Has anybody seen this........

[Q3ark]

omg the Aussies are making spitfires in kit form :o http://www.supermarineaircraft.com/About.htm

now all I need is a few hundred thousand £££'s, a pilots licence and a lot of free time :|\\

[SUBMAN1]

Not as fast as the original. Seems slow. 150 kt to 165 kt cruise speeds in the kit. Original was about 220 kt.

-S

[SUBMAN1]

Found the specs - top speed on this kit is about the cruise speed of the original:

http://www.supermarineaircraft.com/Specs.htm

-S

[Schöneboom]

No wonder they're slower, the kits are using auto engines, not Rolls-Royce Merlins. Still, looks like loads of fun!

[Q3ark]

And they're scaled down :know:

Yeh it looks like they do two versions, one is at 80% scale and the other is at 90% scale

[Task Force]

Il take one, even if it is slower than a real one.:huh: :D

[SUBMAN1]

I want a P-51D or better. That is my plane!

-S

[Morts]

bah, the P-51 is overrated
id rather have a Me 109G/2

[Tango589]

For god's sake, I want one of these for christmas!:rock: It would be one hell of an incentive to get my pilots license. All I need now is the cash...I wonder if I can sell any organs?:hmm:

[UnderseaLcpl]

bah, the P-51 is overrated
id rather have a Me 109G/2


:yep: :yep: :yep:

Awesome aircraft. Piston-engine excellence.:up:

[Morts]

bah, the P-51 is overrated
id rather have a Me 109G/2


:yep: :yep: :yep:

Awesome aircraft. Piston-engine excellence.:up:
and the roar of the engine from the 109:D
*instert drooling smiley*

[SUBMAN1]

bah, the P-51 is overrated
id rather have a Me 109G/2

:yep: :yep: :yep:

Awesome aircraft. Piston-engine excellence.:up:Barf! I disagree!

That thing has crappy visibility, doesn't like left turns (or was it right?) is slower, and not even pressurized! Even the soviet fighters of the war could keep up with that thing! I am not impressed at all!

P-51 would eat it for lunch and they did! The P-51 even has a 50 knot speed advantage!

-S

PS. Found a good article from the Soviet side of things against a captured G2 - http://www.airpages.ru/cgi-bin/epg.pl?nav=lw70&page=bf109g2

[Sailor Steve]

bah, the P-51 is overrated
id rather have a Me 109G/2

:yep: :yep: :yep:

Awesome aircraft. Piston-engine excellence.:up:Barf! I disagree!

That thing has crappy visibility, doesn't like left turns (or was it right?) is slower, and not even pressurized! Even the soviet fighters of the war could keep up with that thing! I am not impressed at all!

P-51 would eat it for lunch and they did! The P-51 even has a 50 knot speed advantage!

-S

PS. Found a good article from the Soviet side of things against a captured G2 - http://www.airpages.ru/cgi-bin/epg.pl?nav=lw70&page=bf109g2
That's what happens when you only know the propaganda.

The Mustang's main advantage was that there were so many of them built, and its reputation stems from the fact that it was the only single-engined fighter that could make it from England to Berlin and back. The P-51 was indeed faster at altitudes in the 20-30,000-foot range, which was where they needed it, but the '109 climbed and rolled much faster. And accelerated faster, which is tied into the climb rate. The Mustang's speed advantage was not "50 knots"...more like 25, which translates to around 30mph.

From the article you cite:
The German designation was Bf 109G-2/R6.
The 'R6' suffix denotes the modified 'bomber-buster' with the underwing 20mm gun pods, which make an absolute pig of the aircraft, slowing down the roll and climb considereably, which takes away the plane's main advantages.

And the later models, from the G-4 on, were indeed pressurized.

And no, in a fair fight the P-51 would not "eat up" the Bf-109G - the two were just about equal, and the Bf-109K was just as fast, while retaining its other advantages.

[SUBMAN1]

...And no, in a fair fight the P-51 would not "eat up" the Bf-109G - the two were just about equal, and the Bf-109K was just as fast, while retaining its other advantages.Now that's propaganda! We already know the Mustang can out turn and out fight it. In a flat bank for example, the K model couldn't hang with the Mustang as proven in the air battle over Y-29. The 109 had the speed advantage and the mustang just naked, about 3rd turn, the Mustang pulled on the tail of the 109 and sent him into the dirt. The Mustang was in its game against the 109 with the 109 severely out classed.

It's not an equal fight by any means. Y-29, though severely outnumbered 10 to 1, only lost a few aircraft even with all the German aces in that fight who many met their death there.

I stand by my case above.

-S

[Morts]

subman, check out the ace list here
http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/aces/aces.htm#wwii
even though americans had the super mighty 109 slaughtering (according to you) P-51, the american aces didnt score over 50 kills, where as the germans in their poor, poor (again according to you) 109/190 alot of times scored well over 50, and 100 for that sake

[Sailor Steve]

@ Subman1: The Russian tests show what happens when you're flying an unfamiliar aircraft. The same thing happened when the Americans recovered an intact Mitsubishi Zero in Alaska. Our pilots were not sure of the aircraft's capabilities, and so didn't fly it to its limits. The result was an official claim that a Corsair could stay with the Zero in a flat turn! And that one we know to be way off base.

@ Morts: The real numbers are even worse than you think.

Highest scoring US ace in Europe: Francis Gabreski, in a P-47, 31 kills.

Highest scoring Mustang ace: George Preddy, 27-1/2 kills. He was the third-highest US ace in Europe and 7th overall.

Highest scoring ace ever: Erich Hartmann, in a series of Bf-109s, 352 kills.

There were 105 German aces with 100 kills or more, and at least half of them flew Bf-109s.

The fact is that in this case there is no 'best'. Adolph Galland, German General of Fighters, himself holding more 104 kills, stated that the reason the Germans held such high scores was that the Allies rotated their pilots out to teach the new guys what was what, while the German pilots "flew until they were killed". On the whole, over any equal period of time, every country's pilots' scores were about equal, and so were the planes they flew.

Technology doesn't remain secret for long, and everybody made up slack as time went on. The P-51D and Bf-109G-10 and K models were about equal in every combat respect, as were the very late-war Japanese, British and Russian planes.

[SUBMAN1]

Morts - check the facts as to why. Classic case of comparing apples and oranges, though I know you like doing that to try an make a point since you do it every time you enter a thread. Also, why don't you look at how many times these so called 'aces' were shot down! Hahahaha! :p

SS - You are missing the above as well - no left turns and crappy visibility. That is a massive disadvantage to the Germans, even if other things were equal (which they weren't if you bother to read up on Y29). Roll rate on a 109 is terrible with all the cannon in the wing as well, so I am not getting where you claim it was better? Show me that.

Even if the P-51 can't roll quite as fast, it definitly had a greater degrees per second in a turn.

Stealth is based around the concepts of WWII. The ME109 frequently never saw the plane that downed him. This lesson translates all the way to today in our F-22. This is the very thinking as to why the F-22 is the way it is.

-S

[Morts]

subman, fact still remains that they downed more planes than american
and besides..in 43/44 alot of the german pilots where rookies with little to no experience...so a somewhat experienced american pilot is able to down a rookie in a 109? wow i must say..that makes it the best ever (not)
sure, german aces where shot down..but hey..so where american?

[SUBMAN1]

subman, fact still remains that they downed more planes than american
and besides..in 43/44 alot of the german pilots where rookies with little to no experience...so a somewhat experienced american pilot is able to down a rookie in a 109? wow i must say..that makes it the best ever (not)
sure, german aces where shot down..but hey..so where american?Apples and oranges. We are talking about the plane too, not the pilots. So where do you get off bringing in the pilots that got shot down so many times that they probably only got off lucky shots most days?

-S

[Sailor Steve]

Morts - check the facts as to why. Classic case of comparing apples and oranges, though I know you like doing that to try an make a point since you do it every time you enter a thread. Also, why don't you look at how many times these so called 'aces' were shot down! Hahahaha! :p
Why is it you do the very same things you accuse others of doing? 'Making points' and being right seem to be all you ever want to do. No real discussion, just "I'm right and you're stupid."

SS - You are missing the above as well - no left turns and crappy visibility. That is a massive disadvantage to the Germans, even if other things were equal (which they weren't if you bother to read up on Y29). Roll rate on a 109 is terrible with all the cannon in the wing as well, so I am not getting where you claim it was better? Show me that.

Even if the P-51 can't roll quite as fast, it definitly had a greater degrees per second in a turn.
If you're going to make a claim like that, you should give the actual 'degrees-per-second' numbers. You keep making slams like "if you bother to read up on...", but you ignore the overall numbers.

The roll rate was terrible with the cannons, which was why the 'R6' models were rare, and got dumped as soon as they could manage it. The stock '109 rolled almost twice as fast as a Mustang, and the turn rates were actually about equal. You sound like the P-40 pilot who was quoted saying "I don't see what the hubbub is about. I never met a Zero that could out-turn me!"

Stealth is based around the concepts of WWII. The ME109 frequently never saw the plane that downed him.
That's true of 90% of all the pilots ever shot down in any war. The German designers recognized the deficiencies of their early canopies, which is why the Bf-109G-10 and K models had the much-improved 'Erla Haube', sometimes called the 'Galland Hood'.

Citing one battle over and over doesn't prove anything. The fact remains that overall, the scores of pilots from every country were, mission-for-mission, about equal. Either the German pilots were so much better that they could overcome the inequality of inferior aircraft, or the planes were, indeed, roughly equal.

[stabiz]

No real discussion, just "I'm right and you're stupid."

Without reading up on it, I would say this goes for 99% of Submans posts.

[I-25]

Without reading up on it, I would say this goes for 99% of Submans posts.

:rotfl::rotfl:

[Q3ark]

Wow this thread stayed on topic for all of seven posts :roll:.

I have done quite a bit of reading on their site http://www.supermarineaircraft.com/Pilot.htm and the replica's appear to handle quite nicely. Obviously they don't have the speed of an original spit but to my knowlege nobody makes merlin engines any more.

[kurtz]

Seems some people can get hold of them.

http://www.practicalperformancecar.com/projectcardetail.asp?id=4

I had an SD1 with the 2.6 engine and that was entertaining enough. Eventually Frau Kurtz parked it halfway up a tree:cry:

[Morts]

No real discussion, just "I'm right and you're stupid."

Without reading up on it, I would say this goes for 99% of Submans posts.
yup:rotfl:

[Fincuan]

I may be a bit late to the discussion(sorry, couldn't find it from amongst all the election "debate" threads), but here's a site for anyone interested in the tested performance of said fighters: http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org
The site also houses plenty of combat reports.

Have fun, there should be enough reading for a few days :lol:

[bookworm_020]

Back to topic;)

I saw a couple of the scaled versions at an airshow a couple of years ago and saw them in the air as well, they sound like the real thing when they put the throttle down!

They are also alot cheaper to buy, easier to maintain, and use a heck of lot less fuel that a full size warbird (pretty clear to all, but just had to point it out)

Now if I can getmine with hardpoints and working guns, I'll buy....:D

[Tango589]

Now if I can getmine with hardpoints and working guns, I'll buy....:D

Cool, then you can go strafing the neighbours gardens and blast their gnomes to shreds!:rock:

[August]

The P-51 is the fighter that won the war. Fakt.

[Morts]

not really
US/Brit bombers would still have reduced germany to rubble just with a few more losses
id say the hurricane and spittys did more to help win the war than the P-51

[FIREWALL]

If anyone read the whole article thoroughly they'd know the difference between the 80% and the 90% is the passenger tandem seat.

If he built a replica 100% You'd be into it $millions and he would be out of business. By his (Sullivan's) own words.

To be honest, I doubt most here would even know how to start a Merlin engine. :lol:

[August]

To be honest, I doubt most here would even know how to start a Merlin engine. :lol:

First you wave the magic wand?

[FIREWALL]

To be honest, I doubt most here would even know how to start a Merlin engine. :lol:

First you wave the magic wand?

:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

[Fincuan]

To be honest, I doubt most here would even know how to start a Merlin engine. :lol:

First you wave the magic wand?

Works just like any other engine: Just hit i :rotfl:

[FIREWALL]

To be honest, I doubt most here would even know how to start a Merlin engine. :lol:

First you wave the magic wand?

Works just like any other engine: Just hit i :rotfl:


Not even close.:roll: :lol:

[Task Force]

Now that I think about it, I want a BF 109 F-4.:rock: Full size please.:yep:

I think im gona take Tango 589`s advice and sell a organ (or two) to get one, I think il sell my brain cause I never use it.:rotfl:

[August]

Not even close. :roll: :lol:

Oh you were serious?

Here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coffman_starter

[Q3ark]

I doubt most here would even know how to start a Merlin engine. :lol:






:shifty: Psst, I do :smug:

I'll type up the procedure after work tomorrow. It's 22:10 here and i'm up at 06:00 :up:

[FIREWALL]

Not even close. :roll: :lol:

Oh you were serious?

Here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coffman_starter


:up: :up: :up:

[FIREWALL]

Just for the record, I'm not a Warbird pilot. Only flying I've done is flightsims.:smug:

[Task Force]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-cY1jldbbhk&feature=related
Now Id like one of these, even if its just a RC.:D

[HunterICX]

The P-51 is the fighter that won the war. Fakt.

Fakt made by the ignorant, and not by saying ''the P-51'' but by saying that a Single Fighter type can win a War.

P-51 was the best Escort Fighter indeed it was what the bombers needed by their side, but not the best fighter in overall. I can name more examples, Spitfire was the best Interceptor of World War 2, but it couldnt do the task of the P-51 escorting bombers into center Germany and return. Did the P-51 have the same striking power to knock out Ground Targets (armor convoys) and Locomotives like the Hawker Typhoons did? or did it have the ability to butcher down Bombers out of the skies like the FW190 did?

the Fact is NO Fighter won any WAR. The key to succes is to have a variety of aircraft everyone furfilling its Role. but even that doesnt win the war, but what it did by winning the battle for the sky it has been of great importance to win World War 2.

HunterICX

[Task Force]

In actuality, the aircraft just transported the bombs/shells, The Bombs and shells won the war for aircraft. Because, the plains were just plains without Ammo.;)

[Hylander_1314]

I like the Hawker Hurricane MkI. Not as good as the Bf-109E during the Battle of Britain, but it had nice lines, and I like the combination of stressed skin and fabric covering.

A nice 120 to 150 inch wingspan R/C model would be cool too. If I could just find plans for it.

[joea]

The P-51 is the fighter that won the war. Fakt.

Fakt made by the ignorant, and not by saying ''the P-51'' but by saying that a Single Fighter type can win a War.


HunterICX

I think August was kidding (Subman sadly was not), got to be a veteran of the UBI forums to know why. ;)

Otherwise I agree with your post.

[HunterICX]

The P-51 is the fighter that won the war. Fakt.

Fakt made by the ignorant, and not by saying ''the P-51'' but by saying that a Single Fighter type can win a War.


HunterICX

I think August was kidding (Subman sadly was not), got to be a veteran of the UBI forums to know why. ;)

Otherwise I agree with your post.

Thinking the same here, wasnt aiming at August in any way but at the statement I've heard many times and for me it's like dropping my favorite mug on the ground everytime I hear a statement like ''this fighter won the war, this tank won the war and this bomber won the war, etc etc''.

HunterICX

[Rilder]

Does it have reinforced landing gear for those umm... hard landings. :lol:

[XabbaRus]

Hunter you should go to the strategypage forums. They are hilarious for the my plane is better than your plane argument.

Honestly there is or was a guy who posts there who posts in a way similar to subman. I'm right you are wrong, its up to you to look up the facts type post.

subman denies its him but I'm not so sure.

[August]

...got to be a veteran of the UBI forums to know why. ;)

Oh yeah, those arguments were legendary! Remember the one about killing Tiger tanks by bouncing rounds off the roadway underneath them?

[Fincuan]

If it's on History Channel it has to be true :lol: No wonder all "teh P-51 won teh war"-threads if people watch this kind of crap:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H282DVlZVQA

The Tiger's getting destroyed by .50 cals claim is from this vid btw:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6f9cqhuARrM&feature=related

[Jimbuna]

If it's on History Channel it has to be true :lol: No wonder all "teh P-51 won teh war"-threads if people watch this kind of crap:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H282DVlZVQA

The Tiger's getting destroyed by .50 cals claim is from this vid btw:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6f9cqhuARrM&feature=related

Agreed.....tis a crackin series, but better known for it's CGI.

[HunterICX]

If it's on History Channel it has to be true :lol: No wonder all "teh P-51 won teh war"-threads if people watch this kind of crap:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H282DVlZVQA

The Tiger's getting destroyed by .50 cals claim is from this vid btw:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6f9cqhuARrM&feature=related

The Dogfight series....:nope: A nice enjoyable CGI animation serie, but no way near a qualified documentary I would watch.

The Tiger getting shot by a P-47, well .50 cal would be like throwing pebbles against the Tiger.

HunterICX

[Dowly]

If it's on History Channel it has to be true :lol: No wonder all "teh P-51 won teh war"-threads if people watch this kind of crap:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H282DVlZVQA

The veteran said himself that the 109 was outperforming him. :p

[Tango589]

Spitfire start up procedure video here:

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=FzsJBjbCyvM

[Jimbuna]

Nice one http://www.psionguild.org/forums/images/smilies/wolfsmilies/thumbsup.gif

Just need my pilots licence now http://img403.imageshack.us/img403/6324/uowyaydh5wc2zm2.gif