![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Wed, 28 Apr 2004 23:14:39 -0400, vincent p. norris
wrote: That might be true. But back in 1918, guys with less time than anyone in this news group, probably, got into Camels and flew away.. Some killed themselves, but most of them did not. Survival of the fittest. The history books describe the Camel as an airplane far more dangerous to those learning to fly it than combat with the Germans. It was extremely short coupled and the large prop bolted to the spinning rotory engine resulted in a remarkable turning radius opposite the direction of the prop/engine rotation. Some have described the turning radius as being scarcely larger than the wingspan. Unfortunately, few pilots could use this maneuverability because loss of control was always close at hand. The intersting contradiction is that most shootdowns, in WWI, occured from stalking and firing from behind and below the target aircraft, or swift pounces from above and behind. During the "furball" type of swirling dogfights, few got shot down as everyone was maneuvering to avoid collision and get on someone's tail or get someone off theirs. The smart guys stayed off to one side and above and pounced on pilots who strayed out of the mass of airplanes without paying attention to their surroundings. The Germans seemed to understand the proper lessons learned from WWI and what constituted an effective fighter as the Messerschmitt Bf109 was not designed with dogfighting in mind. It was almost purely a "bouncer", and aircraft that excelled in high speed dives upon an unaware enemy. But the cockpit was so narrow that the pilots literally could not apply as much force to the stick as they could have had they a few more inches to within the cockpit to brace themselves. (notes from British pilots who tested a captured 109 during the Battle of Britain) In addition, the 109 had a higher wingloading than either the Spitfire or the Hurricane, and it's stall speed that deturmines how tightly a fighter turns. In WWI as WWII, it was the careful stalk and high speed bounce that accounted for most of the shootdowns, not the dogfight. Corky Scott |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
To Tarver Engineering | fudog50 | Military Aviation | 2 | January 9th 04 07:15 PM |
12 Dec 2003 - Today’s Military, Veteran, War and National Security News | Otis Willie | Naval Aviation | 0 | December 12th 03 11:01 PM |
sopwith camel kill/loss ratio | old hoodoo | Military Aviation | 35 | October 24th 03 06:10 PM |