A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

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.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Military Aviation
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

PZL 62 Aircraft Claim



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old January 4th 04, 05:11 PM
robert arndt
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default PZL 62 Aircraft Claim

http://www.miramex.com.pl/jwsoft/193...e/pzl62_01.JPG

A strange old Polish guy sent me a drawing of this basically unknown
aircraft and claimed that it would have swept the skies of the German
invaders if it were built. He further claimed it would have been
superior to the Spitfire.
What is this guy talking about? The Me-109E was more than a match for
that obsolete looking crate and the German pilots already had
experience in Spain.
Now, what comments can I add regarding to the Spitfire claim?

Rob
  #2  
Old January 4th 04, 05:16 PM
Michael Williamson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

robert arndt wrote:
http://www.miramex.com.pl/jwsoft/193...e/pzl62_01.JPG

A strange old Polish guy sent me a drawing of this basically unknown
aircraft and claimed that it would have swept the skies of the German
invaders if it were built. He further claimed it would have been
superior to the Spitfire.
What is this guy talking about? The Me-109E was more than a match for
that obsolete looking crate and the German pilots already had
experience in Spain.
Now, what comments can I add regarding to the Spitfire claim?

Rob


He's likely a kook. You get the same kind of kooks claiming that
(for instance) German aircraft were superior to allied aircraft,
that they designed and in some cases began building supersonic,
long range aircraft that would have allowed them to bomb the
United States, and stuff like that. Best to ignore them

Mike

  #3  
Old January 4th 04, 07:27 PM
Greg Hennessy
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Sun, 04 Jan 2004 10:16:05 -0700, Michael Williamson
wrote:


He's likely a kook. You get the same kind of kooks claiming that
(for instance) German aircraft were superior to allied aircraft,
that they designed and in some cases began building supersonic,
long range aircraft that would have allowed them to bomb the
United States, and stuff like that. Best to ignore them


ROFLMAO!



greg


--
Once you try my burger baby,you'll grow a new thyroid gland.
I said just eat my burger, baby,make you smart as Charlie Chan.
You say the hot sauce can't be beat. Sit back and open wide.
  #4  
Old January 4th 04, 10:17 PM
nemo l'ancien
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

You make a war with the weapons you really have, not with those you plan
to have....
  #5  
Old January 5th 04, 05:28 AM
robert arndt
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Michael Williamson wrote in message ...
robert arndt wrote:
http://www.miramex.com.pl/jwsoft/193...e/pzl62_01.JPG

A strange old Polish guy sent me a drawing of this basically unknown
aircraft and claimed that it would have swept the skies of the German
invaders if it were built. He further claimed it would have been
superior to the Spitfire.
What is this guy talking about? The Me-109E was more than a match for
that obsolete looking crate and the German pilots already had
experience in Spain.
Now, what comments can I add regarding to the Spitfire claim?

Rob


He's likely a kook. You get the same kind of kooks claiming that
(for instance) German aircraft were superior to allied aircraft,
that they designed and in some cases began building supersonic,
long range aircraft that would have allowed them to bomb the
United States, and stuff like that. Best to ignore them

Mike


Yeah, kinda like some of the RAM kooks that don't believe the German
windtunnel data, thousands of tons of captured German documents and FE
(foreign equipment) flown at Wright Field/Patterson had ANYTHING to do
with the US postwar success in the space race and military aviation.
Point well taken... I ignore them too!

Rob
  #6  
Old January 5th 04, 09:03 PM
Stephen Harding
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

robert arndt wrote:

Yeah, kinda like some of the RAM kooks that don't believe the German
windtunnel data, thousands of tons of captured German documents and FE
(foreign equipment) flown at Wright Field/Patterson had ANYTHING to do
with the US postwar success in the space race and military aviation.


Given that the Russkies had the lead in the space race right up into
the late 60's, such equipment didn't seem to benefit the US much; at
least not in space.


SMH

  #7  
Old January 6th 04, 05:34 AM
robert arndt
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Stephen Harding wrote in message ...
robert arndt wrote:

Yeah, kinda like some of the RAM kooks that don't believe the German
windtunnel data, thousands of tons of captured German documents and FE
(foreign equipment) flown at Wright Field/Patterson had ANYTHING to do
with the US postwar success in the space race and military aviation.


Given that the Russkies had the lead in the space race right up into
the late 60's, such equipment didn't seem to benefit the US much; at
least not in space.


SMH


I would hardly call saving the West a decade in aerospace research
non-beneficial. The windtunnel data alone is invaluable. The West got
much more documents and scientists than Russia did and it took years
to evaluate what was worth pursuing and what wasn't. The Russian
approach was different. The forced their captured scientists and
families to relocate to the USSR, virtually prisoners, and forced them
to work on the most cost-effective systems along with their Russian
counterparts. They had but one goal- beat the West.
In the end, however, the US beat them in the air and space with a lot
more experimentation with German designs than Russia could ever
afford. Only now in the 21st century are we getting away from
evolutionary designs that lead all the way back the Third Reich.

Rob
  #8  
Old January 8th 04, 09:47 PM
Alan Minyard
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 16:03:27 -0500, Stephen Harding wrote:

robert arndt wrote:

Yeah, kinda like some of the RAM kooks that don't believe the German
windtunnel data, thousands of tons of captured German documents and FE
(foreign equipment) flown at Wright Field/Patterson had ANYTHING to do
with the US postwar success in the space race and military aviation.


Given that the Russkies had the lead in the space race right up into
the late 60's, such equipment didn't seem to benefit the US much; at
least not in space.


SMH


Actually, the Soviets were killing launch crew and cosmonauts on a
continuing basis. They simply did not report the things that went "BOOM".

They never had a significant lead, if they had a lead at all.

Al Minyard
  #9  
Old January 5th 04, 03:42 PM
Alan Minyard
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Sun, 04 Jan 2004 10:16:05 -0700, Michael Williamson wrote:

robert arndt wrote:
http://www.miramex.com.pl/jwsoft/193...e/pzl62_01.JPG

A strange old Polish guy sent me a drawing of this basically unknown
aircraft and claimed that it would have swept the skies of the German
invaders if it were built. He further claimed it would have been
superior to the Spitfire.
What is this guy talking about? The Me-109E was more than a match for
that obsolete looking crate and the German pilots already had
experience in Spain.
Now, what comments can I add regarding to the Spitfire claim?

Rob


He's likely a kook. You get the same kind of kooks claiming that
(for instance) German aircraft were superior to allied aircraft,
that they designed and in some cases began building supersonic,
long range aircraft that would have allowed them to bomb the
United States, and stuff like that. Best to ignore them

Mike


Very well said :-))))

Al Minyard
  #10  
Old January 4th 04, 09:09 PM
Keith Willshaw
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"robert arndt" wrote in message
om...
http://www.miramex.com.pl/jwsoft/193...e/pzl62_01.JPG

A strange old Polish guy sent me a drawing of this basically unknown
aircraft and claimed that it would have swept the skies of the German
invaders if it were built. He further claimed it would have been
superior to the Spitfire.
What is this guy talking about? The Me-109E was more than a match for
that obsolete looking crate and the German pilots already had
experience in Spain.
Now, what comments can I add regarding to the Spitfire claim?

Rob


The PZL-62 was designed as a low wing cantilever monoplane, all-metal
fighter with a retractable undercarriage automatic slats and
integral tank inside wing. Armament consisted of eight machine-guns.

The designed top speed was around 650 km/hr which all other things
being equal would have made it competitive with the Spitfire 1 or
Me-109E.

However without an efficient command and control system they would
have been at a severe disadvantage and it seems unlikely that the
possession of a few squadrons of such aircraft would have materially
affected the course of the campaign.

Keith


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Homebuilt Aircraft Frequently Asked Questions List (FAQ) Ron Wanttaja Home Built 40 October 3rd 08 03:13 PM
Homebuilt Aircraft Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) Ron Wanttaja Home Built 0 October 1st 04 02:31 PM
Homebuilt Aircraft Frequently Asked Questions List (FAQ) Ron Wanttaja Home Built 0 September 2nd 04 05:15 AM
Homebuilt Aircraft Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) Ron Wanttaja Home Built 0 June 2nd 04 07:17 AM
Homebuilt Aircraft Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) Ron Wanttaja Home Built 0 May 1st 04 07:29 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:34 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.