Comments by "Solo Renegade" (@SoloRenegade) on "Australian Military Aviation History" channel.

@jacktattis why?
1
@jacktattis you aren't stating any facts, and what makes someone a "reputable" author? I'm citing primary sources, not authors regurgitating the work of others out of context.
1
@jacktattis yet here yo are, making worthless posts.....
1
@jacktattis Eric Brown was not an aeronautical engineer and did not fly every model of aircraft. cite names all you like, it proves nothing. facts are what matters. verifiable facts. the fact you're telling me NOT to respond proves you can't win and are hoping I'll just ignore your lies. Make facts based and supported claims if you want to be correct.
1
@jacktattis Eric Brown knew FAR less than I do. I have the benefit of decades of advancement and hindsight, I've flown helicopters, airplanes, am a combat veteran, and I am an Actual Mechanical and Aerospace Engineer. On top of being an amateur historian. Flying 200+ types doesn't make him an expert on some very specific arguments, as most of those airframes contribute nothing of value to the argument. And most of what Eric Brown did had nothing to do with range, tactics, Pacific Theater, etc. Shot myself in the foot? how do you figure? Got any actual facts to share?
1
@jacktattis Appeal to authority is an unscientific logical fallacy. don't even know what all those BS acronyms mean, nor do I care. present facts. some dead guy's credentials don't make you right.
1
@jacktattis I'm not a chef. I don't cook "pork pies".
1
@jacktattis tell them how to cook pies? I'm not a chef. I guess you missed my last comment.
1
@jacktattis well, I'm not an Aussie. you clearly are just a worthless troll.
1
wrong, the P-47 carried more fuel, as it also burned more fuel. the P-47 also consumed 2X as much aluminum resources per airframe.
1
@jacktattis "The P47 had a lousy dive and was being lost chasing the Bf109 and Fw190" this is a complete lie which has been debunked by many people. German pilots mistook the P-47 for a Spitfire early on due to the elliptical wing. standard German tactic to escape a Spitfire was to push the nose over into a dive, but that didn't work against the P-47. Mistaken identity leads to death, same as Japanese pilots mistaking F6F for an F4F early on and trying to out climb the F6F thinking it was an F4F.
1
A6M Climb Rate: 3100 fpm Me109 climb rate: 3900 fpm P-39 climb rate: 3600 fpm (pre-war fighter) P-38 climb rate: 3300 fpm (pre-war fighter) F4U climb rate: 2400 fpm (pre-war fighter) F4U-4 climb rate: 4300 fpm Spitfire climb rate: 2600-3200 fpm (pre-war fighter), late war variants pushing to 4000+ fpm F4F climb rate: 3300 fpm (pre-war fighter) P-51B and P-51D proved capable of 3800 to 4600 fpm. F8F set climb rate record at 6378 fpm in 1946. in 2018 a heavily modified Harmon Rocket came within 4sec of the F8F record.
1
A-36 was preferred by pilots over the P-47, with even Robert Johnson praising the A-36. Also, the IL-2 is praised as a ground attack aircraft.....as was the Mosquito, and Typhoon.
1
with sufficient thrust, anything is possible.
1
@ and I know what such things are. But, the fact remains, with sufficient thrust, all of that can be overcome.... Ever seen a rocket? Some amount of brute forcing is 100% possible and doable. The SR-71 profile had more to do with refueling that anything else.
1
And the Germans slaughtered untold numbers of Russian aircraft. Slaying inferior aircraft and inferior pilots. Same as the F6F did to rack up it's kill count. the most impressive high kill scoring aircraft is thus the P-39Q. A decent aircraft fighting superior pilots and superior aircraft, flown by inferior pilots, and still managed to score high.
1
@fazole Allied radar played next to no part in the arguments I made.
1
@TTTT-oc4eb good point, but it also doesn't change anything I said.
1