just have written: long range fighter bomber, reconaissance aircraft???? typical roles for Bf-109.
Skychimp at his best, you will allow me to quote on this one, don't you?

The requirement for a new heavy fighter will necessarely specify multiple role. But the main reason why RLM made this new specification was to prepare LW for the threat of high altitude bombing. Fw-190A did not have good high altitude performance and Bf-109 engine was not protected enough (to make it back after being hit). LW needed something else.



-- I have difficulties in believing anything not
-- properly argumented.
-
- Me too. That's why I flush 99.9% of everything you
- say.

I have a different recall of this. I actually made 1000 posts, soon 2000, correcting your mistakes and lies.



<center> http://www.stormbirds.com/images/discussion-main.jpg </center>

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 07:15 AM
You think those bikes are hot! Check out this Harrley want to be... And who is that handsome devil on that beest? /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

http://www.geocities.com/grantsenn/meandmyroadstar.jpg


<div style="background:#222222;color:#e0e0e0;font-size:24px;font-weight:bold;font-face:courier;"> TAGERT
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?
</div>
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=forum
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=discussion

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 07:15 AM
The F4F Wildat was in production, as the FM-2, all the way 'til the end of the war. And it was scoring kills, even over the N1K2-J George fighter.

Anyone, flying anything, can sometimes be in the right place at the right time.

Regards,

SkyChimp

http://members.cox.net/rowlandparks/NAA_logo.jpg

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 07:17 AM
dang tag.. you are big sucker...and i was gonna beat you up /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Nice bike

Regards,
VFC*Crazyivan
http://www.rmutt.netfirms.com/ivan-reaper.gif

"No matter how good the violin may be, much depends on the violinist. I always felt respect for an enemy pilot whose plane I failed to down." Ivan Kozhedub

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 07:18 AM
SkyChimp wrote:
- Anyone, flying anything, can sometimes be in the
- right place at the right time.

This is true! Worked for me on prom night.. I was flying my pickup truck down the road and she passed out right in my arms! /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif



<div style="background:#222222;color:#e0e0e0;font-size:24px;font-weight:bold;font-face:courier;"> TAGERT
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?
</div>
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=forum
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=discussion

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 07:20 AM
crazyivan1970 wrote:
- dang tag.. you are big sucker...and i was gonna beat
- you up

LOL! Well 6'4", 230lbs and enough hair on my back to weave a persian rug... But Im really a nice guy! /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif


<div style="background:#222222;color:#e0e0e0;font-size:24px;font-weight:bold;font-face:courier;"> TAGERT
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?
</div>
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=forum
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=discussion

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 07:21 AM
I am sure...with the sig like this /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

Regards,
VFC*Crazyivan
http://www.rmutt.netfirms.com/ivan-reaper.gif

"No matter how good the violin may be, much depends on the violinist. I always felt respect for an enemy pilot whose plane I failed to down." Ivan Kozhedub

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 07:23 AM
crazyivan1970 wrote:
- I am sure...with the sig like this

No really I am! /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif


<div style="background:#222222;color:#e0e0e0;font-size:24px;font-weight:bold;font-face:courier;"> TAGERT
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?
</div>
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=forum
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=discussion

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 07:37 AM
necrobaron wrote:
- In context of the original post,of course the 109
- was outdated by 43/44,but I don't think this made it
- "utterly bad". It was getting kills right up to the
- end. But considering the 109's role,the Germans
- could've done a LOT better. Plenty of projects were
- in the works for a replacement but the RLM's idiotic
- beauracracy stalled most of the good ones. Oh,sure
- you have the Ta-152 and Fw-190D but they never saw
- combat in the numbers the 109s did. In short the 109
- was outdated(but sufficient) and it's silly to say
- otherwise...

"Silly to say"... http://www.blitzpigs.com/forum/images/smiles/icon_rolleyes.gif

Going by that line of arguing, every plane with pre-war roots was "outdated but sufficient", when you consider what was in development or field use (P-80, 262, 335, etc).

If it is "outdated" it's no longer capable in it's primary role (even if it isn't it's initial role), if it's "sufficient" in it's primary role then it really isn't outdated.

To borrow from the computer industry - new hardware doesn't outdate old hardware. What you *do* with it outdates it. If all you do is run Wordstar on DOS, then a 286 is plenty for you, and not outdated in that task. Even if the latest crop is in teh 3GHz range.

It doesn't translate directly to WWII combat planes, but, it is still the same point. If a plane is still able to do what you want it to do (it's primary role) against the opposition (and by this I mean frequently and easily enough that it's not miracles or cases of "right place at the right time"), then it's not outdated.

Of course, that isn't to say that it's necessarily superior, or without weaknesses against it's opposition.

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 07:42 AM
BlitzPig_DDT wrote:
- necrobaron wrote:
-- In context of the original post,of course the 109
-- was outdated by 43/44,but I don't think this made it
-- "utterly bad". It was getting kills right up to the
-- end. But considering the 109's role,the Germans
-- could've done a LOT better. Plenty of projects were
-- in the works for a replacement but the RLM's idiotic
-- beauracracy stalled most of the good ones. Oh,sure
-- you have the Ta-152 and Fw-190D but they never saw
-- combat in the numbers the 109s did. In short the 109
-- was outdated(but sufficient) and it's silly to say
-- otherwise...
-
- Of course, that isn't to say that it's necessarily
- superior, or without weaknesses against it's
- opposition.


5 pages with trash and no arguments. Can somebody point out a single argument why it was outdated?

Please don't bring range, range was not an issue for the roles Bf-109 was employed.



<center> http://www.stormbirds.com/images/discussion-main.jpg </center>

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 07:44 AM
Huckebein_FW wrote:

- If you say that Me-209 was made to replace Bf-109
- meant that Bf-109 indeed had those roles in LW. Let
- me remaind you what you just have written: long
- range fighter bomber, reconaissance aircraft????
- typical roles for Bf-109.
- Skychimp at his best, you will allow me to quote on
- this one, don't you?


You absolutely refuse to research anything before posting your inane blatherings, don't you?

The Me-209 was absolutley intended to replace the Bf-109 in production. the Bf-109G was to be the last in the Bf-109 line until the Me-209 was dropped.

"General Galland's test flight in the 262 has prompted a discussion on accelerating production of this type. A suggestion was made to drop the 209 and start up 262 production instead. General Galland has now demanded that fighter numbers not be allowed to drop below the figures set by the increased output program and that, by cancelling the 209, the 190 is expected to cover the numbers when Bf-109 production ran out. In order to achieve commonality of fighters within the German Luftwaffe, shifting to a single piston engined fighter type is only advantageous when there is no loss in production and when the best performing aircraft is the one selected. In my opinion, it is very doubtful whether it will be possible for those factories producing 190s to increase their output when fighter numbers drop with the end of the Bf-109 production."*

*Messerschmitt AG, Augsburg, Willy Messerschmitt, memorandum ffrom 5/24/43 to Messrs Seiler, kokothaki, Hentzen


Clearly, Messerschmitt intended to stop Bf-109 production and produce the Me-209 as its successor. The Fw-190 production would have continued.

You said the Me-209 was NOT a replacement for the Bf-109, and that it was a replacement for the Fw-190. Looks like you are wrong on both counts. As usual.



- The requirement for a new heavy fighter will
- necessarely specify multiple role. But the main
- reason why RLM made this new specification was to
- prepare LW for the threat of high altitude bombing.
- Fw-190A did not have good high altitude performance

Remember this comment. I will /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif




- and Bf-109 engine was not protected enough (to make
- it back after being hit). LW needed something else.

Remember this, too. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif



- I have a different recall of this. I actually made
- 1000 posts, soon 2000, correcting your mistakes and
- lies.

2000 posts spreading the party line. Goebbels would be proud of you.

Regards,

SkyChimp

http://members.cox.net/rowlandparks/NAA_logo.jpg

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 07:46 AM
Huckebein_FW wrote:
- 5 pages with trash and no arguments. Can somebody
- point out a single argument why it was outdated?

God where does one begin?

- Please don't bring range, range was not an issue for
- the roles Bf-109 was employed.

LOL! RANGE is another was of sayig ENDURANCE.. ie time in the air, time on target, time on XXX. Might not mean much in a an online FB game where two bases are withing a rock toss of each other.. but RANGE/ENDURANCE was a very useful thing in the real war.



<div style="background:#222222;color:#e0e0e0;font-size:24px;font-weight:bold;font-face:courier;"> TAGERT
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?
</div>
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=forum
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=discussion

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 07:46 AM
Huckebein_FW wrote:
- BlitzPig_DDT wrote:
-- necrobaron wrote:
--- In context of the original post,of course the 109
--- was outdated by 43/44,but I don't think this made it
--- "utterly bad". It was getting kills right up to the
--- end. But considering the 109's role,the Germans
--- could've done a LOT better. Plenty of projects were
--- in the works for a replacement but the RLM's idiotic
--- beauracracy stalled most of the good ones. Oh,sure
--- you have the Ta-152 and Fw-190D but they never saw
--- combat in the numbers the 109s did. In short the 109
--- was outdated(but sufficient) and it's silly to say
--- otherwise...
--
-- Of course, that isn't to say that it's necessarily
-- superior, or without weaknesses against it's
-- opposition.
-
-
- 5 pages with trash and no arguments. Can somebody
- point out a single argument why it was outdated?
-
- Please don't bring range, range was not an issue for
- the roles Bf-109 was employed.

Uh....you missed a whole lot in that quote dude. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 07:46 AM
Huckebein_FW wrote:

- 5 pages with trash and no arguments. Can somebody
- point out a single argument why it was outdated?
-
- Please don't bring range, range was not an issue for
- the roles Bf-109 was employed.

Poor reliability, poor high speed handling. A great slow speed dogfighter. Not competative at high speed.


BTW, know why Germans told their pilots to maintain sufficient altiutude when flying the Bf-109? Increased their chances of surviving a bail out. As if they were anticipating it.

Regards,

SkyChimp

http://members.cox.net/rowlandparks/NAA_logo.jpg

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 07:53 AM
BlitzPig_DDT wrote:Going by that line of arguing, every plane with
- pre-war roots was "outdated but sufficient", when
- you consider what was in development or field use
- (P-80, 262, 335, etc).
-
- If it is "outdated" it's no longer capable in it's
- primary role (even if it isn't it's initial role),
- if it's "sufficient" in it's primary role then it
- really isn't outdated.
-
- To borrow from the computer industry - new hardware
- doesn't outdate old hardware. What you *do* with it
- outdates it. If all you do is run Wordstar on DOS,
- then a 286 is plenty for you, and not outdated in
- that task. Even if the latest crop is in teh 3GHz
- range.
-
- It doesn't translate directly to WWII combat planes,
- but, it is still the same point. If a plane is still
- able to do what you want it to do (it's primary
- role) against the opposition (and by this I mean
- frequently and easily enough that it's not miracles
- or cases of "right place at the right time"), then
- it's not outdated.
-
- Of course, that isn't to say that it's necessarily
- superior, or without weaknesses against it's
- opposition.

I dunno,the P-40 was considered outdated,but was still able to perform it's duties in the Pacific and China. "Outdated" in terms of WWII aircraft simply means they aren't up to the(then)current standards,but doesn't neccessarily mean that they can't perform their duties,especially if that's all you have....Like I said the 109 could(usually) get the job done,but Germany could've done MUCH better....

47|FC
http://rangerring.com/wwii/p-47.jpg

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 07:54 AM
BlitzPig_DDT wrote:
- necrobaron wrote:
-- In context of the original post,of course the 109
-- was outdated by 43/44,but I don't think this made it
-- "utterly bad". It was getting kills right up to the
-- end. But considering the 109's role,the Germans
-- could've done a LOT better. Plenty of projects were
-- in the works for a replacement but the RLM's idiotic
-- beauracracy stalled most of the good ones. Oh,sure
-- you have the Ta-152 and Fw-190D but they never saw
-- combat in the numbers the 109s did. In short the 109
-- was outdated(but sufficient) and it's silly to say
-- otherwise...
-
- "Silly to say"... <img
- src="http://www.blitzpigs.com/forum/images/smiles/
- icon_rolleyes.gif">
-
- Going by that line of arguing, every plane with
- pre-war roots was "outdated but sufficient", when
- you consider what was in development or field use
- (P-80, 262, 335, etc).
-
- If it is "outdated" it's no longer capable in it's
- primary role (even if it isn't it's initial role),
- if it's "sufficient" in it's primary role then it
- really isn't outdated.
-
- To borrow from the computer industry - new hardware
- doesn't outdate old hardware. What you *do* with it
- outdates it. If all you do is run Wordstar on DOS,
- then a 286 is plenty for you, and not outdated in
- that task. Even if the latest crop is in teh 3GHz
- range.
-
- It doesn't translate directly to WWII combat planes,
- but, it is still the same point. If a plane is still
- able to do what you want it to do (it's primary
- role) against the opposition (and by this I mean
- frequently and easily enough that it's not miracles
- or cases of "right place at the right time"), then
- it's not outdated.
-
- Of course, that isn't to say that it's necessarily
- superior, or without weaknesses against it's
- opposition.
-
-

EXACTLY! but what some are trying to do is say that the 109 was STILL superior to other a/c, in the same way it was when it came out. This is not the case, it merely remained competitive at the role it was designed for, short range day fighting. The Germans were excellent engineers, and designed suberb a/c, the 109 and Fw-190 WERE the best around when they came out, but they did not maintain that ratio of superioity to other a/c as things progressed. This is the point I believe the most poeple miss, IMHO.

Good hunting,
Cajun76

"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it."
-Aristotle

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 07:57 AM
necrobaron wrote:
- I dunno,the P-40 was considered outdated,but was
- still able to perform it's duties in the Pacific and
- China. "Outdated" in terms of WWII aircraft simply
- means they aren't up to the(then)current
- standards,but doesn't neccessarily mean that they
- can't perform their duties,especially if that's all
- you have....Like I said the 109 could(usually) get
- the job done,but Germany could've done MUCH
- better....

It's all relative.. The out dated statment is relitive to the WAR being faught.. The war started off with a WWI kind of DF mind set.. The ZERO and 109 where great at that kind of war.. But the WAR in WWII changed quickly.. The island hopping attatude and high alt high speed BnZ style of war that it turned into made the ZERO and 109 outdated.

<div style="background:#222222;color:#e0e0e0;font-size:24px;font-weight:bold;font-face:courier;"> TAGERT
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?
</div>
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=forum
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=discussion

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 07:58 AM
Cajun76 wrote:EXACTLY! but what some are trying to do is say that
- the 109 was STILL superior to other a/c, in the same
- way it was when it came out. This is not the case,
- it merely remained competitive at the role it was
- designed for, short range day fighting. The Germans
- were excellent engineers, and designed suberb a/c,
- the 109 and Fw-190 WERE the best around when they
- came out, but they did not maintain that ratio of
- superioity to other a/c as things progressed. This
- is the point I believe the most poeple miss, IMHO.

Agreed. You've got it,Cajun.../i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

47|FC
http://rangerring.com/wwii/p-47.jpg

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 08:05 AM
tagert wrote:
- It's all relative.. The out dated statment is
- relitive to the WAR being faught.. The war started
- off with a WWI kind of DF mind set.. The ZERO and
- 109 where great at that kind of war..

Sounds like what the Yak3 and La7 were meant for too. People consider them top notch. And where would this idea of the 109 being unable to turn crop up then?


- But the WAR in WWII changed quickly.. The island hopping
- attatude and high alt high speed BnZ style of war that it
- turned into made the ZERO and 109 outdated.

Except I have seen enough evidence that the 109 was no worse than it's contemporaries in terms of control pressure/authority to at least cast doubt on the commonly accepted notions. And, the 109 was all abot climbing, and could dive quite well also. All around it was a good BnZ machine. And Hartmann turned it into an exsquisite art form. Doing so well that, "score" aside, he never lost a wingman.

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 08:11 AM
SkyChimp wrote:
-
- Huckebein_FW wrote:
-
-- If you say that Me-209 was made to replace Bf-109
-- meant that Bf-109 indeed had those roles in LW. Let
-- me remaind you what you just have written: long
-- range fighter bomber, reconaissance aircraft????
-- typical roles for Bf-109.
-- Skychimp at his best, you will allow me to quote on
-- this one, don't you?
-
-
- You absolutely refuse to research anything before
- posting your inane blatherings, don't you?

Inane are your posts altogether. We cannot correlate a single piece of evidence to produce a proof.

I have the letter with the Galland's recommandations after he test flew the Me-262. He makes not a single mention about Bf-109. He recommends the drop of the Me-209 project in favor of Fw-190D!!! and concentration on Me-262.



- The Me-209 was absolutley intended to replace the
- Bf-109 in production. the Bf-109G was to be the
- last in the Bf-109 line until the Me-209 was
- dropped.
-
- "General Galland's test flight in the 262 has
- prompted a discussion on accelerating production of
- this type. A suggestion was made to drop the 209
- and start up 262 production instead. General
- Galland has now demanded that fighter numbers not be
- allowed to drop below the figures set by the
- increased output program and that, by cancelling the
- 209, the 190 is expected to cover the numbers when
- Bf-109 production ran out. In order to achieve
- commonality of fighters within the German Luftwaffe,
- shifting to a single piston engined fighter type is
- only advantageous when there is no loss in
- production and when the best performing aircraft is
- the one selected. In my opinion, it is very
- doubtful whether it will be possible for those
- factories producing 190s to increase their output
- when fighter numbers drop with the end of the Bf-109
- production."*
-
- *Messerschmitt AG, Augsburg, Willy Messerschmitt,
- memorandum ffrom 5/24/43 to Messrs Seiler,
- kokothaki, Hentzen
-
-
- Clearly, Messerschmitt intended to stop Bf-109
- production and produce the Me-209 as its successor.
- The Fw-190 production would have continued.


Basic reading and comprehension Skychimp, this is what you need:

"In my opinion, it is very doubtful whether it will be possible for those factories producing 190s to increase their output when fighter numbers drop with the end of the Bf-109 production."

It basically says that Fw-190 production cannot cover the production numbers of Bf-109, if Bf-109 production will be discontinued, therefore it is implied that he does not agree with such a measure.

Messerschitt invested very little effort in Me-209A compared with Me-309. They just tried to resuse as many Bf-109 parts in Me-209A, which was a different fighter type. As disinterested was Messerschitt about Me-209 the same disinterest was manifested by RLM about Me-309. Me-309 compared with Me-209 was a sound design, but did not bring any significant advantages in performance over Bf-109 (which once again proves Bf-109 qualities).



- You said the Me-209 was NOT a replacement for the
- Bf-109, and that it was a replacement for the
- Fw-190. Looks like you are wrong on both counts.
- As usual.

No you were wrong. As usual. You just designated Bf-109 as a long-range fighter-bomber. Also you thought that Dora was a replacement for Bf-109.
Nobody expected more from you Skychimp. From you and your mentor Goebbels.


<center> http://www.stormbirds.com/images/discussion-main.jpg </center>

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 08:13 AM
SkyChimp wrote:
-
- Huckebein_FW wrote:
-
-- 5 pages with trash and no arguments. Can somebody
-- point out a single argument why it was outdated?
--
-- Please don't bring range, range was not an issue for
-- the roles Bf-109 was employed.
-
- Poor reliability, poor high speed handling. A great
- slow speed dogfighter. Not competative at high
- speed.


Bf-109 was a very reliable machine. And it had excellent high speed hadling. This was already discussed.


<center> http://www.stormbirds.com/images/discussion-main.jpg </center>

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 08:13 AM
Wow. 6 pages in 10 hours. So what's the record anyway? lol

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 08:15 AM
BlitzPig_DDT wrote:
- Wow. 6 pages in 10 hours. So what's the record
- anyway? lol


When it's about trashing something you get the usual suspects in no time.


<center> http://www.stormbirds.com/images/discussion-main.jpg </center>

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 08:18 AM
Cajun76 wrote:

-
- EXACTLY! but what some are trying to do is say that
- the 109 was STILL superior to other a/c, in the same
- way it was when it came out. This is not the case,
- it merely remained competitive at the role it was
- designed for, short range day fighting. The Germans
- were excellent engineers, and designed suberb a/c,
- the 109 and Fw-190 WERE the best around when they
- came out, but they did not maintain that ratio of
- superioity to other a/c as things progressed. This
- is the point I believe the most poeple miss, IMHO.


For air superiority Bf-109 was better until the end of war. Can you name a single allied design that could compete with it?


<center> http://www.stormbirds.com/images/discussion-main.jpg </center>

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 08:22 AM
Huckebein_FW wrote:
- For air superiority Bf-109 was better until the end
- of war. Can you name a single allied design that
- could compete with it?

"Compete"? Now you're just plain being ridiculous.

P-51D
P-47D(late blocks)
P-47M
P-47N
P-38
Spitfire
La7
Yak3
F6F
F8F
F4U

Those are just off the top of my head.

Remember, you used the word "compete". That rendered your statement null and void.

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 08:36 AM
- P-51D
- P-47D(late blocks)
- P-47N
- P-38
- F6F
- F4U


All underpowered bricks, that climbed bad, accelerated awful, most had poor speed at low level, turned bad, were hangar queens, and unable to operate in field conditions.
Had heavy turbosuperchargers or two speed superchargers, hampering the performance with their weight, except at high altitudes were there was no combat.
Victims all the time if seen by the enemy.


Spit, La7 and to some degree late Yaks were reasonable competitors. The rest of the list were hypothetical aircraft, not relevant for discussion.


<center> http://www.stormbirds.com/images/discussion-main.jpg </center>

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 08:36 AM
Huckebein_FW wrote:

- Inane are your posts altogether. We cannot correlate
- a single piece of evidence to produce a proof.

I just posted a letter from Willy himself. Now you're calling Willy a liar?





- I have the letter with the Galland's recommandations
- after he test flew the Me-262. He makes not a single
- mention about Bf-109. He recommends the drop of the
- Me-209 project in favor of Fw-190D!!! and
- concentration on Me-262.

Yeah, here's what he says about it:

"We've got the Fw-190D in developement, a design which can be considered on par with the Me-209 in all areas. neither type will ever be able to surpass their enemy counterparts in terms of performance, especially at higher altitudes. The only areawhich can be improved are armement and speed." *

*Letter from Galland to Generalfeldmarchall Milch on 5/25/43.



- Basic reading and comprehension Skychimp, this is
- what you need:
-
- "In my opinion, it is very doubtful whether it will
- be possible for those factories producing 190s to
- increase their output when fighter numbers drop with
- the end of the Bf-109 production."
-
- It basically says that Fw-190 production cannot
- cover the production numbers of Bf-109, if Bf-109
- production will be discontinued, therefore it is
- implied that he does not agree with such a measure.

If Me-209 production does not begin. Again. Messerschmitt intended for the Me-209 to subplant the Bf-109 in production. In otherwords, if Bf-109 production stopped, and the Me-209 did not go into production as planned, Fw-190 production could not cover the shortfall.



- Messerschitt invested very little effort in Me-209A
- compared with Me-309. They just tried to resuse as
- many Bf-109 parts in Me-209A, which was a different
- fighter type. As disinterested was Messerschitt
- about Me-209 the same disinterest was manifested by
- RLM about Me-309.

Oh, yeah Huckles. Messerschmitt was so "disinterested" in the Me-209 that they planned to produce it.



- Me-309 compared with Me-209 was a
- sound design, but did not bring any significant
- advantages in performance over Bf-109 (which once
- again proves Bf-109 qualities).

Oh, yeah. the Me-309 was sound design.

"Nose wheel flutter, failure to extend, loss of engine oil, overheating. Nor were the flight handling characterisitics satisfactory, especially roll rate and turning radius, which were no improvements over its predecessors."

"Developement of the Me-309 was officially stopped and the type certified for export on 26 January 1943. This came as no real surprise, for by the end of 1942 the aviation industry had reached its capacity and bottle necks in materials were becoming more prevalent. Plus, the Me-209 (based on the Bf-109G), also in developement, was showing as good or better promise with regard to performance and material consumption."

"The History of German Aviation: Willy Messerschmitt - Pioneer of Aviation Design"
Ebert/Kaiser/Peters
page 153



- No you were wrong. As usual. You just designated
- Bf-109 as a long-range fighter-bomber. Also you
- thought that Dora was a replacement for Bf-109.
- Nobody expected more from you Skychimp. From you and
- your mentor Goebbels.

/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

You're a lightweight in this debate. In fact, you've gotten wrong every contention you've made. Your carelss and sloppy arguments have been shot all to hell.

Now off with you, naive. Back to the hole from which you crawled.

/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif


Regards,

SkyChimp

http://members.cox.net/rowlandparks/NAA_logo.jpg


Regards,

SkyChimp

http://members.cox.net/rowlandparks/NAA_logo.jpg

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 08:36 AM
Huckebein_FW wrote:

- Bf-109 was a very reliable machine. And it had
- excellent high speed hadling. This was already
- discussed.


Fantasy on your part.

Regards,

SkyChimp

http://members.cox.net/rowlandparks/NAA_logo.jpg

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 08:39 AM
Huckebein_FW wrote:
-- P-51D
-- P-47D(late blocks)
-- P-47N
-- P-38
-- F6F
-- F4U
-
-
- All underpowered bricks, that climbed bad,
- accelerated awful, most had poor speed at low level,
- turned bad, were hangar queens, and unable to
- operate in field conditions.
- Had heavy turbosuperchargers or two speed
- superchargers, hampering the performance with their
- weight, except at high altitudes were there was no
- combat.
- Victims all the time if seen by the enemy.
-
-
- Spit, La7 and to some degree late Yaks were
- reasonable competitors. The rest of the list were
- hypothetical aircraft, not relevant for discussion.


/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif



Regards,

SkyChimp

http://members.cox.net/rowlandparks/NAA_logo.jpg

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 08:40 AM
Hey Huckles, you're losing badly, again.


I'm going to bed now. I'm going to leave you to yourself, to post whatever rantings you wish. I'll be back tomorrow to thrash you some more.

http://members.cox.net/rowlandparks/hucksajoke.jpg


Regards,

SkyChimp

http://members.cox.net/rowlandparks/NAA_logo.jpg


Message Edited on 10/11/0311:47AM by SkyChimp

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 08:43 AM
Threat such as this one remind me of why I don't come here very often anymore.

As for why the 109 was becomming outdated by the end of WWII:

1. Loiter time.

I know Huck said range is not a factor, however, the time an aircraft can stay on station is a factor. It was a common tactic to send in a wave of bombers to an area, in order to stir up the German defenses, then break off, before crossing into hostile airspace. They would be followed by another wave of bombers about an hour behind them, that would penetrate German airspace and attack. German fighter swould already have been scrambled to deal with the first wave, that never arrived. By the time the second wave hit, they would be out of loiter time, and could not intercept. Mix with some real attacks leading, and you have a royal pain forthe defending fighters. With a two or three hour loiter time, that tactic could not have been used nearly as effectively.

By the late war period, most other aircraft had two to three times the On Station loiter time, even the defensive fighters.

2. Weapons load.

Bomber intercept was the 109's cheif role by the end of WWII. Now they had the bomber busting Mk108, with a high bomber lethality of merely three rounds. They had sixty rounds or ammo for it. Sounds great, right? There's a catch; the top makesmen pilots only score around 10% hits; rookie pilots score even less. That's, on average 6 rounds on target for highly skilled pilots. It only had enough ammo for two bombers, then it was dry. Rookie pilots would be lucky if they could manage one, even if they did avoid getting shot down. It didn't help matters that the Mk108 could dump all sixty rounds in less than five seconds. Of course, it gets better. Due to the MK108's high rate of fire, and heavy round, that gun also has an extremely strong recoil. Mounted on an aircraft as light as the 109, it, of course, kicked the plane around the sky like a kite, and made aiming considerably more difficult, especially for the untrained pilot.

Now, it was possible to mount an additional pair of MK108's under the wings, which greatly increases the aircraft's killing power, however, they significantly decreased the aircraft's climb rate, top speed, and agility, making them, both less able to intercept their targets, and more vulnerable to enemy interception.

For compairison, consider for a moment that the Fw-190A-8R6 has over twice the firepower of the Bf-109K-4, and greater ammo capacity.

3. Visibility.

This one is a killer. I think it was Hartmann who said, "The pilot who see the other first has already won half the battle." The 109 had a very narrow, low slung, heavily framed canopy, with barely enough room to crane one's neck. Some aces managed to still spot targets wedged into that canopy, but they could have done it is just about anything. For the average pilot, the 109's canopy was one of the more restrictive fighter canopies of the war, being narrow, low, and with many large restricing bars. While the Erl Haube canopy remidies some of the problems, and greatly reduced the plenthora of vision obscuring struts, is still did not make the 109's canopy large enough to move around it.

Compair this to its contemporaries. The Typhoon, P-47, and Tempest all had buble canopies wide enough that the pilto could turn his entire body around looking for enemy targets. The P-51D also was equiped with a bubble canopy, offering nearly 360 degree unobstructed view. The Yak-9,-3 and La-7 lines all had bubble canopies with little framming, again offering excellent 360 degree view. Same situation with the 190, a nearly complete bubble canopy, with nearly unrestricted view. Even the Spitfire had the Malcom hood, giving pilots the ability to lean around and see things. Only the 190 stuck with the narrow, small canopy to the bitter end.

That is what it means to be obsolescent; stuck with outdated design features when all others have passed them by.

And this, marks my departure from this thread, and likely these boards for a while. They just aren't worth the effort or irritation. And yes Huck, I am sure you will immediatly disregard this post with some glib remark, and a "good riddance to bad garbage."

Enjoy.

Harry Voyager

http://groups.msn.com/_Secure/0YQDLAswcqmIpvWP9dLzZVayPXOmo6IJ16aURujNfs4dDETH84 Q6eIkCbWQemjqF6O8ZfvzlsvUUauJyy9GYnKM6!o3fu!kBnWVh BgMt3q2T3BUQ8yjBBqECLxFaqXVV5U2kWiSIlq1s6VoaVvRqBy Q/Avatar%202%20500x500%20[final).jpg?dc=4675409848259594077

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 08:46 AM
nixon-fiend wrote:
- er.. do you really not have anything else to do bub?
-
-
-
--Thanks to Freddie; i'm a sexual spastic.

considering that you're hanging out here and taking your sig line into account you're one hell of a character to complain about this post, buddy!



<center>Another BlitzPig</center>

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 08:48 AM
You guys are crazy... i`m off to bed /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Have a nice weekend all!

V!

Regards,
VFC*Crazyivan
http://www.rmutt.netfirms.com/ivan-reaper.gif

"No matter how good the violin may be, much depends on the violinist. I always felt respect for an enemy pilot whose plane I failed to down." Ivan Kozhedub

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 08:57 AM
"Air Superiority" =

From Wikipedia

During military operations to have air superiority, means having sufficient control of the air to make air attacks on the enemy without serious opposition and to be free from the danger of significant enemy air incursions.

(Huckbein) For air superiority Bf-109 was better until the end of war.

The bombing of the Third Reich night and day escorted by fighters never happened, huh? I'm using a source for my assertion, where is yours?

"Compete" =

From Merriam-Webster

Main Entry: com‚∑pet‚∑i‚∑tive
Pronunciation: k&m-'pe-t&-tiv
Function: adjective
Date: 1829
1 : relating to, characterized by, or based on competition
2 : inclined, desiring, or suited to compete


So ANY design could compete, should I list every plane from WWI to 1945?


The 109 was 'better' than what? An I-16, I-153, P-40? These designs *never* shot down a 109?


I have *never* contended the German designs sucked, I'm even saying the designs rocked when they were introduced, but they did not maintain that edge all the way until the end of the war. Your assertion about the 109 would make the Fw-190 irrelavent....

However, you have asked "Can you name a single allied design that could compete with it?"

Yes, I can. I can name many, even. P-39, P-40, P-47, P-51, Hurricane, Spitfire, Tempest, Typhoon, Yaks, La's, MiGs.... shall I continue? They all could compete, they all got kills on the 109, and they all contributed to Allied "air superiority".

Good hunting,
Cajun76

"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it."
-Aristotle

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 09:05 AM
SkyChimp wrote:
-
- Huckebein_FW wrote:
-
-- Inane are your posts altogether. We cannot correlate
-- a single piece of evidence to produce a proof.
-
- I just posted a letter from Willy himself. Now
- you're calling Willy a liar?

No, I'm just calling you stupid, unable to understand a letter written in plain English. You needed my help.



-- I have the letter with the Galland's recommandations
-- after he test flew the Me-262. He makes not a single
-- mention about Bf-109. He recommends the drop of the
-- Me-209 project in favor of Fw-190D!!! and
-- concentration on Me-262.
-
- Yeah, here's what he says about it:
-
- "We've got the Fw-190D in developement, a design
- which can be considered on par with the Me-209 in
- all areas. neither type will ever be able to
- surpass their enemy counterparts in terms of
- performance, especially at higher altitudes. The
- only areawhich can be improved are armement and
- speed." *

And later he recommend the production of Fw-190D together with discontinuation of Me-209. Here's the paragraph Skychimp is hiding from Galland's letter:

"Conclusion:
a) Me 209 be discontinued
b) Total fighter production to switch from the Fw 190 with BMW 801 to the Fw 190 with DB 603 and Jumo 213 respectively.
c) The construction and industrial capacities thus released to be concentrated on the Me 262, with immediate effect."


-- Basic reading and comprehension Skychimp, this is
-- what you need:
--
-- "In my opinion, it is very doubtful whether it will
-- be possible for those factories producing 190s to
-- increase their output when fighter numbers drop with
-- the end of the Bf-109 production."
--
-- It basically says that Fw-190 production cannot
-- cover the production numbers of Bf-109, if Bf-109
-- production will be discontinued, therefore it is
-- implied that he does not agree with such a measure.
-
- If Me-209 production does not begin. Again.
- Messerschmitt intended for the Me-209 to subplant
- the Bf-109 in production. In otherwords, if Bf-109
- production stopped, and the Me-209 did not go into
- production as planned, Fw-190 production could not
- cover the shortfall.



That is entirely your assumption. The text of the letter does not contain this idea at all, read it again:

"General Galland has now demanded that fighter numbers not be allowed to drop below the figures set by the increased output program and that, by cancelling the 209, the 190 is expected to cover the numbers when Bf-109 production ran out.
(..)it is very doubtful whether it will be possible for those factories producing 190s to increase their output when fighter numbers drop with the end of the Bf-109 production."

It says that after the discontinuation of Me-209, Bf-109 production should continue, which happened in reality.



-- Me-309 compared with Me-209 was a
-- sound design, but did not bring any significant
-- advantages in performance over Bf-109 (which once
-- again proves Bf-109 qualities).
-
- Oh, yeah. the Me-309 was sound design.
-
- "Nose wheel flutter, failure to extend, loss of
- engine oil, overheating. Nor were the flight
- handling characterisitics satisfactory, especially
- roll rate and turning radius, which were no
- improvements over its predecessors."
-
- "Developement of the Me-309 was officially stopped
- and the type certified for export on 26 January
- 1943. This came as no real surprise, for by the end
- of 1942 the aviation industry had reached its
- capacity and bottle necks in materials were becoming
- more prevalent. Plus, the Me-209 (based on the
- Bf-109G), also in developement, was showing as good
- or better promise with regard to performance and
- material consumption."


Yes development problems, this happens for every ww2 plane. But it's major drawback was lack of RLM support. Messerschmitt got them interested for a year, but in Jan'43 they pulled the plug on the project. Nevertheless Messerschmitt continued the development for some time.



-- No you were wrong. As usual. You just designated
-- Bf-109 as a long-range fighter-bomber. Also you
-- thought that Dora was a replacement for Bf-109.
-- Nobody expected more from you Skychimp. From you and
-- your mentor Goebbels.
-
- You're a lightweight in this debate. In fact,
- you've gotten wrong every contention you've made.
- Your carelss and sloppy arguments have been shot all
- to hell.
-
- Now off with you, naive. Back to the hole from
- which you crawled.

You came with usual mix of misinterpretations, lies and boring to death trolling just to end in the hole you dug.


<center> http://www.stormbirds.com/images/discussion-main.jpg </center>

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 09:13 AM
Ow man, what did I start /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif



/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

1 Judge not, that ye be not judged.
2 For with what judgment ye judge, ye
shall be judged: and with what
measure ye mete, it shall be
measured to you again.

http://acompletewasteofspace.com/forum/templates/subSilver/images/logo_phpBB.gif (http://acompletewasteofspace.com/forum/index.php)

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 09:25 AM
Huckebein_FW wrote:
-- P-51D
-- P-47D(late blocks)
-- P-47N
-- P-38
-- F6F
-- F4U
-
-
- All underpowered bricks, that climbed bad,
- accelerated awful, most had poor speed at low level,
- turned bad, were hangar queens, and unable to
- operate in field conditions.
- Had heavy turbosuperchargers or two speed
- superchargers, hampering the performance with their
- weight, except at high altitudes were there was no
- combat.
- Victims all the time if seen by the enemy.

Yeah,it's well documented about what "clunkers" they were!/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif I mean,who's ever heard of combat at high altitude? Not me./i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif What gems of knowledge will Hans Huckebein dispense next?/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif

47|FC
http://rangerring.com/wwii/p-47.jpg

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 09:36 AM
HarryVoyager wrote:
- Threat such as this one remind me of why I don't
- come here very often anymore.
-
- As for why the 109 was becomming outdated by the end
- of WWII:
-
- 1. Loiter time.

When the bombers received an increased armament at the middle of the conflict, Bf-109 became not adequate for bomber interceptions, like all other liquid coolled engine fighters (except Dora), because of the cooling system vulnerability. This is why most units in West flew Fw-190 and those in East flew Bf-109. At the end of war 109 flew again bomber interception missions, but only because it was the only type of mission squadrons received at that time. So this is out of the question, because it is out of its intended role.

But I'd like to add a few comments here. What was really outdated were the allied bombers, who were crawling like snails, making them easy targets for interceptions. Also the german fighter threat forced them to fly in "boxes" which made them ideal targets for flak. German bombers on the other hand were fast, well armoured, small targets, hard to intercept, hard to hit in the bombing run, especially in a dive, and had very good precision.



- 2. Weapons load.
-
- Bomber intercept was the 109's cheif role by the end
- of WWII. Now they had the bomber busting Mk108,
- with a high bomber lethality of merely three rounds.
- They had sixty rounds or ammo for it. Sounds
- great, right? There's a catch; the top makesmen
- pilots only score around 10% hits; rookie pilots
- score even less. That's, on average 6 rounds on
- target for highly skilled pilots. It only had
- enough ammo for two bombers, then it was dry.
- Rookie pilots would be lucky if they could manage
- one, even if they did avoid getting shot down. It
- didn't help matters that the Mk108 could dump all
- sixty rounds in less than five seconds. Of course,
- it gets better. Due to the MK108's high rate of
- fire, and heavy round, that gun also has an
- extremely strong recoil. Mounted on an aircraft as
- light as the 109, it, of course, kicked the plane
- around the sky like a kite, and made aiming
- considerably more difficult, especially for the
- untrained pilot.


1 bomber down per each fighter sortie means heavy bomber losses. This is more than enough as a objective. Sure at the end of war only small units could take off to counter the bomber. Dispite their victories such small grups could not have a heavy impact on bomber operations.
Mk108 had small recoil and it was mounted on center axis of the aircraft. The fact that it was widely adopted in '44, clearly shows the popularity of the weapon.


- 3. Visibility.
-
- This one is a killer. I think it was Hartmann who
- said, "The pilot who see the other first has already
- won half the battle." The 109 had a very narrow,
- low slung, heavily framed canopy, with barely enough
- room to crane one's neck. Some aces managed to
- still spot targets wedged into that canopy, but they
- could have done it is just about anything. For the
- average pilot, the 109's canopy was one of the more
- restrictive fighter canopies of the war, being
- narrow, low, and with many large restricing bars.
- While the Erl Haube canopy remidies some of the
- problems, and greatly reduced the plenthora of
- vision obscuring struts, is still did not make the
- 109's canopy large enough to move around it.
-
- Compair this to its contemporaries. The Typhoon,
- P-47, and Tempest all had buble canopies wide enough
- that the pilto could turn his entire body around
- looking for enemy targets. The P-51D also was
- equiped with a bubble canopy, offering nearly 360
- degree unobstructed view. The Yak-9,-3 and La-7
- lines all had bubble canopies with little framming,
- again offering excellent 360 degree view. Same
- situation with the 190, a nearly complete bubble
- canopy, with nearly unrestricted view. Even the
- Spitfire had the Malcom hood, giving pilots the
- ability to lean around and see things. Only the 190
- stuck with the narrow, small canopy to the bitter
- end.

Actually Erla Haube offered better visibility to the back of the aircraft than bubble canopy allied fighters. So this is not an argument. The visibility in front was good enough, high engine cowling and heavy armored windshield gave the pilot excellent protection, that lacked in allied planes. Fw-190 had similar front visibility due to the same requirements. Was Fw-190 obsolescent too?


- That is what it means to be obsolescent; stuck with
- outdated design features when all others have passed
- them by.

Yes, but none of the defects you found are true for Bf-109.


<center> http://www.stormbirds.com/images/discussion-main.jpg </center>

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 09:42 AM
Huckebein,would you care to enlighten us as to how the hell the Erle Haube could provide better visibility than a bubble canopy?







47|FC
http://rangerring.com/wwii/p-47.jpg

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 09:43 AM
necrobaron wrote:
- Huckebein,would you care to enlighten us as to how
- the hell the Erle Haube could provide better
- visibility than a bubble canopy?
-

Refraction.

Sorry, couldn't resist /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

Harry Voyager

http://groups.msn.com/_Secure/0YQDLAswcqmIpvWP9dLzZVayPXOmo6IJ16aURujNfs4dDETH84 Q6eIkCbWQemjqF6O8ZfvzlsvUUauJyy9GYnKM6!o3fu!kBnWVh BgMt3q2T3BUQ8yjBBqECLxFaqXVV5U2kWiSIlq1s6VoaVvRqBy Q/Avatar%202%20500x500%20[final).jpg?dc=4675409848259594077

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 09:46 AM
Huck, F8F Bearcat is a "theoretical" aircraft? That was loaded onto carriers that were steaming their way to Japan just as the war ended. How the hell is that "theoretical"?

You have defended designs that were little more than drawings as being more than just theoretical. This is an aircraft that reached operational status, just never had a chance to flex it's muscles.

And "hangar queens unable to operate in field conditions"? Huck, do you have any clue at all about the Grumman fighters? Or even carrier planes at all? When the USN asked Grumman to find out just how high a sink rate it could withstand they hoisted it up in the hangar and dropped it. 21 feet was the max they were able to lift it because the crane couldn't go any higher. Combat load, it took a 21 foot static drop and nothing broke.

Couldn't turn? The F6F was able to hold it's own with Zeros in their speed range (under 250mph), and over 250mph they *owned* the Zeros.

By the end of the war the F4U had a phenomenal climb rate. I can't recall exactly what it was, but I can guarentee you it didn't suck.

The Bearcat set a (if not *the*) record for climb for a piston engined prop plane.

The Bearcat was all engine and just enough plane to let a pilot fly it and to mount some fuel and guns. Underpowered, my a$$.

The P-47M was up around 4000fpm at maximum power at SL. It was also one of the fastest planes around. One of the ultimate expressions of an Energy Fighter.


I appreciate that you are fighting against lies and hatred of LW planes, but you are way too overzealous, and apparently not very knowledgable about US planes. (or too zealous to accept what is known about them - not sure)

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 09:48 AM
necrobaron wrote:
- Huckebein,would you care to enlighten us as to how
- the hell the Erle Haube could provide better
- visibility than a bubble canopy?


Have you ever tried to look behind in a P-47D-27? How is it compared to Bf-109K4? I assume you haven't.
Erla Haube offers excellent visibility to the back considering the practical head movements of the pilot.


<center> http://www.stormbirds.com/images/discussion-main.jpg </center>

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 09:54 AM
Huckebein_FW wrote:Have you ever tried to look behind in a P-47D-27?
- How is it compared to Bf-109K4? I assume you
- haven't.
- Erla Haube offers excellent visibility to the back
- considering the practical head movements of the
- pilot.

I have actually. P-47 has the better view. I was just wondering how you could say the Erle Haube provides a better view...

47|FC
http://rangerring.com/wwii/p-47.jpg

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 10:00 AM
BlitzPig_DDT wrote:
- Huck, F8F Bearcat is a "theoretical" aircraft? That
- was loaded onto carriers that were steaming their
- way to Japan just as the war ended. How the hell is
- that "theoretical"?
- You have defended designs that were little more than
- drawings as being more than just theoretical. This
- is an aircraft that reached operational status, just
- never had a chance to flex it's muscles.
-


They did not see combat in ww2, so comparing them with a '44 plane is not accurate. Also the specs vehiculated for it are simply fantasies. Bearcat had a initial climb at sea level of 4500fpm, if the 2300hp rating is correct. That 6000fpm climb is out of cartoon books.



- And "hangar queens unable to operate in field
- conditions"? Huck, do you have any clue at all about
- the Grumman fighters? Or even carrier planes at all?
- When the USN asked Grumman to find out just how high
- a sink rate it could withstand they hoisted it up in
- the hangar and dropped it. 21 feet was the max they
- were able to lift it because the crane couldn't go
- any higher. Combat load, it took a 21 foot static
- drop and nothing broke.

I also think that USN fighter were more rugged. When I said that I was thinking at planes like P-38, P-51.


- Couldn't turn? The F6F was able to hold it's own
- with Zeros in their speed range (under
- 250mph), and over 250mph they *owned* the Zeros.

Here's you are making a mistake. Hellcat had only a comparable turn radius, not turn rate. Grumman fighters had not a good turn rate because of the low aspect ratio of the wings and poor power loading.



- By the end of the war the F4U had a phenomenal climb
- rate. I can't recall exactly what it was, but I can
- guarentee you it didn't suck.

It was not phenomenal, but it was good. Late models had the same climb with Dora.


- The Bearcat was all engine and just enough plane to
- let a pilot fly it and to mount some fuel and guns.
- Underpowered, my a$$.

No, Bearcat and P-51H reached the needed powerloading. Too late for service, though.


- The P-47M was up around 4000fpm at maximum power at
- SL. It was also one of the fastest planes around.
- One of the ultimate expressions of an Energy
- Fighter.

AHT gives for P-47M 3500fpm at combat power at sea level. All of a sudden you don't agree with AHT?




<center> http://www.stormbirds.com/images/discussion-main.jpg </center>

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 10:01 AM
necrobaron wrote:
- Huckebein_FW wrote:Have you ever tried to look
- behind in a P-47D-27?
-- How is it compared to Bf-109K4? I assume you
-- haven't.
-- Erla Haube offers excellent visibility to the back
-- considering the practical head movements of the
-- pilot.
-
- I have actually. P-47 has the better view. I was
- just wondering how you could say the Erle Haube
- provides a better view...


You see through the armor plate? Great then.


<center> http://www.stormbirds.com/images/discussion-main.jpg </center>

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 10:02 AM
HarryVoyager wrote:
- Threat such as this one remind me of why I don't
- come here very often anymore.
-
- As for why the 109 was becomming outdated by the end
- of WWII:

- 2. Weapons load.
-
- Bomber intercept was the 109's cheif role by the end
- of WWII. Now they had the bomber busting Mk108,
- with a high bomber lethality of merely three rounds.
- They had sixty rounds or ammo for it. Sounds
- great, right? There's a catch;

Another limitation was the low muzzle velocity. Accuracy at longer ranges was very poor so attacks had to be pressed to close range, certainly not an easy thing to do when faced by the defensive fire of most bombers.

Regards,

RocketDog.

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 10:08 AM
nt = No Text

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 10:10 AM
- HarryVoyager wrote:
-- Threat such as this one remind me of why I don't
-- come here very often anymore.
--
-- As for why the 109 was becomming outdated by the end
-- of WWII:
-
-- 2. Weapons load.
--
-- Bomber intercept was the 109's cheif role by the end
-- of WWII. Now they had the bomber busting Mk108,
-- with a high bomber lethality of merely three rounds.
-- They had sixty rounds or ammo for it. Sounds
-- great, right? There's a catch;
-
- Another limitation was the low muzzle velocity.
- Accuracy at longer ranges was very poor so attacks
- had to be pressed to close range, certainly not an
- easy thing to do when faced by the defensive fire of
- most bombers.

Heavy projectiles had difficult to estimate trajectories for fighter pilots. This is why Mk108 had a high rate of fire, almost like a 20mm cannon, much larger than other cannons of the same caliber. High rate of fire plus dispersion ensured the hit.


<center> http://www.stormbirds.com/images/discussion-main.jpg </center>

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 10:17 AM
Huckebein_FW wrote:
- But I'd like to add a few comments here. What was
- really outdated were the allied bombers, who were
- crawling like snails, making them easy targets for
- interceptions. Also the german fighter threat forced
- them to fly in "boxes" which made them ideal targets
- for flak. German bombers on the other hand were
- fast, well armoured, small targets, hard to
- intercept, hard to hit in the bombing run,
- especially in a dive, and had very good precision.
-

German bomb tonnage on UK (including V weapons)
1942 3,260
1943 2,298
1944 9,151
1945 761

US/UK bomb tonnage on Germany
1942 53,755
1943 226,513
1944 1,188,577
1945 477,051

German bomb tonnages as fraction of UK/US tonnage
1942 6.0 %
1943 1.0%
1944 0.5%
1945 0.16%

(source, R.J.Overy, The Air War, 1939-45)

The facts sugest that German bombers proved to be useless.

Regards,

RocketDog.

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 10:22 AM
looks like you have never really dug into the german confirmation procedure:

NO kill was ever granted if only the pilot claimed it !!!
It was ALWAYs necessary to have an eyewitness. For all kills detailed reports had to be filed. Only planes really seen to explode in the air or to hit the ground were counted. All kills and reports were sent to OKl and checked there and confirmed mostly months later.
After the war many german pilot cliams were thoroughly counterchecked with loss lists of teh Allies by RAF, USAAF, VVS and historians and proved to correspond. They did that because they also couldnt believe it.

II/JG54_Zent

crazyivan1970 wrote:
- FYI
-
- Kills acheived by soviet pilots HAVE to be confirmed
- by ground units.
-
- Kills acheived by german pilots have to be
- confirmed...by pilots themselfs...
-
-
- Just a thought.
-
-
- I still have doubts about 300+ kills by Hartmann and
- Rall.. even that i admire them as a pilots. Those
- doubts are not something i came up with ... they are
- coming from various sources... and actualy number of
- air to air kills mentioned for Hartmann was around
- 130-150 .. I am sure that i am going to take alot of
- flak for this... but read Blond Knight of Germany
- carefully... you will see with your own eyes that
- german air kills confirmation system was more then
- relaxed /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif comparing to russian.
-
- Fire away
-
- Regards,
- VFC*Crazyivan
- http://www.rmutt.netfirms.com/ivan-reaper.gif
-
- "No matter how good the violin may be, much depends
- on the violinist. I always felt respect for an enemy
- pilot whose plane I failed to down." Ivan Kozhedub
-

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 10:27 AM
(Huckbein)You see through the armor plate? Great then.


/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif Not every pilot was strapped into a snug cockpit like the 109s. Do you not know that other a/c actually have different cockpits?




Good hunting,
Cajun76

"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it."
-Aristotle

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 10:28 AM
RocketDog wrote:
-
- Huckebein_FW wrote:
-- But I'd like to add a few comments here. What was
-- really outdated were the allied bombers, who were
-- crawling like snails, making them easy targets for
-- interceptions. Also the german fighter threat forced
-- them to fly in "boxes" which made them ideal targets
-- for flak. German bombers on the other hand were
-- fast, well armoured, small targets, hard to
-- intercept, hard to hit in the bombing run,
-- especially in a dive, and had very good precision.
--
-
- German bomb tonnage on UK (including V weapons)
- 1942 3,260
- 1943 2,298
- 1944 9,151
- 1945 761
-
- US/UK bomb tonnage on Germany
- 1942 53,755
- 1943 226,513
- 1944 1,188,577
- 1945 477,051
-
- German bomb tonnages as fraction of UK/US tonnage
- 1942 6.0 %
- 1943 1.0%
- 1944 0.5%
- 1945 0.16%


Germany used precision bombing not random terror bombing allies employed with zero effects. Should I remaind you again that Germany fell to russian tanks not RAFs cardboard bombers? Also most of the activity of the german bombers was on east front. I guess you don't know that since you came with this comparison.

Tonnage comparisons is useless. It does not take into account the percentage of targets hit.


<center> http://www.stormbirds.com/images/discussion-main.jpg </center>

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 10:32 AM
Cajun76 wrote:
- (Huckbein)You see through the armor plate? Great
- then.
-
-
- /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif Not every pilot was
- strapped into a snug cockpit like the 109s. Do you
- not know that other a/c actually have different
- cockpits?


Did you know that fighter pilots were strapped into their seat with belts all the time? If they try to look to their back they still see less in a P-47 with bubble canopy than in a 109 with Erla Haube.


<center> http://www.stormbirds.com/images/discussion-main.jpg </center>

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 10:34 AM
”ěh, Blitzpig DDT, sorry to have to correct you, victories were actually shot down planes. THere existed a score system which weighed planes shot down on the western front and bombers heavier, this system was solely for calculating when someone was ready for another medal/award and because Western allied pilots were supposed to be more difficult to shoot down...
Actually the german kill figures were checked after the war and found to be correct, as the german confirmation system was one of the strictest in the world (no witness, no confirmation, detaield reports, double checking with other witnesses, only planes seen actually destroyed counted etc.)

So those numbers are actually true and dont listen to CrazyIVan about this subject, seems he doesnt know much about it...in theory the russian system was very strict...in practice in the war against finland they claimed so many kills that compared to actual loss figures of fins they exceeded that by more then ten times !!!!! One should know that russian pilots were often lilving under very harsh conditions including lack of food and that Stalin bestowed them with 1000 Rubel for each shot down plane (with which they could byu much food for themselves and their comrades/crew and after 10 planes they were awarded with the "Hero of Sovietunion" medal, regarded aces and granted a lifelong pension....

II/JG54_Zent

BlitzPig_DDT wrote:
- crazyivan1970 wrote:
-- I still have doubts about 300+ kills by Hartmann and
-- Rall.. even that i admire them as a pilots. Those
-- doubts are not something i came up with ... they are
-- coming from various sources... and actualy number of
-- air to air kills mentioned for Hartmann was around
-- 130-150 .. I am sure that i am going to take alot of
-- flak for this... but read Blond Knight of Germany
-- carefully... you will see with your own eyes that
-- german air kills confirmation system was more then
-- relaxed /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif comparing to russian.
--
-- Fire away
--
-- Regards,
-- VFC*Crazyivan
-
- I think it's "victories" and that the LW used a
- system where differnt planes were worth different
- points, kinda like FB. So it's not saying that he
- had 300 kills necessarily.
-
-

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 10:41 AM
Huckebein_FW wrote:
-- P-51D
-- P-47D(late blocks)
-- P-47N
-- P-38
-- F6F
-- F4U
-
-
- All underpowered bricks, that climbed bad,
- accelerated awful, most had poor speed at low level,
- turned bad, were hangar queens, and unable to
- operate in field conditions.
- Had heavy turbosuperchargers or two speed
- superchargers, hampering the performance with their
- weight, except at high altitudes were there was no
- combat.
- Victims all the time if seen by the enemy.
-
-
- Spit, La7 and to some degree late Yaks were
- reasonable competitors. The rest of the list were
- hypothetical aircraft, not relevant for discussion.
-
-

I had to do a double take on this one. btw, great info, keep it coming. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

So your venerated 109 was driven from the skies by these "bricks" ? HAHAHAHAHAHAHA, ROFLMAO!!

The 109, what a hot ship! <sarcasm, as I know certain people will try to take this out of context>

I gotta wipe the tears of hilarity out of my eyes....


"bricks"........ha.......haha........he

Good hunting,
Cajun76

"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it."
-Aristotle

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 10:42 AM
Now let's go back to the original topic, gentlemen.

How come that the germans, who where never known to be jolly fellows, came up with outrageous apple green and orange colours for the 911 during more than 10 years ?

I think it reveals something in their deepest nature, someting nobody could suspect... and I even tend to believe that a highly secret apple green 109 prototype was never seen by the public !

This innocent comparison between the 109 ande the 911 just allowed the greatest discovery in the history of man : Germans are FUN /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 10:43 AM
Necrobarons post is the perfect example of a completely substanceless post, a mere stereotypical opinion without any background argument, actually as i understand it this thread could be interesting to understand more about whether the late model 109s were still competitive or whether they were outclassed, a difficult and interesting question. But its not helpfull to just tell what one believes without arguments or numbers to back up ones opinion. Why was it outdated ?? Specify please..

II/JG54_Zent

necrobaron wrote:
- In context of the original post,of course the 109
- was outdated by 43/44,but I don't think this made it
- "utterly bad". It was getting kills right up to the
- end. But considering the 109's role,the Germans
- could've done a LOT better. Plenty of projects were
- in the works for a replacement but the RLM's idiotic
- beauracracy stalled most of the good ones. Oh,sure
- you have the Ta-152 and Fw-190D but they never saw
- combat in the numbers the 109s did. In short the 109
- was outdated(but sufficient) and it's silly to say
- otherwise...
-
- 47|FC
http://rangerring.com/wwii/p-47.jpg
-

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 10:45 AM
Looks like this thread struck a soar spot http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif There is only so far a really big engine can take a really poor airframe.


Huckebein_FW wrote:

Huckebein_FW wrote:

Huckebein_FW wrote:

Huckebein_FW wrote:

Huckebein_FW wrote:




No fancy quote or cool photo.... YET

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 10:47 AM
Huckebein_FW wrote:
-- P-51D
-- P-47D(late blocks)
-- P-47N
-- P-38
-- F6F
-- F4U
-
-
- All underpowered bricks, that climbed bad,
- accelerated awful, most had poor speed at low level,
- turned bad, were hangar queens, and unable to
- operate in field conditions.
- Had heavy turbosuperchargers or two speed
- superchargers, hampering the performance with their
- weight, except at high altitudes were there was no
- combat.
- Victims all the time if seen by the enemy.
-
-
- Spit, La7 and to some degree late Yaks were
- reasonable competitors. The rest of the list were
- hypothetical aircraft, not relevant for discussion.
-
-
- <center> <img
- src="http://www.stormbirds.com/images/discussion-m
- ain.jpg"> </center>

I could go for miles on these gems of yours, Huckbein.

- Had heavy turbosuperchargers or two speed
- superchargers, hampering the performance with their
- weight, except at high altitudes were there was no
- combat.

So those high alt combats involving escorting Allied heavy bombers never happened? Priceless stuff. Not everyone can rewrite history as blithely as you... thank goodness!



Good hunting,
Cajun76

"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it."
-Aristotle

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 10:48 AM
Huckebein_FW wrote:
- Germany used precision bombing not random terror
- bombing allies employed with zero effects.

The German blitz of Britain in 1940-41 killed 42,000 civilians. You could regard this as the equivalent of 15 9/11s, one after the other, inflicted on a country with a much smaller population. There were few moral qualms about area bombing German cities after the Blitz.

The "zero effects" you claim are incorrect. To quote from one historian:

"In 1945 German officials from the Ministry of Armaments assessed what might have been produced in 1944 without the bombing. They estimated that German industry turned out 35% fewer tanks, 31 % fewer aircraft and 42 % fewer lorries than would otherwise have been possible. This would have given Germany over 55,000 aircraft in 1944 and 30,000 tanks...

...After the war the major department heads of the Ministry were interviewed by Allied intelligence teams to help them assess the effect of bombing. All the officials interviewed stated that bombing was the factor responsible for the declining gains from rationalisation and for the eventual collapse of the economic structure after January 1945."

(source: War and Economy in the Third Reich, Oxford University Press, 2002)

Regards,

RocketDog.

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 01:17 PM
Logically if they were outclassed, then the hit and run choose your fight tactics line is pure hog wash. Not possible to employ such tactics as doctrine in a sub marginal outclassed plane. And if it is true that they did engage in such a fight with such a plane, something seriously wrong with Soviet methods to the point of redicule.

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 01:38 PM
Me209

"Huckie wrote in reply to my "Me262" quote:

- See pg 32 "Me262" Vol.1
-
- "Still determined to produce a successor to the
- Bf109, Messerschmitt began work on a new Me209 (the
- V5), based on the P1091 project, during the spring
- of 1943."
-
- So who is blabbering Huckie?


So you found an error."

In this thread he does the big about face. Huckie flip-flops like a fish out of water.
.................

Just so everyone knows what a Me209 looks like

http://www.sturmfalke.info/images/209v5.jpg



http://www.thundercycle.com/photos/dropdead2.gif



"Only a dead 'chamber pot' is a good 'chamber pot'!"

Message Edited on 10/11/0308:52AM by MiloMorai

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 02:21 PM
One interesting note I just wanted to throw out into this. The P-63 was the only WWII aircraft designed AFTER the US joined WWII, and it was only a heavily modified P-63. All other US aircraft that served in WWII were designed in 1939 and 1940, before we entered the war. Interesting hay?

Also, my view. The P-51 was big and heavy. It had to carry fuel for a LONG trip and the pilots were tired after a 3-4 hour flight to the target. This big and heavy aircraft with lots of fuel and a tired pilot was still a very capable match for the ultra light and powerful Bf-109 that took off from there airfield 15 mins ago. You cant say it was all numbers because the USAAF was out numbered at the beginning of the war, and still putting up more kills then losses.

Bf 109 was a 1935/36 design intended to have a 650HP engine. It should have been retired after BoB when it got its azz handed to it by "inferior" Hurricanes and a few Spits.

Thats my openion. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

MiloMorai wrote:
- Me209
-
- "Huckie wrote in reply to my "Me262" quote:
-
-- See pg 32 "Me262" Vol.1
--
-- "Still determined to produce a successor to the
-- Bf109, Messerschmitt began work on a new Me209 (the
-- V5), based on the P1091 project, during the spring
-- of 1943."
--
-- So who is blabbering Huckie?
-
-
- So you found an error."
-
- In this thread he does the big about face. Huckie
- flip-flops like a fish out of water.
- .................
-
- Just so everyone knows what a Me209 looks like
-
http://www.sturmfalke.info/images/209v5.jpg
-
-
-
-
- <img
- src="http://www.thundercycle.com/photos/dropdead2.
- gif">
-
-
-
- "Only a dead 'chamber pot' is a good 'chamber pot'!"
-
- Message Edited on 10/11/03‚ 08:52AM by MiloMorai



No fancy quote or cool photo.... YET

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 02:37 PM
kvestion::
-- How come that the germans, who where never known to be jolly...

See the colourful skins the Spanish Civil WAR people are putting on their FB aircrsft--both Nazi and Communist. And by jolly, Galland flew Naked in SCW. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 03:12 PM
Huckebein_FW wrote:

- No, I'm just calling you stupid, unable to
- understand a letter written in plain English. You
- needed my help.

You're help? You still don't get it.



- And later he recommend the production of Fw-190D
- together with discontinuation of Me-209. Here's the
- paragraph Skychimp is hiding from Galland's letter:
-
- "Conclusion:
- a) Me 209 be discontinued
- b) Total fighter production to switch from the Fw
- 190 with BMW 801 to the Fw 190 with DB 603 and Jumo
- 213 respectively.
- c) The construction and industrial capacities thus
- released to be concentrated on the Me 262, with
- immediate effect."

-
-
-
- That is entirely your assumption. The text of the
- letter does not contain this idea at all, read it
- again:
-
- "General Galland has now demanded that fighter
- numbers not be allowed to drop below the figures set
- by the increased output program and that, by
- cancelling the 209, the 190 is expected to cover the
- numbers when Bf-109 production ran out.
- (..)it is very doubtful whether it will be possible
- for those factories producing 190s to increase their
- output when fighter numbers drop with the end of the
- Bf-109 production."
-
- It says that after the discontinuation of Me-209,
- Bf-109 production should continue, which happened in
- reality.


Galland clearly wants Messerschmitt to drop all prop fighter construction and concentrate in the 262.



- Yes development problems, this happens for every ww2
- plane. But it's major drawback was lack of RLM
- support. Messerschmitt got them interested for a
- year, but in Jan'43 they pulled the plug on the
- project. Nevertheless Messerschmitt continued the
- development for some time.


In other words, you were wrong.



- You came with usual mix of misinterpretations, lies
- and boring to death trolling just to end in the hole
- you dug.

/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif Oh yeah.

Regards,

SkyChimp

http://members.cox.net/rowlandparks/NAA_logo.jpg


Message Edited on 10/11/0306:34PM by SkyChimp

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 03:18 PM
HarryVoyager wrote:
-
- necrobaron wrote:
-- Huckebein,would you care to enlighten us as to how
-- the hell the Erle Haube could provide better
-- visibility than a bubble canopy?
--
-
- Refraction.
-
- Sorry, couldn't resist

ROTFLMAO!


<div style="background:#222222;color:#e0e0e0;font-size:24px;font-weight:bold;font-face:courier;"> TAGERT
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?
</div>
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=forum
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=discussion

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 03:20 PM
Huckebein_FW wrote:

- When the bombers received an increased armament at
- the middle of the conflict,

What increase armament?



- Bf-109 became not
- adequate for bomber interceptions,

It never was adequate, uless it had gunpods, then it was easymeat for any fighter.


- like all other
- liquid coolled engine fighters (except Dora),
- because of the cooling system vulnerability. This is
- why most units in West flew Fw-190 and those in East
- flew Bf-109.

Except the Bf-109s in the west that had to fly cover for the under-performing-at-bomber-altitude Fw-190A.



- At the end of war 109 flew again bomber
- interception missions, but only because it was the
- only type of mission squadrons received at that
- time. So this is out of the question, because it is
- out of its intended role.

The only type of mission it received? Are you daft? (ok, I know you are, forget I asked that) Bf-109 units were flying fighter-sweep missions throughout the war. Do you think all those grand dogfights over the Ardennnes in 1944/45 were bomber intercept missions? What were they doing during Bodenplatte, besides committing suicide?



- But I'd like to add a few comments here. What was
- really outdated were the allied bombers, who were
- crawling like snails, making them easy targets for
- interceptions. Also the german fighter threat forced
- them to fly in "boxes" which made them ideal targets
- for flak. German bombers on the other hand were
- fast, well armoured, small targets, hard to
- intercept, hard to hit in the bombing run,
- especially in a dive, and had very good precision.

They were so good, they lost the war against the US and British bombers.



- 1 bomber down per each fighter sortie means heavy
- bomber losses. This is more than enough as a
- objective. Sure at the end of war only small units
- could take off to counter the bomber. Dispite their
- victories such small grups could not have a heavy
- impact on bomber operations.
- Mk108 had small recoil and it was mounted on center
- axis of the aircraft. The fact that it was widely
- adopted in '44, clearly shows the popularity of the
- weapon.

But the pay-off on the grokund was worth it. The strategic bombing campaign was a success. Defense agaist it was a failure. Rememeber? Or are you saying this is false as well?



- Actually Erla Haube offered better visibility to the
- back of the aircraft than bubble canopy allied
- fighters.

This is your mind on crack.



- So this is not an argument. The visibility
- in front was good enough, high engine cowling and
- heavy armored windshield gave the pilot excellent
- protection, that lacked in allied planes. Fw-190 had
- similar front visibility due to the same
- requirements. Was Fw-190 obsolescent too?

The Fw-190 had poor forward visability compared to Allied planes.



- Yes, but none of the defects you found are true for
- Bf-109.

The Bf-109 was flawless! http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gifhttp://members.cox.net/rowlandparks/hucksajoke.jpg


Regards,

SkyChimp

http://members.cox.net/rowlandparks/NAA_logo.jpg

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 03:25 PM
BlitzPig_DDT wrote:
- I appreciate that you are fighting against lies and
- hatred of LW planes, but you are way too
- overzealous, and apparently not very knowledgable
- about US planes. (or too zealous to accept what is
- known about them - not sure)

Welcome to our world! /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

As for Lw haiter.. NOT! Just a truth lover. As I pointed out before, I even brought up the whole Me262 breaking the sound barrier thing here.. right or wrong.. Does that sound like someone that hates the Lw? Or someone seaking the truth about aircraft?




<div style="background:#222222;color:#e0e0e0;font-size:24px;font-weight:bold;font-face:courier;"> TAGERT
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?
</div>
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=forum
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=discussion

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 03:26 PM
Gibbage1 wrote:
- Also, my view. The P-51 was big and heavy. It had
- to carry fuel for a LONG trip and the pilots were
- tired after a 3-4 hour flight to the target. This
- big and heavy aircraft with lots of fuel and a tired
- pilot was still a very capable match for the ultra
- light and powerful Bf-109 that took off from there
- airfield 15 mins ago. You cant say it was all
- numbers because the USAAF was out numbered at the
- beginning of the war, and still putting up more
- kills then losses.

I think I agree. The type of air combat that took place on escort missions was something in which the P-51 excelled. Very fast climb rates weren't required by the P-51 because it would usually be entering combat already at high altitude. Equally, turn rate was less and less important to late-war fighters. For an escort fighter, a high speed, good endurance, heavy armament and good visibility (often overlooked) were far more critical to success than climb or turn rates. The P-51 had these quantities in abundance. Late-war Bf-109s were somewhat lacking in comparison. This is why Huck's claims that the Bf-109 was superior to the P-51 so totally miss the mark. The P-51 simply didn't need a high climb or turn rate. The outcomes of many encounters over Germany rapidly showed which aircraft was the most effective fighting machine.

Although the late Bf-109s were only a marginally inferior to the US and UK aircraft they faced, they were crippled in use by poor aircrew quality and control, by being available in too small numbers and ultimately by the lack of fuel (although one could argue that the Luftwaffe would still have lost control of the sky even with adequate fuel reserves). I think this is part of the explanation of how the Finns managed to use inferior, outnumbered aircraft very effectively against the Russian VVS but the Luftwaffe was unable to manage the same feat against the Western Allies. The Finns were always able to keep a clear superiority in pilot ability and tactics over their opponents. In contrast, the Luftwaffe was confronted with highly capable pilots in good aircraft and so suffered such serious attrition that it could never regain the initiative.

Regards,

RocketDog.

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 03:27 PM
Huckebein_FW wrote:

- They did not see combat in ww2, so comparing them
- with a '44 plane is not accurate. Also the specs
- vehiculated for it are simply fantasies. Bearcat had
- a initial climb at sea level of 4500fpm, if the
- 2300hp rating is correct. That 6000fpm climb is out
- of cartoon books.

Of course Huckles, if you can't calculate it, or if it beats your Nazis, it MUST be a lie!



- I also think that USN fighter were more rugged. When
- I said that I was thinking at planes like P-38,
- P-51.

The ONLY thing you've said in this thread that can not be considered an intentional misrepresentation.



- Here's you are making a mistake. Hellcat had only a
- comparable turn radius, not turn rate. Grumman
- fighters had not a good turn rate because of the low
- aspect ratio of the wings and poor power loading.

And your source for this? (I anticipate you'll post some of you inana calculations.)



- It was not phenomenal, but it was good. Late models
- had the same climb with Dora.

Bull$hit. The F4U-4 was better than Dora, and better than the Bf-109K-4, too.



- No, Bearcat and P-51H reached the needed
- powerloading. Too late for service, though.

They weren't needed. The Luftwaffe uberfighters had been decimated with lesser fighters.



- AHT gives for P-47M 3500fpm at combat power at sea
- level. All of a sudden you don't agree with AHT?

A little more actually. Buy the book and stop guessing.




Regards,

SkyChimp

http://members.cox.net/rowlandparks/NAA_logo.jpg


Regards,

SkyChimp

http://members.cox.net/rowlandparks/NAA_logo.jpg

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 03:28 PM
Huckebein_FW wrote:
-- Another limitation was the low muzzle velocity.
-- Accuracy at longer ranges was very poor so attacks
-- had to be pressed to close range, certainly not an
-- easy thing to do when faced by the defensive fire of
-- most bombers.
-
- Heavy projectiles had difficult to estimate
- trajectories for fighter pilots. This is why Mk108
- had a high rate of fire, almost like a 20mm cannon,
- much larger than other cannons of the same caliber.
- High rate of fire plus dispersion ensured the hit.

muzzle velocity is very different then rate of fire.

<div style="background:#222222;color:#e0e0e0;font-size:24px;font-weight:bold;font-face:courier;"> TAGERT
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?
</div>
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=forum
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=discussion

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 03:29 PM
LEXX_Luthor wrote:
- kvestion::
--- How come that the germans, who where never known to be jolly...
-
- See the colourful skins the Spanish Civil WAR people
- are putting on their FB aircrsft--both Nazi and
- Communist. And by jolly, Galland flew Naked in SCW.
- /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif
-
-
-
-
-
Galland flew naked?...what a laugh!.

BTW: that 209 looks cool!

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 03:29 PM
Huckie, where is the 'box spar' you claim the 109 had?

http://frhewww.physik.uni-freiburg.de/~jaensch/109/pic1/lw211.jpg


Photo taken 10/1943 and shows a '[' shape.


http://www.thundercycle.com/photos/dropdead2.gif



"Only a dead 'chamber pot' is a good 'chamber pot'!"

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 03:31 PM
Huckebein_FW wrote:

- Germany used precision bombing not random terror
- bombing allies employed with zero effects. Should I
- remaind you again that Germany fell to russian tanks
- not RAFs cardboard bombers?

Oh yeah, your Nazis never employed terror bombing! What next from you Huck, Holocaust denial? I'm beginning to believe you live in the US because you would be a criminal in Germany.

Didn't use terror bombing. Tell that to the Nazi victims in London, Rotterdam and Warsaw.



- Also most of the
- activity of the german bombers was on east front. I
- guess you don't know that since you came with this
- comparison.

That's because German bombers couldn't survive in the west. They were useless there and made next to no contribution after BoB.



- Tonnage comparisons is useless. It does not take
- into account the percentage of targets hit.

/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif





Regards,

SkyChimp

http://members.cox.net/rowlandparks/NAA_logo.jpg


Message Edited on 10/11/0306:33PM by SkyChimp

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 03:36 PM
Cajun76 wrote:
- (Huckbein)You see through the armor plate? Great
- then.
-
- Not every pilot was strapped into a snug cockpit
- like the 109s. Do you not know that other a/c
- actually have different cockpits?

Strapped in or not the cramped space of the 109 would not allow the pilot to lean L or R and then look back around the seat because the canopy was so close the pilots head would hit the glass. The 109 would nead a Malory bubble type of canopy to enable this.. But Willie never did that.

The bubble canopys of the P47 and P51 had alot of room L and R that allowed the pilot to lean out L or R and then look back.. *OR* he could op to remain tucked in behind the armor plate when not looking back.

The *lean* not simulated very well in any sim to date because the view is as if the pilot sholder are nailed to the seat and thus he can only turned his head (linda blair) without leaning.. thus you get that looking into the head rest feel... Actually PAW 1942 did a pretty good job of simulating the lean in the snap views.


<div style="background:#222222;color:#e0e0e0;font-size:24px;font-weight:bold;font-face:courier;"> TAGERT
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?
</div>
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=forum
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=discussion

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 03:38 PM
"The fighter models Me-109 and Fw-190, with the exception of the latest series Me-109K4, K10, Fw 190 and D12 (sic) as well as the Ta 152, which arrived much to late, were inferior to the enemy fighters and unsuited for high altitude fighting. These factors could not be overcome by the emergency measure of GM I and G supercharger."

Generalleutenant Josef Schmid, in 'German Dayfighting in Defence of the Reich, 15 September 1943 to the End of the War'.

Schmid was intelligence chief of the Luftwaffe 1938-1942, commander of I. JagdKorps September 1943 - November 1944, and Luftwaffe West commander from then for until the end of the war.

From 'Fighting the Bombers', by Galland, Kammhuber , Messerschmitt etc, edited by David C. Isby, ISBN 1-85367-532-6. A very interesting read as it consists of debriefs of German pilots and commanders immediately after the war.

-------------------------------------
When the (German) rationalisation drive began it was found that the armed forces had greatly inflated the demand for raw materials by exaggerating the quantity needed for each unit of production. The large firms held substantial stocks of scarce materials, particularly aluminium, which had been allocated on the basis of 16,000 lb for each aircraft, regardless of the fact that a fighter consumed only a quarter of this quantity. Aircraft firms had so much ingot aluminium in store that they used it to produce non-essential goods - ladder, greenhouses, even mosquito nets.

Professor R.J. Overy, 'War and Economy in the Third Reich'

Message Edited on 10/11/0302:42PM by Mr_Nakajima

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 03:42 PM
SkyChimp wrote:
-
- Huckebein_FW wrote:
-
-- When the bombers received an increased armament at
-- the middle of the conflict,
-
- What increase armament?

Is what I was wondering.. In that they actually REMOVED a .50 cal from the B17's top radio area.



<div style="background:#222222;color:#e0e0e0;font-size:24px;font-weight:bold;font-face:courier;"> TAGERT
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?
</div>
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=forum
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=discussion

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 03:43 PM
SkyChimp wrote:
-
- Huckebein_FW wrote:
-
-- When the bombers received an increased armament at
-- the middle of the conflict,
-
- What increase armament?

B-17E-G had increased defensive armament, compared to earlier models. Of course this transformed the speed to a crawl and the load to a twin engine bomber. A poor and obsolete design.



-- Bf-109 became not
-- adequate for bomber interceptions,
-
- It never was adequate, uless it had gunpods, then it
- was easymeat for any fighter.

Easymeat only in your dreams. And it is not the job of the planes designated to intercept bombers to attack fighters.



-- like all other
-- liquid coolled engine fighters (except Dora),
-- because of the cooling system vulnerability. This is
-- why most units in West flew Fw-190 and those in East
-- flew Bf-109.
-
- Except the Bf-109s in the west that had to fly cover
- for the under-performing-at-bomber-altitude Fw-190A.

Fw-190A had excellent performance at medium altitudes, 6000-7000m were the bomber stream was. Fw-190A did not have good performance at high altitude, but no bombers were there. Germans prepared to introduce a new high altitude interceptor, just in case that real high altitude bombing would have materialise. This never happened since the easily flamable, slow and underpowered B-17 was kept in service though it was obsolete by the time it reached ETO.



-- At the end of war 109 flew again bomber
-- interception missions, but only because it was the
-- only type of mission squadrons received at that
-- time. So this is out of the question, because it is
-- out of its intended role.
-
- The only type of mission it received? Are you daft?
- (ok, I know you are, forget I asked that) Bf-109
- units were flying fighter-sweep missions throughout
- the war. Do you think all those grand dogfights
- over the Ardennnes in 1944/45 were bomber intercept
- missions? What were they doing during Bodenplatte,
- besides committing suicide?

Yeah to picture defeats as victories in battles with second rate forces, as Luftwaffe was in '45, is what americans and brits do best.



-- 1 bomber down per each fighter sortie means heavy
-- bomber losses. This is more than enough as a
-- objective. Sure at the end of war only small units
-- could take off to counter the bomber. Dispite their
-- victories such small grups could not have a heavy
-- impact on bomber operations.
-- Mk108 had small recoil and it was mounted on center
-- axis of the aircraft. The fact that it was widely
-- adopted in '44, clearly shows the popularity of the
-- weapon.
-
- But the pay-off on the grokund was worth it. The
- strategic bombing campaign was a success. Defense
- agaist it was a failure. Rememeber? Or are you
- saying this is false as well?


It wasn't a success since the russians took Berlin. Something that the poorly equiped british and american ground troops could never do.



-- Actually Erla Haube offered better visibility to the
-- back of the aircraft than bubble canopy allied
-- fighters.
-
- This is your mind on crack.
-
-
-
-- So this is not an argument. The visibility
-- in front was good enough, high engine cowling and
-- heavy armored windshield gave the pilot excellent
-- protection, that lacked in allied planes. Fw-190 had
-- similar front visibility due to the same
-- requirements. Was Fw-190 obsolescent too?
-
- The Fw-190 had poor forward visability compared to
- Allied planes.

Your jealous Skychimp.


<center> http://www.stormbirds.com/images/discussion-main.jpg </center>

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 03:47 PM
SC, you forgot a certain city/town in Spain./i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Guernica was the place and the date 1937. The Germans claimed they were trying to knock out a bridge but NOT 1 bomb hit the bridge.



http://www.thundercycle.com/photos/dropdead2.gif



"Only a dead 'chamber pot' is a good 'chamber pot'!"

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 03:51 PM
Huckebein_FW wrote:
- SkyChimp wrote:
--
-- Huckebein_FW wrote:
--
--- When the bombers received an increased armament at
--- the middle of the conflict,
--
-- What increase armament?
-
- B-17E-G had increased defensive armament, compared
- to earlier models. Of course this transformed the
- speed to a crawl and the load to a twin engine
- bomber. A poor and obsolete design.

Middle of conflict.. Increased armament? They did add a better chin gun mount.. but they also removed the .50 cal from the radio man position on top. right?

<div style="background:#222222;color:#e0e0e0;font-size:24px;font-weight:bold;font-face:courier;"> TAGERT
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?
</div>
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=forum
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=discussion

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 03:54 PM
kvestion wrote:
- Now let's go back to the original topic, gentlemen.
(snip)
- This innocent comparison between the 109 and the
- 911 just allowed the greatest discovery in the
- history of man : Germans are FUN

oh yeah...especially german girls!

but seriously, one factor I haven't seen mentioned here is the differing industrial policies of Axis and Allied combatants. Germany was looking for a short, sharp war, where the 109 was the tool at hand for the job. The Allies by contrast were initaill hanging on, then slowly retooling etc etc for victory. It was only really after the war lengthened out that the Germans had to look at newer armaments in large numbers.

I find it interesting to contrast the design of the 109 to the Panzers 3 and 4. Tank design was done with a large turret ring, so the tanks could be upgunned with little redesign, but the Luftwaffe didn't expect the same from the 109. Even still, both the Wehrmacht and the Luftwaffe were underprepared for a long war.



cheers,
Tony
(flying as "wombat" on HL)


< !--image map -->
http://members.optusnet.com.au/~tonybirchill/sig.jpg
<map name="main">
<area shape="rect" coords="0,0,200,54" href="http://www.il2airracing.com/" alt="Il2 online air racing">
<area shape="rect" coords="200,0,400,54" href="http://pub82.ezboard.com/b1ejava" alt="skinners heaven">
</map>


oh yeah, and I'm a Whirlwind whiner too /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 03:55 PM
SkyChimp wrote:
- Huckebein_FW wrote:
-
-- Germany used precision bombing not random terror
-- bombing allies employed with zero effects. Should I
-- remaind you again that Germany fell to russian tanks
-- not RAFs cardboard bombers?
-
- Oh yeah, your Nazis never employed terror bombing!
- What next from you Huck, Holocaust denial? I'm
- beginning to believe you live in the US because you
- would be a criminal in Germany.
-
- Didn't use terror bombing. Tell that to the Nazi
- victims in London, Rotterdam and Warsaw.

No, the americans were just liberating from the dictatorship terror.

some people liberated after firebombing in Tokio:

http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/RM1.US.HIROSHIMA2.JPG


shadow of a vaporized man in Hiroshima, he looks liberated too:

http://www.peacewire.org/photoexhibits/Hiroshima/images/lg04.GIF



or a child victim of the nuclear tests made by US in Marshall Islands. He died soon of cancer, thanking to the americans:

http://www.peacewire.org/photoexhibits/Hiroshima/images/lg18.GIF





-- Also most of the
-- activity of the german bombers was on east front. I
-- guess you don't know that since you came with this
-- comparison.
-
- That's because German bombers couldn't survive in
- the west. They were useless there and made next to
- no contribution after BoB.


West front was second in importance, like everything that americans did.


<center> http://www.stormbirds.com/images/discussion-main.jpg </center>

Message Edited on 10/11/0309:58AM by Huckebein_FW

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 03:59 PM
Huckebein_FW wrote:
- SkyChimp wrote:
--
-- Huckebein_FW wrote:
--
--- When the bombers received an increased armament at
--- the middle of the conflict,
--
-- What increase armament?
-
- B-17E-G had increased defensive armament, compared
- to earlier models. Of course this transformed the
- speed to a crawl and the load to a twin engine
- bomber. A poor and obsolete design.

Oh, now I know where you made your mistake! Your thinking of the YB40 that B17 that they added a bunch of guns to and removed the bomb load from.. It was intended to fly with the regualar B17s but it could not keep up with the regualr B17s so they dropeed the idea.. In that as you yourslef pointed out the B17s were effective as is, they shot down all the fighters, not the aillied fighters! /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif


<div style="background:#222222;color:#e0e0e0;font-size:24px;font-weight:bold;font-face:courier;"> TAGERT
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?
</div>
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=forum
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=discussion

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 04:02 PM
Huckebein_FW wrote:
- SkyChimp wrote:
-- Huckebein_FW wrote:
--
--- Germany used precision bombing not random terror
--- bombing allies employed with zero effects. Should I
--- remaind you again that Germany fell to russian tanks
--- not RAFs cardboard bombers?
--
-- Oh yeah, your Nazis never employed terror bombing!
-- What next from you Huck, Holocaust denial? I'm
-- beginning to believe you live in the US because you
-- would be a criminal in Germany.
--
-- Didn't use terror bombing. Tell that to the Nazi
-- victims in London, Rotterdam and Warsaw.
-
- No, the americans were just liberating from the
- dictatorship terror.
-
- some people liberated after firebombing in Tokio:
-
- <img
- src="http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/RM1.US.HIROS
- HIMA2.JPG">
-
-
- shadow of a vaporized man in Hiroshima, he looks
- liberated too:
-
- <img
- src="http://www.peacewire.org/photoexhibits/Hirosh
- ima/images/lg04.GIF">
-
-
-
- or a child victim of the nuclear tests made by US in
- Marshall Islands. He died soon of cancer, thanking
- to the americans:
-
- <img
- src="http://www.peacewire.org/photoexhibits/Hirosh
- ima/images/lg18.GIF">
-
-
-
-
-
-
--- Also most of the
--- activity of the german bombers was on east front. I
--- guess you don't know that since you came with this
--- comparison.
--
-- That's because German bombers couldn't survive in
-- the west. They were useless there and made next to
-- no contribution after BoB.
-
-
- West front was second in importance, like everything
- that americans did.
-
-
- <center> <img
- src="http://www.stormbirds.com/images/discussion-m
- ain.jpg"> </center>

Is this the part where the PRO Nazi guys step in and tell us how all the picutres in the Nazi death camps were just a HOLLYWOOD ploy by the Jewish movie makers?


<div style="background:#222222;color:#e0e0e0;font-size:24px;font-weight:bold;font-face:courier;"> TAGERT
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?
</div>
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=forum
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=discussion

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 04:02 PM
I'm not going to get into all the arguements about qualities of planes, etc as you guys are doing a great job of it.

However the comment about Brits/US not taking Berlin and why is blatently wrong.

Soviets got there first solely due to interal western politics. Read Anthony Beavors excellent "The Fall of Berlin 1945" and you'll see the truth.

If the west wanted to take Berlin, it would have done so without much of a fight as Berlin was so afraid of the Soviets they would have welcomed them in as allies.

Again, all laid out in the book. Excellent read as well as his earlier book "Stalingrad".

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 04:07 PM
tagert wrote:
-
- Is this the part where the PRO Nazi guys step in and
- tell us how all the picutres in the Nazi death camps
- were just a HOLLYWOOD ploy by the Jewish movie
- makers?


The only pro nazi people I see here are Rocketdog, Skychimp and Milo. They are the only ones justifying mass murder.

I'm absolutely disgusted by the nazi regime, it's exponents and deeds.


<center> http://www.stormbirds.com/images/discussion-main.jpg </center>

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 04:09 PM
Huckebein_FW wrote:

- B-17E-G had increased defensive armament, compared
- to earlier models. Of course this transformed the
- speed to a crawl and the load to a twin engine
- bomber. A poor and obsolete design.

Yet better for the task that anything the Nazi put into the air.

Do you think the Strategic Boming Campaign would have succeeded if the USAAF flew Ju-88s? /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif



- Easymeat only in your dreams. And it is not the job
- of the planes designated to intercept bombers to
- attack fighters.

No, but it WAS the job of the covering fighters to engage the escorts, and they failed at that too.



- Fw-190A had excellent performance at medium
- altitudes, 6000-7000m were the bomber stream was.
- Fw-190A did not have good performance at high
- altitude, but no bombers were there. Germans
- prepared to introduce a new high altitude
- interceptor, just in case that real high altitude
- bombing would have materialise. This never happened
- since the easily flamable, slow and underpowered
- B-17 was kept in service though it was obsolete by
- the time it reached ETO.

Obsolete. Keep up with the Nazi propaganda, Huckels. You reveal more and more about yourself with every post.



- Yeah to picture defeats as victories in battles with
- second rate forces, as Luftwaffe was in '45, is what
- americans and brits do best.

Let's see, did the Luftwaffe ever win a battel agaisnt the Allies at any time after BoB. Hmmm, except for a minor delay in the bombing campaign in 1943, it seems the Luftwaffe was on the losing end at all times.



- It wasn't a success since the russians took Berlin.
- Something that the poorly equiped british and
- american ground troops could never do.

Of course, Huckles. Germany was divided BEFORE the fall of Berlin, and the Soviets were going to end up with it anyway. Taht's why the Soviets took it. But historical accuracy isn't your strong point, is it?



- Your jealous Skychimp.

That's exactly what it is /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Regards,

SkyChimp

http://members.cox.net/rowlandparks/NAA_logo.jpg

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 04:13 PM
Huckebein_FW wrote:
-
- The only pro nazi people I see here are Rocketdog,
- Skychimp and Milo. They are the only ones justifying
- mass murder.

Well take off those rose colored 109 glasses of your and look again! They simply pointed out to you your error in thinking that the Nazi's didnt bomb civilians. They didnt have smart bombs back then.. So it did happen. Is that to imply that both sides didnt get some pay back? Nope! It did happen alot! I lived in Wurzburg for 4 years.. They claim it didnt have any miltary targets.. Well it might not have had any industry to bomb.. But I lived in one of those none existing NAZI baracks in Wurzburg.. It had targets! But, the Brits said it was a mistake, they were trying for Kitzeingen if I remeber correctly.

- I'm absolutely disgusted by the nazi regime, it's
- exponents and deeds.

Agreed 100%

<div style="background:#222222;color:#e0e0e0;font-size:24px;font-weight:bold;font-face:courier;"> TAGERT
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?
</div>
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=forum
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=discussion

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 04:13 PM
Huckebein_FW wrote:

- I'm absolutely disgusted by the nazi regime, it's
- exponents and deeds.


Yet you defend them at every turn. You deny their attrocities, make absolutley false statements. You've taken the Nazis as your heros, Huck. Why is that? What is it about the Nazis that appeals to you so much?

Regards,

SkyChimp

http://members.cox.net/rowlandparks/NAA_logo.jpg

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 04:19 PM
6,000,000 systematically rounded up and summerly BUTCHERED Jews and other so-called non-desirerables by the Germans does not compare even remotely to what the Allied bombers did Huckie.

These innocent people did not have any defence unlike the German and Japanese cities.




http://www.thundercycle.com/photos/dropdead2.gif



"Only a dead 'chamber pot' is a good 'chamber pot'!"

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 04:19 PM
WRT increased armament for the B-17, I believe it was the B-17G that added the twin fifties and the chin turret.

This was an attempt to try and afford some protection from the highly successful and psychologically devastating head-on attack tactics developed by Egon Meyer and Georg Peter-Eder of JG2.

The Focke-Wulfs of JG/2 and JG/26 emplopyed this tactic with great success (even after the adoption of the chin turret) against American heavy bombers. In many (well-documented) cases, only a single head-on pass by FW190s and their devastating firepower were enough to take down any American heavy bomber.


The Browning .50 cal. was deleted from the cheek position on the B-17s because it was useless.


<center><img src= "http://www.luftwaffepics.com/LCBW4/FW190-A0-52.jpg" height=215 width=365>

<center>"We are now in a position of inferiority...There is no doubt in my mind, nor in the minds of my fighter pilots, that the FW190 is the best all-round fighter in the world today."

Sholto Douglas, 17 July 1942

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 04:19 PM
Huckebein_FW wrote:

- West front was second in importance, like everything
- that americans did.


Anti--American. Thanks for this tidbit.

Regards,

SkyChimp

http://members.cox.net/rowlandparks/NAA_logo.jpg


Message Edited on 10/11/0307:25PM by SkyChimp

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 04:19 PM
SkyChimp wrote:
-
- Huckebein_FW wrote:
-
-- I'm absolutely disgusted by the nazi regime, it's
-- exponents and deeds.
-
-
- Yet you defend them at every turn. You deny their
- attrocities, make absolutley false statements.
- You've taken the Nazis as your heros, Huck. Why is
- that? What is it about the Nazis that appeals to
- you so much?
-


This is incredible, the fact that I like german technology transforms me in a Nazi defender?? you are the only Nazi supporter here, you and your friends are the only ones who defends mass murder.

What else should Skychimp say to take the ban. Mods?


<center> http://www.stormbirds.com/images/discussion-main.jpg </center>

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 04:23 PM
Huckebein_FW wrote:

- This is incredible, the fact that I like german
- technology transforms me in a Nazi defender?? you
- are the only Nazi supporter here, you and your
- friends are the only ones who defends mass murder.
-
- What else should Skychimp say to take the ban. Mods?



Your tirades go beyond "liking German technology." You make disgusting insults like this:

- West front was second in importance, like everything
- that americans did.

You deny histroy Huck. You deny terror raids by the Nazis, you make insulting and denigrating comments about Americans. You call people idiots.

"Liking German technology" is one thing, your attitude is quite another. If you don't want people to believe you are a Nazi defender, stop acting like one.

Regards,

SkyChimp

http://members.cox.net/rowlandparks/NAA_logo.jpg

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 04:28 PM
Gemini can we have the smilie eating popcorn again?
ILMFAROFLPM

<img src=http://www.baseclass.modulweb.dk/giap/var/storage/original/image/69giap_badge_marx.jpg>

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 04:28 PM
Huckebein_FW wrote:
- This is incredible, the fact that I like german
- technology transforms me in a Nazi defender?? you
- are the only Nazi supporter here, you and your
- friends are the only ones who defends mass murder.

You dont see the differance between civilians killed who lived near a target and/or suported the war effort by working in the factorys to rounding people up based on thier religion and putting them into an oven? Why am I not suprised.. your selective memory is well documented on aircraft.. why stop there..

- What else should Skychimp say to take the ban. Mods?

HEHEHAHEHAHEHAHEAHAHHAHAAAAa *YOU* calling for the *MODS* becuase of something said.. THAT IS CLASSIC!!



<div style="background:#222222;color:#e0e0e0;font-size:24px;font-weight:bold;font-face:courier;"> TAGERT
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?
</div>
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=forum
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=discussion

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 04:29 PM
Just like Huckie to go off on some irrelevent tangent. What has bombing have to do with the "outdated design" of the 109?



http://www.thundercycle.com/photos/dropdead2.gif



"Only a dead 'chamber pot' is a good 'chamber pot'!"

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 04:34 PM
Huckie, why would the 109's rear view improve with the 'Erla Haube' when the 109 still had its 'razor back' fuselage. All the Erla did was remove some framing that improved the side vision.


http://www.thundercycle.com/photos/dropdead2.gif



"Only a dead 'chamber pot' is a good 'chamber pot'!"

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 04:35 PM
MiloMorai wrote:
- Just like Huckie to go off on some irrelevent
- tangent. What has bombing have to do with the
- "outdated design" of the 109?


Nothing, this is HarryVoyager's argument. Ask him.


<center> http://www.stormbirds.com/images/discussion-main.jpg </center>

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 04:35 PM
MiloMorai wrote:

- Just like Huckie to go off on some irrelevent
- tangent. What has bombing have to do with the
- "outdated design" of the 109?


Hell, Milo, your the one talking about Guernica, the Holocaust and custom-built motorcycles /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

I thought this thread was supposed to be about about pickles



<center><img src= "http://www.luftwaffepics.com/LCBW4/FW190-A0-52.jpg" height=215 width=365>

<center>"We are now in a position of inferiority...There is no doubt in my mind, nor in the minds of my fighter pilots, that the FW190 is the best all-round fighter in the world today."

Sholto Douglas, 17 July 1942

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 04:36 PM
SkyChimp wrote:
- You deny histroy Huck. You deny terror raids by the
- Nazis, you make insulting and denigrating comments
- about Americans. You call people idiots.
-
- "Liking German technology" is one thing, your
- attitude is quite another. If you don't want people
- to believe you are a Nazi defender, stop acting like
- one.

So what exactly do you want to be called?

Now you've accused Huck of supporting the nazi ideology. Either you should proove it (quote him where he said it), or you should apologise. Well it's always the same story with you anyway. So I expect neither.

Nic

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 04:37 PM
Well I enjoyed talking with Huck about Fb109 until you guys show up. And still nobody knows the range of late war Spits vs Fb109s. If there is a difference, that should settle the Question of comparing the basic design between the two.


/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif
-- I'm beginning to believe you [Huckie] live in the US
-- because you would be a criminal in Germany.

Easy there Chimp. Got a chart for that? I think from there the thread went bad.


SkyChamp a Nazi. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif
Huckie a Communist. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 04:38 PM
nicolas10 wrote:
- So what exactly do you want to be called?
-
- Now you've accused Huck of supporting the nazi
- ideology. Either you should proove it (quote him
- where he said it), or you should apologise. Well
- it's always the same story with you anyway. So I
- expect neither.
-
- Nic

Nic Im so proud of you.. not one pie hole reference.. keep up the good work!


<div style="background:#222222;color:#e0e0e0;font-size:24px;font-weight:bold;font-face:courier;"> TAGERT
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?
</div>
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=forum
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=discussion

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 04:39 PM
- You deny histroy Huck. You deny terror raids by the
- Nazis,

You deny those of the allies...

you make insulting and denigrating comments
- about Americans

Americans (more correct: americans like you) are funny people /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif
Why not laughing about them ? /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif


- You call people idiots.

Better calling s.b. an idiot than beeing one /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

If you don't want people
- to believe you are a Nazi defender, stop acting like
- one.

Please define the way a Nazi acts like. According to your opinion of "Nazi pilots", "Nazi planes", etc. there seem to be lots of people having been Nazis. And everybody had the same behaviour ?
That would be a nice theory to argue with Mr. Freud...

http://franz.lampl.bei.t-online.de/toryusig.jpg (http://www.virtual-jabog32.de)

http://franz.lampl.bei.t-online.de/toryusig2.jpg (http://www.jg68.de.vu)

When once you have tasted flight,
you will always walk the earth
with your eyes turned skyward;
to where you have been
and to where you always want to return.

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 04:39 PM
I'm not interested to discuss anything at all with you, so you could as well ignore me.

Nic

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 04:40 PM
nicolas10 wrote:

- So what exactly do you want to be called?

Well you certainly can't call me a Nazi defender.



- Now you've accused Huck of supporting the nazi
- ideology. Either you should proove it (quote him
- where he said it), or you should apologise. Well
- it's always the same story with you anyway. So I
- expect neither.
-
- Nic

Huck has a long history here of misrepresenting historical fact, and his anti-American jibes are well known. I suppose you are here to tell us it's all just a big misunderstanding?




Regards,

SkyChimp

http://members.cox.net/rowlandparks/NAA_logo.jpg

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 04:41 PM
nicolas10 wrote:
- I'm not interested to discuss anything at all with
- you, so you could as well ignore me.
-
- Nic

The typical Nic tactic, take a shot, then run away.

You did this in the thread in the Ta152, took pop-shots, then said "just ignore me."

Don't you have another UBI-spamming campaign to go to?



Regards,

SkyChimp

http://members.cox.net/rowlandparks/NAA_logo.jpg

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 04:42 PM
Tagert, your sig tells me a lot about your spiritual horizon.../i/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

http://franz.lampl.bei.t-online.de/toryusig.jpg (http://www.virtual-jabog32.de)

http://franz.lampl.bei.t-online.de/toryusig2.jpg (http://www.jg68.de.vu)

When once you have tasted flight,
you will always walk the earth
with your eyes turned skyward;
to where you have been
and to where you always want to return.

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 04:42 PM
nicolas10 wrote:
- I'm not interested to discuss anything at all with
- you

Well than you better think twice about posting in a public forum.

-, so you could as well ignore me.

Been




<div style="background:#222222;color:#e0e0e0;font-size:24px;font-weight:bold;font-face:courier;"> TAGERT
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?
</div>
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=forum
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=discussion

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 04:42 PM
SkyChimp wrote:
- Huck has a long history here of misrepresenting
- historical fact, and his anti-American jibes are
- well known. I suppose you are here to tell us it's
- all just a big misunderstanding?
-
Don't try changing subject AGAIN. You called him a nazi supporter, so you should prove what you claim. It's a big insult in my book, so failing supporting your insults makes you owe him an apology.

Nic

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 04:44 PM
Bremspropeller wrote:
- Tagert, your sig tells me a lot about your spiritual
- horizon...

Spiritual Horizon? Is this the part where you ask me what my sign is.. and then ask me what Im doing friday night? Sorry, I dont swing that way!



<div style="background:#222222;color:#e0e0e0;font-size:24px;font-weight:bold;font-face:courier;"> TAGERT
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?
</div>
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=forum
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=discussion

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 04:46 PM
nicolas10 wrote:

- Don't try changing subject AGAIN. You called him a
- nazi supporter, so you should prove what you claim.
- It's a big insult in my book, so failing supporting
- your insults makes you owe him an apology.
-
- Nic


I've already pointed out why I think that. You might try reading this thread, iunstead of jumping in, taking pop-shots, then crying "ignore me" then running away, only to reappear to make yet another comment.

Your "book" mean nothing to me.

Regards,

SkyChimp

http://members.cox.net/rowlandparks/NAA_logo.jpg

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 04:47 PM
Fw190fan, can't let the Nazi lover away with his usual BS. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

I also went back on topic with a question on the view to the rear.

Where did I go off on a mc tangent? That was others commenting on my sig./i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif


http://www.thundercycle.com/photos/dropdead2.gif



"Only a dead 'chamber pot' is a good 'chamber pot'!"

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 04:50 PM
Bremspropeller wrote:

- You deny those of the allies...

Example?



- Please define the way a Nazi acts like. According to
- your opinion of "Nazi pilots", "Nazi planes", etc.
- there seem to be lots of people having been Nazis.
- And everybody had the same behaviour ?
- That would be a nice theory to argue with Mr.
- Freud...

You seem to be offended when reminded of the fact that the Luftwaffe flew for the Nazis, and that the Nazis were the bad guys in this war. Or are you disputing that?


Regards,

SkyChimp

http://members.cox.net/rowlandparks/NAA_logo.jpg

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 04:50 PM
What no reply to this photo from 10/1943 Huckie? Those are the 're-designed' wings used on the FGKs.

http://frhewww.physik.uni-freiburg.de/~jaensch/109/pic1/lw211.jpg


Don't see NO 'box spar'.




http://www.thundercycle.com/photos/dropdead2.gif



"Only a dead 'chamber pot' is a good 'chamber pot'!"

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 04:51 PM
What are you gonna do friday night ?

http://franz.lampl.bei.t-online.de/toryusig.jpg (http://www.virtual-jabog32.de)

http://franz.lampl.bei.t-online.de/toryusig2.jpg (http://www.jg68.de.vu)

When once you have tasted flight,
you will always walk the earth
with your eyes turned skyward;
to where you have been
and to where you always want to return.

XyZspineZyX
10-11-2003, 04:51 PM
SkyChimp wrote:
- I've already pointed out why I think that. You
- might try reading this thread, iunstead of jumping
- in, taking pop-shots, then crying "ignore me" then
- running away, only to reappear to make yet another
- comment.

What an idiot (oooh let's PM the mods).

Anyway it's so easy to see when you're loosing an argument. Just wait till you resort to unfounded insults when you have nothing intelligent to say to further your point.

As a side note my only post until now was to say I thought the was outdated in the end of the war. But your behaviour here is very irritating, and you and your new pal do exactly what it takes to ruin what could be interesting threads (see the one about the Ta 283 too). Both were quite interesting for a page or two until your kind showed up.

Nic