KenH Posted May 9, 2004 Share Posted May 9, 2004 Something about the whining roar of a Rolls-Merlin that just brings a tear to your eye The fact that they power two of the sweetest fighters of the war (Spit, Mustang B -onward) probably doesnt hurt either Oh, PTO deserves mention (for the P+W R2800 guys ) Hellcat - Ensigns airplane, easy to handle, designed specifically to kill the Zero Corsair - Ensign Eliminator but it wasnt nicknamed whistling death for nothing... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pinetree Posted May 9, 2004 Share Posted May 9, 2004 Capt.Charlie Upham,the only combat soldier to win the VC twice. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gunnergoz Posted May 9, 2004 Share Posted May 9, 2004 Here's my vote for the M-1 Garand as best battle implement, as Gen. Patton put it IIRC. And the MB/GP peep AKA jeep, as everyman's mobility. Would amphibious warfare been the same without the plywood LCVP? Another simple but basic tool of victory. Let us not forget the lowly 6x6 truck, be it Jimmy or Studebaker, but it put the Allies on wheels and kept 'em fed and ammo'd up for most of the war. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CombinedArms Posted May 9, 2004 Share Posted May 9, 2004 Gotta love both the Merlins and the Pratt & Whitney R-2800. The engines that won the air war! Why don't we call them best in-line fighter engine and best radial engine respectively. Then we don't have to choose. My candidate for best amphibious landing vessel is the good old LST. This Large Slow Target allowed the Allies to supply whole armies over the beaches, permitting the Pacific war to occur as it did and allowing the Allies to achieve strategic surprise in Normandy by landing far from any port. (The German High Command should have studied what was happening in the Pacific!) The Allies were still bringing whole divisions ashore by LST in Normandy in Nov '44, IIRC. I don't see how the western allies could have won a largely amphibious war without them. I also have to mention the US pilot training program as the best of the best. The US began the war with a small cadre of trained pilots with no combat experience. The ended the war with a vast number of highly skilled veteran pilots. By contrast, the Germans and Japanese could never replace the elite corps of pilots with which they began the war. As a professional educator myself, I'd love to know what they were doing in the US pilot training program. Whatever it was, it worked and on a very large scale. [ May 09, 2004, 10:20 AM: Message edited by: CombinedArms ] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted May 9, 2004 Share Posted May 9, 2004 Originally posted by CombinedArms: (The German High Command should have studied what was happening in the Pacific!)They didn't have to go that far. The landings in North Africa, Sicily (where the LST was first used, I believe), Salerno, and Anzio had already given them a taste of what the Allies were capable of. I think the truly amazing thing about Normandy was the artificial harbors. Even though one was wrecked by the June storm, the remaining one outperformed the combined expectations for both. This was an engineering feat of the first order and one of Britain's greatest contributions to the war. PLUTO (Pipe Line Under The Ocean) which freed up docking space on the Continent by pumping fuel direct from the UK was also a neat innovation. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Mike Posted May 10, 2004 Share Posted May 10, 2004 I didn't read the whole therad, but the 1st post said Hartman shot down 352 russian planes - IIRC that's not correct - there were 352 total, but 8 of them were anglo/allied 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joachim Posted May 10, 2004 Share Posted May 10, 2004 German optics - Carl Zeiss factory captured and relocated to American sector. German rocket propulsion. The first man in space was a Soviet, the first men on the moon Americans - but guess which scientists sent them there. German photo paper. Osnabrück was captured by a plt - but a comapny secured the nearby factory. German jet fighter planes. Gruß Joachim 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted May 10, 2004 Share Posted May 10, 2004 Originally posted by Joachim: German jet fighter planes.That's debatable. The Gloster Meteor was arguably a better plane than any of the German Jets, even though it saw only limited service during the war. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Harmes Posted May 10, 2004 Share Posted May 10, 2004 Michael... Do you know if the Meteor actually shot anything down or not? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted May 10, 2004 Share Posted May 10, 2004 Originally posted by Lord Harmes: Michael... Do you know if the Meteor actually shot anything down or not? ISTR it had successes against V-1s, which is mainly what it was used for. There were a couple of squadrons moved onto the Continent in the closing days of the war, but I don't recall if they ever actually saw the enemy. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
General Bolt Posted May 11, 2004 Share Posted May 11, 2004 Best Ground Support - Early German Blitz Aircraft. They would send a flight of three ME-110s against a column on a road. The 1st plane would strafe the road. The other 2 would drop bombs on the side of the road. They would kill their enemys and leave the road unharmed for the advancing panzies. - Source a Lecture to US War College by US Maj Black (Attache in Berlin) 6 DEC 1939 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lars Posted May 11, 2004 Share Posted May 11, 2004 Best Sub – USS Barb. Ninety five ships, four shore bombardments, four rocket attacks, rescued 16 POW's, and to top it all off, the only ones who actually invaded the Japanese Home Islands (and blew up a train). Check out their battle flag . 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yacinator Posted May 13, 2004 Share Posted May 13, 2004 What about Audie Murphy? This thread has been going on for 4 pages and nobody mentioned him. He killed like 200 Germans, was wounded 3 times, received 30 medals including the Medal of Honor which made him the most decorated US soldier in WW2. One of the things he pulled of was holding of a company of Germans with supporting tanks by himself with a .50 cal mg. Now thats an army of one. He finished the war with the rank of LT. After the war he also made a bunch of movies including "To Hell and Back". Just my 2 cents... for more info go here Doesn't that look like a Ruskie general with all these medals? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonS Posted May 13, 2004 Share Posted May 13, 2004 Well, if you exclude the discussion of him earlier in the thread about him I suppose you're correct 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Mike Posted May 13, 2004 Share Posted May 13, 2004 Meteors were slower than the 262's at eh end of the war, but IIRC the first of the Mk III's with a better engine were only a month away from service. I don't know if any head-to-head tests weer flown by Meteors against 262's after the war - there was quiet a lot of test flying done against varius axis aircraft tho'. the models that saw service in 1944 were Mk 1's I think - their top speed wasn't all that flash (just over 400 mph??) but they could get there and stay there much more easily than prop fighters could - ie they were not straining their engines to do it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KenH Posted May 13, 2004 Share Posted May 13, 2004 Chuck Yeager mentions flying the 262 against the P-80 in comparison tests in his biography, and the 2 aircraft had nearly identical performance. The only difference being the 262's swept-wing design giving the edge in near-transonic regimes. The swept wing concept would be properly employed on the F-86 (and the MiG 15..) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted May 13, 2004 Share Posted May 13, 2004 Originally posted by Mike: Meteors were slower than the 262's at eh end of the war...Without pulling out my books and going over the numbers, I am inclined to agree with you. But I think the Meteor had other advantages, such as more reliable engines. It little matters how fast your planes are, if they are sitting in the shop when the enemy comes to pay a visit. All early jets had problems, but the Me-262 was one of the worst. Another thing I have read was that the Me-262 was very tricky to fly and would become unstable in some regimes. I have not heard the same of the Meteor or the P-80 for that matter. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_Axe_ Posted May 13, 2004 Author Share Posted May 13, 2004 Originally posted by yacinator: What about Audie Murphy? This thread has been going on for 4 pages and nobody mentioned him. Ummm, check page three there sparky. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mies Posted May 13, 2004 Share Posted May 13, 2004 Want to see what a close up of a Spitfire does to you check this: http://www.alexisparkinn.com/oh_my_god.htm B.T.W. Turn up the volume, makes for a good experience. Mies [ May 13, 2004, 12:52 PM: Message edited by: Mies ] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scheer Posted May 13, 2004 Share Posted May 13, 2004 Originally posted by Mies: Want to see what a close up of a Spitfire does to you check this: http://www.alexisparkinn.com/oh_my_god.htm B.T.W. Turn up the volume, makes for a good experience. Mies Thank you for the link, oh wise one .... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KenH Posted May 13, 2004 Share Posted May 13, 2004 GD suicidal jockeys, messing with an irreplaceable warbird like that! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lars Posted May 13, 2004 Share Posted May 13, 2004 Originally posted by KenH: GD suicidal jockeys, messing with an irreplaceable warbird like that! Well, what else would you do with it? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Merkin Muffley Posted May 13, 2004 Share Posted May 13, 2004 Originally posted by Mies: Want to see what a close up of a Spitfire does to you check this: http://www.alexisparkinn.com/oh_my_god.htm B.T.W. Turn up the volume, makes for a good experience. Mies Oh wonderful. You cannot watch it without laughing. And then watching it again. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yacinator Posted May 14, 2004 Share Posted May 14, 2004 quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Originally posted by yacinator: What about Audie Murphy? This thread has been going on for 4 pages and nobody mentioned him. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ummm, check page three there sparky yeah page 3 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KenH Posted May 14, 2004 Share Posted May 14, 2004 Originally posted by Lars: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by KenH: GD suicidal jockeys, messing with an irreplaceable warbird like that! Well, what else would you do with it? </font> 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.