Some claim that the 262 could have had an impact on the terms of surrender
if it hadnt been neutralised by misuse as a light bomber, and the lack of
surviving skilled combat pilots. Who knows, but its difficult to believe a
single advanced aircraft type could have such a profound effect.
Serviceability I read centred around an incomplete understanding of
turbine/compressor blade vibration caused in part by tip vortex shedding.
Frank Whittle had it fairly sussed, but, according to him, no-one was
listening.
For servicing hassles, the Napier Sabre H16 (Typhoon, Tempest and a few
tanks) would take some beating.
Tanks, tanks, tanks. Tiger was too slow and heavy. It needed thick armour
cause it couldnt run away. Very German; I bet Ferdinand Porsche (engine
behind rear axle) had a hand in it. Many reckon that the 88 was the best
"original" cannon. Would be interested to hear what you think of the
bazooka; now theres a weapon.
Psychological warfare has been around for a long time and Sun Tzu refers to
it obliquely. The only effective psych component of the US that I can
see,was one of perceived size. Incidentally, this size effect is what Ho Chi
Minh used to freak the US out of Vietnam; he used the 5 to 1 gambit.
Yes I have heard of inflatable tanks (Normandy diversion); ever heard of the
Trojan horse? Sort of an inflatable tank with teeth.
Never heard of innocent sounding Canadians, however..............
Are they also inflatable?
Cheers
Steve
-----Original Message-----
From: Paul Bowers [mailto:pbowers@pipingdesign.com]
Sent: Monday, January 19, 2004 6:43 PM
To: PipingDesign@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [PipingDesign] OGF: War History
Me262? Good idea (from what I've heard, it was a bitch for maintenance but freaked the hell out of allied pilots due to its speed).
The German Panther was the best overall theoretical tank but the Russian T-34 (that was a really good design) bested it.
Even the mighty Tiger couldn't cope with 5 or 6 Shermans stalking it. The Sherman commanders knew its weak points and took advantage - many Tigers were killed by this stalking procedure. Many lives were lost, but it worked. We had more tanks.
Regarding innovation, you are way off base. You are forgetting the psychological warfare angle. Ever hear of inflatable tanks or innocent-sounding Canadians?
Paul
> Paul
> you are spoiling for an argument.
> If you want to compare planes that saw service for only part of the
war,
> then you had better include the Me262.
> From memory the major feature of the P51 was the "laminar" (thin) wing
> section. It is not balanced comparing the P51 with pre war designs
such as
> the BF109, Fw190(sort of) and the hurricane & spitfire.
> For my choice on looks: Fw190, F4U tie (yes I like radials). But
everyone
> has an opinion on looks, and I think WW1 planes leave the rest for
dead.
>
> As for the tiger tank, they had an unfortunate habit of falling
through
> bridges owing to a weight of over 60T. The germans made an even bigger
> prototype called a Maus, over 100T I think.
>
> As far as innovation goes, I dont think the US was in it. I would say
> germany followed by britain. The US major contribution appeared to be
mass
> production capability far in excess of others.
Yahoo! Groups Links
To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PipingDesign/
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: PipingDesign-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ Received on Mon Jan 19 03:25:00 2004
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon Oct 27 2008 - 20:24:02 EDT