|
10-01-2007, 01:28 PM
| #841 | |
| Senior Member  Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Limburg
Posts: 1,143
 | Quote:
Kris
__________________   | |
|         |
|
10-01-2007, 02:20 PM
| #842 | |
| Senior Member  Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: FL
Posts: 3,262
| Quote:
Soviet P-39 Aces Flying American equipment was a mixed blessing. The airplanes were as good (or better) as any Russian-made, but in the Stalinist era, carried a certain stigma. The leading Airacobra ace, Alexandr Pokryshkin, who finished the war with 59 aerial victories, was once denied a third award of the Hero of the Soviet Union, because that would have glorified foreign manufacturing. | |
|
| |
|
10-01-2007, 02:38 PM
| #843 | |
| Senior Member  Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Dordrecht
Posts: 3,809
| Quote:
__________________  " The knack of flying lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss." | |
|
| |
|
10-01-2007, 03:01 PM
| #844 | |
| Senior Member  Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Jacksonville, NC
Posts: 3,561
| Quote:
__________________ If the Army and the Navy ever look on heaven's scenes, they will find the streets are guarded by United States Marines  | |
|
| |
|
10-02-2007, 04:46 PM
| #845 |
| Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Limburg
Posts: 1,143
| Yeah I got back a couple of days ago. I said I would be back at the forum in the beginning of October ... so here I am.  Anyway, about the matter of the lend-lease equipment, I have my doubts about it. Awarding medals are not an exact science. It doesn't always makes sense why some get them and others don't. I can imagine it's normal to find reasons behind it. Well, I'm not saying it wasn't because of the foreign equipment but I have my doubts about it as I don't hear this stories from the army of which half was equiped with lend-lease equipment. Kris
__________________ |
|
| |
|
10-02-2007, 04:50 PM
| #846 | |
| IP/Mech THE GREAT GAZOO   Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Colorado, USA
Posts: 15,981
| Quote:
__________________ "IF ITS RED OR DUSTY, DON'T TOUCH IT"  | |
|
| |
|
10-03-2007, 02:30 AM
| #847 |
| Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Limburg
Posts: 1,143
| Interesting. It's definitely true that those boys didn't get the attention nor the praise they deserved. Just one of many factors which influence handing out medals or not. Kris
__________________ |
|
| |
|
10-03-2007, 03:14 AM
| #848 |
| Member  Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Sydney
Posts: 35
| I have to stand up for the Boomerang - it might not have shot much down (embarrassingly, I think it was the Wirraway that shot down the Zero), but it doesn't qualify for the list by virtue of its pleasant aesthetics. Arguably quite a pretty plane... Steve
__________________ Steve Heyen - Aviation Artist  |
|
| |
|
10-03-2007, 04:40 PM
| #849 |
| Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Limburg
Posts: 1,143
| As a fighter the Boomerang was no match for the Zero and uncapable of catching most Jap bombers but it must have been a decent attack aircraft with its bombload and cannons. At the time of its design the Australians didn't have an alternative, so better this aircraft than none at all. Kris
__________________ |
|
| |
|
10-08-2007, 03:58 PM
| #850 |
| Member Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 63
| Dont diss the Battle some very brave pilots bombed german targets and harbours at the start of the war knowing what they had to go against but it was all we had at the time.Dont forget we were even still flying the Gladiator and Heyford |
|
| |
|
10-08-2007, 08:12 PM
| #851 |
| Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Limburg
Posts: 1,143
| The thing with these light bombers is that it's not so much that these aircraft were bad, it was the concept with proved to be disastrous. All single-engined light bombers failed during WW2. The Germans were one of the few to realize this before the start of the war when they put the He 45 out of service. On the other hand, if the British had had a Stuka it would probably have faired just as bad as the Battle. Kris
__________________ |
|
| |
|
10-14-2007, 03:16 PM
| #852 |
| Senior Member  Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Plymouth
Posts: 805
| To say a plane is bad in no way takes away from the bravery of its pilots. If anything, it amplifies their courage |
|
| |
|
10-21-2007, 10:09 AM
| #853 |
| Junior Member Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 29
|  RAF Defiant I'd have to say the RAF Defiant-aircraft-not because it couldn't shoot down EA-but because it not only had such a ludericous design-putting 4 MG in a Bomber type turrent on a figther aircraft yet not leaving any MG for the Pilot in the Wings! In fact it would have been better to have placed 2 to 4 MG in the Wings and streamlined the rear canopy os the gunner could fire 1 to 2 MG-but the whole concept of a EA bomber letting itself be blasted at close range by 4 MG from a fighter plane!!  |
|
| |
|
10-22-2007, 01:25 PM
| #854 |
| Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Limburg
Posts: 1,143
| Again, it may not have been a bad aircraft but a bad concept. There would be no need to change the Defiant into a conventional aircraft, you already had the Hurricane and Spitfire for that. I can imagine it looked like a good idea in the late thirties... And it did make a reasonably good nightfighter... Kris
__________________ |
|
| |
|
10-23-2007, 04:39 PM
| #855 |
| Member  Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Palm Beach Gardens, FL
Posts: 48
| Well, I would have to say the Breda Ba. 88 has my vote. Other than as a weight to keep the airfield from spinning off the planet, it seemed to have no useful purpose. Decoy work not withstand, of course. |
|
| |
 |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
| |
Linear Mode
