Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 10, 2017 9:22:48 GMT -7
I can't imagine the noises a V-12 would make with 8 busted cylinders. That sort of resiliency would certainly breed Brand Loyalty.
Of course, over vodka... "HA! Yuri Ivanonvich, eight dead cylinders! Pheh! That is nothing! I once flew P-39 with ELEVEN cylinders shot out and only one wing! AND I and made perfect three-point landing with only two wheels, yet!"
|
|
|
Post by cowboy40 on Dec 10, 2017 9:26:38 GMT -7
Well P-40 pilots in North Africa were confirming similar stories with the their Warhawks...damn fine engine....lol
There is also a story, out there, about the American Volunteer Group (AVG, the Flying Tigers) had the Allison engines built for their P-40C birds built to a higher tolerance by hand, and these engines had about an extra 150 hp...that translated to more speed!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 10, 2017 14:39:04 GMT -7
DANG! I'll have to check that one out!
150 additional HP at the same weight meant more speed, better climb, and higher ceiling. Against the Japanese fighters of the day... and the Japanese pilots of early WWII, I'll take every tiny advantage I can get.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 16, 2017 15:28:46 GMT -7
|
|
|
Post by cowboy40 on Dec 16, 2017 16:39:50 GMT -7
Prop looks balanced, but don't think I would want to fly that Cub
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 16, 2017 17:31:14 GMT -7
Apparently the crazy thing flies just fine.
I dunno though...
|
|
|
Post by cowboy40 on Dec 16, 2017 17:58:57 GMT -7
Change the prop and i will be glad to climb in, but hey not with one blade, but now i have to wonder, how did pilots react to the idea of three blades on the prop...? After all they were use to having two...lol
|
|
|
Post by starcruiser on Dec 16, 2017 22:03:08 GMT -7
I believe I saw a plane with one of those at Hooks airport in the Houston area but, it would have to have been many years back...
|
|
|
Post by krebizfan on Dec 16, 2017 23:19:26 GMT -7
Flies fine but can't take damage to the prop.
|
|
|
Post by starcruiser on Dec 17, 2017 7:43:29 GMT -7
To be fair - any damage to a wood prop is a bad thing - even with two or three blades!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 18, 2017 9:46:49 GMT -7
In many instances, when a single blade is lost from a propeller, the engine is torn free of its mountings. If the engine departs from the airplane, your a statistic. But look at it like this... a single blade prop has half the risk of blade damage versus a 2 blade prop... cowboy40, What's the old saying about a propeller just being a fan to keep the pilot cool?
|
|
|
Post by cowboy40 on Dec 18, 2017 10:04:02 GMT -7
lol i hadn't heard that in awhile....thanks for that smile
|
|
|
Post by cowboy40 on Dec 19, 2017 18:46:52 GMT -7
I put this together for a film editing class a few years back. Forgot that i posted it on youtube...hope you guys enjoy...
The class was about using programs like Windows Movie Maker and Adobe Premiere. Man i actually did forget about this video.
|
|
|
Post by cowboy40 on Jan 6, 2018 2:21:13 GMT -7
Brewster F2A-3 Buffalo flying from Midway Island with VMF-221 I was flying one of my favorite types tonight on the flight sim...I love this old bird...it has been treated by people who haven't really studied it, as a bad aircraft, but it really wasn't. I have talked about its service in a prior thread here... But man I do love flying this bird!!!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 6, 2018 6:25:52 GMT -7
Wasn't the big problem with the Buffalo simply that it was an out-of-date design by Midway? It was a year older than the P-40 at a time when aviation was making big leaps every few months. I has the Vultee P-66 Vanguard on ACOF, and had a blast with it. Unfortunately, it suffered from a slow development, and was a out of date by the time the war started for the US. It ended up being about 20 mph slower than the P-40, had a slightly better rate of climb, but a lower ceiling (by about 200 ft), 150 mile shorter range, and 4 x .30 cal and 2 x .50 cal guns (where the P-40 typically had 6 x .50 cals). We actually have this picture in the entrance where I work.
|
|
|
Post by cowboy40 on Jan 6, 2018 8:20:06 GMT -7
Wasn't the big problem with the Buffalo simply that it was an out-of-date design by Midway? It was a year older than the P-40 at a time when aviation was making big leaps every few months. I has the Vultee P-66 Vanguard on ACOF, and had a blast with it. Unfortunately, it suffered from a slow development, and was a out of date by the time the war started for the US. It ended up being about 20 mph slower than the P-40, had a slightly better rate of climb, but a lower ceiling (by about 200 ft), 150 mile shorter range, and 4 x .30 cal and 2 x .50 cal guns (where the P-40 typically had 6 x .50 cals). We actually have this picture in the entrance where I work. Actually the aircraft did well, given the circumstances it had to fight in. In the hands of VMF-221, it didn't perform any worse then the F4F-3/4s of VMF-221. In the hands of the British and Commonwealth pilot's, the machine suffered from operation at poorly kept airfields and bad maintenance practices. It should be pointed out also that most of the aircraft lost were taken out on the ground. There were several aces that came out of flying the Buffalo. No matter what service the aircraft were flying in, they were always out numbered in the air. With everything taken in hand, the Buffalo still aquired a 2/1 kill ratio, yes not that good, but it wasn't all that bad either given the age of the design and the poor condition the RAF had to fight them in, but they proved in experienced hands that it could be a machine that could put up a fight. Now for the Marines that fought them at Midway, those pilots just barely had any experience in flying any combat machines. The Buffalo needed an experienced pilot at its stick. One successful US squadron that flew the buffalo was VF-2, who performed well in the early Pacific Raids and at the Battle of the Coral Sea. Once the aircraft was withdrawn from front line service, it performed well as a combat trainer for both the US Army and the RAAF in Australia until they just simply were worn out.... So yes its drawback was the fact, that it was no longer in production. Spares were getting hard to come by, and so on...
|
|
|
Post by cowboy40 on Jan 6, 2018 8:38:40 GMT -7
Wasn't the big problem with the Buffalo simply that it was an out-of-date design by Midway? It was a year older than the P-40 at a time when aviation was making big leaps every few months. I has the Vultee P-66 Vanguard on ACOF, and had a blast with it. Unfortunately, it suffered from a slow development, and was a out of date by the time the war started for the US. It ended up being about 20 mph slower than the P-40, had a slightly better rate of climb, but a lower ceiling (by about 200 ft), 150 mile shorter range, and 4 x .30 cal and 2 x .50 cal guns (where the P-40 typically had 6 x .50 cals). We actually have this picture in the entrance where I work. The P-40B/C, which were the standard aircraft in service at the time of Pearl Harbor were equipped with two nose mounted .50 Browning machine-guns, while four .30 Browning guns were mounted in the wings. It wasn't until the P-40D that the .50 cals were moved to the wings, and the D model only had four, but with the introduction of the P-40E, the well known arrangement of six .50 cals was established as the standard armament of the P-40 series.
|
|
|
Post by cowboy40 on Jan 14, 2018 9:55:26 GMT -7
What has to be one of the most over looked airplanes from the Cold War. The LVT A-7 Corsair in USAF/ANG service soldiered on from Vietnam into the 1990's. It was an amazing little airplane. It was mainly designed for the light attack role off of aircraft carrires, but proved to be an excellent close air support bird, Mainly designed for day time operations, but it could fly night strikes, but had a limited all-weather strike capability. It also could fly CAP (Combat Air Patrol) using AIM-9 missiles. It was sub-sonic but capable of flying in a dog fight. I hope people with eventually give her it's place in history.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 14, 2018 15:43:19 GMT -7
Beast of a plane! Love it. They used to run mock bombing missions over the Charity Islands in Lake Huron, due east from my Great Aunt's cabin. They buzzed my dad and I many times while fishing. Once you heard them coming there was just enough time to wince before it roared over us at <200'. Just a cool old plane. Another one I wonder about (what if we shoved an F-35 engine and some modern avionics into one of those old airframes?)
|
|
|
Post by starcruiser on Jan 15, 2018 8:31:00 GMT -7
Without some structural upgrades to the wings - no wings!
This comes back to my feelings that the DOD needs to read through Admiral Zumwalt's "High/Low" concept and think -very- seriously about it...
|
|
|
Post by rabid on Jan 15, 2018 8:49:41 GMT -7
|
|
|
Post by cowboy40 on Jan 15, 2018 11:59:06 GMT -7
Republic F-105D Thunderchief all-weather fighter-bomber... F-105F two seater. This is another one of my favorites planes from the Vietnam era USAF. This machine found itself conducting just about every type of mission you can dream up. They were used from high altitude to carpet bomb an area. They would scream in from medium altitude and conduct, only what you could call dive bombing attacks, on bridges. They were used also as penetration bombers at low altitudes. They also retained the original nuclear strike capability. The planes even were able to handle some air combat if pressed to. This big Republic bird was an impressive machine, and it flew more strike missions with the USAF then any other type in inventory in South East Asia, though they payed a high price for it. By the time involvement ended in SEA, the USAF had only 17 flyable examples of the F-105D, with another 14 in ANG hands. That doesn't mean the losses were so high that it wasn't useful...simply that as many returned from Vietnam they were placed in storage, because new types were replacing them. The EF-105F/F-105G also was the proof of the ability of the USAF to suppress enemy air defense. At the beginning of developing this mission. a couple of modified 105F's would be mixed into a strike package with 105D Thuds. As the enemy radars came on the "Wild Weasel" would then fire a Shrike missile at it. This success lead to new tactics being formed for Hunter/Killer missions in the SEAD role to clear the path to the target, because the missiles were still hitting targets even though they lost their warning radars. A Weasel team would dash out ahead of a package and using decoy methods, jamming and missile strikes would either keep the enemy from lighting up the force, or they would simply destroy the defenses before the package hit the target. Those guys had some real guts. The F-105G replaced the Shrike with the Standard ARM, and achieved even better results. The 105 was no dogfighter, but it did achieve 25 Mig kills during the war.
|
|
|
Post by cowboy40 on Jan 26, 2018 22:04:16 GMT -7
Some of he best fun you can have...lol Preparing to set up a "trap" during a thunderstorm...trying to bring down a Brewster F2A-2 onto the USS Lexington CV-3
|
|
|
Post by cowboy40 on Feb 9, 2018 14:42:00 GMT -7
When you collect USN aviation models, books, or what ever, no collection would be complete with out anything that covered the Navy's Demonstration team. In my virtual model collection I have tried to keep the types in their liveries. So here is part of my collection of Blue Angels' wings. The Grumman F-11A Tiger used from the 1958 to the 1968 show season. During the 1969 season, the Angels would start performing in the McDonnell Douglas F-4J Phantom II, but by the 1973 season a new type was being flown because of operational incidents. That new type would be the McDonnell Douglas A-4F Skyhawk, which they would fly will into the 1980's. I have had the opportunity to see the team flying the Skyhawk several times as a child. I also remember seeing them in the Phantom once, but i don't remember much about the show, I was only five years old, Reguardles of what these guys fly, they always do one hell of a show. I even keep a F/A-18 Hornet in the shed. Eventually the present F/A-18C/D birds will be followed by F/A-18E/F Super Hornet types. God I am glad the push for the T-45 was finally pushed away in 2017. The Angels belong in combat type birds.
|
|
|
Post by cowboy40 on Feb 10, 2018 11:38:36 GMT -7
A very graceful lady in a very nice dress!!! Lockheed VC-121J Constellation was used from 1968 will into the mid 1970's by the Angels as the primary support bird. I remember, as a kid of 6 years old, being so impressed with this bird, when i saw her setting on the tarmac at NAS Pensacola.
|
|