27fd1c No.622123
Tell me, /k/.
Why were the United States of Burgerland the only major participant of WW2 who did not field autocannons as primary armament on the majority of its fighter aircraft?
Why were license-built Hispanos limited to P-38s and larger aircraft while most single engined fighters across the Navy and Air Force had to contend with 4 fiddys/wing throughout the war?
Not that 50. BMGs are bad or anything, they did a fine job against Paper aircraft equipped with 30mm autocannons constructed by starving slant eyed rice farmers but if it hadn't been for Göring screwing over German heavy bomber procurement Burgerplanes wouldn't have performed as well in Europe as they did.
It bothers me to no end considering the fuckhueg Industrial base of the USA back then, how did they fuck this up when even Soviet engineers chained up in a Gulag were capable of delivering functional 20mm aircraft armaments?
0b199b No.622132
>>622123
USA brought licensing rights for Hispano-Suiza HS.404. Produced by Bendix, it was very unreliable, to such degree that they had 40 mln of 20mm stored but didnt pushed rearment of planes. Canons for P-38 was produced by different company.
912df0 No.622136
Gotta make sure the soldiers die, that's why the kike's goy army has shitty stuff and uses human wave. remember that they only pick men to be soldiers, that's why their military is all fags and non-whites now.
You know, the more time passes the less differences I see between snownigger and junglenigger. Sandniggers look superior to both honestly, that means a lot.
The kikes are right, the cumskins (northern european races) exist to be slaves, just look how they grovel at their nigger and kike masters. Anglos, french, etc should all be killedtogether with their kike and nigger masters.
Meds are the true master race, greeks are based and spaniards are ok. Everyone else gets the genocide train.
>inb4 redditors saging, crying about le DnC, insulting italians, and saying they reported me
a96de0 No.622140
>>622123
>Why were license-built Hispanos limited to P-38s and larger aircraft while most single engined fighters across the Navy and Air Force had to contend with 4 fiddys/wing throughout the war?
Most US fighters had six .50's and P-47 had eight of 'em. .50 cal was more than adequate armament back then. Might take few more hits to destroy enemy fighters and bombers, but they could carry a lot more ammunition as well. .50BMG also has higher muzzle velocity than most contemporary heavy MG and light cannon rounds, so that helped with gunnery as well.
>It bothers me to no end considering the fuckhueg Industrial base of the USA back then, how did they fuck this up when even Soviet engineers chained up in a Gulag were capable of delivering functional 20mm aircraft armaments?
They fucked up parts fitting with their Hispanos. They basically used too unskilled workforce on weapon that wasn't as idiot proof design as it should have been. Brits simply used properly trained gunsmiths in producing their Hispanos and as result had far less issues. I'm too lazy to check, but IIRC most serious issues were with chamber dimensions being too loose and firing pins striking too lightly. Burgers didn't solve issues until after war.
2a7740 No.622141
>>622136
Are you the " muh superior Med race " spamming both /b/ and /pol/ regularly?
65e262 No.622142
>>622136
>implying monkeys are allowed to have opinions about human matters.
27fd1c No.622143
>>622140
>.50 cal was more than adequate armament back then
>he wants to pepper 15+ bullets into a single enemy fighter before it fully dies
>he wants to put over 50 bullets into a large bomber until it dies due to a fuel tank fire and/or the crew ejecting
>he has to dive on the bomber multiple times to achieve this, exposing himself to gunner fire and escorting fighters in the process
>he doesn't want to lob 4 30mm HEF-I shells into the bomber, showering the crew in high speed shrapnel, destroying control cables, setting fuel tanks afire and critically damaging core structural elements all in a single burst
>he doesn't want to annihilate smaller enemy fighters with a single shot
>muh high muzzle velocity
a96de0 No.622147
>>622143
Accuracy isn't irrelevant. To get those few hits to a target with cannon you might end up wasting more ammo by weight. It isn't just hits that count, it was misses as well. What you are suggesting is that Burgers should have sent effectively unarmed fighters to the fight because most of their wartime cannons were dogshit that weren't reliable. 6 working M2's are far more effective armament than occasionally working Hispanos.
I wonder why Germans sent barely trained pilots to combat in final years of the war… prior to war Germans had adequate resources to train their pilots properly. They could have easily trained fewer better trained pilots.
27fd1c No.622160
>>622147
>To get those few hits to a target with cannon you might end up wasting more ammo by weight. It isn't just hits that count, it was misses as well.
WW2 dogfightan often didn't allow for long firing windows in which the enemy could be peppered with bullets until he died.
Would you prefer a single violent decisive deflection burst crashing the enemy with no survivors or would you rather spend 15 minutes fierciely maneuvering to get several 1-2 second firing windows until the enemy jumps out over the english channel after his engine dies and you've spent half your ammo a good portion of which hit the enemy but didn't do enough damage?
Do you really need all that >accuracy when 2-4 hits from a cannon is all it takes to kill the target?
Are you implying that autocannons can't be used with some degree of accuracy when Ace related existed?
Are you implying that every WW2 autocannon had the projectile trajectory, recoil and firing rate of the American 37mm T9 cannon?
Are you implying that the Fw 190 with its 4 cannons wasn't an effective BnZ fighter+bomber interceptor for its time?
ecabf0 No.622170
>>622140
Didn't the problems from the Hispanos stem from the chamber being a tad short and the US refused to use the fix the English did?
>>622143
>using 30mm designed for slower moving bombers on fighter craft
>65 rounds
Yeah no, I'll take .50bmg any day. There is a reason why the world went from muzzleloaders to selectfire guns. Volume of fire is an extremely important thing, there is a very clear reason why everyone isn't armed with a .338 rifle and a 3k scope.
>>622160
The 190 had enough problem with high altitude that Herr Tank redesigned the fucking thing to actually deal with bombers, unfortunate for him the war was at the point the 152 was an outright death trap to be in.
2ce202 No.622184
Because America was the only airforce that didn't have to shoot down large bombers like everyone else.
27fd1c No.622187
>>622170
>not gitting gud at using 30mm Mk108 HE to rip and tear enemy fighters to pieces
You're right about volume of fire, though the MG151/20 and later models of the HS.404 weren't too bad in that regard.
The .50 is by no means a bad aircraft gun but its shit at killing an aircraft quickly outside of pilot kills and/or fuel tank fires.
A short burst of 20mm HE cannon shells can make short work of any single engine fighter aircraft even from behind while a fighter armed solely with .50s might have to make a second run to finish off the enemy aircraft and/or get himself involved in an unnecessary dogfight if he only manages to lightly damage it.
aad012 No.622192
>>622136
>Meds are the true master race
In the past we were, but right now I can't look at an Aryan and not feel like he has way better genes than me. We fought off the Turks, the slavskopje monkeys and the albanians and we thrived. But the moment we were governed by commies we have become the pathetic laughing stock of the Balkans Europe world. 1973 was the last good year for Greece. Ever since then we are just another shithole in the balkanland.
We are so fucking pathetic than the Albanian police executed a Greek patriot a week ago and the government not only hasn't genocided their entire country yet, they haven't even managed to get the lad's body back. The absolute fucking state of Greece. Communism was a mistake.
09b2d6 No.622203
Could the RAF have made a heavy fighter (presumably a Mosquito or Blenheim/Beaufort/Bolingbroke) carrying a pair (or more) of their 3.7-inch AA guns? I guess the fusing could have been tricky, and the low rate fire might have been a problem; but if a 20mm HE shell is going to fuck up an aircraft then surely a 94mm He-Frag shell would do a much better job? Or am I just going for impractical overkill there?
322d4c No.622209
>>622160
>and you've spent half your ammo
The P-47 carried 22-24 seconds of fire for each of its guns. The .50 had shortcomings but ammo load wasn't one of them.
>>622170
Other way around, the US Hispano suffered from light strikes caused by a chamber that was a little too long and it never got fixed due to a combination of an outdated bureaucratic structure and good old fashioned arrogance. IIRC every gun in the US Army with a bore larger than 0.5" fell under the control of the artillery bureau and they didn't have the knowledge and experience to produce something as finely engineered and manufactured as aircraft guns or much interest in learning from those that had it.
1c8847 No.622215
>>622203
>Could the RAF have made a heavy fighter (presumably a Mosquito or Blenheim/Beaufort/Bolingbroke) carrying a pair (or more) of their 3.7-inch AA guns?
They did make a Mosquito (the MkXVIII) that had a 57mm cannon, which reportedly worked reasonably well and flew some successful anti-ship and anti-sub sorties, as well as scoring a number of aircraft kills. Apparently a larger variant with the gun you suggest was prototyped:
>Despite the preference for rockets, a further development of the large gun idea was carried out using the even larger, 96 mm calibre QF 32-pounder, a gun based on the QF 3.7 inch AA gun designed for tank use, the airborne version using a novel form of muzzle brake. Developed to prove the feasibility of using such a large weapon in the Mosquito, this installation was not completed until after the war, when it was flown and fired in a single aircraft without problems, then scrapped.
They say it flew fine, but I doubt its practicality. The 57mm model already only carried 25 shells.
2ce202 No.622232
>>622187
The problem with .50 is that its too small a projectile to be stable at engagement ranges, and the gun itself (m2) was just ridiculously large for what it did.
Americans did boom-zoom shit mainly because their aircraft were too heavy, and a huge part of that was the garbage weapons. Of course other parts is the giant pilot and the giant fucking radial
84cf1d No.622239
>>622209
>the US Hispano suffered from light strikes caused by a chamber that was a little too long and it never got fixed
That's the AN/M1. The AN/M2 was built to the correct chamber dimensions, but then we made a bunch of other retarded changes that made the striker itself unreliable.
322d4c No.622243
>>622239
I see. Can you elaborate on the changes? All I know is that they added an electrical recocker at some point.
84d683 No.622267
>>622123
>United States of Burgerland the only major participant of WW2 who did not field autocannons as primary armament on the majority of its fighter aircraft?
You have a case if you are discussing the USAAF and that is probably down to their terrible experience with the P-39 which used a 37mm autocannon that couldn't hit shit plus their claims of it hitting 300mph at high altitude despite not having a supercharger wew
However the USN and USMC made massive use of autocannon armed fighters so what sort of bullshit are you spouting?
4eba0c No.622282
>>622123
Germoney never invented a four engine bomber that required more substantial firepower to destroy. The .50 was the perfect gun for the job of bomber escort and strafing up trucks and soft vehicles on the ground. It obviously wasn't going to cut it for the axis powers who needed to deal with real bombers so they turned to canon. The British were retarded and believed rifle caliber guns were sufficient to destroy aircraft and when that didn't cut it they went too big. The hispanos they had also had a lot of problems with jamming during high G maneuvers.
ecabf0 No.622284
>>622267
The later models of the P-39 were able to do it, the earlier ones/lend lease to bongland weren't. Soviets didn't really care for high altitude
>>622187
The 20mm's did exactly what they were designed for, fucking twin engine planes up. Everyone had a .50cal or equivalent on their planes.
>>622209
What a clusterfuck.
2f2e35 No.622285
>>622209
Good old bureaucracy.
>>622267
>However the USN and USMC made massive use of autocannon armed fighters so what sort of bullshit are you spouting?
Cannon armed Hellcats were mostly used Brits and French. Cannon armed Corsairs were used heavily by Americans in Korean War. Most those were made too late to be used in WWII, some were used in final parts of the war, most notably in Okinawa. Cannon armed Bearcats were used in Koreas as well, but Bearcat as whole entered service too late for WWII.
>>622282
Bongoloids unfucked their versions of Hispano. US didn't until the end of the war.
4eba0c No.622289
>>622285
Again, it was more because of the situation they found themselves in had no other choices. The Americans replaced nearly all their rifle caliber guns with the M3.50 before the war even began. When the canon didn't work out the .50s were already excellent at dispatching fighters which, because the Germans lacked real bombers, was all they needed. The British saw that .303 wasn't going to cut it, and had canon that were finicky. Their choices were to ether completely retool for browning M3 production, including ammo, spare parts and the whole nine yards, which I'm pretty sure they didn't even have the rights to make, or get the canon working. They rightfully chose the latter. Though it does make me think about what an aircraft mounted Besa with an increased firing rate would have looked like.
84cf1d No.622300
>>622285
We never really fixed the Hispano, we just developed an incredibly ghetto workaround to drop the misfire rate to acceptable levels. Rather than build the chambers to spec like we had been repeatedly told to, we coated the cases in a thick layer of lubricating wax so that they wouldn't headspace correctly. The grunts thought it was insane, but it mostly worked so BuOrd decided that there must not be a problem
f17ddb No.622310
>>622123
Because contrary to popular belief murkans always hated guns.
f17ddb No.622312
>>622192
> We fought the slavskopje monkeys and the albanians
Not really. They mostly just collapsed on their own.
fce4c3 No.622328
>>622215
I knew they'd used a 57mm gun for coastal patrol/antiship use, but I hadn't heard they had scored air to air kills.
>The 57mm model already only carried 25 shells
It's the Brits, tell 'em to drill their pilots until their shot:kill ratio approaches 1:1.
27fd1c No.622331
>>622267
>the USN and USMC made massive use of autocannon armed fighters so what sort of bullshit are you spouting?
But cannon Hellcats and Corsairs only entered service in the final months of WW2, before that it was all fiddys.
>>622209
>burgers can't get a fucking 20mm cannon working decently while Krauts, Bongs, Nips and Soviets are already fielding 30mm autocannons
>Their main fighter aircraft for the Western European campaign only performed as well as it did due its Britbong engine, with earlier models being barely better than a P-40
I wonder how the Allied invasion of German-occupied France would've turned out if the Brits hadn't sold Merlin blueprints to the US.
7228ce No.622332
>>622328
there was exactly ONE air kill scored with it,a rather unlucky fighter ju88 that got absolute wreaked when the shell hit,lemme find thew source real quick
7228ce No.622334
7228ce No.622335
>>622334
9:32 in the vid is where it talks about the air kill
f31c03 No.622367
>>622123
US didn't have good cannon at hand and had good HMG. Most aircraft guns of WWII were big mess of jammomatic. So picking what works is right for WWII.
>they did a fine job against Paper aircraft equipped with 30mm autocannons constructed by starving slant eyed rice farmers but if it hadn't been for Göring screwing over German heavy bomber procurement Burgerplanes wouldn't have performed as well in Europe as they did.
BTW mainstream cannons are overrated. WWII 50. BMG is better than WWII 20mm against bombers. FACT.
But it was not known during WWII. Scientific tests were done only after war.
4cc565 No.622463
>>622332
So … what you're saying is that we'll need to use a much, much, much larger cannon in order to fire a shell with a much, much, much larger blast radius to make it an effective weapon for unguided, uncomputerized, air to air combat?
>Schwerer Gustav gun weighs 1350 tonnes without the rail carriage etc.
>Its 80cm shells weigh approx 4800kg each (assuming the HE shell is a better starting point for AA work than the AP rounds).
>Call it 48 tonnes to give us 10 rounds (remember that particularly in the early days of WW2 you stood a decent chance of getting several planes entering combat in formation, meaning that you could realistically score multiple kills per shot).
>The Antonov AN-225 has carried 247 tonnes as its record weight.
How large a plane are we going to need multiply the largest airlift capacity by a factor of 5.7?
33d75a No.622466
>>622463
Just bring back monitors with big guns. The bongs once mounted a 18" gun on a monitor:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BL_18_inch_Mk_I_naval_gun
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Lord_Clive
Mind you, that 18" is just slightly smaller than the Yamato's main guns, and it actually fires a heavier projectile. Imagine what would happen if you modernized it with Gerald Bull's ideas, gave it an autoloader, and backed it up with a radar and modern fire controls. A simple HE shell with a proximity fuse would be enough to take down any aircraft.
6a3207 No.622471
>>622123
Why?
>.50's shoot flatter and don't tumble as readily as cannon shells.
>Aerial gunnery is hard, it's easier to train new pilots to hit with MGs
>More chance to hit = more kills overall
>Less jamming
>More cost effective
>Less weight = better aircraft performance
>Uniformity of ammunition load means less logistical problems
Pretty basic stuff. Also, Armour Piercing Incendiary ammunition was very effective and the USAAF was mainly shooting it at fighter planes, not armoured bombers. Swap USAAF aircraft with the Luftwaffe and make them attack B-17's and B-24's and you'd see why cannons were all the rage for the Axis.
b9183d No.622487
>>622463
Anon, you need to think bigger; just stick a nuke on a rocket and aim in the general direction of the enemy formation. Alternatively just use a remote controlled plane like a nuclear fire ship.
30d256 No.622560
>>622136
You're literally a mixed race abomination.
4cc565 No.622573
>>622466
Nice dubs, that would be far more practical, efficient, and useful. while dramatically reducing the cost of maintaining a theater-wide IADS net. So almost certainly never going to happen until about half way through WW3 when politicians decide they care more about effectiveness than transferring taxpayers cash to their (((friends))).
Still though, HMS Lord Clive
>Her main guns were taken from the obsolete pre-dreadnought battleship Majestic.
>She spent World War I in the English Channel bombarding German positions along the Belgian coast.
>She was fitted with a single 18-inch (460 mm) gun in 1918, but only fired four rounds from it in combat before the end of the war.
>She was deemed redundant after the end of the war and was sold for scrap in 1927.
That poor gun, brought back from the scrapyard for a triumphant return to active service, given a task just perfect for it, and then only getting to fire four more times in anger before being decommissioned and scrapped 12 years later. That's just sad.
>>622487
Using nukes in a design just feels like you're saying "Fuck it, I can't figure out how to make this work, just NUKE IT". If we can't figure out how to do this with good old fashioned shrapnel then what's the point?
f31c03 No.622606
>>622471
>USAAF was mainly shooting it at fighter planes, not armoured bombers.
.50 API is better against "armoured bombers" than 20mm HE.
6ae8d7 No.622617
>>622160
try playing arcade mode on war thunder, it is a pretty accurate depiction of what ye olde dogfights felt like
Bonus round: play on an old shitty chinkpad while barely managing sub-10fps
it is called spray and pray for a reason
3b22c7 No.622652
02a947 No.622672
>>622617
>war thunder
>arcade
At the very least go with something that pretends to be realistic.
27fd1c No.622676
>>622617
>war thunder
.50s aren't that great in Sim mode compared to cannons, it's much harder to get sustained hits on targets there mostly due to their lesser structural damage output compared to high explosive cannon shells.
t. ran out of cannon ammo with the P-38 in SB and had to make 3 .50cal bursts at deflection to force an A7M to spin out at low altitude, even though earlier I'd torn off a paper bomber's wing in a single gun run with the cannon.
27fd1c No.622677
>>622676
*much harder to get enough sustained hits on target to cause structural failure there
f31c03 No.622752
>>622676
>>622617
>>622676
War Thunder nerfs all weapons 3-10 tiems compare to IRl, otherwise over-skilled virtual pilots flying perfectly smooth virtual planes would be too deadly.
4b32db No.622828
>>622617
>try playing arcade mode on war thunder, it is a pretty accurate depiction of what ye olde dogfights felt like
>arcade
>accurate of real dogfights
84cf1d No.622903
>>622676
>he doesn't remember the good old days when .50BMG dealt as much damage as a 30mm, and each B-17 was protected by an impenetrable CIWS system that would instakill any plane within 1600m
36f35e No.623014
>>622617
this has to be bait
27fd1c No.623174
>>622903
>Bomber CIWS
did it get any better? Last time I tried going up against B-25s it wasn't so bad as long as you came in diagonally at high speed.
H8Ks on the other hand…
9809f9 No.623176
>>622123
>.50cal works as good or better than the 20mm Hispano against single-engine fighters.
>The primary enemy encountered was single-engine fighters, not heavy or medium bombers.
>the primary focus of American fighters was bomber escort and combat air patrols, ground attack was tertiarity.
and that goes before you even consider reliability or ammunition and parts logistics. American airplanes needed to be shipped or flown thousands of miles to even reach the combat theater.
9809f9 No.623177
>>623174
Speaking historically the Luftwaffe's tactic for initiation was high speed passes from above and the front of the bomber formations. With the first few flights attempting to draw off the escorts.
Pretty much neccesitated the use of cannons on german fighters because they might only get one pass at the bomber formation and needed to put as much damage into those large targets as quickly as possible.
27fd1c No.623212
Invidious embed. Click thumbnail to play.
>>623177
That's everyone's tactic in War Thunder SB because it's the one of the few with any decent chance of survival for the attacking fighter.
If the bomber didn't died from that though high speed sideswipes or whatever one desires to call them are the only real option left.
Funnily enough there is RL guncam footage of Bf 110s safely engaging B-17s just by firing some 20mm into the tailgunner's position and then going from there.
9809f9 No.623304
>>623212
The bomber's escorts are just as dangerous as the bomber's turrets proper. A high speed pass on the front means the escorts need to do a 180 to purse you, which by netwon's third law is a huge energy expenditure and it draws them away from the bombers they're trying to protect. You're keeping your speed up going straight with the boom and zoom and the escorts lose lots of airspeed turning to chase you.
It isn't suprising that a BF110 unmolested by escorts can wreck from behind. Especially true when you're using cannons that outrange the B-17's turrets.
4b32db No.623306
>>623212
Music is much better than that disko stuff you used before. I'm just getting into rank 4 for the Luftwaffe and my highest tank is 5.7, what do you suggest for my next nation for fighters or ground forces? I've been playing on and off for 6 years but only switched to RB last year, is sim battles worth checking out?
9809f9 No.623307
it is an even bigger deal at high altitudes where thin air reduces the performance of engines, propellers and the control and flight surfaces. You might achieve a great cruise speed but you're halfway to outer space and the lack of density in the air really matters.
27fd1c No.623319
Invidious embed. Click thumbnail to play.
>>623304
that spoiler was also referring to the sheer insane amount of luck it'd take a Bf 110 to get close enough for making precise cannon shots on the B-17's tailgunner without getting shoah'd by said gunner from 1km range back in the olden days of shit thunder.
>>623306
I never played RB much because the Radar HUD prevent me from doing Erich Hartmann ERP.
Sim requires a joystick and headtracker, it can be fun but the game clearly isn't designed around it as evidenced by the suffering gunship bombers with CIWS gunners balanced against countering third party RB mouseaim snipe fighters from 1km inflicted on many an SBfighter pilot flying T4 fighter aircraft from the cockpit with no HUD beyond the IAS/altitude/fuel and damage indicators.
It got so bad that there was a revolt on the forums where some players banded together as the anti-bomber police whose sole purpose was to TK any B-17 tier gunship on their teams.
Last time I played AI gunners weren't as OP anymore, and in some recent update the third party gunner view was removed from a number of aircraft, haven't tried it but I hope it fixed the issue of bomber pilots mouse-sniping everything while in 3rd person view autopilot.
>next nation
Dunno, I never liked the Soviet tree much due to the Yak's inverted prop wash, most Soviet planes having overly aggressive stall characteristics and generally retarded balancing across the board.
Burgers are decent if you stick to pure BnZ, Brits I only played at lower tiers and everything on the Nip tree past the A6M3 was pure suffering until they introduced the H8K, J2M2 and A7M burger fryers.
9809f9 No.623324
>P-38F/J are classy as fuck and futuristic
>#1 airframe in air-to-air kills by USAAF in the Pacific
>outclassed by BF109s in Europe
feels bad
27fd1c No.623328
>>623324
What do you expect, it's a heavy fighter going up against planes easily capable of outmaneuvering it without falling apart beyond 500 km/h.
It ain't so bad against the 190 though as it can outturn that one while still retaining decent amounts of energy.
b21e04 No.623349
>>622136
>human wave
not since vietnam. And before then, everyone(including germany) was doing it.
>sandniggers are superior to both
Not at war lol. They may be able to hold isolated mountain passes and valleys, but they cant barely conquer each other. If we want to actually annex a nation in the middle east, we could do it in a few months if Washington was also behind it.
>>622140
I'd bet the liscence-built hispanos were fucked up by the different inch standards between various euro countries and America at the time, everyone's inch was a bit different and lead to the more precise interchangeable parts not really being interchangeable, this wasn't fully resolved until 43 or maybe 44 iirc, not exactly sure
>>623319
actual (private)pilot here, whats a good joystick to get for warthunder? Played with my muse+kb, feel like it would be great with a good joystick, but I don't want to waste my money.
27fd1c No.623354
>>623349
The Thrustmaster T16000M FCS is breddy gud for its price.
692f83 No.623368
>>623362
I wouldn't count ANA into the left bracket considering their frequent turncoat killings, desertions and abandoning NATO units in combat.
d3ff1c No.623413
>>622143
>be you
>think you're hot shit
>fire 30 mm at the enemy
>miss
>miss again
>expend all 40 rounds, make one grazing hit that didn't do shit
>go back to base and get bitchslapped by your superior for being a fuckwit
>could have downed multiple enemy planes by spraying machinegun at them and correcting the aim as you go
c4b716 No.623439
>>623413
>Be you
>Think you're hot shit
>Fire 8x .50cal MGs at enemy aircraft
1000 rounds and 3 overheats later
>WTF!
>How is it still flying!
>Go back to base and get bitchslapped by your superior for being a useless fuckwit
>Could have downed multiple enemy planes by actually trying to hit them rather than just holding down the trigger and screaming 'GET SOME!'
27fd1c No.623463
>>623413
>be Fw 190 D-9 pilot
>be in a dogfight with a Mustang
>exercise trigger discipline, lightly pepper the enemy with 13mm HMG boolits when the cannon trajectories don't line up with the target
>damage his left flap and elevator
>eventually get into a good firing position
>pump 8 rounds of HE cannon shells straight into his ass
>he dies
>Go back to base
>Get bitchslapped by your squadron commander for fagging around with Allied escort fighters instead of going straight for the B-17 fleets
9809f9 No.623487
>>622617
WoWp is also pretty fun, but the relatively long TTK (~5sec) causes a bias in favor of cannons and turnfighters, therefore making spitfires almost retardproof.
9809f9 No.623489
>>623349
Get a full set with rudder pedals and a separate throttle with other controls including flaps. Pedals > 3 axis stick
9809f9 No.623498
>>623463
>be FW 109 D-9 Pilot
>make a head-on pass on a B-17 and kill it with superior teutonic gunnery
>Shoot down a P-51D Mustang with superior teutonic stall characteristics.
>Die in flames 5 seconds later because I'm outnumbered 20:1
>Squadron commander writes a nice letter to my mother
>Letter never gets delivered because allies have destroyed the railway network
27fd1c No.623524
>>623498
>be Me 262 pilot in February of 1945
>engage 100 B-17s all on my own
>shoot down 4 of them before running out of 30mm shells
>want to RTB but the sky is swarming with allied fighters, they'll probably shoot me down as I land(assuming the base I took off from still exists)
>also one of my engines is slowly dying after having exceed its 12 hour lifetime
>decide to heroically ram into another B-17
>both of us crash with no survivors
>end up a footnote in some history book
>more than half a century later anons on an anti-semitic formosan cutlery exchange remember my unsung war exploits while discussing slav-made digital recreations of 1940s aerial warfare
2300f6 No.623595
it may have not been god tier armament, but almost every other nation in the war made the move to put HMGs on their fighters. that has to account for something.
pic slightly related to the above post
4b32db No.623611
>>623487
>WoWp is also pretty fun
While WT's fligth models are'n perfect they're generally much better than Warplanes. I'm not a fan of health bars, even though bouncing 3 shots off the side of an M4 at point blank in a Tiger is really fucking annoying I've survived many shots because the enemy tank doesn't know how to aim or keeps shooting me when I'm angled at my thickest armour. That being said it's obviously preference for fun at reduced realism or more realism (which some won't find fun).
>>623595
>>623524
A real human bean, he died LARPing just to take out a few more zogbots.
>tfw you'll never be that cool
cc00f4 No.623614
>>623413
>be Ki-43 pilot in Pacific
>hottest shit in all of the pacific
>intercepting bombers headed for tokyo
>can't reach the bombers
>some boom and zoom fag manages to land 3 shots on my plane
>burst into flame and die
It's still a very beautiful plane, just with a under-powered engine and lack luster armament; other than that, it's extremely capable.
27fd1c No.623639
>>623614
>be Ki-43 pilot in the Pacific
>best turn rate in all the world, filthy amerifats will never touch me
>intercepting B-25s in Indochina
>can barely catch up to the damn things
>get in guns range
>gunners burn my half of my squadron to death in less than a minute
>I somehow manage survive long enough to kill one of the tail gunners
>me and the B-25 I just shot fly into a cloudbank and lose contact with our allies
>I fire half my ammo into him, it still keeps flying
>eventually its engines die and its surviving crew ejects over some hill
>on my way back I join up with the sole remaining bomber interceptor plane
>we spot several Hellcats, they spot us
>outnumbered 2:1
>a chaotic furball ensues in which I manage to barrel roll myself out of the majority of the enemy's bullets long enough to get a lucky Pilot headshot on a single Hellcat
>however I still take several hits nonetheless, my right wing fuel tank is leaking
>the Hellcats retreat after killing my companion
>80% of my fuel is gone and I have only 20 bullets remaining
>no way in hell am I gonna make it back to base
>fug
>spot a slow chinese P-40 flying at low altitude
>If I kill him before honorably crashing myself with no survivors I'll die an Ace pilot
>dive down hard
>get as close as possible, he's just above my gunsight
>gently nudge the stick towards me so I can hit him with my guns
>as I do so both of my wings tear off simultaneously from structural and aerodynamic stress
>die from crashing into a gaggle of trees as the chink turns his head
>he shits himself and stalls his aircraft, barely recovering before making an extremely rough bellylanding near some rice farming village
>Allied war reports and statistics on that particular day end up getting fudged, as a result the chink pilot is remembered as a hero who took down 4 Japanese aircraft all by himself on that day
893398 No.623675
>>623524
>be Me-262 pilot in '45
>want to take off to ram allied bombers
>allied bombers turned your runway into a crater showroom last week
>decide to try and risk it anyway
>no fuel for your planefu, as your dear fuhrer didn't seem to understand that you need oil to run anything higher performance than a horse
>lose
>your gorgeous, feminine, wife and cute, blonde, loli-tier daughters get raped by either American, British, or Russian soldiers as they close on Berlin
>if you lived on the eastern side of the line they and their descendent's probably get raped (metaphorically and literally) by the Soviets for about 50 years after that
>Finally, 70-80 years afterwards your female descendants thank Jamal for impregnating them/their wives with their 20th mutt rape-baby and bless the dear state for being wise and decent enough to beat them back into line that one time they thought your family, nation, continent, and race didn't need to be destroyed to pay for your actions.
Krautniggers - the eternal enemy of the white man - should have been gassed millenia ago.
cee03b No.623681
>>623675
>buttmad jewpig overdosing on semen and posting his mastrubation fantasies again
wew
893398 No.623684
>>623681
>Got nothing to say?
>No argument?
>Nothing of value to add to the thread?
>JUST CALL HIM A JEW!
>That definitely works!
95ed30 No.623686
>>623675
>german philosopher
893398 No.623687
>>623686
>Philosopher
>someone who sits down, talks shit, and does absolutely nothing of value.
Seems to fit Marx pretty well tbh
2ce202 No.623688
>>623675
>actual white guy fighting against roman kikes
>another guy fighting against roman kikes
>kike
>brit
>turk
893398 No.623690
>>623688
Hey, they're the leaders the Krautroaches chose or submitted to.
4b32db No.623696
>>623690
I didn't realize swamp-Germans were butthurt so easily.
893398 No.623702
>>623696
Hey, a Dutch world order would have been better for everyone. Loads of business, loads of trade, coffee chocolate and weed for every budget.
0d46e7 No.623709
>>623675
Le epic bait 4chan graphic.
>Muh Alaric
Rome had it coming for them with granting everyone citizenship, hunnic invasion, divided empire and internal instability.
>Muh Marx
Jew.
>Muh Willhelm
WW1 declaration was a chain of alliances which escalated into a continent wide conflict. Blame the invention of machine guns for such an attritional war.
>Muh Hitler
It is not like England and France turned Europe into a timebomb with the new borders and treaty of Versailles. War was inevitable.
>Muh Merkel
Puppet leader set up by Americans. Germans can nowadays not democratically elect a leader that cares for the people.
Go back to 4/k/ and jerk off with high torries about how Hitler did meth and everyone who doesn't praise Deep Battle and le glorious Sherman 24/7 is a Wehraboo.
2ce202 No.623710
>>623702
>dutch
>not being evil
>not having webbed feet
>not being in league with belgians
>50% income tax
>40% sales tax, import tax, corporate tax, fees, licences and other bullshit
>only keep a tenth of what you make
So progressive.
dd259d No.623714
893398 No.623721
dd259d No.623723
>>623721
>he doesn't even deny being H*Paoid
Sadece hayatına gül
9809f9 No.624111
So what's it going to take to have a good fighter thread? Is it too sterile and already figured out with hours of online videos or too sloppy and general and mutable on the exact aircraft involved that it is impossible?
Because I'm getting better at choosing my engagements and managing my angle-off so I can land enough seconds of shots on my boom and zoom with an option to enter the fight without overshooting, but I know I can fly smarter.
Even being able to choose between a one-circle and two-circle fight is huge.
e10a45 No.624714
>>622123
How good would WW2 era planes if we replaced their piston engines with modern turboprops, made them out of modern composites and alloys and gave them rudimentary electronics?
6a2cb5 No.624715
>>624714
They'd make for nice COIN/low cost light attack aircraft.
aef15a No.624764
>>624714
>turboprops
Yes.
>composites
Fuck no.
Why do you want x10 cost of build and x100 cost of damage repairs for the 20-30% increase of load? Nope.
4e2c56 No.624777
>>624714
I'm still waiting for that Super P-38 to become real.
e10a45 No.624785
>>624764
>x10 cost of build and x100 cost of damage repairs
It's not the 90s anymore, anon.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_787_Dreamliner#Overview
But you are right that repairs would be an issue if they are used for CAS.
bd6f2c No.624816
>>624714
You would have something USAF has fought against for a decade.
4078a9 No.624826
>>624816
Turboprops are on the wrong side of history, and America is about nothing so much as progress. They made Democracy possible, they made feminism popular, they made racial equality cool and they made the Jewish century a reality. It's far better to have a $100,000,000 jet that can't fly than a $5,000,000 turboprop that looks old and gross, like something your racist, sexist, antisemitic grandpa flew in. Also, Lockheeb doesn't know how to make turbine work, so how are we going to make a $75,000,000 gen-VI stealth air superiority supersonic turboprop?
4eba0c No.624878
>>624826
But jets can do COIN. The chair force just hates everything ground attack with a burning passion because they all want to be Tom Cruise and not actually help win wars.
2644bb No.624892
>>624878
>But jets can do COIN
Not nearly as efficiently as a turboprop designed for the role. Shit, a B2 could do COIN if you really wanted it to - doesn't mean it's a sensible decision.
120a3b No.624901
>>624892
>Not nearly as efficiently as a turboprop designed for the role
The A-37 had been the most prominent commie-remover around the globe for half a century. I really can't site any obvious disadvantage compared to props.
d3ff1c No.624929
>>624901
Yeah besides stuff like range and loiter time, basically everything that comes out of worse fuel efficiency of jet propulsion.
d3ff1c No.624932
>>624714
Using turboprop instead of piston engine only means that the engine will be smaller and lighter. They were made of modern alloys back then already, composite material would only really be good for skin and considering things like damage repair that's not a step up from aluminium at all. They also already had rudimentary electronics.
Basically, the only thing that would change is that it would be feasible to build single-prop heavy aircraft, so you wouldn't need to conceive crap like >>624777
120a3b No.625002
>>624932
I'll give you loiter time but in terms of km/fuel even turbojets are more efficient than turboprops unless you need to fly at like 350km/h for hours.
a63874 No.625015
>>624901
>>625002
Turboprop engines use less fuel at lower/medium speeds. As COIN involves long periods loitering at low speeds over a particular area the turboprop is the obvious choice. Not sure where you're getting your information there.
9809f9 No.625047
>>624714
Turboprop means you don't need a separate supercharger, so there is significant high altitude weight savings.
Of course you're really just going to use it for observation and ground attack, meaning you don't need altitude performance except to have a nice cruise speed.
In the end you're better off with the predator drone.
6a2cb5 No.625058
>>625047
Predator drones can't do bombing/gun runs at treetop altitudes.
9809f9 No.625072
>>625058
>predator drones don't do this thing that has no benefit
d3ff1c No.625130
>>625072
>accuracy has no benefit
No wonder you dipshits bombed random civilians in Japan instead of military targets.
4078a9 No.625131
>>625130
>implying they don't do it in every conflict they've fought
Daily reminder that Mosul and Raqqa are 90% destroyed because Americans are now too scared to fight like men and have to rely on drones and proxies instead.
5edb74 No.625156
>>625131
And who cares? The only thing the US is doing incorrectly is not eradicating the mudshits, colonising the whole Middle East for the good of their people.
d3ff1c No.625174
>>625156
>implying the planet would be better off without the only people on it willing to fight jews and jewish agenda
Also reminder mudslimes resort to terrorism only in retaliation to american terrorism against them.
62eee3 No.625176
>>625174
Muslims and jews are the same fucking thing, and they will continue to cause troubles due to their greed and shortsightness.
d3ff1c No.625177
>>625176
I'm not seeing any mudslimes taking over entire countries and bending them to their will, all I see is them trying to fuck up jews to their best ability.
62eee3 No.625179
>>625177
Dude you don't know about the Ottoman empire?
62eee3 No.625180
>>625177
>>625179
And it's a myth that they fuck up jews.
In fact, jews freely live in muslim countries. Muslim don't give a damn. "Anti-semitism" is a joke.
aad012 No.625181
I came into this tread expecting autism and I was not disappointed
6a2cb5 No.625232
>>625181
Is that a Bf 109T?
Why do fags say the 109 and 190 woulda been unsuitable for carrier ops?
They're not that hard to land, though the 109's massive propwash on takeoff might've necessitated some modifications to its rudder.
e307b1 No.625233
>>623710
Even Canada has no love for the Dutch, rightfully so.
e307b1 No.625234
>>625174
Yes, 9/11 and several bombings of military installations and ships happened before the US started the war on terror. Grow up.
6b7415 No.625237
>>625234
>9/11 was orchestrated by muslims
top jej. Haven't been baited this hard in a while.
120a3b No.625239
YouTube embed. Click thumbnail to play.
>>625174
>mudslimes resort to terrorism only in retaliation to american terrorism
6b7415 No.625252
>>625239
To muslims Israel and America are the same. Hence why their scream Death to America and Death to Israel all the time.
Note that with death to america they mean americas foreign policy and not the inhabitants of the country.
Have you heard about the USS liberty yet?
6b7415 No.625257
>>625239
And the Levon affair / Operation Susannah, where the based jews planned to bomb American and British targets in Egypt and blame the muslim brotherhood.
2232db No.625341
>>625257
>>625252
>kikes gonna kike
>that somehow means muds dindu nuffin
db2905 No.625395
>>625239
It depends entirely if you're talking about kebab attacking American targets in America or abroad in retaliation for aggressive acts this covers everything from drone strikes outside of national law to invasions or if it's something like 'home grown' kebab ramming civilians. One is faggots defending their ethnic homelands kebab are well within their rights to shit up the middle east however they please as long as they stay there and the other is generally trying to convert or attack someone else's homeland.
>>625234
And all of those were responses to American acts that can generally be described as terrorism or war crimes in their own right. The fact it was done with planes and drones doesn't magically change that fact.
McVeigh was 100% right when he pointed out the double standard with the terminology of human shields and acceptable collateral damage.
2232db No.625492
>>622487
>unguided air to air rocket
Good for giving cancer to an enemy pilot but not particularly good from stopping him from doing his thing unless he directly looked at the blast.
6b7415 No.625498
>>625492
A nuke with a proximity fuse would be a pretty good anti aircraft weapon.
d1c244 No.625527
>>625498
Why isn't anyone using AA missiles fitted with small fission warheads to take out enemy AWACs+nearby aircraft with a localized EMP?
2232db No.625549
>>625527
I think the significant part of the EMP is the result of ionoshere's disturbance and not directly from the explosion. Low-yield nukes would probs have no significant EMP effect outside of their directly lethal range.
d1c244 No.625566
>>625549
A small nuke can still produce an EMP at altitude, fission warheads are even said to be more efficient at this than thermonuclear ones if judenpedia is to be believed.
Isn't the whole thing mostly dependent on detonation altitude anyway?
How high would a 40N6 missile carrying a Davy Crockett-sized warhead have to fly in order to EMP a 25-50km^2 surface area?
d3ff1c No.625663
>>625527
Mostly the price. Weapon-grade plutonium is extremely expensive, it will be cheaper to launch 1000 normal rockets. Also about 99% of it will get dispersed as toxic dust all over your country and you generally want to avoid giving cancer to your own people.
1c1718 No.625729
>>625527
EMP induces overvoltage across circuits and electronics. Most of the electronics will be protected in faraday cages (metal case) so you've mostly got induction across the antennae themselves, certain cables and wiring will also be affected. The metal skin of the airplane can also act as a faraday cage.
Plus the whole part where military equipment is supposed to be EMP resistant. You might blind the AWACS and maybe even knock out radio communication, but you won't make them fall out of the sky. Airliner rules might have changed, but they used to require mechanical linkages that function in the event of power and hydraulic failure.
d3ff1c No.625785
>>625729
These rules don't exist, for the simple reason that it's physically impossible even for multiple people to meaningfully steer the plane of that size through muscle power. Airplanes are instead designed with backup hydraulic and electric systems.
1c1718 No.625833
>>625785
I'll take trim tabs for 1000 Alex.
d1c244 No.625945
>>625729
>The metal skin of the airplane can also act as a faraday cage.
Would it be enough to withstand an E1 pulse?
d3ff1c No.626089
>>625833
Trim tabs need hydraulic actuation too, dumbass. How do you even imagine doing a 300 lbs pull on something this shape and size?
2dd1f9 No.634701
>>625232
>They're not that hard to land
The 109 killed a significant amount of its pilots due to bad take-offs and landings. Trying to get that design to then land on a fucking carrier when landing on ground that isn't moving is hard enough for those skinny shitty little legs it has is just asking for dead pilots. I'm not sure what the 190s issues would've been for carrier ops so I'm not even convinced that it would've been a bad choice, but I suspect it's something to do with runway distance for both landing and takeoffs.
db2b5e No.634720
>>634701
>runway distance for both landing
Thats what a tailhook is for you fucking retard.
f6d6e4 No.634730
>>634701
190 low speed handling is quite unfriendly as it doesn't have the auto-slats that made the 109 so comfy to fly.
b0eb6c No.634751
>>634701
Bf 109 had ok landing speed and take of and landing distances because of the very effective trail and leading edge flaps ( btw nobody had automated leading edge flaps).
Bf 109 landing problems was due to already mentioned narrow wheel based making plane easy to flop over when landing with non zero roll. Also Bf 109 had very bad visibility on landing. Every forward engine planes had that but it can be mitigated by tricks. Like open canopy and sticking head out and to the side, standard practice during landing for WWII fighters. Can't do effectively in Bf 109 due to small size and canopy design. Also on the land pilot can work around bad visibility looking to the ground on teh side of runway, if it has parallel road/trail no forward visibility is non issue. Not the case for carrier ops.
b0eb6c No.634752
>>625566
150+ kms. Beyond significant atmosphere that can block gamma rays.
f6d6e4 No.634762
>>634751
>yfw picrel was a land-based bomber interceptor and not a mainline carrier fighter
ebe64c No.635606
>>625729
>Most of the electronics will be protected in faraday cages (metal case)
Not an electrician or anything near it but I think that if you want to protect wiring from EMP to any significant degree then the weight increase would make a sluggish plane. At that point its just better to switch to optic fiber or even vacuum tubes.
f9572b No.638679
>>626089
>Stick it up your mothers ass and give her a shove.
4ef436 No.638833
>>622123
because US Ord has a proud history of incompetence, and their autocannon was "almost ready" for the entire war.
>>622300
that's p funny
>>622331
probably the same. and the Merlin was a stop-gap. the Allison was a great engine, but not adapted to high alt use, which was needed for the bomber escorting. the evolved version of it is what's in the Lightning, a beast plane.
>>623439
overheats? is this some videogame shit? AN/M2s aren't going to overheat in the amount of ammo an aircraft has.