ADS NOT DISPLAYED TO REGISTERED USERS.
Page 12 of 69 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 62 ... LastLast
Results 166 to 180 of 1033

Best Fighter

Old Threads Discuss Best Fighter in the Old Stuff forums; because they didn't have the range for combat in europe..................

  1. #166
    Senior Member the lancaster kicks ass's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    19,986
    Country
    United Kingdom
    because they didn't have the range for combat in europe...............


    "Reminds me of the time I sank the Tirpitz" comments a Spitfire pilot, "One pass of course, old boy."

  2. #167
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    WSM, England
    Posts
    20,367
    Country
    United Kingdom
    but late in the war the raf had captured airfields practically on the german border, they could use them from there

  3. #168
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    2,511
    What good is a fighter that lacks the range for combat in the ETO? Where else is it going to fight? Certainly not the Pacific.

  4. #169
    Senior Member the lancaster kicks ass's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    19,986
    Country
    United Kingdom
    but how can a jet fighter fly escort missions, it worked as a interceptor, but they didn't need many in the ETO.......................

    "Reminds me of the time I sank the Tirpitz" comments a Spitfire pilot, "One pass of course, old boy."

  5. #170
    the old Sage Erich's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Platonic Sphere
    Posts
    12,916
    Country
    United States
    why not ? sure it would be short lived. Consider the April 8th ? 1945 day light mission where unarmored Bf 109's attacked B-17's in part of a greater stupid overall scheme to take down as many US a/c by ramming.
    sonderkommando elbe. JG 7 provided some high altitude cover of the Bf 109's but were involved with their own bomber intercept mission and warding of the multitude of P-51's.

    Erich

  6. #171
    Senior Member the lancaster kicks ass's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    19,986
    Country
    United Kingdom
    but they didn't need many in the ETO.......................
    why not
    as i said, it was the range thing, jets couldn't fly escort missions, and so were not that usefull for much other than interceptors.......................

    "Reminds me of the time I sank the Tirpitz" comments a Spitfire pilot, "One pass of course, old boy."

  7. #172
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    WSM, England
    Posts
    20,367
    Country
    United Kingdom
    and if the meteor is stuck back in blighty, it wouldnt have intercepted very many planes at all in that time of the war.

  8. #173
    the old Sage Erich's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Platonic Sphere
    Posts
    12,916
    Country
    United States
    The RAF spits and other RAF a/c were not ordered to fly escort nor long range intruder type missions. They were to clean up and pounce on the northern German air fields and counter any approaching German fighters as well as strafe the northern road systems, trains, trucks, people and anything that moved.

    the US was instructed to cover the bombers first and if no Luftwaffe intrusion was then to drop down and shoot anything up, especially airifields and cargo-trains.

    The Me 262 from where it was located could easily of performed escort missions for JG 300 and 301 which were stationed somewhat close in proximity to Brandenburb-Briest and the Berlin corridor. But JG 7 was never called on to perform this function, rather to attack the US 4 engine bombers and try to avoid contact with P-51 escorts as much as possible. The jet bomber formations that acted in the fighter role performed the same criteria and only when moved to Prague did they encounter missions against Russian a/c and ground support vehicles where they made a real mess of the Soviets. but from their logbooks the proof was the bomber pilots were not experienced in the fighter to fighter roles and upon landing(s) they were shot down without mercy by US Mustangs....

  9. #174
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    2,511
    So the Meteor was only useful as an interceptor? And not the best interceptor the Allies had. How can an aircraft that limited in its utility be argued for being the best jet in the war?

  10. #175
    Senior Member the lancaster kicks ass's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    19,986
    Country
    United Kingdom
    we're defining best jet by ability, not usefullness............

    "Reminds me of the time I sank the Tirpitz" comments a Spitfire pilot, "One pass of course, old boy."

  11. #176
    the old Sage Erich's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Platonic Sphere
    Posts
    12,916
    Country
    United States
    Lanc the Meteor really did not prove itself and was developed way too late to show any improvement to the Allied war effort. heck the jet needed oversizing, more armament, longer range including larger fuel tank(s). Several different a/c in the RAF/US arsenal could tackle the V-1 which was not that fast anyway. having a jet to perform one on one with the Me 262 would have been something but the Allies resorted to keeping the fighter prop driven a/c in the line, besdies having overwhelming numbers why even bring another piece of untried equipment on ?

    two cents for your thinking cap

  12. #177
    Senior Member the lancaster kicks ass's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    19,986
    Country
    United Kingdom
    besdies having overwhelming numbers why even bring another piece of untried equipment on ?
    once again, you're talking about it's combat record, we're talking about it's ability..................

    "Reminds me of the time I sank the Tirpitz" comments a Spitfire pilot, "One pass of course, old boy."

  13. #178
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    2,511
    We've been through all of this Lanc. The 262 was faster, climbed faster, had more range, and more armament than any mark of the Meteor to see service. There is ability. And in case you hadn't noticed, usefullness and ability are usually connected.

  14. #179
    Senior Member the lancaster kicks ass's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    19,986
    Country
    United Kingdom
    not normally, the G0-229 had amazing perormance stats, but didn't see any use..................

    "Reminds me of the time I sank the Tirpitz" comments a Spitfire pilot, "One pass of course, old boy."

  15. #180
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    2,511
    Which is a ridiculous example and I think you know it. If an aircraft had the ability and saw action it would prove its usefulness. Now, either the Meteor saw the action but its usefulness was limited by its ability and the 262 was better or the Meteor didn't see the action which the 262 did and you still have a powerful argument for the 262 being the superior of the two since it was able to have some impact on the war.

Page 12 of 69 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 62 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86