WWII Europe Theater Aircraft

[NavyTopGun]

Whats ur favorite wwii aircraft

[Theis]

in what role do you mean?
as fighter: The FW190
as interceptor: BF 109
as attack aircraft: IL-2
as Bomber: Lancaster

so you need to be more presiscly

Cheers Theis

[Felix/FFDS]

Gloster Gladiator, of course!

[SilverFox441]

Lockheed Lightning, of course.

Name the role and a Lightning can do it...no need for those other types at all.

[Felix/FFDS]

Lockheed Lightning, of course.

Name the role and a Lightning can do it...no need for those other types at all.

Fleet Defense fighter - carrier based.

[C]

Gloster Gladiator, of course!

Hurrah! Quite right too!

I notice you've been very general with the Bf109, yet with the Spitfire you've limited us to the Mk XIV.

On balance, the aircraft on the "victorious" side which was in continual production and front line service from 3rd Sept 1939 until the 8th May 1945 was the VS Spitfire...

[SilverFox441]

Fleet Defense fighter - carrier based.

Lockheed proposed a carrier-based "Model 822" version of the Lightning for the US Navy. The Model 822 would have featured folding wings, an arresting hook, and stronger undercarriage for carrier operations. The Navy wasn't interested, as they regarded the Lightning as too big for carrier operations and didn't like liquid-cooled engines anyway, and the Model 822 never went beyond the paper stage. However, the Navy did operate four land-based F-5Bs in North Africa, with these aircraft inherited from the USAAF and redesignated "FO-1".

It was only USN obstinance that prevented the Lightning from filling this role.

[Felix/FFDS]

Lockheed proposed a carrier-based "Model 822" version of the Lightning for the US Navy. The Model 822 would have featured folding wings, an arresting hook, and stronger undercarriage for carrier operations. The Navy wasn't interested, as they regarded the Lightning as too big for carrier operations and didn't like liquid-cooled engines anyway, and the Model 822 never went beyond the paper stage. However, the Navy did operate four land-based F-5Bs in North Africa, with these aircraft inherited from the USAAF and redesignated "FO-1".

It was only USN obstinance that prevented the Lightning from filling this role.

Oh, I didn't forget that.  You also did not mention that the redesign would have included cranked booms, to help in landing deck clearance!

At least carrier landings were tested with a hook-equipped P-51 Mustang.  There, it was considered that the necessary "robustness" that would have had to be added to the Mustang would have diminished it's performance "advantage", as well as the necessity of different spares, etc. for the liquid cooled engines ..

In teh end, the first North American carrier fighter (not airplane, since SNJ versions were already carrier-equipped) was to be the FJ-1 Sabre.

[SilverFox441]

A carrier Lightning would have alleviated the spares problem....

FO-1 Lightning torpedo bombers, recon fighters, level bombers, fighters, night fighters, dive bombers, scouts...

Of course with logical production (Lightnings only) many Merlins would have been available for Lightnings...making the best even better.

[Felix/FFDS]

Next, you'll argue that the DH Vampire/Venom/Vixen was just the P-38 LIghtning concept carried to the (jet) extreme ...

[SilverFox441]

Obviously not...

Though Vampire/Venom/Vixen was a copy of the FW P7 Flitzer...which was an attempt to make a better, jet powered version of the Lightning.

[NavyTopGun]

I notice you've been very general with the Bf109, yet with the Spitfire you've limited us to the Mk XIV.

it didnt put he F/G on it

[Hagar]

Though Vampire/Venom/Vixen was a copy of the FW P7 Flitzer...which was an attempt to make a better, jet powered version of the Lightning.

And here was me thinking the Vampire was basically a jet engined Mosquito. I'll admit they look very similar but the Vampire prototype first flew in September 1943. According to this the Fw "Flitzer" project was started at around the same time & approval for a mock-up was not given until February 1944. http://www.luft46.com/fw/fwflitz.html
It's very doubtful that Allied intelligence would have known anything about it until later in 1944 at the earliest.

PS.

The British Air Ministry was also interested in a simple, lightweight, single-engine jet fighter with an armament of four 20 millimeter cannon, as defined in "Specification E.6/41". A design team at de Havilland, under company chairman Sir Geoffrey de Havilland and featuring Chief Designer R.E. Bishop, came up with the twin-boom "DH.100" design concept based on the "Halford H.1" centrifugal flow engine, a Whittle derivative then being developed by Frank Halford of de Havilland. The Air Ministry liked the idea and placed an order for two prototypes in April 1942, soon increasing the number to three.

Work went slowly for a time, since both de Havilland and the Air Ministry were more focused on other projects, but in November 1942 priority of work on the DH.100 was raised. The project was assigned the codename "Spider Crab". Initial flight of the first prototype was on 20 September 1943, with Geoffrey de Havilland JR, company chief test pilot and son of the founder, at the controls. This machine was powered by a Halford H.1 turbojet with 12.0 kN (1,225 kgp / 2,700 lbf) thrust and was unarmed. The flight was satisfactory, though there were issues, such as oversensitive ailerons and a tendency towards yaw instability. http://www.vectorsite.net/avvamp_1.html#m1

[Felix/FFDS]

Hagar - Just don't tell Silver Fox that the Lightning was Lockheed's attempt to make a long range twin engined Spitfire.    I mean, don't those two booms look like cockpit-less Spitfire fuselages?

[Hagar]

[quote]Hagar - Just don't tell Silver Fox that the Lightning was Lockheed's attempt to make a long range twin engined Spitfire.