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 |
#41
|
|||
|
|||
F-35's Costs Climb Along With Concerns
Ed Rasimus wrote in
: SNIP My point was the unusual nature of taking a general conclusion from a very limited anecdotal sampling and one that was arguably not an expert observer. It would be similar to taking testimony regarding an individual who has been shot and extrapolating their experience to some level of expertise in firearms. I'm in trail with your point - and I agree with it, but in the absence of everything else, you go with what you've got. The last few exchanges have been an education. I disagree with your discounting a non-"expert observer" in this case. I drive submarines for a living, and I'm certain I can tell the difference between dive bombing and high altitude level bombing when I see it; no reason to expect anything different from anyone else. If you were in attendance at "the US Army's General Staff College" (can I assume you mean C&GSC?), then I would further assume a professional military background and some exposure during your educational background to some coverage of the Battle of Britain, the blitz, and the bombing of London. The Battle of Britain was not covered at CGSC in any great detail as part of the general course - you had to take an elective to get that, one I was not able to take due to other requirements. The course is joint oriented, and therefore is very effects based centric, especially for those working out of rate, ie: a Navy guy like me working on an Army staff in a traditionally green suiter role. We didn't really discuss the technical aspects of various types of bomb delivery, and the effects of the bombing, regardless of type, were more relevant to our discussions. One of the lessons learned from Vietnam is that those kinds of details are best left to the experts. During exercises/war-games, while acting as the S3 of a joint staff, I wouldn't dream of requesting a certain type of bomb delivery. I would discuss the effect I was trying to achieve with the Strike Cell. The pilots, missileers and artillerymen assigned to the cell would put the details together to create the effect. While I can do the math and physics on a wide variety of ordnance targeting and delivery, I don't have a good feel for what it takes for the crews (at least air crews) to make it happen. While I'd like to learn some of those details simply for professional development, I much prefer the effects based planning, and I bet you would as well. How would you like to be leading a squadron of your 105s on a strike that had been planned by somebody who's complete exposure to the details of air warfare included being certified as a private pilot, and had numerous briefings and rides in a variety of tactical aircraft over the course of his career? One could go a step further and, as Harry Andreas has pointed out, "high speed/low altitude" is probably not the best characterization of dive bombing either. Lay-down or skip-bombing display those attributes more accurately. Agreed. Other than the oral history aspect of seeing a real live WW II British Tommy, what was the point of his presentation at C&GSC? Was this part of some larger program? Inquiring minds, etc. . . . It was one part of a larger program - but one involving military history - the recording of and study of, rather than any strategic, operational or tactical application. The US Army has a rather rigorous approach to history. They even have an officer skill designator for 'historian'. DS Ed Rasimus Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret) "When Thunder Rolled" www.thunderchief.org www.thundertales.blogspot.com |
#42
|
|||
|
|||
F-35's Costs Climb Along With Concerns
DeepSea wrote: snip That would explain the British complaint with the early P-51's lack of high altitude performance. Based on the information I had, I (apparently incorrectly) assumed that there was no need for a fighter with good high altitude performance - I thought that most of the action during the BoB was down low where the early P-51 was actually pretty capable. The Mustang didn't arrive 'til well long after the Battle of Britain, so the point is moot anyway. Requirements would have moved on. Graham |
#43
|
|||
|
|||
F-35's Costs Climb Along With Concerns
"Paul J. Adam" wrote: In message , Ricardo writes Incidentally, a few sources have claimed that the Packard built Merlin, whilst a superb engine, lacked the power levels of the Rolls Royce version. This, it is claimed, was because the British kept secret the composition of the phosphor-bronze bearings that they used in the engine. No, I can't quote a source/s. On the other hand, I heard - from "old factory hands" lecturing on manufacturing technique at Highbury College in 1988 - that a big difference between Packard and Rolls-Royce was in fitting the cylinder head. Rolls-Royce used a precision hand-scraped metal-to-metal fit. Very effective, though extremely demanding in scarce skilled labour. (Attempting to 'file flat' is a useful exercise for a trainee mechanical engineer; it teaches a certain humility in demanding surface finishes) Packard cleaned up the castings, milled the mating faces approximately flat (at least, compared to a metal-metal seal) and put a gasket between them. I don't recall hearing tales of P-51s routinely or regularly falling from the skies when their engines failed, nor of the Packard Spitfires being execrated for unreliability (or, for that matter, lack of horsepower). I think it's fair to say that Packard 'productionised' the design of the Merlin which made it easier and quicker to build, possibly more reliable too. Graham |
#44
|
|||
|
|||
F-35's Costs Climb Along With Concerns
Ricardo wrote: At the height of the Battle of Britain the country's desperate need was for fighter aircraft - any fighter aircraft - hence purchases from American sources. However, by the time the early Mustang came on stream that particular battle was virtually over, Entirely over by over a year in fact ! Graham |
#45
|
|||
|
|||
F-35's Costs Climb Along With Concerns
|
#46
|
|||
|
|||
F-35's Costs Climb Along With Concerns
Steve Hix wrote: In article , Ricardo wrote: Steve Hix wrote: In article , Ricardo wrote: What was the 'A-36' version of the Mustang? In brief, a dive bomber based on the early P-51 airframe, officially named "Apache". - Three-blade rather than four-blade prop. - Allison V-1710 engine, rather than Allison Merlin, as used in original Mustang. - Dive brakes included on inboard underside of wings, similar to Douglas Dauntless. About 500 made, used mostly in CBI and Mediterranean/North African theaters. The Collings Foundation is restoring one in Florida. Thanks Steve, Each day we learn a little more... Ricardo PS Allison Merlin? - I thought Packard were the boys for the Merlin production. Here I'm going to learn something else... Duuuh. Packard is right. I blame it on the poison oak what I got around my eyes currently. Glasses are a *good* thing... So is doing it by feel... Ricardo |
#47
|
|||
|
|||
F-35's Costs Climb Along With Concerns
"DeepSea" wrote in message . 136... Ed Rasimus wrote in : snip The discussion was not about "what dive bombing is all about", the technicalities or merits of dive bombing, nor was the talk. Simply that in his experience, he mostly saw dive bombing. This was important to my point of view because his talk was my only exposure to primary source material on the subject (at least until Brian posted the weblink). The topic as been 'done to death' and You'll (Dep Sea) are probably regretting the assertion that 'England was mostly sunjected to attack using Dive-bombers . I can somewhat understand your inference as (apparently) you've only ever experienced a talk from _one_ person that had endured aerial attack ( in England?). I'm a mid-War 'baby'. [My mother and her neighbours _might_ have been the female ordnance workers clustered around the weapon shown on the Liverpool Blitz website ... as they all were 'conscripted/drafted' for war work into the Royal Ordnance Factory which was at Kirkby!]. I know and have been exposed to primary source material off hundreds of relatives / neighbours that survived the Blitz. My playgrounds were the bombed sites (called Debris, pronounced deb-ree) that surounded our homes. I can still 'hear' the cries of neighbours, mothers and scuffers yelling 'Gerr'off that deb-ree!' to us kids. Later whilst serving in the RAF, I was exposed to primary source material from Pilots that had survived 'The War'. I was privileged to serve with -that's probably best described as 'at the same station, during the same time' - with 'Ginger Lacey'. http://www.battle-of-britain.com/BoB.../RAF/lacey.htm One of the nicest man that one could encounter. (then) Flt. Lt. Lacey was serving his 'last tour' as a (Master) Fighter Controller at RAF Buchan. During the long midnight watches -as we anticipated the outbreak of WW1II - we youngsters would listen enthralled to Flt. Lt. Lacey's recounting his engagements. { I must stress that he was incredibly modest and unassuming -it was we, youngsters, who pushed him into telling 'War-ies'. I had a feeling of watching an updated 'Boyhood of Raleigh' scene with 'Ginger' playing the part of the oldster and the audience, the youngsters, cluttered about the feet: albeit everybody was wearing air-force blue, and the light was emanating off the Tote Board, Display Table and flickering consoles. This is the reason I felt that the original statement 'most ... dive bombing' needed clarification. -- Brian |
#48
|
|||
|
|||
F-35's Costs Climb Along With Concerns
In article ,
Ricardo wrote: Steve Hix wrote: In article , Ricardo wrote: Steve Hix wrote: In article , Ricardo wrote: What was the 'A-36' version of the Mustang? In brief, a dive bomber based on the early P-51 airframe, officially named "Apache". - Three-blade rather than four-blade prop. - Allison V-1710 engine, rather than Allison Merlin, as used in original Mustang. - Dive brakes included on inboard underside of wings, similar to Douglas Dauntless. About 500 made, used mostly in CBI and Mediterranean/North African theaters. The Collings Foundation is restoring one in Florida. Thanks Steve, Each day we learn a little more... Ricardo PS Allison Merlin? - I thought Packard were the boys for the Merlin production. Here I'm going to learn something else... Duuuh. Packard is right. I blame it on the poison oak what I got around my eyes currently. Glasses are a *good* thing... So is doing it by feel... Heh. That was my dad and uncle, who got horrible cases of poison oak collecting pretty red leaves and ferns for table decorations while my mom and aunt fixed dinner on a camping trip shortly after they got married. A good two weeks before either could so much as touch their new brides. Dad was always just a bit twitchy about camping after that; we three kids didn't find out why until years later. This time I got it from water that apparently had poison oak oil (urushiol) on it splashed in my face while kayaking last week. Not the first time I've gotten it without contacting the stupid plant at all. Yay for spectacle; else I'd have had it in my eyes, rather than just around them. |
#49
|
|||
|
|||
F-35's Costs Climb Along With Concerns
|
#50
|
|||
|
|||
F-35's Costs Climb Along With Concerns
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Washington DC airspace closing for good? | tony roberts | Piloting | 153 | August 11th 05 12:56 AM |
Jet Ranger Operating Costs? | greenwavepilot | Owning | 5 | February 3rd 05 03:31 PM |
The frustrating economics of aviation | C J Campbell | Piloting | 96 | July 21st 04 04:41 PM |
Club Management Issue | Geoffrey Barnes | Owning | 150 | March 30th 04 06:36 PM |
Angle of climb at Vx and glide angle when "overweight": five questions | Koopas Ly | Piloting | 16 | November 29th 03 10:01 PM |