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
45-Shooter       7/16/2013 8:07:40 PM

 
2. More speed is better than less.
true, but what happens when you havent that speed and cannot turn?
Again, we agree completely!
 
4. Longer effective weapons range is better than less effective weapons range.
I figure that four items is enough for now. If you disagree, then please list your dispute with any of the above for further discussion
by the way did you even bother to read the section prior to the one you quote, the one that showns how to defeat an energy fighter by a turner? I thought not
Absolutely and I quoted it too. The entire point is that there is no pat hand, for every maneuver there is a counter that works every time and that for every "dog" there are tactics that work against every thoroughbred, but the four items above give the plane that has those attributes and advantage over any plane with less of them. SET can be traded for turn rate, but turn rate can not be traded for SET. Energy can be traded for turn rate, but not vice verse!


 
Quote    Reply

45-Shooter    Prior post failed to post the entire reply.   7/16/2013 8:22:37 PM

In general conclusion of what is or is not in the "Common knowledge" I make the following statements based on my interpretation of what Shaw states in that book;
1. More energy is better than less.
but what happens when you havent the energy advantage and cannot turn?
The same thing that happens to ALL other planes when they are low, slow and out of options! What happens when the low wing loaded plane is out of energy because he sheds it faster than the high wing loaded plane? 
 
2. More speed is better than less.
true, but what happens when you havent that speed and cannot turn?
See above! When you are out of speed you are out of options to do anything but punch out! 
 
3. Lower wing loading is better than less.
this makes no sense
You are correct! It should read; " Lower wing loading is better than higher wing loading!" 
 
4. Longer effective weapons range is better than less effective weapons range.
again a gernalisation that skips over reality hitting power in an effective usable band if far more important than range, it doesnt matter if you can fire 3 miles if you cant hit anything over 300 yards
No, you are wrong on this! "Effective range means that I have more hitting power at longer range thus generating longer "Effective" Range! If you can not hit anything at over 300 yards, then you are dead meat if I can hit with effective weapons at three miles! Longer range is better than shorter range.

I figure that four items is enough for now. If you disagree, then please list your dispute with any of the above for further discussion

you make generalisations that mean nothing and think your self clever
See the yellow high light in the first sentences above. But they do mean something! Do you think a higher performance plane will not have an advantage over one with less performance? That is not my idea of a clever reply. Those ideas do matter.
 
by the way did you even bother to read the section prior to the one you quote, the one that showns how to defeat an energy fighter by a turner? I thought not
Absolutely, but since the energy fighter has two choices and the turner only has one, which plane would you rather fight from? 



 
Quote    Reply

oldbutnotwise       7/17/2013 8:43:06 AM
In general conclusion of what is or is not in the "Common knowledge" I make the following statements based on my interpretation of what Shaw states in that book;
1. More energy is better than less.
but what happens when you havent the energy advantage and cannot turn?
The same thing that happens to ALL other planes when they are low, slow and out of options! What happens when the low wing loaded plane is out of energy because he sheds it faster than the high wing loaded plane?
 
sorry but Shaw clearly states that you cannot afford to shed energy in a HighT/A against a low wing loaded and you drop into his advantage, he also makes the point that you need significant speed advantage not jus a slight one you are claiming
 
 
2. More speed is better than less.
true, but what happens when you havent that speed and cannot turn?
See above! When you are out of speed you are out of options to do anything but punch out! 
eg you lose, not good if you cannot dictate the situation
 
 
3. Lower wing loading is better than less.
this makes no sense
You are correct! It should read; " Lower wing loading is better than higher wing loading!" 
no, again you make  assumptions, low wing loading is gernearlly better as long as the compromise isnt to great, in two fighters of equal performace then low is better than high, but if you trade too much speed for that then it becomes bad, else we would still be flying biplanes, it is worthy of note that modern fighters are designed with lifting bodies to get the best of both
 
4. Longer effective weapons range is better than less effective weapons range.
again a gernalisation that skips over reality hitting power in an effective usable band if far more important than range, it doesnt matter if you can fire 3 miles if you cant hit anything over 300 yards
No, you are wrong on this! "Effective range means that I have more hitting power at longer range thus generating longer "Effective" Range! If you can not hit anything at over 300 yards, then you are dead meat if I can hit with effective weapons at three miles! Longer range is better than shorter range.
 
your Gun might hit something at three miles but you in a fighter in the real world could only do it by complete fluke, and it would probably take a ton of ammo to even get close, this is were the theory fails in the real world
 
I figure that four items is enough for now. If you disagree, then please list your dispute with any of the above for further discussion
 
your problem is you dont want disscussion you everyone to bow down and worship your genius

you make generalisations that mean nothing and think your self clever
See the yellow high light in the first sentences above. But they do mean something! Do you think a higher performance plane will not have an advantage over one with less performance? That is not my idea of a clever reply. Those ideas do matter.

by the way did you even bother to read the section prior to the one you quote, the one that showns how to defeat an energy fighter by a turner? I thought not
Absolutely, but since the energy fighter has two choices and the turner only has one, which plane would you rather fight from? 
 
Quote    Reply

45-Shooter       7/17/2013 7:43:37 PM

 
I figure that four items is enough for now. If you disagree, then please list your dispute with any of the above for further discussion
 
your problem is you dont want disscussion you everyone to bow down and worship your genius
No, I do want to have a conversation. It is you who are obstructionist.

See the yellow high light in the first sentences above. But they do mean something! Do you think a higher performance plane will not have an advantage over one with less performance? That is not my idea of a clever reply. Those ideas do matter.

by the way did you even bother to read the section prior to the one you quote, the one that showns how to defeat an energy fighter by a turner? I thought not
Absolutely, but since the energy fighter has two choices and the turner only has one, which plane would you rather fight from? 
Remember that an "Energy Fighter" has options that a turn and burn fighter does not! The Scooter is perhaps the ultimate turn and burn fighter, yet no-one in their right mind would go to war in it as a primary fighter plane Vs a plane like the Starfighter!

 
Quote    Reply

45-Shooter    Best pic so far of Me-109 cowl guns!   7/18/2013 12:19:32 AM
See this image! If you look close, you can clearly see how much room there is between the cowl and the engine and the engine bearers/mounts! There are clearly two 13 MM guns in this particular model of late G or early K type 109. Just note how much room there is between the muzzles of the 13 mm guns and the front edge of the spinner backing plate. The Mg-151/15's muzzles could be stretched out into this space very easily!
F" target="_blank">http://www.google.com/search?q=me-109+plans+images&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=fGnnUYyIJ-SqyAGykoAI&ved=0CCoQsAQ&biw=1280&bih=679#tbm=isch&q=Images+of+me-109k+blueprints&spell=1&sa=X&ei=K2vnUd7kAZPUyQGg_oAI&ved=0CE4QBSgA&bav=on.2,or.r_qf.&fp=ff0ad3c074d0dae3&biw=1280&bih=679&facrc=_&imgdii=_&imgrc=jovXv8-vw0dU3M%3A%3BUMBLPqbxF3areM%3Bhttps%253A%252F%252Ffbcdn-sphotos-a-a.akamaihd.net%252Fhphotos-ak-frc1%252Fp480x480%252F190175_139249176144581_8197808_n.jpg%3Bhttps%253A%252F%252F />
 
Quote    Reply

45-Shooter    Best pic so far of Me-109 cowl guns!   7/18/2013 12:24:31 AM
 
Quote    Reply

Jabberwocky       7/18/2013 1:17:10 AM
Ahahahahahahahahahahahahah!
 
Its a 109F4 with MG 17s and MG151/20!
 
Quote    Reply

oldbutnotwise       7/18/2013 2:57:50 AM
shooter,
 
could you please explain this,
 
Distance between prop spinner and cockpit - 1780mm
length of mg151/15 1955mm
 
just how do you get that to fit?
 
especially as they would need staggering
 
Quote    Reply

45-Shooter       7/18/2013 6:00:00 PM




 
Quote    Reply

45-Shooter       7/18/2013 6:14:42 PM

shooter, could you please explain this,
Distance between prop spinner and cockpit - 1780mm
I get 2,248 mm for this distance. So please explain how you got that dimension?
That is between the back of the instrument panel, just in front of the lower edge of the windshield and the back edge of the panel behind the spinner.  
length of mg151/15 1955mm
Wiki states 1,916 mm? ( For the 15 mm version!)
 
just how do you get that to fit?
Use the new space in the K model airframe?
 
especially as they would need staggering
Since they do not stagger any of the other guns in those positions, why would you think they would require it now!


 
Quote    Reply



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics