Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Fighters, Bombers and Recon Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: Best All-Around Fighter of World War II
sentinel28a    10/13/2009 3:38:03 PM
Let's try a non-controversial topic, shall we? (Heh heh.) I'll submit the P-51 for consideration. BW and FS, if you come on here and say that the Rafale was the best fighter of WWII, I am going to fly over to France and personally beat you senseless with Obama's ego. (However, feel free to talk about the D.520.)
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
oldbutnotwise       3/19/2013 5:45:03 PM
he's like a bad tooth, you just cant help prodding it
 
I think its his "cant be wrong" attitude combined with a inability to do any research into his stupid ideas
 
I am becoming to think that he is sat in a provincial library on one of their internet machines with access to only half dozen books and with zero knowledge of how to use Google and Bing, he gets a bit of knowledge and thinks that is the only possible truth
 
it suspect when he posts a link to a site and when you look its obvious that he cannot of read the information on the site, do US libraries charge per web page?
 
 
Quote    Reply

Heorot       3/19/2013 6:03:47 PM
I think it's pretty safe to say, given his appalling spelling, that he is functionally illiterate. He can find the articles and read them but  the meaning cannot penetrate his thick skull. Also, if he could only learn what a spell checker does….
 
Quote    Reply

45-Shooter       3/19/2013 8:41:54 PM


I think it's pretty safe to say, given his appalling spelling, that he is functionally illiterate. He can find the articles and read them but  the meaning cannot penetrate his thick skull. Also, if he could only learn what a spell checker does….

Or, maybe I just give a RRE, (Rats Rear End) about any of it and am just trying to help some of you dencer indavidual people learn some of the finner points about aircraft.

 
Quote    Reply

45-Shooter       3/19/2013 8:44:44 PM


I think it's pretty safe to say, given his appalling spelling, that he is functionally illiterate. He can find the articles and read them but  the meaning cannot penetrate his thick skull. Also, if he could only learn what a spell checker does….

Or, maybe I just give a RRE, (Rats Rear End) about any of it and am just trying to help some of you dencer indavidual people learn some of the finner points about aircraft.

 
Quote    Reply

Maratabc       3/19/2013 9:31:15 PM




Or, maybe I just give a RRE, (Rats Rear End) about any of it and am just trying to help some of you dencer indavidual people learn some of the finner points about aircraft.
We do care. It embarrasses us, when we see such ignorance paraded as knowledge about aircraft.
 
denser
individual
finer
 
Spelling is so simple, so is fact checking. 
 
A person who is careless of the one, might be adduced to be careless of the other.
 
So we understand that a person who claims that he doesn't give a rat's rear end about it, actually means he doesn't care about anything he writes as long as he can claim he is right, even when he is proved wrong by his own words?
 
I have a word for that.
 
That word I reserve for special cases.  It is baudet. 
 
Quote    Reply

oldbutnotwise       3/20/2013 8:56:30 AM

Or, maybe I just give a RRE, (Rats Rear End) about any of it and am just trying to help some of you dencer indavidual people learn some of the finner points about aircraft.
 
only problem with that is you consistantly give the wrong info, anybody following you would actually end up knowing less about aircraft than they did before.
 
a Hint, when you make a factual statement at least check as to whether it is actually factual.
 
 
I once asked you to find ONE person on all the forums you have frequented (and strangely banned from) that agrees with your opinions, just ONE would do (and dont try the "everyone is an idiot but me" line we have heard it and know its not true)
 
and I am still waiting (come to think of it I am still waiting for you to povide evidence for 90% of your claims)
and you wonder why they call you Walter (at least when they are being polite)
 
 
Quote    Reply

45-Shooter       3/20/2013 3:28:16 PM

only problem with that is you consistantly give the wrong info, anybody following you would actually end up knowing less about aircraft than they did before.
Lets start with some of the larger points; Please point out which of these is factualy wrong;
1. The MTO of the B-17G is 68,000 pounds. 2. The B-17's Service Ceiling, Plackard Range and top speed are ~35,600', 2,000 Statute Miles with 6,000 pounds of bombs and 287 MPH.
3. Me-109s shot down more aircraft than any two other types combined.
and you wonder why they call you Walter (at least when they are being polite)
Walternate?

 



 
Quote    Reply

oldbutnotwise       3/20/2013 4:43:43 PM
only problem with that is you consistantly give the wrong info, anybody following you would actually end up knowing less about aircraft than they did before.      
  Lets start with some of the larger points; Please point out which of these is factualy wrong;1. The MTO of the B-17G is 68,000 pounds. 2. The B-17's Service Ceiling, Plackard Range and top speed are ~35,600', 2,000 Statute Miles with 6,000 pounds of bombs and 287 MPH.
3. Me-109s shot down more aircraft than any two other types combined.
 
wow in nearly 80 pages you can come up with 2 facts that you got right, however these were never in dispute it is your interpretation of facts that is always incorrect

and you wonder why they call you Walter (at least when they are being polite)
  Walternate?
 
nope try Walter Mitty as you seem to have a good a grasp of reality has he had
 
a few figures for you
 
Lancaster with minimum bomb load 2500lbs and optional bomb bay tanks range 55000 miles
Lancaster combat speed 220mph (B17 208)
Lancaster maximum bomb load used operationally 22000lbs (B17 9600lbs)
Lancaster max dive speed 360mph  (B17 220mph 270 in late G models)
Lancaster normal bomb load to Berlin 12000lbs (B17 4000lbs on Tokyo tanks 2500 without)
 
 
Quote    Reply

JFKY    Don't get me wrong...   3/21/2013 3:38:16 PM
your pounding of 45-Shooter is more than passing interesting, BUT
 
how did this thread become the Lancaster and the B-17 since it began as a discussion of the "Best All-Around FIGHTER"? 
 
Quote    Reply

45-Shooter       3/21/2013 10:25:27 PM

your pounding of 45-Shooter is more than passing interesting, BUT
how did this thread become the Lancaster and the B-17 since it began as a discussion of the "Best All-Around FIGHTER"? 



I do not know? But My ideas are;
1. The Me-109 shot down more enemy AC in combat that the next three types combined. That makes it the most effective, but then it comes down how do you define "Best"?
2. Pointability is the single most important factor in any planes ability to shoot other planes down.
3. Counter, or Contra rotating props are the single largest positive factor in pointability!
4. CL guns are the single largest factor in determining the effectivness of a planes weapons during the guns combat time line!
5. Given all of the above, I nominate the P-38 as the best fighter plane of WW-II!
 
 
Quote    Reply



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics