• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Airplane images

eohrnberger said:
Oh that's a really good one too. Clear, sharp, fast lines that aircraft has.



:doh Really? Oh man. What a waste of a beautiful airplane.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I was shocked. They were being remotely flown by guys sitting in trailers...
 
jet57 said:
You guys know more about planes than I do obviously. So, what do you think makes a fighter today better than the other. The principles seem very much the same as when fighter planes were first used. The corsair was more maneuverable than any zero. The P51 was faster and much heavier as a fighter with a 12 cylinder supercharged Allison engine. Very much like the spitfire's 12 cylinder engine; Rolls Royce as I recall.

But today, what use is breaking the sound barrier, and it seems weapons are the real thing.

What am I missing?
Click to expand...

Ah the P-51 now there is a beautiful plane. Cool story on that one and how it became the renowned fighter known today. p51-2.jpg

The green one you see is a razorback version of the plane one the first built. It had an Allison designed and built engine in it the 1710 and was originally ordered by the Brits ( they wanted Curtis P-40's originally) it had really good low altitude performance but the high altitude was rather anemic. Basically the supercharger and some other bits didn't allow the engine to breath well above 15,000. The Brits being Brits stuffed a Rolls Royce Merlin in it. That pepped it up big time. The superlative version with bubble canopy and the big tanks and the Packard built Rolls Royce Merlin 66 which a had a 2 stage supercharger. P-51.jpg
 
eohrnberger said:
Yup. An awesome machine. Looked 'Star Trek' before even Star Trek was born. You realize they were building that back in the 1950's? Pity they retired it.

But for longevity, you can't beat the B-52.

B-52_Takeoff_Tinker_05.jpg


The pilots are younger than the aircraft they are flying. Amazing.
Click to expand...

I was up close and personal and inside FIFI twice:

FIFI.jpg

The B-29 is a lot smaller than I thought it would be. An old friend serviced them during the war; he said they had a lot of problems: one being that the side bubbles and roof caps would blow off and guys would get sucked out..

Yikes!
 
The Old South African Airforces "Atlas Cheetah", it was an upgraded variant of the French Dassault Mirage III.

cde72834a782c5e203eac3e719c0d34e.jpg
 
PirateMk1 said:
Ah the P-51 now there is a beautiful plane. Cool story on that one and how it became the renowned fighter known today. View attachment 67211275

The green one you see is a razorback version of the plane one the first built. It had an Allison designed and built engine in it the 1710 and was originally ordered by the Brits ( they wanted Curtis P-40's originally) it had really good low altitude performance but the high altitude was rather anemic. Basically the supercharger and some other bits didn't allow the engine to breath well above 15,000. The Brits being Brits stuffed a Rolls Royce Merlin in it. That pepped it up big time. The superlative version with bubble canopy and the big tanks and the Packard built Rolls Royce Merlin 66 which a had a 2 stage supercharger. View attachment 67211277
Click to expand...

That is a good looking machine, for sure. 12 hour flight duration with drop tanks, if I recall. I can only imagine what sort of hamburger the pilots butts would be after a flight like that. I guess if you are young, it doesn't really matter.

Of course if you bring up the P-51, you have to be fir and bring up these two as well.

Ray_Flying_Legends_2005-1.jpg

Spitfire

Hurricane_IIC_87_Sqn_RAF_in_flight_1942.jpg

Hurricane
 
PirateMk1 said:
Ah the P-51 now there is a beautiful plane. Cool story on that one and how it became the renowned fighter known today. View attachment 67211275

The green one you see is a razorback version of the plane one the first built. It had an Allison designed and built engine in it the 1710 and was originally ordered by the Brits ( they wanted Curtis P-40's originally) it had really good low altitude performance but the high altitude was rather anemic. Basically the supercharger and some other bits didn't allow the engine to breath well above 15,000. The Brits being Brits stuffed a Rolls Royce Merlin in it. That pepped it up big time. The superlative version with bubble canopy and the big tanks and the Packard built Rolls Royce Merlin 66 which a had a 2 stage supercharger. View attachment 67211277
Click to expand...

Cool picture: the P-51 was tough as nails.

The other really tough one was this -


P38.jpg



To me, one of the most exotic of that era was the PBY:

PBY.jpg
 
jet57 said:
I was up close and personal and inside FIFI twice:

View attachment 67211276

The B-29 is a lot smaller than I thought it would be. An old friend serviced them during the war; he said they had a lot of problems: one being that the side bubbles and roof caps would blow off and guys would get sucked out..

Yikes!
Click to expand...

B-29 was the most advanced bomber of WW II. Some teething problems initially, but were worked out, and most famous of all, dropped the A-bombs that ushered the world forth into the next era.

If we are talking WW II era bombers, I've always had a soft spot for these two.

North_American_B-25C_Mitchell_%2800910460_178%29.jpg

Ever since
Army_B-25_%28Doolittle_Raid%29.jpg


B-26B_bomber_in_flight.jpg

Martin B-26 Marauder

Man the arsenal of freedom certainly did produce a great many airplanes.
 
eohrnberger said:
That is a good looking machine, for sure. 12 hour flight duration with drop tanks, if I recall. I can only imagine what sort of hamburger the pilots butts would be after a flight like that. I guess if you are young, it doesn't really matter.

Of course if you bring up the P-51, you have to be fir and bring up these two as well.

Ray_Flying_Legends_2005-1.jpg

Spitfire

Hurricane_IIC_87_Sqn_RAF_in_flight_1942.jpg

Hurricane
Click to expand...

The Spitfire. IMHO one of the most beautiful planes ever conceived with a sound and sight that is both ferocious and sensuous.
 
Of course, no WW II bomber spread would be complete without . . . .

Color_Photographed_B-17E_in_Flight.jpg
 
An interesting design. Engine to the rear of the cockpit.
I wonder if that helped the handling, putting that weight at the center pivot point of the aircraft.

P-39_Airacobra_2006-06-15.jpg


Russians really liked and needed it as a tank buster.
 
eohrnberger said:
Yup. An awesome machine. Looked 'Star Trek' before even Star Trek was born. You realize they were building that back in the 1950's? Pity they retired it.

But for longevity, you can't beat the B-52.

B-52_Takeoff_Tinker_05.jpg


The pilots are younger than the aircraft they are flying. Amazing.
Click to expand...

Yep, they were kept secret for some time. Way ahead of their time.

I've seen a couple of them up close, albeit at museums.
 
eohrnberger said:
That is a good looking machine, for sure. 12 hour flight duration with drop tanks, if I recall. I can only imagine what sort of hamburger the pilots butts would be after a flight like that. I guess if you are young, it doesn't really matter.

Of course if you bring up the P-51, you have to be fir and bring up these two as well.

Ray_Flying_Legends_2005-1.jpg

Spitfire

Hurricane_IIC_87_Sqn_RAF_in_flight_1942.jpg

Hurricane
Click to expand...

Ha! Spitfire and Hawker Hurricane, two more of my favorites. Built balsa and paper models of them as a kid. :D
 
No aircraft ensemble would be complete without the Lockheed P-38 Lightning.

001.jpg
 
eohrnberger said:
B-29 was the most advanced bomber of WW II. Some teething problems initially, but were worked out, and most famous of all, dropped the A-bombs that ushered the world forth into the next era.

If we are talking WW II era bombers, I've always had a soft spot for these two.

North_American_B-25C_Mitchell_%2800910460_178%29.jpg

Ever since
Army_B-25_%28Doolittle_Raid%29.jpg


B-26B_bomber_in_flight.jpg

Martin B-26 Marauder

Man the arsenal of freedom certainly did produce a great many airplanes.
Click to expand...

The B25 is my favorite of all time. The B26 was tough plane as well, but as numerous I think. Have you ever sen Catch 22? It has the largest gathering of B25s ever had after the war; some great stuff.
 
eohrnberger said:
Of course, no WW II bomber spread would be complete without . . . .

Color_Photographed_B-17E_in_Flight.jpg
Click to expand...

The Flying Fortress. Ever been on one? I have. Really cramped. All the room went to the bombs. The B24 is a little wider.

The USS Hornet is birthed in Alameda BTW. It's a museum now, guys I know volunteer on it.
 
Jetboogieman said:
The Old South African Airforces "Atlas Cheetah", it was an upgraded variant of the French Dassault Mirage III.

cde72834a782c5e203eac3e719c0d34e.jpg
Click to expand...

Going with the smaller less expensive theme, can't beat Northrup's F5.
J-3005.jpg

Probably the best bang for the buck, and a huge export success for Northrup.
 
jet57 said:
Cool picture: the P-51 was tough as nails.

The other really tough one was this -


67211278d1481942717-airplane-images-p38-jpg




To me, one of the most exotic of that era was the PBY:

View attachment 67211279
Click to expand...

The P-38 Lightning is cool. I always thought they took 2 P-51's and stuck them together, but that's not how it came to be.

Tough as nails? Surprised this one wasn't mentioned.
Republic_P-47N-5_three_ship_formation_061020-F-1234P-037.jpg

Republic P-47
 
jet57 said:
The Flying Fortress. Ever been on one? I have. Really cramped. All the room went to the bombs. The B24 is a little wider.

The USS Hornet is birthed in Alameda BTW. It's a museum now, guys I know volunteer on it.
Click to expand...
That's very cool.

Another from WW II.

B-24_Liberators_in_Formation%2C_1980.JPEG

B-24 Liberator

This was built just South West of Detroit at a GM run plant (at the time) that became Willow Run Airport.

Really tiring to fly, but near the same bomb load as the B-17 and greater range from what I recall.
 
eohrnberger said:
The P-38 Lightning is cool. I always thought they took 2 P-51's and stuck them together, but that's not how it came to be.

Tough as nails? Surprised this one wasn't mentioned.
Republic_P-47N-5_three_ship_formation_061020-F-1234P-037.jpg

Republic P-47
Click to expand...

Yeah, those things were armed to the teeth. In Ken Burns' The War one of the interviewees was P 47 pilot and he talks a lot about those things. The P38 was actually designed before the war. The split the fuselage in order to handle the horsepower; twin supercharged Allisons of 1150 horsepower, four .50 cal machine guns. Just a nasty aircraft.
 
eohrnberger said:
That's very cool.

Another from WW II.

B-24_Liberators_in_Formation%2C_1980.JPEG

B-24 Liberator

This was built just South West of Detroit at a GM run plant (at the time) that became Willow Run Airport.

Really tiring to fly, but near the same bomb load as the B-17 and greater range from what I recall.
Click to expand...

True, because of the Davis wing it had. But apparently they were VERY fragile (especially compared to the B-17)...it could not take much punishment.

But I believe it was the single most mass produced American combat aircraft of the war.
 
PirateMk1 said:
Ah the P-51 now there is a beautiful plane. Cool story on that one and how it became the renowned fighter known today. View attachment 67211275

The green one you see is a razorback version of the plane one the first built. It had an Allison designed and built engine in it the 1710 and was originally ordered by the Brits ( they wanted Curtis P-40's originally) it had really good low altitude performance but the high altitude was rather anemic. Basically the supercharger and some other bits didn't allow the engine to breath well above 15,000. The Brits being Brits stuffed a Rolls Royce Merlin in it. That pepped it up big time. The superlative version with bubble canopy and the big tanks and the Packard built Rolls Royce Merlin 66 which a had a 2 stage supercharger. View attachment 67211277
Click to expand...

My fav WW2 plane. And so, SO pretty (from the 'D' onwards).

Apparently, when Goring saw them flying over Berlin, he knew the war was lost.
 
jet57 said:
I tried to find a better picture of the SU: the cockpit is pitched way forward and down giving it the appearance of a goose neck. It's really a cool lookin plane.

That Fox Bat just looks tough doesn't it? Big too.

Yeah aircraft these days have radar deflection which are essentially cloaking devices: a Star Ship could be seen if you were outside in space, but the sensors wouldn't read it so you couldn't see it on screen.

I've always thought that the costs of these things was waaay too high.

maybe they should be made in mexico
Click to expand...

You gotta love the Mig-25.

Capable of Mach 3.2 - one was clocked flying over Israel at that speed. But apparently, when it got back to base, the engines were finished as they had gone into overspeed and burned themselves to bits. Apparently it's actual top speed (without having to throw the engines out when the plane got home) was only Mach 2.8.

And the radar was REALLY crude but incredibly powerful. It would simply burn it's way through jamming and was supposedly so dangerous that it was VERY harmful to humans that got anywhere near it while switched on and would kill small animals on the sides of the runway if the pilot turned the radar on before takeoff.

This big thing defined BRUTE FORCE...I love it.

MiG-25PU_rvb_2.jpg




But it's successor, the Mig-31 Foxhound, is even more impressive.

It is bigger, has the same top speed, two crew, a longer range, was the world's first aircraft with first phased-array radar (so it could track ultra-low flying planes/cruise missiles) and carries missiles (the R-33S or E) that is basically a Phoenix missile knockoff, imo - but with a range of over 300 kilometers.

Surely, one of the most potent, air defense fighters in history.

Mikoyan-MIG-31-Foxhound.jpg
 
Last edited:
DA60 said:
You gotta love the Mig-25.

Capable of Mach 3.2 - one was clocked flying over Israel at that speed. But apparently, when it got back to base, the engines were finished as they had gone into overspeed and burned themselves to bits. Apparently it's actual top speed (without having to throw the engines out when the plane got home) was only Mach 2.8.

And the radar was REALLY crude but incredibly powerful. It would simply burn it's way through jamming and was supposedly so dangerous that it was VERY harmful to humans that got to close and would kill small animals on the sides of the runway if the pilot turned the radar on before takeoff.

This big thing defined BRUTE FORCE...I love it.

MiG-25PU_rvb_2.jpg
Click to expand...

Yeah, it's like sitting on the nose of a rocket.
 
DA60 said:
True, because of the Davis wing it had. But apparently they were VERY fragile (especially compared to the B-17)...it could not take much punishment.

But I believe it was the single most mass produced American combat aircraft of the war.
Click to expand...

An interesting thought.

Aircraft construction, at least at that time, was an aluminum skin riveted onto aluminum spars, so seemingly like a fragile eggshell, and this structure is to take damage and continue to function sufficiently to maintain flight.

I'm not saying they didn't, the battle damage that B-17s took and still brought the crew home is legendary. I'm saying the juxtaposition of what it was made of and the damage it was capable of sustaining and keep flying just seems to be at serious odds with each other somehow.
 
DA60 said:
You gotta love the Mig-25.

Capable of Mach 3.2 - one was clocked flying over Israel at that speed. But apparently, when it got back to base, the engines were finished as they had gone into overspeed and burned themselves to bits. Apparently it's actual top speed (without having to throw the engines out when the plane got home) was only Mach 2.8.

And the radar was REALLY crude but incredibly powerful. It would simply burn it's way through jamming and was supposedly so dangerous that it was VERY harmful to humans that got anywhere near it while switched on and would kill small animals on the sides of the runway if the pilot turned the radar on before takeoff.

This big thing defined BRUTE FORCE...I love it.

MiG-25PU_rvb_2.jpg




But it's successor, the Mig-31 Foxhound, is even more impressive.

It is bigger, has the same top speed, two crew, a longer range, was the world's first aircraft with first phased-array radar (so it could track ultra-low flying planes/cruise missiles) and carries missiles (the R-33S or E) that is basically a Phoenix missile knockoff, imo - but with a range of over 300 kilometers.

Surely, one of the most potent, air defense fighters in history.

Mikoyan-MIG-31-Foxhound.jpg
Click to expand...

Proof that pigs and bricks can fly if you strap big enough engines to them. :lol:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom