B-17 Vs Me262

Gnomey · 08-08-2006, 03:56 PM

Yeah I would like to see it too. I watched that clip again and the so called fighter flys straight into the B-17 and it then explodes (it also looks like a rocket/AA missile). I don't see how you can say it was taken down by cannon...

Sputnik34 · 08-08-2006, 04:31 PM

I think "OOST VLAANDEREN" boy wishes to death that it was a -262 that did this. You need to get f-ing real with yourself man. The plane doesn't even have any turrets. Also identifying the plane as "B-17 N" doesn't make you look like that much of an expert. Sheesh.....

Erich · 08-08-2006, 04:41 PM

a problem you have overlooked, had this been an Me 262A-1a attack by JG 7 the jet would of overshot the target, remember that the Mk 108 armed unit with 4 3cm weapons would of had 3-4 seconds of firing time maximum and not even that with the range presented in the video, the jet closing too rapidly to stay around that long to watch the wing blow off, cartwheel, the jet and pilot would of passed the B-17 in much too quick a time

sorry you lose ............

an expert no, knowing JG 7 jet veterans..............YES !

E ~

Erich · 08-08-2006, 04:44 PM

another interesting point if it would of been true, R4M's if fired at this B-17 would of struck in several places at much a greater distance, still the jet pilot would of banked out of the way of the explosion and debris counting on his Kameraden to confirm his kill while he went after another B-17 in the formation

you have been greatly deceived !

E ~

lesofprimus · 08-08-2006, 06:39 PM

If u go frame by frame like I just did, u can clearly see the missle come in from the left hand side of the screen, right below the wing....

Another hoax busted by the "Experts"....

Erich · 08-08-2006, 06:47 PM

un-manned drone or practice post war experiment it sounds. Agreed Les Idid the same and the killing blow comes from the left hand side. Me 262 attacks were all from the rear quarter and slightly below to take out the rear gunner first and then the inboard engine(s). that was the standard rule of attack in 45.

FLYBOYJ · 08-08-2006, 08:57 PM

STOOMLOK, quit while you're ahead unless you wish to be known as #17.

syscom3 · 08-09-2006, 12:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FLYBOYJ

STOOMLOK, quit while you're ahead unless you wish to be known as #17.

Dont you mean "-17N"?

lesofprimus · 08-09-2006, 12:21 AM

STOOMLOK · 08-09-2006, 04:00 AM

http://hexjumper.be/bafke/b17_1.bmp

http://hexjumper.be/bafke/b17_2.bmp

http://hexjumper.be/bafke/b17_3.bmp

http://hexjumper.be/bafke/b17_4.bmp

ORIGINAL CREDIBLE SOURCE of this footage: the B.B.C.
(25 Frames/S)

POSTED FILE crunched lousy quality (15 Frames/S !!!)

|-anyway thanx for the many insults & attacks to me-|

FLYBOYJ · 08-09-2006, 05:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by STOOMLOK

http://hexjumper.be/bafke/b17_1.bmp

http://hexjumper.be/bafke/b17_2.bmp

http://hexjumper.be/bafke/b17_3.bmp

http://hexjumper.be/bafke/b17_4.bmp

ORIGINAL CREDIBLE SOURCE of this footage: the B.B.C.
(25 Frames/S)

POSTED FILE crunched lousy quality (15 Frames/S !!!)

Once again you're grasping at straws. You're seeing debris from the aircraft and distorted fragment fly off the aircraft after the missile strike. Turrets ARE NOT visible in the first frames which shows the aircraft IS a drone. Additionally its been pointed out that no ETO B-17 carried "N" as a tail codex.

Here's something else for you...

"The designation QB-17L was assigned to surplus B-17Gs that were modified during the postwar years for use as radio-controlled drones for various tests, usually as targets for missiles. They were sometimes equipped with television cameras to provide a target's view of the approaching missile. They were usually painted in red-orange Day-Glo paint with black diagonal stripes for increased visibility. Their serial numbers were prefixed by an O, indicative of their obsolete status. Sources for QB-17 conversions were new B-17s that had went directly to storage upon delivery from the factory, B-17s that had been retired from other duties, and DB-17 drone directors that were now surplus to requirements.

Most of the QB-17Ls met their end as flying targets for the early Nike Ajax surface-to-air missile or for the Hughes Falcon air-to-air missile. Often, the QB-17L would be the subject of intentional near misses to preserve the drone for as many missions as possible. Other QB-17Ls were used for various unmanned but destructive tests such as the ditching tests carried out by NACA in San Francisco Bay. The last DB-17/QB-17 mission was flown on August 6, 1959, with 44-83727 being blown out of the sky by a Falcon missile fired by a F-101 Voodoo. The last QB-17L was destroyed by an IM-99 Bomarc missile in 1960."

Quote:

Originally Posted by STOOMLOK

|-anyway thanx for the many insults & attacks to me-|

As a reminder numbnuts, your first comments...

Quote:

Originally Posted by STOOMLOK

how stupied must one be to not see the enormous dimensions if that passing
fighterplane had be a rocket ?!? come on

If you want to continue here you better change your attitude. It is being shown that not only don't you know what you're talking about, but you're also a rude pinhead. You're the one who first started with the insults.

lesofprimus · 08-09-2006, 06:30 AM

Notice how he didnt take a pic of the missle coming in???? U can actually see the fins on it, as well as the smoke trail...

Freakin clueless knowitalls...

RedChico · 08-09-2006, 06:44 AM

Hi guys, 1st post.

Check this

Russian Air To Air Missiles

looks more like a test of a russian missile??

USA Code : AA-1/3/5/6 or 7, probably those.

FLYBOYJ · 08-09-2006, 08:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RedChico

Hi guys, 1st post.

Check this

Russian Air To Air Missiles

looks more like a test of a russian missile??

USA Code : AA-1/3/5/6 or 7, probably those.

I doubt its Russian - more than likely its an early Falcon or Sidewinder missle test.

Nonskimmer · 08-09-2006, 11:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by STOOMLOK

|-anyway thanx for the many insults & attacks to me-|

Around here you get what you give bud, sometimes worse. Ya don't like being called a numb nuts, then reel in yer tits and show folks a little civility. Especially since you're new around here.

Anyway, it sure looks like a missile test to me too. Just slow down the frames a bit like these guys did, you'll see it. I sure didn't see anything there that remotely resembled an Me-262 attack. About the only thing WWII-sh about it was the graininess of the clip and the fact that it was a B-17.