 |
01-25-2008, 02:32 PM
|
#1 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Indiana
Posts: 142
Country: | ETO Fighters 1939-1942 Part 2 -Which would you fly? This is something of a follow-up to DerAdler's poll on the Best ETO Fighters 1939-1942. This time it's a choice of the lesser known aircrafts, of countries other than the US-UK-GER. These aircraft did not have the advantage of further modifications and upgrades as the more famous fighters we have all become familiar with.
I included only aircraft which saw frontline service, from the following countries: France, Poland, Holland, Russia, Yugoslavia, Romania, and Italy.
__________________ You'll live. Only the best get killed. - Charles de Gaulle
England is a former colony gone horribly wrong. - Georges Clemenceau
Last edited by Arsenal VG-33 : 01-25-2008 at 02:44 PM.
|
| |
01-25-2008, 02:36 PM
|
#2 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Dordrecht
Posts: 1,523
Country: | Better add a poll then
__________________ 
"I'm no hero. Soldiers on the ground, they are heroes. In an aircraft you can always evade the bullets."
-Jan Linzel, Dutch fighter pilot |
| |
01-25-2008, 02:41 PM
|
#3 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Indiana
Posts: 142
Country: | Quote:
Originally Posted by Marcel Better add a poll then |
I have it now. My first time at this, took me a minute to realize the answers I needed were in the FAQ section!
I chose the Caudron C. 714, only because I like crappy, half-wood and half metal "desperation weapons" that could give anyone a challenge.
__________________ You'll live. Only the best get killed. - Charles de Gaulle
England is a former colony gone horribly wrong. - Georges Clemenceau
Last edited by Arsenal VG-33 : 01-25-2008 at 02:48 PM.
|
| |
01-25-2008, 02:50 PM
|
#4 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Dordrecht
Posts: 1,523
Country: | Very good. I voted Fokker G.I, partly because I'm quite biased towards this machine  . I still think it was a very promising machine. Very versatile, manouvrable, heavy weapons for the time, one of the first multirole airplanes. Fokker has considered fitting it with RR merlins which would have given the dutch a mossie-like plane already in 1940. Unfortunately because of great misjuging from the dutch government, it could never develope it great potential.
__________________ 
"I'm no hero. Soldiers on the ground, they are heroes. In an aircraft you can always evade the bullets."
-Jan Linzel, Dutch fighter pilot |
| |
01-25-2008, 04:32 PM
|
#5 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: logan ohio
Posts: 219
Country: | the d-520 was a good lookin plane and could hold its own, but the french miltary only let it operate too protect its aircraft industry i wonder what the hell they were thinking would it have been better used over the sedan crossing chaseing down stukas or me 109s but a plane is only as good as the pilots> never forget this< |
| |
01-25-2008, 04:57 PM
|
#6 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 3,682
| My favor tends to be with the Italian planes, I really admire Reggiane 2000 series, esp. the 2005, the Ferrari of the fighter world in WW2 
__________________ We have built a total of about 1250 of this aircraft (Me-262), but only fifty were allowed to be used as fighters - as interceptors. And out of this fifty, there were never more than 25 operational. So we had only a very, very few.
- Adolf Galland |
| |
01-25-2008, 10:36 PM
|
#7 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: South Jersey, United States
Posts: 4,626
Country: | I chose the D 520. The Russian and Italian a/c have a good history but I thought the 520 presented itself well early in the war. The G1 was to have promise but don't know if it got a chance to tangle with the Luftwaffe.
__________________ 
"If you can read this, thank a teacher. If it's English, thank a soldier!" |
| |
01-26-2008, 02:37 AM
|
#8 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Bucharest
Posts: 771
Country: | I have to go with the IAR 80 for the simple fact that was made by my country in the time when we could still produce a plane that would be a challenge in the hands of a good pilot...
__________________ These airplanes we have today are no more than a perfection of a child's toy made of paper."Henri Coanda" |
| |
01-26-2008, 05:06 AM
|
#9 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Great Southern Land
Posts: 419
Country: | I am going for the Macchi 202. It's a beautiful and deadly aeroplane, that could give the Spitfire a run for its money
__________________
"Courage is doing what you are afraid to do. There can be no courage unless you are scared." - Eddie Rickenbacker |
| |
01-26-2008, 11:09 AM
|
#10 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Poland
Posts: 4,820
Country: | Although I like PZL P-24 and as Greek Air Force history shows it could meet Italian planes my vote goes to D-520.
__________________ |
| |
01-26-2008, 12:41 PM
|
#11 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Cyprus
Posts: 303
| I'm Greek so I would have voted for the Pzl.
But since this is about which is the best aircraft, my obvious choice is the
MC 202 Folgore.
__________________ 
And now for something completely different... |
| |
01-28-2008, 01:03 AM
|
#12 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Nelspruit, Mpumalanga
Posts: 160
Country: | I go for the LaGG-3!!
The main reason, it would be replaced by the brillaint LaGG-5!!
General characteristics
Crew: One
Length: 8.81 m (28 ft 11 in)
Wingspan: 9.80 m (32 ft 1.75 in)
Height: 2.54 m (8 ft 4 in)
Wing area: 17.4 m² (188 ft²)
Empty weight: 2,205 kg (4,851 lb)
Loaded weight: 2,620 kg (5,764 lb)
Max takeoff weight: 3,190 kg (7,018 lb)
Powerplant: 1× Klimov M-105PF liquid-cooled V-12, 924 kW (1,260 hp)
Performance
Maximum speed: 575 km/h (357 mph)
Range: 1000 km (621 mi)
Service ceiling 9,700 m (31,825 ft)
Rate of climb: 14.9 m/s (2,926 ft/min)
Wing loading: 150 kg/m² (31 lb/ft²)
Power/mass: 350 W/kg (0.21 hp/lb)
Armament
2× 12.7 mm (0.50 in) Berezin BS machine guns
1× 20 mm ShVAK cannon
6× RS-82 or RS-132 rockets up a total of 200kg (441 lb) |
| |
01-28-2008, 06:19 PM
|
#13 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: British Columbia, Canada
Posts: 191
Country: | Good on ya Eddie! Glad to see somebody chose the LaGG3.
I don't think this plane gets enough attention. Though it was not universally liked by pilots, and was too heavy for the Klimov M-105 engine, it did it's job, much like the P40 did.
My choice would be the Yak-1. Same engine as the LaGG3, but a lighter more agile plane. In the paraphrased words of the Soviet pilots who flew it, "It was almost as good as a Messerschmitt." Since the Me109 was, and still is, widely regarded as the best fighter of WWII, the Yak-1 being 'almost as good', is pretty high praise, IMO. |
| |
01-29-2008, 10:51 AM
|
#14 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: London
Posts: 2,606
| I went for the IAR 80. It had a good performance and was pretty agile and in its last version was quite well armed.
Its a good reminder that the smaller countries around the world were capable of building capable aircraft, a point often overlooked. |
| |
02-01-2008, 03:47 AM
|
#15 | | Junior Member
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 2
Country: | I also voted for IAR 80.I like its prerformence when I tried it in IL-2,and it looks good to. |
| | | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | | | | | Display Modes | Linear Mode |
Posting Rules
| You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts HTML code is Off | | | All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:28 AM. |  | |