WWII Aircraft Facts
Printed From: Enfield-Rifles.com
Category: Off Topic
Forum Name: Military Talk
Forum Description: Feel free to talk about anything military related.
URL: http://www.enfield-rifles.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=5790
Printed Date: March 26 2026 at 7:18pm Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.07 - https://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: WWII Aircraft Facts
Posted By: 25-5
Subject: WWII Aircraft Facts
Date Posted: February 23 2013 at 2:25am
For all of you history buffs out there. STATISTICS GIVE THE CARNAGE A DIMENSION. WHEN YOU READ THE PRODUCTION NUMBERS CAPTIONS BELOW THE PHOTOS, UNDERSTAND THAT VIRTUALLY NONE OF THESE PLANES SURVIVES TODAY! THERE IS ONLY ONE B-29 RESTORED BY BOEING TO FLYING CONDITION.
Amazing WW2 Aircraft Facts
These are very moving statistics.
On average 6600 American service men died per MONTH, during WW2 (about 220 a day).
People who were not around during WW2 have no understanding of the magnitude. This gives some insight.
276,000 aircraft manufactured in the US . 43,000 planes lost overseas, including 23,000 in combat. 14,000 lost in the continental U.S.
The staggering cost of aircraft in 1945 dollars
B-17 $204,370. P-40 $44,892. B-24 $215,516. P-47 $85,578. B-25 $142,194. P-51 $51,572. B-26 $192,426. C-47 $88,574. B-29 $605,360. PT-17 $15,052. P-38 $97,147. AT-6 $22,952.
From Germany 's invasion of Poland Sept. 1, 1939 until Japan 's surrender on Sept. 2, 1945 = 2,433 days. America lost an average of 170 planes a day.
A B-17 carried 2,500 gallons of high octane fuel and carried a crew of 10 airmen.
9.7 billion gallons of gasoline consumed. 108 million hours flown. 460 thousand million rounds of aircraft ammo fired overseas. 7.9 million bombs dropped overseas. 2.3 million combat flights. 299,230 aircraft used. 808,471 aircraft engines used. 799,972 propellers.
WWII MOST-PRODUCED COMBAT AIRCRAFT
Russian Ilyushin IL-2 Sturmovik 36,183
Yakolev Yak-1,-3,-7, -9 31,000
Messerschmitt Bf-109 30,480
Focke-Wulf Fw-190 29,001
Supermarine Spitfire 20,351
Convair B-24/PB4Y Liberator/Privateer 18,482
Republic P-47 Thunderbolt 15,686
North American P-51 Mustang 15,875
Junkers Ju-88 15,000
Hawker Hurricane 14,533
Curtiss P-40 Warhawk 13,738
Boeing B-17 Flying Fortress 12,731
Vought F4U Corsair 12,571 Grumman F6F he!!cat 12,275
Petlyakov Pe-2 11,400 Lockheed P-38 Lightning 10,037
Mitsubishi A6M Zero 10,449
North American B-25 Mitche!! 9,984
Lavochkin LaGG-5 9,920
Grumman TBM Avenger 9,837
Bell P-39 Airacobra 9,584
Nakajima Ki-43 Oscar 5,919
DeHavilland Mosquito 7,780
Avro Lancaster 7,377
Heinkel He-111 6,508
Handley-Page Halifax 6,176
Messerschmitt Bf-110 6,150
Lavochkin LaGG-7 5,75
Boeing B-29 Superfortress 3,970
Short Stirling 2,383
The US lost 14,903 pilots, aircrew and support personnel plus 13,873 airplanes --- inside the continental United States . There were 52,651 aircraft accidents (6,039 involving fatalities) in 45 months. Average 1,170 aircraft accidents per month---- nearly 40 a day.
It gets worse..... Almost 1,000 planes disappeared en route from the US to foreign climes. But 43,581 aircraft were lost overseas including 22,948 on combat missions (18,418 in Europe ) and 20,633 due to non-combat causes overseas.
In a single 376 plane raid in August 1943, 60 B-17s were shot down. That was a 16 percent loss rate and meant 600 empty bunks in England . In 1942-43, it was statistically impossible for bomber crews to complete the intended 25-mission tour in Europe .
Pacific theatre losses were far less (4,530 in combat) owing to smaller forces committed. The B-29 mission against Tokyo on May 25, 1945, cost 26 Superfortresses, 5.6 percent of the 464 dispatched from the Marianas .
On average, 6,600 American servicemen died per month during WWII, about 220 a day. Over 40,000 airmen were killed in combat and another 18,000 wounded. Some 12,000 missing men were declared dead, including those "liberated" by the Soviets but never returned. More than 41,000 were captured. Half of the 5,400 held by the Japanese died in captivity, compared with one-tenth in German hands. Total combat casualties were 121,867.
The US forces peak strength was in 1944 with 2,372,000 personnel, nearly twice the previous year's figure.
Losses were huge---but so were production totals. From 1941 through 1945, American industry delivered more than 276,000 military aircraft. That was not only for US Army, Navy and Marine Corps, but also for allies as diverse as Britain , Australia , China and Russia .
Our enemies took massive losses. Through much of 1944, the Luftwaffe sustained hemorrhaging of 25% of aircrews and 40 planes a month.
Experience Level: Uncle Sam sent many men to war with minimum training. Some fighter pilots entered combat in 1942 with less than 1 hour in their assigned aircraft.. The 357th Fighter Group (The Yoxford Boys) went to England in late 1943 having trained on P-39s, then flew Mustangs. They never saw a Mustang until the first combat mission.
With the arrival of new aircraft, many units transitioned in combat. The attitude was, "They all have a stick and a throttle. Go fly `em." When the famed 4th Fighter Group converted from P-47s to P-51s in Feb 44, there was no time to stand down for an orderly transition. The Group commander, Col. Donald Blakeslee, said, "You can learn to fly 51s on the way to the target". A future P-47 ace said, "I was sent to England to die." Many bomber crews were still learning their trade. Of Jimmy Doolittle's 15 pilots on the April 1942 Tokyo raid, only five had won their wings before 1941. All but one of the 16 co-pilots were less than a year out of flight school.
In WW2, safety took a back seat to combat. The AAF's worst accident rate was recorded by the A-36 Invader version of the P-51: a staggering 274 accidents per 100,000 flying hours. Next worst were the P-39 at 245, the P-40 at 188, and the P-38 at 139. All were Allison powered.
Bomber wrecks were fewer but more expensive. The B-17 and B-24 averaged 30 and 35 accidents per 100,000 flight hours respectively-- a horrific figure considering that from 1980 to 2000 the Air Force's major mishap rate was less than 2.
The B-29 was even worse at 40 per 100,000 hours; the world's most sophisticated, most capable and most expensive bomber was too urgently needed to be able to stand down for mere safety reasons.
(Compare: when a $2.1 billion B-2 crashed in 2008, the Air Force declared a two-month "safety pause").
The B-29 was no better for maintenance. Although the R3350 was known as a complicated, troublesome power-plant, only half the mechanics had previous experience with it.
Navigators: Perhaps the greatest success story concerned Navigators. The Army graduated some 50,000 during WW2.
Many had never flown out of sight of land before leaving "Uncle Sugar" for a war zone. Yet they found their way across oceans and continents without getting lost or running out of fuel - a tribute to the AAF's training.
At its height in mid-1944, the USAAF had 2.6 million people and nearly 80,000 aircraft of all types. Today the US Air Force employs 327,000 active personnel (plus 170,000 civilians) with 5,500+ manned and perhaps 200 unmanned aircraft. That's about 12% of the manpower and 7% of the airplanes of the WW2 peak.
SUMMATION: Another war like that of 1939-45 is doubtful, as fighters and bombers have given way to helicopters and remotely-controlled drones, eg. over Afghanistan and Iraq . But within our living memory, men left the earth in 1,000-plane formations and fought major battles five miles high, leaving a legacy that remains timeless.
|
Replies:
Posted By: Canuck
Date Posted: February 23 2013 at 7:11am
|
Amazing statistics! Thanks for the good read.
|
Posted By: hoadie
Date Posted: February 23 2013 at 7:47am
Interesting stats.Note the issue with the Allison engines. As I've noted before..the Mustang ALMOST didn't come into exsistance because of the Allison power plants. I note there is no mention of the Typhoon.(Although it had shortcomings, it was mass produced.)I'm surprised at no mention of the Stuka or the Mosquito, as well Hoadie
------------- Loose wimmen tightened here
|
Posted By: hoadie
Date Posted: February 23 2013 at 7:49am
woops! I spoke too soon! There it was..the '"SKEETER" IS listed. I stand corrected Hoadie
------------- Loose wimmen tightened here
|
Posted By: Zed
Date Posted: February 24 2013 at 3:09am
Thats an interesting article. The casualty figures from WWII are astounding, when you consider that 95% of all Allied casualties were Russian! The Spitfire is my favourite plane of WWII, (It' normal I'm english  ) I have a client that owns and flies a Spitfire Mk19 (36 litre RR Griffin engine instead of the 27 litre Merlin) It is a photo reconaissance version with pressurised cabin, very rare. Last year I got to visit the hangar and sit in it, that was a boyhood dream come true. There are many films on youtube of his Mk19. There is only 1 Lancaster still flying and I think 1 Mosquito.
------------- It's nice to be important, but it's more important to be nice!
|
Posted By: flanker
Date Posted: February 24 2013 at 3:56am
Some of the statistics about losses are truly alarming. I think the RAF lost 80,000 aircrew from the bomber command over Germany in the course of that war. That's just one command, in one campaign in one theatre of war. The impact on the German population must have been absolutely staggering too.
The information you mention only details the more popular aircraft too. There were dozens of other less common types all manufactured in their hundreds and thousands by all sides.
I think we do live in safer world nowadays. let's hope it stays that way.
------------- Life is full of possibilities, 50% of them are likely to good....
|
Posted By: 25-5
Date Posted: February 24 2013 at 8:18am
Just want to say that these stats are not totally complete. They are what they are, and from a US perspective. Anyone who knows about WWII is fully aware of the sacrifices made buy all the allies and like myself, honor them all. Those of us who are more mature have a responsibility to let the youngins know that "Freedom is not free" .
My original source had photos of all the planes listed. However, I was unable to get them to copy.  Probably too big a file.
------------- For the pikes must be together at the rising of the moon.
|
Posted By: hoadie
Date Posted: February 24 2013 at 9:30am
Zed, there is TWO flying Lancasters.One in Blighty & one here in Canada.(Hamilton,Ontario).There is also one out west in Canada, although operable, does not have an airworthy ticket(read$$$). I was told-but I dont know- that there is one in Oz, as well.It is supposedly under the same constrictions as the one out west...taxi but do not fly. (sigh) To my knowledge, there is not a single Mossie airworthy.I DO know that there was collection boxes @ some legions for donations for a 'skeeter" restoration project. It was a P/R model, ex Jamaican air force.Dunno what ever became of that. Hoadie
------------- Loose wimmen tightened here
|
Posted By: 303Guy
Date Posted: February 24 2013 at 12:56pm
I've seen a TV documentary in which the cameraman was in a flying Mosquito in the UK, sounds and all.
------------- 303Guy
|
Posted By: LE Owner
Date Posted: February 25 2013 at 4:33am
|
Many years ago an article on the U S Airforce stated that at the end of WW2 we had 76,000 combat aircraft and 3.5 million personel. They may have been counting some civilian personel and airmen still in training and not yet assigned to duty as aircrew.
There may have been some overlap of Naval Aviators and Marine Corp Aviators.
|
Posted By: Zed
Date Posted: February 25 2013 at 5:05am
|
For anyone interested, here is a link to a site that features several videos of the Mk19 Spitfire of one of my clients, as well as his recently finished Hawker Sea Fury, which was the last piston engined Royal Navy fighter. 18 cylinder radial, 3,000 HP http://www.youtube.com/user/ericgoujon/videos
Turn the sound up for the fly pasts!!
------------- It's nice to be important, but it's more important to be nice!
|
Posted By: A square 10
Date Posted: February 25 2013 at 7:25am
|
"................
The B-29 was even worse at 40 per 100,000 hours; the world's most sophisticated, most capable and most expensive bomber was too urgently needed to be able to stand down for mere safety reasons.
(Compare: when a $2.1 billion B-2 crashed in 2008, the Air Force declared a two-month "safety pause").
The B-29 was no better for maintenance. Although the R3350 was known as a complicated, troublesome power-plant, only half the mechanics had previous experience with it.
..............................."
the one in my avitar was one that made it back to rest in the desert , my father was an electrician on her ground crew and left gunner in the air , the avitar is the cover of yank magazine in december 44 , photo taken on hardstand soon after the dec 7th raid
|
Posted By: lmao_37
Date Posted: February 25 2013 at 9:57am
|
There is no mention of the Tempest or the Defient or the lysander sorry but these were all aircraft flown bybthe RAF during world war two the lysander was used fly spys in to france as well as other duties.
|
Posted By: hoadie
Date Posted: February 25 2013 at 11:29am
The Tempest & the TYPHOON were one and the same.The Bolton-Paul defiant wasn't produced in great numbers, & was actually obsolete by the time the festivities got going. I note there was ALOT of Yanks flying in RCAF.(We got into the 2nd twirl at war in '39.)Doc Hannah only lost ONE crewman during the airwar.It was a kid named "PARKER" from Chicago.He was trapped in the tail turret when they crashed the Sterling on a training mission.He couldn't get out when she burnt.Went onto Lancs after that..& didn't lose anyone else. Hoadie
------------- Loose wimmen tightened here
|
Posted By: 303Guy
Date Posted: February 25 2013 at 12:19pm
hoadie wrote:
The Tempest & the TYPHOON were one and the same. | That's not quite correct. (But close).
The Tempest was developed from the Typhoon with basically an improved wing, being thinner among what can be seen in the image. Same airframe though.
------------- 303Guy
|
Posted By: Shamu
Date Posted: February 25 2013 at 10:00pm
& you had to "tap the brakes" at about 90 KIAS just to get the tail to come up.
------------- Don't shoot till you see the whites of their thighs. (Unofficial motto of the Royal Air Force)
|
Posted By: hoadie
Date Posted: February 26 2013 at 6:51am
Awful lot of casualties due to carbon monoxide poisoning..an issue they never resolved.Just shows, saftey took a back seat to numbers.The earlier models had a tail separation problem(The tail plane would separate from the rest of the kite)So they put re-enforcing clamps on 'em to hold it together! Napier-Sabre engine had HUGE development issues, as well.(I wonder if anyone kept any of them, or if they all went for scrap?) Hoadie
------------- Loose wimmen tightened here
|
Posted By: Shamu
Date Posted: February 26 2013 at 9:22pm
Years back I worked as a volunteer at a privately owned warbird museum in Gloucester, they had both a Tempest & a Mossie.That Sabre engine was a horror story, even just starting it was an exercise in futility! 
------------- Don't shoot till you see the whites of their thighs. (Unofficial motto of the Royal Air Force)
|
Posted By: muffett.2008
Date Posted: February 27 2013 at 4:19am
 We have a Warbirds Museum here, it's pretty easy to get distracted when the boys are playing.
|
Posted By: 25-5
Date Posted: February 27 2013 at 6:22am
|
These are what my uncle flew. C-46 (left) and C-47 (right) over the "Hump" in the CBI, forgotten theater of war. In SAC he flew the B-29 tanker. I think he is flying now up there, but I am sure he chose a Lear Jet and no mountains,
------------- For the pikes must be together at the rising of the moon.
|
Posted By: Shamu
Date Posted: February 27 2013 at 6:46am
If you want some fantastic pictures & video of warbirds flying google "North Wales, the Mach Loop". Its an area in Wales where every flyable warbird in the U. K. gets to strut its stuff through a series of valleys & reservoirs. The spectators are sometimes level with them as they go past.
------------- Don't shoot till you see the whites of their thighs. (Unofficial motto of the Royal Air Force)
|
Posted By: 303Guy
Date Posted: February 27 2013 at 3:40pm
My Dad flew Dakota's from North Africa into Europe delivering supplies behind the iron curtain. He had a passport issued by Moscow to allow allied pilots to fly in. He said that in Budapest there was a Russian official stamping the crates delivered as 'made in Russia'. When questioned this fellow replied that they were made in Russia and that the Dakota delivering them was made in Russia. Well, Dacota's were supplied to Russia in parts for assembly but no doubt these guys were 'not being told the truth' exactly.
------------- 303Guy
|
Posted By: Shamu
Date Posted: February 27 2013 at 9:14pm
Sounds very Soviet to me. IIRC they claimed to have "invented" sex, sliced bread & the wheel as well.
------------- Don't shoot till you see the whites of their thighs. (Unofficial motto of the Royal Air Force)
|
Posted By: LE Owner
Date Posted: March 20 2013 at 3:56am
|
The Russians built many copies of the DC3, with beefed up airframe and extra tough landing gear for flying out of rough air strips or pasteurs and such. They may still build these, or at least build parts for refurbing them. PS After watching a documentary about the Horten flying wing I rembered the Northrop flying wing. Turns out Northrup had been developing the idea since the 30's and had a few prop engined prototypes by 44. No jet engines though, that came later.
|
Posted By: 303Guy
Date Posted: March 20 2013 at 10:10am
A question always on my mind is how do the Spitfire and Mustang compare? Two marvellous planes, different yet similar. Both beautiful.
------------- 303Guy
|
Posted By: hoadie
Date Posted: March 20 2013 at 11:37am
The Spit was instrumental in development of the Mustang. Primary Mustangs were Allison powered on a P-40 frame. Tweaking the P-40 frame, & adding the Merlin, allowed for increased performance. Putting fuel tanks behind the pilot, & allowing for a new idea of "drop tanks" gave the 'tang the long range the Spit didn't have.(Also the internal tanks were self sealing.) Further improvments-like moving the intake from the cowl & putting it under the fuselage increased speed & gave less drag. They kept on tweaking it, & it kept getting faster. One thing to remember tho..by the time Mustangs were into the theater in serious numbers - the best of the Luftwaffe had already been decimated.Therefore-its hard to actually say how well she would have done if they still had skilled veteran pilots with 190's & 109's. Hoadie
------------- Loose wimmen tightened here
|
Posted By: EnfieldNut82
Date Posted: March 20 2013 at 12:02pm
If I am not mistaken didn't the US build the mustang for the british during ww2? I personally like the spitfire better myself.
|
Posted By: hoadie
Date Posted: March 20 2013 at 8:34pm
The Air Ministry approached the U.S. for help in developing an aircraft to replace the Spit.Spit was an awesome kite-but she lacked the range.Britain was maxed out in wartime production (so was Canada). The US hadn't entered the war yet-so had excess production capabilities.When they came to see what the states had developed-it was dissapointing.A slightly tweaked P-40, with an Allison engine..It just didn't cut it.BUT..rather than abandon the project-someone in the ministry saw the potential of the airframe & had 6 sent to Blighty WITHOUT engines.Once in Britain-they tweaked a few things(balance points & trusses etc) & added a MERLIN engine.This proved to be the answere-although was very difficult to fly at first.(Balances were off-giving her the propensity to flip end over end, among other things)After crashing a few, they had the answeres needed..& 1st 'Tangs went into production.They just kept getting better as aerodynamics & power plant improvements kept coming. Hoadie
------------- Loose wimmen tightened here
|
Posted By: Zed
Date Posted: March 21 2013 at 5:06am
|
The last Spitfires were fitted with the Rolls-Royce Griffin engine which was 36 litres instead of the Merlins 27 litres. The photo reconaissance model Mk19 had a pressurized cabin (and no side door) and had an operational ceiling of 45,000 feet. They had larger fuel tanks in the wings because they had no guns . One of my clients owns and fly's one of these Mk19's. It is magnificent. Probably one of the most recognizable and beautiful sounds in the mechanical world! (in my opinion)
------------- It's nice to be important, but it's more important to be nice!
|
Posted By: muffett.2008
Date Posted: March 21 2013 at 5:51am
Posted By: hoadie
Date Posted: March 21 2013 at 6:27am
I believe the Mk19 also had a TWO stage supercharger, to allow it to gain the extra altitude Hoadie
------------- Loose wimmen tightened here
|
Posted By: Shamu
Date Posted: March 21 2013 at 10:06pm
|
That was one of the big differences between the Merlin & the Griffon. One thing the Gridffon was supposed to do was give a performance bost over the Merlin at low altitude. Because of that goal the Griffons were originally fitted with single-stage blowers, not 2-stage, like the Merlins. If I'm lucky I may get to  a merlin this weekend, I'm off to the Air & space museum at Dulles airport. I'll see if I can get pics as they have an engine gallery there.
------------- Don't shoot till you see the whites of their thighs. (Unofficial motto of the Royal Air Force)
|
Posted By: Zed
Date Posted: March 22 2013 at 3:57am
|
The merlin engined Spitfire is the prettier of the two; with the Griffon engine the front is a bit bulkier with bulged cowls above the exhaust stacks to make room for the rocker covers. The Mk19 which I looked around last year now has a five blade prop; prior to that they were running a counter rotating six blade. This Spit is the subject of many Youtube videos,(generally posted by Eric Goujon) well worth a look if you have time. Some in cockpit video as well. The plane is now in Camo colours instead of the original reconaissance scheme.
------------- It's nice to be important, but it's more important to be nice!
|
Posted By: Shamu
Date Posted: March 24 2013 at 1:03am
Ok, OK! So it's a Packard Merlin, not a real Roller! & the much maligned Allison sitting right next to it. They also have the Shuttle "Discovery" having updated from the "Enterprise" & the restoration hanger is almost open..
------------- Don't shoot till you see the whites of their thighs. (Unofficial motto of the Royal Air Force)
|
Posted By: hoadie
Date Posted: March 24 2013 at 2:42am
Oh man! Thats BEAUTIFUL! Hoadie
------------- Loose wimmen tightened here
|
Posted By: paddyofurniture
Date Posted: March 24 2013 at 3:05am
Wow!
I have not been there in 40 years. I am sure I have missed a lot.
------------- Always looking for military manuals, Dodge M37 items,books on Berlin Germany, old atlases ( before 1946) , military maps of Scotland. English and Canadian gun parts.
|
Posted By: Shamu
Date Posted: March 24 2013 at 3:46am
|
Oh you have! The whole thing is slowly moving from the old building on the mall in DC to a series of aircraft hangers at the edge of Dulles airport in Chantilly, Virginia. Phase 2, shown here is now about 99% complete & the restoration hanger is working, but not yet open to the public, but there is an open observation gallety. They eventually hope to consolidate everything there, including the old Silverhills restoration facility. A couple of interior views. Even these don't really show it all off theres just so much of it packed in everywhere. More including webcams here: http://airandspace.si.edu/udvarhazy/" rel="nofollow - http://airandspace.si.edu/udvarhazy/
------------- Don't shoot till you see the whites of their thighs. (Unofficial motto of the Royal Air Force)
|
Posted By: paddyofurniture
Date Posted: March 24 2013 at 4:17am
I have missed a lot.
------------- Always looking for military manuals, Dodge M37 items,books on Berlin Germany, old atlases ( before 1946) , military maps of Scotland. English and Canadian gun parts.
|
Posted By: hoadie
Date Posted: March 24 2013 at 5:04am
OH MAN!! I'd overamp for SURE if I was in there! Nice shot of the Kingfisher Hoadie
------------- Loose wimmen tightened here
|
Posted By: Shamu
Date Posted: March 24 2013 at 5:44am
You should make a visit of it. The NRA museum is just down the road.
------------- Don't shoot till you see the whites of their thighs. (Unofficial motto of the Royal Air Force)
|
Posted By: paddyofurniture
Date Posted: March 24 2013 at 6:29am
Sounds like a great road trip to take.
------------- Always looking for military manuals, Dodge M37 items,books on Berlin Germany, old atlases ( before 1946) , military maps of Scotland. English and Canadian gun parts.
|
Posted By: hoadie
Date Posted: March 24 2013 at 11:25am
Back in the day..we did the 125th anniversary re-enactment of 1st Manassas just outside of Dulles.Went to the Viet Nam memorial & Arlington..If I hadda known bout this place-I'd a bin there fer sure!(maybe STILL there!) Hoadie
------------- Loose wimmen tightened here
|
Posted By: paddyofurniture
Date Posted: March 24 2013 at 11:37pm
The "Wall" is a strange place for a lot of people. I know people who are listed and missed.
------------- Always looking for military manuals, Dodge M37 items,books on Berlin Germany, old atlases ( before 1946) , military maps of Scotland. English and Canadian gun parts.
|
Posted By: hoadie
Date Posted: March 25 2013 at 1:07am
I'll say..Ken Furhman had never been to it, before that.(He did 2 1/2 tours). He selected ME (of all people) to assist him in the grotto.Wow. I traced the names of his brother, his C.O. & the pilot of the Herc he crashed in, for him. Its a humbling experience. Even moreso when this huge man is reduced to tears.I defy anyone to walk through there-look at those 58,000 names-& come out dry-eyed! Hoadie
------------- Loose wimmen tightened here
|
Posted By: Smokey
Date Posted: March 25 2013 at 3:18am
Hoadie, I was at the 125th Antietam too, with the Irish brigade. Both sides took the appearance of looking pretty shot up at the "sunken road", though I was on the right side. 
------------- The thief may possess something he stole, but he does not own it. The owner has a right to take his property back from the thief.
|
Posted By: hoadie
Date Posted: March 25 2013 at 5:10am
If you were on the "right" side...why were you in the IRISH Brigade? Guess you just couldnt live up to OUR standards..so you lived DOWN to theirs! Hoadie ZINNNGGG!
------------- Loose wimmen tightened here
|
Posted By: paddyofurniture
Date Posted: March 25 2013 at 5:12am
I have seen the Berlin Wall and the Wall in DC. The Wall in DC is a place of Honor and Peace.
The Berlin wall was the wall of lost Freedom and what could have been.
------------- Always looking for military manuals, Dodge M37 items,books on Berlin Germany, old atlases ( before 1946) , military maps of Scotland. English and Canadian gun parts.
|
Posted By: hoadie
Date Posted: March 25 2013 at 9:34am
The wall in Berlin was a symbol of totalarism.It took a regiem(?) to put it up...& the PEOPLE to take it down. Hoadie
------------- Loose wimmen tightened here
|
Posted By: paddyofurniture
Date Posted: March 25 2013 at 10:04am
I lived in Berlin for four years and say the Wall everyday.
I wish I was there to see it come down but I had left nine years before it fell.
Hoadie, there was a IRISH Brigade one each side.
------------- Always looking for military manuals, Dodge M37 items,books on Berlin Germany, old atlases ( before 1946) , military maps of Scotland. English and Canadian gun parts.
|
Posted By: hoadie
Date Posted: March 25 2013 at 11:51am
I KNOW there was Irish on both sides...but if you hadda bin on the RIGHT side, ya would call it SHARPSBURG!! Heathen! Hoadie
------------- Loose wimmen tightened here
|
Posted By: paddyofurniture
Date Posted: March 25 2013 at 10:24pm
Hoadie,
As my Family is from western Maryland I do know the history of the bloodiest days.
------------- Always looking for military manuals, Dodge M37 items,books on Berlin Germany, old atlases ( before 1946) , military maps of Scotland. English and Canadian gun parts.
|
Posted By: hoadie
Date Posted: March 26 2013 at 12:18am
SEE!? SEE!? Maryland...that automatically puts you on the wrong side! What a shame..Maryland COULD'VE SHOULD'VE (& almost did) join the south..but alas..twas not to be. You said you were at SHARPSBURG for 125th..what 'bout 1st & 2nd Manassass? Did you do G'Burg or Pittsburg Landing? If I recall correctly-SHARPSBURG & APPOMATOX were the only 2 I missed.(Couldn't make it to Sharpsburg,& refused to surrender @ APPO...but I did SAYLOR'S CREEK. Hoadie
------------- Loose wimmen tightened here
|
Posted By: paddyofurniture
Date Posted: March 26 2013 at 1:00am
I do not think so.
There are a few Gray Ghosts in my family. I did not know them to shake their hand but I honor their memory.
------------- Always looking for military manuals, Dodge M37 items,books on Berlin Germany, old atlases ( before 1946) , military maps of Scotland. English and Canadian gun parts.
|
Posted By: LE Owner
Date Posted: April 01 2013 at 2:13pm
hoadie wrote:
The Air Ministry approached the U.S. for help in developing an aircraft to replace the Spit.Spit was an awesome kite-but she lacked the range.Britain was maxed out in wartime production (so was Canada). The US hadn't entered the war yet-so had excess production capabilities.When they came to see what the states had developed-it was dissapointing.A slightly tweaked P-40, with an Allison engine..It just didn't cut it.BUT..rather than abandon the project-someone in the ministry saw the potential of the airframe & had 6 sent to Blighty WITHOUT engines.Once in Britain-they tweaked a few things(balance points & trusses etc) & added a MERLIN engine.This proved to be the answere-although was very difficult to fly at first.(Balances were off-giving her the propensity to flip end over end, among other things)After crashing a few, they had the answeres needed..& 1st 'Tangs went into production.They just kept getting better as aerodynamics & power plant improvements kept coming. Hoadie |
Actually the Mustang owed little or nothing to the P-40 design. North American Aircraft co had hired a German immigrant who had worked for Fokker and he influenced the design as his idea of an improved ME fighter. This is one reason some of the early Mustangs were shot down by mistake, they looked too much like the ME-109. The later bubble canopy cured that ID problem. If you check out some older war films the early model Mustangs and A-36 dive bomber version were often painted up to pass for ME-109 fighters on film. There were a few P-40 fighter fitted with Merlin engines, but these were not much improved by the extra horsepower. Curtis aircraft co built a number of improved P-40 protypes but the basic design was simply not well suited to higher horsepower inline engines, the P-40 airframe having been a development of the radial engine P-36 fighter. The P-40 continued to soldier on as a ground attack and close air support fighter.
|
Posted By: hoadie
Date Posted: April 01 2013 at 8:37pm
With all due respect, methinks you may be in error. The British Purchasing Commission was sent to the U.S. with the aim of acquiring American built military aircraft, in 1938. This commission was led by Sir Henry Self.(They were already dealing with North American with the purchase of the AT-6 trainers-Harvards for Canucks). The pres.@ North Am was James H Kindelberger.(They called him "Dutch")He had worked @ Glen Martin & Douglas aircraft before joining N/American.He also tored Germany & Blighty to visit their aircraft factories in the late 30's.When it became apparent the P-40 upgrades werent going to "cut it" Kindelberger & his VP-Atwood approached Sir Henry with a proposal that THEY design a fighter.(They hadn't done that before).Self issued the order w/stipulations:protyotypes to be ready in 120 days,cost not to exceed $50,000.(It was actually designed, built & flown in 117 days!)They started with the ALLISON V-1710.After alot of development glitches, Sir Henry believed the design was sound, & placed an order for 300 NA-73's in Oct 1940. Theres alot more info availble on this in my library-if anyone is interested. Hoadie
------------- Loose wimmen tightened here
|
Posted By: Shamu
Date Posted: April 01 2013 at 9:33pm
|
I'm with Hoadie on this one. The British wanted a US made firghter, but the only thing even close to the issied spec was the P-40. Unfortunately they were running at 100% capacity already & so North American was approached to make an under licence copy of the P-40 for the RAF. N A suggested instead that they could design & build a better aircraft from scratch. That aircraft was the original P-51. It had a more modern design overall including "laminar flow" wings for les drag & a vastly better designed figelage as well. There was really no commonality between the P-40 & the P-51 except the Allison powerplant & that changed once a Merlin was introduced to the P-51 airframe for its superior high altuitude performace.
------------- Don't shoot till you see the whites of their thighs. (Unofficial motto of the Royal Air Force)
|
Posted By: hoadie
Date Posted: April 01 2013 at 9:44pm
The "laminar flow" wing wasn't intended for the new fighter.In fact, it was a bone of contention..which was ultimatley proved the right thing to do by Mr.Ed Horkey & his team.The initial wind tunnel tests in Calif were not good.Quite a setback.But another test in a bigger tunnel @ univ of Seattle proved the previous test had been misleading.Further design upgrades to reduce drag were then implemented. The P-40 was kept on in strength with the commonwealth throughout because it was a good ground support aircraft, & fairly tough Hoadie
------------- Loose wimmen tightened here
|
Posted By: Shamu
Date Posted: April 02 2013 at 5:51am
Gratuitous P-40, & P-51 pics from the Air & Space museum. "Lope's Hope" the Curtiss P-40, not the original flown by Donald S. Lopez Sr, the DD of the Smithsonian, but a copy.
Capt. Charles F.
Blair’s “Excalibur III”, a P-51C modified for long range air racing.
------------- Don't shoot till you see the whites of their thighs. (Unofficial motto of the Royal Air Force)
|
Posted By: paddyofurniture
Date Posted: April 02 2013 at 7:20am
Very cool photos.
------------- Always looking for military manuals, Dodge M37 items,books on Berlin Germany, old atlases ( before 1946) , military maps of Scotland. English and Canadian gun parts.
|
Posted By: paddyofurniture
Date Posted: April 02 2013 at 10:11am
Has anyone read / owned this book, "National Air and Space Museum"by C.D.B. Bryan.
It is a great book. If you get a chance you will enjoy this book if you like aircraft.
The book is 10 inch by 12 inches with a thickness of about 2 inches. I would gladly leaned it out but postage would be a killer.
Let me know what you think.
Yes Hoadie there are lots of photos.
------------- Always looking for military manuals, Dodge M37 items,books on Berlin Germany, old atlases ( before 1946) , military maps of Scotland. English and Canadian gun parts.
|
Posted By: LE Owner
Date Posted: April 03 2013 at 11:35pm
hoadie wrote:
With all due respect, methinks you may be in error. The British Purchasing Commission was sent to the U.S. with the aim of acquiring American built military aircraft, in 1938. This commission was led by Sir Henry Self.(They were already dealing with North American with the purchase of the AT-6 trainers-Harvards for Canucks). The pres.@ North Am was James H Kindelberger.(They called him "Dutch")He had worked @ Glen Martin & Douglas aircraft before joining N/American.He also tored Germany & Blighty to visit their aircraft factories in the late 30's.When it became apparent the P-40 upgrades werent going to "cut it" Kindelberger & his VP-Atwood approached Sir Henry with a proposal that THEY design a fighter.(They hadn't done that before).Self issued the order w/stipulations:protyotypes to be ready in 120 days,cost not to exceed $50,000.(It was actually designed, built & flown in 117 days!)They started with the ALLISON V-1710.After alot of development glitches, Sir Henry believed the design was sound, & placed an order for 300 NA-73's in Oct 1940. Theres alot more info availble on this in my library-if anyone is interested. Hoadie |
Not sure why you think my post is in error. Theres nothing in the P-51 design that harks back to the Curtis P-40. The airframes and wings are entirely different. The P-51 was never an upgraded P-40. Edgar Schmued the North American engineer who designed the P-51 had immigrated to Brazil from Germany in 1925 and to the U S from Brazil in 1931. https://www.google.com/url?q=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edgar_Schmued&sa=U&ei=BI1dUYGdEqHj2QWkxICoCQ&ved=0CAcQFjAA&client=internal-uds-cse&usg=AFQjCNE-F3d7qZujdoJb8yJXdjZES96NTg" rel="nofollow - https://www.google.com/url?q=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edgar_Schmued&sa=U&ei=BI1dUYGdEqHj2QWkxICoCQ&ved=0CAcQFjAA&client=internal-uds-cse&usg=AFQjCNE-F3d7qZujdoJb8yJXdjZES96NTg And he had worked for Fokker in the United States. He and other U S aircraft designers studied the same experimental data compiled by European aircraft engineers and incorporated many of the features of the ME-109 in the new aircraft. While not a copy of the ME by any means the similarity in the airframe design is obvious. They also studied some data on oil coolers and such that came from Curtis' attempts to upgrade the P-40, but those Curtis prototypes were dead ends. The Merlin engined upgrade of the P-40 were used by the U S Airforce and by the British and Free French with some sucess, but the Merlin engine used was an earlier and less efficient version than that later used by the P-51. The early versions of the P-51 and the related A-36 Apache divebomber had used the Allison engine, the upgrade to the Merlin engine was natural under the circumstances and greatly increased performance. PS http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_A-36" rel="nofollow - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_A-36 To be more clear. Its a matter of "design philosophy". The ME-109 was originally designed as a high altitude interceptor. Its low drag wing came at a price, the wing acheived low drag by being far thinner than normal for an aircraft in its class. Because the wing was so thin its spars could not accomodate the landing gear strut attachment points and related machinery. The landing gear had to hinge down from the fueselage with wheels stowed in the wings when folded. While the Laminar flow wing of the P-51 was not as efficient as hoped, it still acheived low drag while allowing the wings to be thick enough for sturdy landing gear attachment points with wing stowage and heavy ordnance and drop tank attachment points, as well as large wing guns of .50 to 20mm caliber. Among the design features of the ME-109 that are found on the P-51 are the trapezoid wing planform with squared tips. This feature was one of several reasons that the Mustang was often mistaken for the ME-109. The later "F" and "G" versions of the ME-109 used a semi-elyptical wing tip, while the Japanese went to a squared wing tip more by guess and by golly when problems with the folding wing tips of Naval Zero fighters suffered damage and they test flew some with the rounded wing tips removed and found this improved speed and dive characteristics with little loss in manueverability.
|
Posted By: hoadie
Date Posted: April 04 2013 at 11:18am
I have three large books on the P-51. Nowhere do I find any mention of Edgar.Schmeud. Where may I find some info on this guy..I don't consider wikipedia to be reliable. Hoadie
------------- Loose wimmen tightened here
|
Posted By: LE Owner
Date Posted: April 04 2013 at 3:14pm
|
Heres a couple of news stories on his death in 1985 http://articles.latimes.com/1985-06-16/local/me-2785_1_world-war-ii" rel="nofollow - http://articles.latimes.com/1985-06-16/local/me-2785_1_world-war-ii http://www.nytimes.com/1985/06/11/us/edgar-schmued.html" rel="nofollow - http://www.nytimes.com/1985/06/11/us/edgar-schmued.html An honor guard of six P-51 Mustangs did a flyover, five in the "Missing Man" formation the sixth scattering his ashes at sea. There are memorials in his honor as the designer of the P-51. Not every book gives the complete story. I have a fairly detailed book on all the P ( Pursuit ) series U S Fighters, designed before they switched to the F ( Fighter )designation. Few of the guys who did the actual detailed design work on American aircraft ever got much credit for it. Schmued being a German born immigrant may have led to the company not mentioning his role in designing the P-51/A-36 aircraft. I'm sure the British would not have minded his heritage, but if there had been serious problems with the plane it would have been a PR nightmare. Heres a book you might want to add to your library. http://www.amazon.com/MUSTANG-DESIGNER-Edgar-Schmued-P-51/dp/1560989947" rel="nofollow - http://www.amazon.com/MUSTANG-DESIGNER-Edgar-Schmued-P-51/dp/1560989947 PS While the Laminar flow wing of the P-51 was not as efficient as wind tunnel testing indicated, this was mainly due to degradation of the wing surfaces after some use. Wear and tear of painted surfaces could disrupt airflow at high speed, which may be why most latter P-51 fighters flew with bare polished metal instead of painted camo. Later testing against German aircraft wings showed that these also suffered increased drag due to the relatively rough surfaces caused by hurried production. So it appears that the Laminar flow cross section did contribute more to speed and range than later testing had suggested. Wing surface smoothness was very important to high speed aircraft. Some Naval Aviators actually shined up the leading edges of their wings with boot polish and claimed that gave them a 3-5 MPH increase in airspeed. While Wiki is not the gretest source, it does give sources and links that you can use to check out their entries for accuracy.
|
Posted By: 303Guy
Date Posted: April 06 2013 at 5:25am
Might I point out that the Messerschmitt was designated Bf 109, having been developed before Willy Messerschmitt acquired the company.
------------- 303Guy
|
Posted By: LE Owner
Date Posted: April 06 2013 at 5:45am
303Guy wrote:
Might I point out that the Messerschmitt was designated Bf 109, having been developed before Willy Messerschmitt acquired the company. |
Yep, but if you say BF-109 very few people will know what you are talking about.
|
Posted By: Shamu
Date Posted: April 06 2013 at 5:53am
303Guy wrote:
Might I point out that the Messerschmitt was designated Bf 109, having been developed before Willy Messerschmitt acquired the company. |
I have found a somewhat different timelimne & explaination of the "BF" designation.
Bayerische
Flugzeugwerke (BFW)
(Bavarian Aircraft Works) was reformed in 1926.
Willy
Messerschmitt joined the company in 1927 as chief designer and engineer.
Design work on
Messerschmitt Project Number P.1034 (the prototype for the Messerschmitt Bf 109) began in March 1934, just three weeks after
the development contract was awarded. The basic mock-up was completed by May,
and a more detailed design mock-up was ready by January 1935. The RLM
designated the design as type "Bf 109," the next available from a
batch of numbers assigned to BFW.
------------- Don't shoot till you see the whites of their thighs. (Unofficial motto of the Royal Air Force)
|
|