Türk porno yayini yapan http://www.smfairview.com ve http://www.idoproxy.com adli siteler rokettube videolarini da HD kalitede yayinlayacagini acikladi. Ayrica porno indir ozelligiyle de http://www.mysticinca.com adli porno sitesi devreye girdi.
Page 11 of 11 FirstFirst ... 234567891011
Results 151 to 162 of 162

Thread: P-38 Lightning

  1. #151
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Victoria, Australia.
    Posts
    353

    Default Re: P-38 Lightning

    Ndf, if you read the comprehensive thread on the 'aircraft of ww2 forum' link I listed..
    .. you will see the lame ETO P-38 figures..

    German fighters were faster in dive/Vne than the P-38 [unlike most Japanese fighters],
    putting it at a significant tactical disadvantage.. & noted by the 8th AF..

    No modern fighter has canopy frames running horizontally at eye-level like the P-38..

    & I note that you posted a pic of the long [2 seater] canopy F-15 that has a slim vertical reinforcement loop..

    The most produced USAAF fighter [& primary ETO fighter, 'til the P-51 took over] was the P-47,

    which DID receive the improvements that the P-38K didn't..

    The development of the P-38 was not proceeded with, since with the P-82, a quantum improvement was
    available to the USAAF for any role advantage the P-38 might still have had over the P-51..

    The P-38 was quickly dropped from service post-war as a result..

    The P-82 was prepared to intercept any Russian nuke capable air-space intruders in the late `40s-early `50s..

    Look up RAF 2nd TAF, from Normandy to VE day, their Spitfires,Typhoons, Tempests & Mustangs were based on continental Europe & fought the air war- hard - right into Germany.. check Canadian Spitfire pilot Richard 'D1ck' Audet for example..ace in a single sortie..
    Last edited by J.A.W.; 05-23-2013 at 07:36 PM.

  2. #152
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Victoria, Australia.
    Posts
    353

    Default Re: P-38 Lightning

    Here's another useful primary reference..

    http://www.usaaf.net/digest/t82.htm

  3. #153
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Buffalo, New York
    Posts
    7,414

    Default Re: P-38 Lightning

    Quote Originally Posted by J.A.W. View Post
    Ndf, if you read the comprehensive thread on the 'aircraft of ww2 forum' link I listed..
    .. you will see the lame ETO P-38 figures..

    German fighters were faster in dive/Vne than the P-38 [unlike most Japanese fighters],
    putting it at a significant tactical disadvantage.. & noted by the 8th AF..
    The German fighters, especially the FW190 didn't have the high level performance of the P-38L, putting it at a "tactical disadvantage."

    And why don't you go post at that forum then, or is that one of the other ones you're apparently banned from?

    No modern fighter has canopy frames running horizontally at eye-level like the P-38..
    Oh Christ, you have no idea what you are talking about...

    & I note that you posted a pic of the long [2 seater] canopy F-15 that has a slim vertical reinforcement loop..
    Which is still a frame rail...

    The most produced USAAF fighter [& primary ETO fighter, 'til the P-51 took over] was the P-47,

    which DID receive the improvements that the P-38K didn't..
    What are you talking about? The P-38 received at least as many "improvements" from the original prototype to the P-38L...

    The development of the P-38 was not proceeded with, since with the P-82, a quantum improvement was
    available to the USAAF for any role advantage the P-38 might still have had over the P-51..
    I'm still trying to figure out what the P-82 has to to with the P-38. I'm pretty sure you are too...

    The P-38 was quickly dropped from service post-war as a result..
    It served until 1949, about the same service length after the war of the P-47, and the 51/82 only made it to the end of Korea. Again, so what? P-38's were used in third world air forces until the 1960's as were P-51's. But they had these things called "jets" that sort of took over fighter roles.

    And it's been stated more than once that the USAF should have kept the twin-engined P-38L in service for tactical air support as it bad better survivability than the P-51D, which often fell victim to its cooling system being hit by AAA...

    The P-82 was prepared to intercept any Russian nuke capable air-space intruders in the late `40s-early `50s..
    Right, which the P-51D/H nor the P-47 could do. But in your idiotic pedantic arguments, you fail to mention that among other things you fail at...

    Look up RAF 2nd TAF, from Normandy to VE day, their Spitfires,Typhoons, Tempests & Mustangs were based on continental Europe & fought the air war- hard - right into Germany.. check Canadian Spitfire pilot Richard 'D1ck' Audet for example..ace in a single sortie..
    Who gives a shit? Does that mean that P-38 pilots sat back and drank margaritas?

  4. #154
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Buffalo, New York
    Posts
    7,414

    Default Re: P-38 Lightning

    Quote Originally Posted by J.A.W. View Post
    Here's another useful primary reference..

    http://www.usaaf.net/digest/t82.htm

    Did you bother to read this one?

  5. #155
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Victoria, Australia.
    Posts
    353

    Default Re: P-38 Lightning

    Oh my.. as George Takei would say.. now there's some ah, intemperance..

    Ok then.. "who gives a shit" well, you Ndf.. stated that Spitfires weren't in range.. & they were..


    "Idiotic" hmmm.. now, if I noted you as being obtuse to the point of idiocy, that would be fair.. since

    you consistently miss the point that the USAAF in `44 had the P-82 specs on the table, the P-51 results

    on the scoreboard & could bloody well see that the over-priced P-38 was past its best-by-date..

    Open your eyes Ndf , & look at a P-38 canopy, there are FRAMES right across the pilot's lateral eyeline..

    Try your abusive profanity act on another forum yourself Ndf.. & see if you get banned, unless its a bullshit

    hypocrite forum like WW2 Aircraft & you are a so called Moderator there too..

    Another cheap shot, or bullshit censoring coming now.. for calling you out on home truths.. I suppose?..
    Last edited by Nickdfresh; 05-31-2013 at 06:21 AM.

  6. #156
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Buffalo, New York
    Posts
    7,414

    Default Re: P-38 Lightning

    Oh my.. as George Takei would say.. now there's some ah, intemperance..

    Ok then.. "who gives a shit" well, you Ndf.. stated that Spitfires weren't in range.. & they were..
    Not until the much later models, dolt! If they were in range. Why didn't the RAF use them as escorts? Or the USAAF? The US also chose the P-38 over the Spitfire. So, you must think the Spit is a poor plane then by you constant pedantic, solipsistic reasoning...

    "Idiotic" hmmm.. now, if I noted you as being obtuse to the point of idiocy, that would be fair.. since
    Yeah, arguing the minute is pretty idiotic...

    you consistently miss the point that the USAAF in `44 had the P-82 specs on the table, the P-51 results
    You're right, because the point is completely stupid and irrelevant....

    on the scoreboard & could bloody well see that the over-priced P-38 was past its best-by-date..
    Of course it was expensive, and unnecessary. That didn't mean it was a "bad" aircraft...

    Open your eyes Ndf , & look at a P-38 canopy, there are FRAMES right across the pilot's lateral eyeline..

    None of the one piece blown bubble canopies then or now have that feature..
    Oh please! How would you know? Of the issues with the 38, visibility was never one. And so?

    Try your abusive profanity act on another forum yourself Ndf.. & see if you get banned, unless its a bullshit

    hypocrite forum like WW2 Aircraft & you are a so called Moderator there too..

    Another cheap shot, or bullshit censoring coming now.. for calling you out on home truths.. I suppose?..
    You're very "special." Aren't you?

  7. #157
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Victoria, Australia.
    Posts
    353

    Default Re: P-38 Lightning

    Well, the Spitfire makes an interesting point of comparison, since like the P-38 & 109, it was a `30s design
    updated & adapted for exigencies of war..

    Spitfires did fly over Berlin..& were also flown there by USAAF pilots.. unarmed on PRU missions..

    There is an interesting documentary about this, available on youtube & the US veteran clearly states the reasoning
    for the preference in utilizing the Spitfire over the F-5 Lightning in the role..

    The British bombed Berlin at night, & had no requirement for Spitfires to accompany them..

    The USAAF were only able to hack it over Germany - when the P-51 was available, in numbers..

    The ETO airwar was much tougher & more costly in terms of American aircrew lives, than the PTO..

    I give credit to the 8th AF leadership for being adaptable & progressive in ensuring that the most

    effective machines were pushed forward..& the results proved they'd got it right..

    & Thanks, Ndf.. for making me feel special.. in rebooting me..

  8. #158
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Victoria, Australia.
    Posts
    353

    Default Re: P-38 Lightning

    For interesting US pilot's viewpoint of flying Spitfires over Berlin in preference to Lightnings..[in PRU role].

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ie3SrjLlcUY
    Last edited by J.A.W.; 05-31-2013 at 10:17 PM.

  9. #159
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Victoria, Australia.
    Posts
    353

    Default Re: P-38 Lightning

    Diving speed limitations [Vne] in mph IAS @ 10,000ft..

    P-38L.......420 mph
    Fw 190.....466 mph
    Spitfire IX.470 mph
    MeteorIII..500 mph
    P-47D.......500 mph
    P-51D.......505 mph
    Typhoon....520 mph
    Tempest....540 mph

  10. #160
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    San Antonio, Texas
    Posts
    604

    Default Re: P-38 Lightning

    Hands down, this may be the most exhausting thread I have read on here. Is it over yet?

  11. #161
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Up in the land of the Yoopers.
    Posts
    4,313

    Default Re: P-38 Lightning

    One can only hope...

  12. #162
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Buffalo, New York
    Posts
    7,414

    Default Re: P-38 Lightning

    Well, since you guys commented in it, I guess it's not over...

Page 11 of 11 FirstFirst ... 234567891011

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Bookmarks

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
  •