![]() |
| |||||||
| Aviation Discussion on the aircraft of WWII. |
![]() |
| | LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
| | #616 | |
| Member Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 62
| Quote:
As a sidebar yes i was aware that there had been previous discussion in another thread its just a bit hard to keep track of who said what where now but that was who i was refering to in one of my posts earlier in this thread. I'm still a hamfist when it comes to navigating around this forum as you can see
__________________ " Now they Shall reap the whirlwind " | |
| | |
| | #617 | |
| Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: niagara falls
Posts: 5,586
| Quote:
is a carry over from ww2 propaganda | |
| | |
| | #618 |
| Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Dordrecht
Posts: 3,834
| When it was introduced it outran both the Spitfire and the Bf109. The 2 fighters had to catch up later, which they did.
__________________ ![]() " The knack of flying lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss." |
| | |
| | #619 |
| Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Lazio
Posts: 806
| Afaik i don't think that mosquitoes (1st mission september 1941) outrun the ~contemporary Bf 109F-4 |
| | |
| | #620 |
| Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Dordrecht
Posts: 3,834
| maybe not, but the mosquito wasn't much slower either, so the intercepting Bf109 would have a hard time catching up.
__________________ ![]() " The knack of flying lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss." |
| | |
| | #621 | |
| Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 2,412
| Quote:
The closest thing to my proposal was the XB-28, but while a high performance high altitude bomber, it was still designed with full defensive armament, so it can't be properly compared in terms of bomb load. (iirc 4,000 lbs, the B-25 having a 6,000 lb capacity, though I'll have to go check others than wiki to be sure) But in service ceiling and performance at high altitude, with two turbocharged 2,000 hp engines it had excellent altitude capabilities. | |
| | |
| | #622 |
| Senior Member Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 914
| The thing about the mosquito and its speed wasn't that it was 2mph faster than the equivalent German fighter or whatever. its that if the Mossie is flying 20,000ft above you at near on 400mph, or only slightly less than your own max speed, without having to climb as well, you are not going to make an intercept. When you have spent the last 2 relaxing years shooting down Blenhiems for fun this is going to spoil your day. The plaudits for the Mosquito are well deserved. Even though my own soft spot is for the fabulous, but less spectacular Beaufighter, which is not actually a bomber, I know.
__________________ BlondeValkyrie - Bugger off and host your OWN pictures you thieving twat |
| | |
| | #623 |
| Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 2,412
| So imagine an aircraft cruising at 300+ mph at over 25,000 ft. (with capability to reach nearly 400 mph as well) At granges comparable o a B-17, but with slightly lower payload. Last edited by kool kitty89; 10-30-2008 at 09:02 PM. |
| | |
| | #624 |
| Senior Member Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 914
| Sounds like the Mosquito KK, except for it being slow? (I actually think the best bomber of WW2 was the B-29, technologically and for its last decisive action, but if I was some theoretical bomber jockey flying throughout the war I would have spent it flying Mosquitoes, if I had a choice, and after surviving 1939-40 flying Wellingtons - the best in that period that would allow the move to Mosquitoes.)
__________________ BlondeValkyrie - Bugger off and host your OWN pictures you thieving twat |
| | |
| | #625 |
| Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: niagara falls
Posts: 5,586
| Everything i've read or heard about the Mossie was the actual speed they operated at was about 240-260 , 240 being preferable as it made navigation easier. |
| | |
| | #626 | |
| Member Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 62
| Quote:
An interesting side bar is that one of the NF squadrons had a few A/C " illegally " fitted with NO2 injection which the pilots claimed to have elevated the top speed of the bird up to 710Km/Hr+ in short bursts. This was used to close with the radar cntacts as fas as possible. Whish i could tell more about this so feel free to add if anyone knows more. Finally as a point of pride for the DH 98 it was one of the major requirements placed by the Air ministry on De Haviland is that this new High altiude fast bomber of theirs that they were pitching did in fact outrun fighters just as claimed. Again no references {sorry} But the prototype DH 98 W4050 was in fact given an Air trial where it did outpace a PR Spitfire in front of Air ministry and Senior RAF oficers {Geoffery De Haviland Jnr was if i'm remembering correctly the Pilot } Based mostly on the strength of this demonstration the first order for 50 A/C was placed by the Air Ministry. One more just for luck i dont think the DH 98 had that much of a public profile during the war itself { certyainly it was propodandized } {if thats even a word } After the war however is when i beleive it began to get larger than life due to a couple of interesting events. The one i will mention here is 1952 i think a DH 98 Piloted by H.B. "Mickey" Martin acheived the record for a piston engined A/C on an Atlantic crossing which i beleive still stands today { I would have to check } But you see the point i'm making i'm sure. No not a war winner on its own but then nothing is Always great to Chew over the fat.
__________________ " Now they Shall reap the whirlwind " | |
| | |
| | #627 | |
| Member Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 62
| Quote:
Have vaguely heard of the XB-28 sounds interestin. The germans themselves exsperimented with an A/C which mirrored the DH 98 but i cant remember bugger all about it right now Cheers
__________________ " Now they Shall reap the whirlwind " | |
| | |
| | #628 |
| Member Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 62
| Certainly these speeds would of been prudent for most of the 2TAF oporations as they were navigating from -150ft most of the way. Pathfinder Mossies had a bit more room to play and were conseqently operating at higher speeds. From what i can glean pilots generally Oporated their DH 98's at about 75% capacity more for fuel savings than anything else those merlins get very thirsty once they're opened right up apparently. One of the reasons that drop tanks for these A/C was such a valuable and almost unatainable item in 1943/4.
__________________ " Now they Shall reap the whirlwind " |
| | |
| | #629 |
| Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 2,412
| Here's an article on the XB-28: North American XB-28 Dragon (I'm not sure why it lists a bombload of 4,000 lbs max, but then mentioned 6,000 lbs in the description, perhaps 6,000 lbs was with external load as well?) Note, my earlier comments on the 300 mph cruise and ~400 mph top speed were speculation an an a/c similar to the B-28, but optimized for performance, unarmmed, and reduced crew. (or a turbocharged B-26 with similar configuration) And I'm not totally sure on the B-25's max bombload (it would depend on the model as well) I think the maximum internal capacity was 4,000 lbs (2x 2,000 lb?) Consolidated B-24 Liberator And the B-26B could carry up to 8,000 lbs (4x 2,000 lb) internally, though normally 4,000 lbs was the maximum carried. Martin B-26 Marauder Last edited by kool kitty89; 10-30-2008 at 11:21 PM. |
| | |
| | #630 |
| Member Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 62
| Cheers Kitty would of been an intersting A/C do any pictures exsist of this beastie
__________________ " Now they Shall reap the whirlwind " |
| | |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
| |