Most Kills

[Copper]

@george-k said in Most Kills:

@copper said in Most Kills:

And I took a picture of GK standing in front of his airplane

I'd like to see that.

I always took a picture of whoever I was with when we walked past the Enola Gay, at least I think I did.

I'm sure we walked past that plane and looked into the cockpit, I'm pretty sure I took the picture. Didn't I?

[George K]

@copper I don't recall. I remember seeing the cockpit at the other Air & Space Museum (at the Smithsonian) back in 1993 (1995?).

[89th]

Found it

[Copper]

I remember GK and D4 being there. I know there were some pictures posted here from that visit, but those might have just been with lufin, M&M and al

What was the date? I'll see what I can find.

[Mik]

A couple things - first, that chart really shows the material destruction that was WWII.

Second - the Finns must have been desperate. Would you go to war in a Fiat fighter plane?

[Mik]

I also did not know that the ME-262 was used so extensively in WWII.

[kluurs]

@mik said in Most Kills:

ME-262

Over the course of the war, Me 262s are believed to have shot down 542 Allied aircraft while losing only 100 jets. One German pilot later said that fighting in an Me 262 "was like being a god in a way."

[89th]

@mik said in Most Kills:

that chart really shows the material destruction that was WWII.

Indeed... WWI (and even moreso WWII with the advances in weapons/planes) came at a unique time where we had bigger and more deadly weapons while still having multi-country conflicts where "killing more soldiers than the other side kills yours" is basically what determined the winner.

Now with tech, drones, economic impacts, and international organizations... seeing that much destruction and carnage only comes from natural disasters (tsunamis, pandemics, etc).

[kluurs]

@89th said in Most Kills:

@mik said in Most Kills:

that chart really shows the material destruction that was WWII.

Now with tech, drones, economic impacts, and international organizations... seeing that much destruction and carnage only comes from natural disasters (tsunamis, pandemics, etc).

One wonders about what a battle would look like fighting a country like China. They could use a mass of mini-drones to attack any infantry position or armored column for that matter. The face of war will be very different next time around. AND even little countries could do this on a smaller scale - i.e. explosive device attached to a do-it-yourself drone could take out a sniper position or a command headquarters. Terrorism in the next round will also be different - no need for a suicide bomber if you can send the explosives over with a remote control drone bought off the internet.

Maybe TNCR should do a 365 a day calendar of "things to think about to keep you up at night..."

[89th]

@kluurs If there was a full blown war between US and China (which I think would never happen based on international/economic pressure), you are right, it would be flush with drones, heck even satellite-based warfare, and hopefully the avoidance of nukes.

[Renauda]

@mik said in Most Kills:

A couple things - first, that chart really shows the material destruction that was WWII.

Second - the Finns must have been desperate. Would you go to war in a Fiat fighter plane?

Finns used any and all aircraft they could get their hands on- German, British, Soviet and apparently, Italian. Not sure if they had any US aircraft. I doubt it. I know the Brits shipped them a number of Hurricanes and they captured quite a few Soviet aircraft. Germans supplied some after June 1941.

[Jolly]

@renauda said in Most Kills:

@mik said in Most Kills:

A couple things - first, that chart really shows the material destruction that was WWII.

Second - the Finns must have been desperate. Would you go to war in a Fiat fighter plane?

Finns used any and all aircraft they could get their hands on- German, British, Soviet and apparently, Italian. Not sure if they had any US aircraft. I doubt it. I know the Brits shipped them a number of Hurricanes and they captured quite a few Soviet aircraft. Germans supplied some after June 1941.

Link to video

I think he's got four or so follow-ons, but you get the gist...

[Renauda]

@Jolly

I stand corrected. I had forgotten about the Brewster Buffalos entirely. Pretty sure that the Soviets had a few early on after June ‘41. I think the Brits transhipped them to the Russians as the RAF found them unsuitable to the high altitude war it was engaged with the Nazis. In any case the Russians much preferred the P 39 Airacobra supplied through Lend Lease. The US supplied close to 5000 of them to the USSR.

[Jolly]

How about the American plane the Soviets had significant input for design mods?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell_P-63_Kingcobra

[Copper]

I have seen some ugly airplanes.

I don't know if that is the ugliest

But it is top 10

[Renauda]

@jolly said in Most Kills:

How about the American plane the Soviets had significant input for design mods?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell_P-63_Kingcobra

Interesting. We are familiar with the aircraft:

https://albertaaviationmuseum.com/2019/08/01/p-39-update-one-volunteers-lifelong-dream/

[Jolly]

The Airacobra is a neat aircraft. One the Soviets made work, after the British and Americans thought it was a dog. The Kingcobra, after Soviet input, was a bigger, better plane. With the Merlin, it was a 400+ mph plane at altitude.

I disagree with Copper. This is not an ugly airplane...

[George K]

Just a random comment...

I am always amazed at the sheer volume of knowledge that people on this forum have...about everything.

This thread is the perfect example of that, and I am humbled.

[Jolly]

Nah, some of us just like WW2 history. In fact, several of us.

Another really, really interesting Soviet aircraft, that came about because the Americans wouldn't Lend/lease them any...Which is understandable, since we paid more to develop and build it than we spent on the atomic bomb.

https://www.airforcemag.com/article/0609bomber/