The didn't. They stopped painting the B-17s first. Please try to keep up. :O:

It would've saved them some money if they'd known that th B-29 was only going to be used against the Japanese.

And the MiG-25 was developed just to counter the B-70. It happens.

LOL

The B-29 was used against the Japanese because it was the best tool available for the job.Do not forget that the B-29 was very complex for its time and had many issues when it first entered service these factors made the USAAF decide to deploy them to the the PTO and not Europe.Remember the strategy was Europe first and then Japan.

They knew that the B-29 had issues and might take time to become truly combat effective but that it had the range to reach mainland Japan from bases in China(missions from China had mediocre results and the B-29s got sent to the Mariana Islands where they where a little closer to Japan) .

The logic was in the PTO we can afford to wait 6 months for the B-29 to become effective on the other hand we need a bomber that is effective right now in Europe.Therefore keep the B-24 and B-17s in Europe and send the B-29 to the PTO where in time it will get the job done.At this point the atomic bomb was not a sure thing yet it was all theory until the test at Trinity in 1945.The war against Japan was expected to possibly last well into 1946.

The B-29 took longer to develop than originally planned had it have been ready in 1943 it would have flown over Germany most likely.

Well excuuuuuuuuse me!

Really though the only thing that aircraft are good for is getting the real warriors to the battlefield. In that they're sorta like the Navy. :D

Typical overly cocky paratrooper.:O:

Which resulted in the F-15, the best fighter to ever grace the skies.

I know...i need to work on that better but my audience is 7 classmates and a teacher usually.

In a school with less than 200 kids, things can get predictable. People always predict that my presentations are about military stuff...and they are pretty good at predicting because I do those presentations whenever I get the chance...

:yep:

But truth be told they just don't come any cockier than fighter pilots. Good thing egos don't have physical weight or they'd never get their birds off the ground! :)

It doesn't mean they won't try... :yep:

Ever since I saw Thirty Seconds Over Tokyo, I've been a huge fan of the B-25 in all it's forms.

http://www.aviation-history.com/nort...can/b25-13.gif

http://www.wingsmagazine.com/images/...wh-b-25web.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...5_Mitchell.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...99px-B-25H.jpg




I was pretty amazed a few years ago to find out about the Ryan FR-1 Fireball built just prior to the end of WW2. Pretty neat reading about how the test pilots would pull up beside a conventional aircraft, shut off the radial engine and then proceed to pull away from the astonished pilot of the other aircraft using the jet engine.:)

http://www.strange-mecha.com/aircraft/Mixed/fr1.JPG

What's up with the nose change, putting the guns in it? I've never seen this in the Mitchell.

I've seen that gun configuration before...there was a British model that had a cannon or something like that IIRC...

And the Missouri Commemorative Air Force has a B-25, Avenger Torpedo Bomber and an L-3...and they are all coming to the local air show this year. Normally, you can pay 400$ and they will take you on a ride from their airfield near St. Louis. I think it's closer to St. Charles actually. I forget...but I'm excited for this June.

Just a couple versions developed to allow the B-25 to contribute to the ground attack role. The bottom one is a B-25H which includes a 75mm cannon but it was manually loaded and found to have too low a rate of fire so was sometimes removed and replaced with 2 more .50 cal. The "J" model could have up to 18 .50 cals. A couple great examples of how versatile the B-25 could be.

Edit: Found a photo of an "H" with the 75mm replaced:

http://scaleplasticandrail.com/kaboo...NARAGunMod.jpg

That's what it was. The H version.

No fair - you can't just ask us to pick 1!

Fighter - toss up between the FW 190 and F4U. The only problem with the F4U was the long nose and radial engine that took out many a pilot. It wasn't known as the "Ensign Eliminator" for nothing!
The P-61 was a night fighters dream. The P-47 deserves mention.
What suprises me most - folks mentioned the Mosquito - but no Beaufighter? A beauty of a bird with a long and distinguished history...

The P-51? Most over-rated warbird by those that don't know any better. Yes - by the time the war ended it had matured into a decent fighter, but its history of design errors (like wings that were too thin so the guns had to be installed at an angle - leading to major jams) and simple lack of common sense (Look on the bottom - the big radiator - one bullet and your streaming Glycol and overheating before you get home...). Honestly ... UGH!

My favorite Axis fighters in the Pacific - again not even mentioned - were probably the Ki61 Swallow (or "Tony" to the Allies) and the K1N1 Shinden (George). The Tony wins on looks, the George on performance.

In Axis Europe - if I can't have the FW190, the FW192/194's were amazing planes. Then again - so was the DO335, though it never saw combat (it fled the only possible engagement). The HE-162 and ME163 also do not escape my list of "fav's", though I would never want to land on a skid or sit beside 2 extremely combustible fuel tanks....

Attack Aircraft - I can't believe no one even mentioned the A-20 Havoc. Maneuverable, tough and packing a punch, it was a true ground attack monster for its day.

Bombers - Yes, I love the B-17. But my favorite was the B-26 Maurader. A medium bomber with great speed and good maneuverability along with a respectable bomb load, she was a true beauty in the sky. A little unstable (thus her nickname that can't be repeated here), she is simply top of my list when it comes to this category.

Just my $0.02....

You can say that again and Navy fighter pilots are the most cocky of all.

Truth be told cockiness is also a sign of aggressiveness and if you are going to be a paratrooper or a fighter pilot you had better have some.Of course not to the point that it hinders your ability to work as a cohesive unit.It has to be cockiness that is backed by fact.


@mako88sb that B-25 nose is a B-25G configuration it is a 75mm cannon they used it to punch holes into sides of enemy ships. The cannon was found not to be very useful in its intended role so they stopped mounting them. There where several different configurations of .50 cals in the nose some where factory others where Jerry rigged in the field.

The G model was the first to have factory designed nose kits they could be installed in the factory and had no option for a plexiglass nose.The H and J models filled up the nose space that the 75mm cannon took up with more .50.cals and allowed the plane to be configured with a plexiglass nose or the gun nose this could be configured in the feild.B-25G have a more stubby nose H and J models have a longer nose.The middle two photos are J or H models the RAF one is missing the top turret though and the blue one is a navy or Marnie Corps PBJ-1 they used the same model letters (G,H,J) though.

We had one of the only two flying Avro Lancasters come to Calgary back in 2010. Quite a sight and pretty hefty price to take a flight in it. One guy here who last flew in a Lancaster back in 1957 got the surprise of his life when his son payed for him to take a flight. It was one heck of a great story.

That's how I am on this subject. It's impossible to pick one...so i have like 50. :D


That's amazing... :yeah: