StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Don't know why, but I am utterly fascinated by them. No one ever seems to bring them up in discussion, it seems that they are disregarded for some reason. WWII and modern era, while many orders of magnitude more bad-assed, are all anyone likes to spare attention for. If you have favorites or opinions, please step up!

I voted for rickety crates. Probably because I don't know anything about them. I really like WW2 fighters though... they're fucking hot-rods!.

World War 2 planes capture my imagination much more. WW1 planes seem quaint little rickety crates by comparison ...

They're interesting but very rickety. Cloth and wood don't make a particularly tough fighter.

WW1 is way too remote for my interest. I remember meeting WW2 and Korea Vets as a kid, but I never met someone from WW1.

But one thing that fascinates me about WW1 pilots is seeing some of the old pictures or films of them dropping bombs by hand. Literally.

World War one planes are less interested then those of WW2 and latter because there influence on the battlefield was much smaller. Even for the Somme the Allies had only a few hundred planes. It wasn’t till 1917 that they really started to show up in really significant numbers, and the limited capacities made them useful but nowhere near decisive. In WW2 planes could turn battles around in 15 minutes, such as Kursk where in one case IL-2 regiment knocked out 70 tanks on one mission.

IN WW1 the effect of aerial attack was greatly out matched by the shear crushing weight of the artillery.

Stormbringer wrote:They're interesting but very rickety. Cloth and wood don't make a particularly tough fighter.

Useful against a certain battleships flak though.

Considering how planes went from 60mph unarmed, highly unreliable powered kites to 140mph killing machines in the space of four years is by any stratch of the imagination a remarkable state of advance. Consider the B-2, it's design was finalized in '84. Production of the prototype took 3 years, AFTER it had been designed. And this is ignoring the years of R&D work that led to technological test beds before actual design of the prototype. Take the F-22, how long has it been since it's first flight and it still isn't operational.
You might say that this is an unfair comparison, considering the complexity of the machines mentioned, but if you take into account the fact that aerospace engineering was not a NEW endeavor when these things were designed, I don't feel it's entirely unfounded.
What advances have been made in basic design in the past 30 years? Other than materials, not many steps forward have been made. Were it possible to cram a modern electronics suite into a F-106, it would be a capable warplane today. Take the B-52, for instance. It will have served for nearly seventy years before it's retired.
The point I'm trying to make with this is WWI aircraft represented the state of the art of an emergent technology, and advancement was so fast that planes were made obsolete six months after entering service. Today, while thankfully lacking the impetus of wartime pressure, things have slowed way down.

Two nits, there was no B-2 prototype and current planning will have the B-52 last to be 90ish, though it was once seriously considered to keep them till 2050-60 which would make the plane over 100 years old.

I know what you're saying, but the fact is much of it doesn’t concern the majority of aviation enthusiasts. They, me included, are more interested in the end result then the process.

I like WWI planes because they are cooler.

Have a very nice day.
-fgalkin

Sea Skimmer wrote:Two nits, there was no B-2 prototype and current planning will have the B-52 last to be 90ish, though it was once seriously considered to keep them till 2050-60 which would make the plane over 100 years old.

I know what you're saying, but the fact is much of it doesn’t concern the majority of aviation enthusiasts. They, me included, are more interested in the end result then the process.

Anyone who starts a thread about Lissa is golden in my book. And I wouldn't fly in a 100 year old airplane unless it was a WWI veteran!

Frank Hipper wrote:

Sea Skimmer wrote:Two nits, there was no B-2 prototype and current planning will have the B-52 last to be 90ish, though it was once seriously considered to keep them till 2050-60 which would make the plane over 100 years old.

I know what you're saying, but the fact is much of it doesn’t concern the majority of aviation enthusiasts. They, me included, are more interested in the end result then the process.

Anyone who starts a thread about Lissa is golden in my book. And I wouldn't fly in a 100 year old airplane unless it was a WWI veteran!

The worlds has DC-3's from before WW2 that still have 350 years of airframe life left you know. Those things are going to last until the end of time, or we develop anti grav, which will then be incorporated into the reaming aircraft to give even lower wing loading.

Sea Skimmer wrote:

Frank Hipper wrote:

Sea Skimmer wrote:Two nits, there was no B-2 prototype and current planning will have the B-52 last to be 90ish, though it was once seriously considered to keep them till 2050-60 which would make the plane over 100 years old.

I know what you're saying, but the fact is much of it doesn’t concern the majority of aviation enthusiasts. They, me included, are more interested in the end result then the process.

Anyone who starts a thread about Lissa is golden in my book. And I wouldn't fly in a 100 year old airplane unless it was a WWI veteran!

The worlds has DC-3's from before WW2 that still have 350 years of airframe life left you know. Those things are going to last until the end of time, or we develop anti grav, which will then be incorporated into the reaming aircraft to give even lower wing loading.

Three hundred and fifty years! I had NO idea! I know they're still flying, and usefull as hell, and the most important aircraft ever built, but DAMN!

Frank Hipper wrote:

Sea Skimmer wrote:

Frank Hipper wrote:Anyone who starts a thread about Lissa is golden in my book. And I wouldn't fly in a 100 year old airplane unless it was a WWI veteran!

The worlds has DC-3's from before WW2 that still have 350 years of airframe life left you know. Those things are going to last until the end of time, or we develop anti grav, which will then be incorporated into the reaming aircraft to give even lower wing loading.

Three hundred and fifty years! I had NO idea! I know they're still flying, and usefull as hell, and the most important aircraft ever built, but DAMN!

The aircraft in question has been flying in Ecuador and Peru since 1938. The plane was built extremely tough and even with a heavy load is under only a small amount of stress. I would not be surprised if the DC-3 becomes the worlds largest lived aircraft in operational service by a 50+ year margin down the line.