Fighter Cover - RAF Style

[ozzy72]

All I expressed was my opinion that Spits look better than P-51s..... that and a small historical fact regarding the P-51 and her engine.
I'll never be swayed from the path of Spits are best.
That said it is nice to hear something positive said about pilots from ones own county. Especially in these days of hi-tech weapons and we're still having blue-on-blues and other terrible accidents. Alas the armchair experts will always have an idyllic view of war. Soldiers know the reality.
Now the Mk. IX was of course......

[dcunning30]

Stangs suck.
Spits suck.
Bomber command sucked.

My point of view.

The DO 335 is my favorite.  However, we don't know how it would have performed in a scrap, but I suspect the Pfeil's best technique would be to use energy tactics, especially since the torque effects with those inline engines affected manuverability.

[ATI_7500]

The D-335 would have practically used the tactics that all Luftwaffe aircraft used: Boom and zoom.

[ozzy72]

A bit like the Corsair really. First time I did an MP session with Kevin I got my bottom kicked in the Corsair! I was trying to fly Spit tactics and that wouldn't work in the Corsair... live 'n learn

[dcunning30]

A bit like the Corsair really. First time I did an MP session with Kevin I got my bottom kicked in the Corsair! I was trying to fly Spit tactics and that wouldn't work in the Corsair... live 'n learn

Most American WWII fighters tend to not be dogfighters.

[ozzy72]

For sheer engine the Jug is the one to beat! That thing is a monster

[dcunning30]

For sheer engine the Jug is the one to beat! That thing is a monster

It's so huge, when a Jug pilot needed to escape, he just pushed the stick forward and rarely can the Luftwaffe pilot keep up.

[ATI_7500]

It's so huge, when a Jug pilot needed to escape, he just pushed the stick forward and rarely can the Luftwaffe pilot keep up.

To a certain extent, a 190 could.

[C]

Surely you wouldn't have us to believe the H2S technology used in 1982 was essentially the same technology and accuracy as that used in 1944-45.

Fair enough - they'd got to the Mk9 by 1982, as opposed to the Mk3 in 1945... :-)

I never said they didn't have technological solutions, but I did say the technology wasn't there in the 1940's to achieve precise nighttime bombing.  It helped, but it wasn't anything resembling precision.

Depends on the term precision - 120m average from the equipped aircraft/master bomber, at night from high level was pretty good for 1940s standard.

There were no limited daylight raids by smaller forces in 1944-45.

The RAF certainly did, often with just one or two Sqns at a time. Particularly of note during the Battle of the Bulge. One pilot at least was awarded the Victoria Cross whilst leading one (using Oboe) over Cologne:

"On 24 December 1944 the Pathfinder Force (27 Lancasters & 3 Mosquitos) attacked the Cologne-Gremberg railway yards (by daylight). With no sign of the forecast cloud bombing orders had been changed en route: instead of bombing on OBOE leaders, each aircraft was to bomb visually. This was because OBOE bombing accuracy depended on the pilot holding a straight and level course on the final approach, and in clear weather the Cologne guns were notoriously effective. Unfortunately the first OBOE leader, Squadron Leader R. A. M. Palmer of No 109 Squadron but on loan to No 582, failed to receive the message in the air. As he approached the target on his straight and level course, flak hit his aircraft in several places and set two engines on fire. Believing that he was setting the bomb pattern for others to follow he still pressed on, despite also coming under attack from fighters. He scored direct hits on the target, then spiralled down in flames.

Statistically, Palmer was a dead man long before he perished: he was on his 110th operation*. The citation for his posthumous Victoria Cross referred with justice to "his record of prolonged and heroic endeavour".

*(More than 3 "tours of duty")

Did the RAF bombers have gunners?  LeMay removed defensive armament and their gunners.

Taking a Lancaster as an example, normally two from a crew of seven; the tail gunner and the mid upper gunner. The bomb aimer normally manned the front turret (unless he was aiming). The "special" Lancasters lost the mid upper turret first (Dambusters and Tallboy - although for these the mid upper gunner moved permanently to the front turret), and then for the Grand Slam (22,000lb), the nose turret as well.

so there is NO record that the B17 was considered for such a modification and that couldn't be done

I think the point is that the RAF bomb bays were designed from the outset to carry varied loads - whether by luck or judgement. I'm not saying the B-17 couldn't be modified, just loking at it from an engineering point of view, looking at the layout, dimensions and location of the bomb bay (and the ball turret and radio compartment), it's hard to see how it could be done without some serious redesign. :-)

It was Spaatz.  I've read that there was much debate prior to the final decision, with much consideration to what the British was doing.  However, when the decision was made, it was made and all debate ended.  And history tells us it was a success.

I wonder if that had anything to do with Spaatz's sourjourn in North Africa for a while? ;-)

Most American WWII fighters tend to not be dogfighters.

Can't beat a radial engined fighter from the US, particularly a) if it's made by Grumman, or b) if you're on a carrier. Shame the Sea Fury was a little too late. :-)

[Bird-Nerd]

Don't remember who said it but I read it in a book somewhere.
"Ha! I told you the 47' could outdive a messerschmitt!"
"Good cause' it sure as hell can't climb."

[C]

Don't remember who said it but I read it in a book somewhere.
"Ha! I told you the 47' could outdive a messerschmitt!"
"Good cause' it sure as hell can't climb."

P-47 = Lead (as in Pb) aeroplane
Bf109 = Feather in comparison!

[H]

Stangs suck.
Spits suck.
Bomber command sucked.
My point of view.

You're not viewing too well, especially from your vantage point -- they blew away...

8-)