Trotskygrad
бля
+354|5969|Vortex Ring State

Dilbert_X wrote:

Karbin wrote:

The Spit started out as a air racer.
The fore-runner of the Spitfire was an air racer.
The fore runner of the Bf 109 started out as a fast speed air mail craft.
The ME109 started out disguised as a mail aircraft.
One needs speed and turning, the other flat out speed. Head to head both are damn good craft. I'm of the mind that there so close that it's more the pilot then the air frame.
Flat out speed was very important, as was climb rate. If the other aircraft has 100mph and 5,000ft on you you won't see him coming, won't see him passing and won't see him leaving, in the meantime there is nothing you can do.
If he can out climb you you'll never catch him up.
Once into a dogfight it comes down to pilot skill and ability to take g, Spitfire and Messerschmidt could both out-g the pilot.

The Spitfire was always a short-range fighter, and never intended for anything else. Except fast PR unarmed and unarmoured.
yeah, and we were comparing dogfight characteristics. It was designed as an interceptor and it did that role well.
Karbin
Member
+42|6264

Dilbert_X wrote:

Karbin wrote:

The Spit started out as a air racer.
The fore-runner of the Spitfire was an air racer.
The fore runner of the Bf 109 started out as a fast speed air mail craft.
The ME109 started out disguised as a mail aircraft.
One needs speed and turning, the other flat out speed. Head to head both are damn good craft. I'm of the mind that there so close that it's more the pilot then the air frame.
Flat out speed was very important, as was climb rate. If the other aircraft has 100mph and 5,000ft on you you won't see him coming, won't see him passing and won't see him leaving, in the meantime there is nothing you can do.
If he can out climb you you'll never catch him up.
Once into a dogfight it comes down to pilot skill and ability to take g, Spitfire and Messerschmidt could both out-g the pilot.

The Spitfire was always a short-range fighter, and never intended for anything else. Except fast PR unarmed and unarmoured.
Ok Dil... if you want to go this way....

Schneider Trophy winner for 1927, 29  and 31 were the fore-runners of the Spit. The Supermarine S.5, S.6 and S.6B the S.6B represented the cutting edge of aerodynamic technology and  provided  valuable experience in producing high-speed aircraft, greatly contributing to the development of the later Spitfire fighter.

The 109 started out, not as a Messerschmitt but, as a product of Bayerische Flugzeugwerke (Bavarian Aircraft Works) hence Bf 109.
Willy joined Bf in 1927 and through his contacts with the Nazi party took control of Bfw in 1938.... after the 109 was submited in the '35 fighter contest.



rdx-fx wrote:
Japan was nuked twice, then still had to think about whether or not to surrender

Dilbert_X wrote:
Not really.

Revisionism at it's best, Dil.
Cheeky_Ninja06
Member
+52|6702|Cambridge, England

-Sh1fty- wrote:

Were Spitfires really that good? I always thought Meshershmidt 109s, Hellcats, Corsairs, and Mustangs were better.
Yes. Yes. No. No. No.
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,810|6075|eXtreme to the maX

Trotskygrad wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

Karbin wrote:

The Spit started out as a air racer.
The fore-runner of the Spitfire was an air racer.
The fore runner of the Bf 109 started out as a fast speed air mail craft.
The ME109 started out disguised as a mail aircraft.
One needs speed and turning, the other flat out speed. Head to head both are damn good craft. I'm of the mind that there so close that it's more the pilot then the air frame.
Flat out speed was very important, as was climb rate. If the other aircraft has 100mph and 5,000ft on you you won't see him coming, won't see him passing and won't see him leaving, in the meantime there is nothing you can do.
If he can out climb you you'll never catch him up.
Once into a dogfight it comes down to pilot skill and ability to take g, Spitfire and Messerschmidt could both out-g the pilot.

The Spitfire was always a short-range fighter, and never intended for anything else. Except fast PR unarmed and unarmoured.
yeah, and we were comparing dogfight characteristics. It was designed as an interceptor and it did that role well.
I bet more than half the fighter-fighter kills didn't come from dogfights but from the classic 'bounce' where height, speed and rate of climb are key - which is what the Spitfire did.
Fighter-bomber kills would have almost all have been bounce kills, even the realtively maneuvreable twin engined German bombers.

Pilots of course like to talk about dogfights because they like to have people believe the pilot matters  more than the airframe and engine.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
-Sh1fty-
plundering yee booty
+510|5443|Ventura, California
Where did you get "bounce" from? But I agree with the speed/altitude/climb rate being one of the biggest factors. A common tactic for such powerful planes was hit-n-run.
And above your tomb, the stars will belong to us.
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,810|6075|eXtreme to the maX
"Bounce" has been used in the vocabulary of air combat since.....the beginning of air combat.
Its another word for hit and run, usually from height and out of the sun.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
HITNRUNXX
Member
+220|6679|Oklahoma City

-Sh1fty- wrote:

hit-n-run.
You called?
Cheeky_Ninja06
Member
+52|6702|Cambridge, England

Dilbert_X wrote:

Trotskygrad wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

Karbin wrote:

The Spit started out as a air racer.
The fore-runner of the Spitfire was an air racer.
The fore runner of the Bf 109 started out as a fast speed air mail craft.
The ME109 started out disguised as a mail aircraft.

Flat out speed was very important, as was climb rate. If the other aircraft has 100mph and 5,000ft on you you won't see him coming, won't see him passing and won't see him leaving, in the meantime there is nothing you can do.
If he can out climb you you'll never catch him up.
Once into a dogfight it comes down to pilot skill and ability to take g, Spitfire and Messerschmidt could both out-g the pilot.

The Spitfire was always a short-range fighter, and never intended for anything else. Except fast PR unarmed and unarmoured.
yeah, and we were comparing dogfight characteristics. It was designed as an interceptor and it did that role well.
I bet more than half the fighter-fighter kills didn't come from dogfights but from the classic 'bounce' where height, speed and rate of climb are key - which is what the Spitfire did.
Fighter-bomber kills would have almost all have been bounce kills, even the realtively maneuvreable twin engined German bombers.

Pilots of course like to talk about dogfights because they like to have people believe the pilot matters  more than the airframe and engine.
Not sure how true that is considering the scramble nature of the battle of Britain. Couldn't say about other theaters.
coke
Aye up duck!
+440|6678|England. Stoke

Cheeky_Ninja06 wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

Trotskygrad wrote:


yeah, and we were comparing dogfight characteristics. It was designed as an interceptor and it did that role well.
I bet more than half the fighter-fighter kills didn't come from dogfights but from the classic 'bounce' where height, speed and rate of climb are key - which is what the Spitfire did.
Fighter-bomber kills would have almost all have been bounce kills, even the realtively maneuvreable twin engined German bombers.

Pilots of course like to talk about dogfights because they like to have people believe the pilot matters  more than the airframe and engine.
Not sure how true that is considering the scramble nature of the battle of Britain. Couldn't say about other theaters.
That was where radar came into play, our fighters, would scramble so they could get into position to "ambush" the German aircraft, which obviously meant rate of climb and speed were important.
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,810|6075|eXtreme to the maX
Correct, typically the RAF would scramble, get into an ambush position, knock out what they could then dogfight until the opposition until they ran out of fuel or were shot down.

If you read up on the aircraft specs of the time they invariably covered, speed, rate of climb and armament - nothing related to dogfighting.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
Cheeky_Ninja06
Member
+52|6702|Cambridge, England

Dilbert_X wrote:

Correct, typically the RAF would scramble, get into an ambush position, knock out what they could then dogfight until the opposition until they ran out of fuel or were shot down.

If you read up on the aircraft specs of the time they invariably covered, speed, rate of climb and armament - nothing related to dogfighting.
They are the easiest things to measure though?
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,810|6075|eXtreme to the maX
They were the priorities for the specification - which was about taking down bombers.

If dogfighting had been the priority then acceleration, g capability,  roll rate, retained speed in a turn etc would have been listed.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
PrivateVendetta
I DEMAND XMAS THEME
+704|6161|Roma
Spitfire is sooo cooooool. That's why it won.
https://static.bf2s.com/files/user/29388/stopped%20scrolling%21.png
AussieReaper
( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
+5,761|6122|what

The ME262 owned everything.

Motherfucking Jet, yo.

It was so good in air-to-air combat that the allies decided their best strategy was to attack them on the runway during takeoff and landing.
https://i.imgur.com/maVpUMN.png
Cybargs
Moderated
+2,285|6686

AussieReaper wrote:

The ME262 owned everything.

Motherfucking Jet, yo.

It was so good in air-to-air combat that the allies decided their best strategy was to attack them on the runway during takeoff and landing.
P51 pilots were like wtf its so fast.

Me262 pilots were like TROLOLOOLOLOL 30MM CANNON DOUBLE TAP HERE WE GOOOOOO

And B17s were like fuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu were dying now
https://cache.www.gametracker.com/server_info/203.46.105.23:21300/b_350_20_692108_381007_FFFFFF_000000.png
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,810|6075|eXtreme to the maX

AussieWarMan wrote:

The ME262 owned everything.

Motherfucking Jet, yo.

It was so good in air-to-air combat that the allies decided their best strategy was to attack them on the runway during takeoff and landing.
Luftwaffe had the best uniforms, it gave them a psychological edge.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
1stSFOD-Delta
Mike "The Spooge Gobbler" Morales
+376|5948|Blue Mountain State
10 F-22s vs entire RAF during WWII

Who would win?
https://www.itwirx.com/other/hksignature.jpg

Baba Booey
Cheeky_Ninja06
Member
+52|6702|Cambridge, England

1stSFOD-Delta wrote:

10 F-22s vs entire RAF during WWII

Who would win?
Entire RAF F22s would run out of places to rearm before they could down the entire raf.
FatherTed
xD
+3,936|6470|so randum

PrivateVendetta wrote:

Spitfire is sooo cooooool. That's why it won.
Small hourglass island
Always raining and foggy
Use an umbrella
PrivateVendetta
I DEMAND XMAS THEME
+704|6161|Roma

Cheeky_Ninja06 wrote:

1stSFOD-Delta wrote:

10 F-22s vs entire RAF during WWII

Who would win?
Entire RAF F22s would run out of places to rearm before they could down the entire raf.
I read something about the F22 that they can't get any squadrons to practice against them because they are so far ahead.
Faster, higher, more manoeuvrable. Multiples better.
They tested them 1v3 F15's with the demo fighter and came off better every time. Serious bit of kit.
https://static.bf2s.com/files/user/29388/stopped%20scrolling%21.png
FatherTed
xD
+3,936|6470|so randum
was this before or after they suffocated their pilots?
Small hourglass island
Always raining and foggy
Use an umbrella
PrivateVendetta
I DEMAND XMAS THEME
+704|6161|Roma
during
https://static.bf2s.com/files/user/29388/stopped%20scrolling%21.png
rdx-fx
...
+955|6561

PrivateVendetta wrote:

I read something about the F22 that they can't get any squadrons to practice against them because they are so far ahead.
Faster, higher, more manoeuvrable. Multiples better.

FatherTed wrote:

was this before or after they suffocated their pilots?
I heard the suffocation is a feature.

When a F-22 pilot is having that much fun, a little autoerotic asphyxiation is said to enhance the pleasure.

Not supposed to go all David Carradine about it, but... mach 2 at 50,000 feet.. things can just happen...

1stSFOD-Delta
Mike "The Spooge Gobbler" Morales
+376|5948|Blue Mountain State
That's why you need a spotter.
https://www.itwirx.com/other/hksignature.jpg

Baba Booey
rdx-fx
...
+955|6561

1stSFOD-Delta wrote:

That's why you need a spotter.
A-Whacks?

Is the AWACS considered a spotter?

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2024 Jeff Minard