Comments by "João Rita" (@jlvfr) on "Not A Pound For Air To Ground" channel.

  1. Clearly the MIG wanted to defect, just not the pilot.
    910
  2. Meanwhile the B-29/Tu-4 team had to be absolutely faithfull to the B-29, even if they saw problems...
    109
  3. Mig with no gun and F-4 with gun. It's a reversal of the Vietnam situation...
    109
  4. Those Canberra cartrige starters! Never gets old, seeing that.
    33
  5. B-29 night fighter... the mind boggles...
    32
  6. This idea kickstarted an entire genre in science fiction!
    18
  7.  @alan-sk7ky  and bullet holes...
    12
  8.  @rossmum  yep.And, let's face it, while it was an amazing plane, the B-29 was a product of a 1940s rush program, and had multiple issues. So... good for cheking technologies and construction, but that was it, specially with jets coming up.
    11
  9. You kid but. in the Koreas, one of the problems facing the South Korean and USAF defenders are North Korean An-2, flying very low, very slow and with fabric fuselages...
    10
  10. I still remember the early NATO reports on this bird, specially when combined with the helmet sight and the AA-11. There was genuine shock; when the wall fell and the Germany reunited, there was a rush by NATO services to this everything; one could read the drooling between the lines...
    8
  11. Kudos to the chinese pilot who managed to return and land with that thing hanging from the plane. Great combination of balls and skill!
    8
  12.  @thelandofnod123  I know, but the original order by Stalin was that: "Copy it or else". They were forced to make changes, because ofc, but that had been his idea.
    5
  13. They chose those with the biggest balls.
    4
  14.  @vladintool  we are both right and wrong. Yes the An-2 is made of aluminium, and that was the one I wanted to refer, but I meant today . The Po-2 was indeed used for night attacks, but I was thinking of the An-2 being used to infiltrate commandos and sabouteurs, due to it's ability to practically fly at grass level.
    4
  15. If I remember correctly the USSR was one of two nations (the other being Italy) that came out of the Spanish civil with the wrong lessons, in terms of future air combat: pure manouverabilty was king, and few but heavy, well aimed guns was all you needed. This is partly to blame for the light designs in service at the start of WWII.
    4
  16. at that time? With such a new tecnology? Other people were building conventional planes that died in stupid ways...
    3
  17. the problem here is that Korea has lots and lots of mountains, hills and valleys; perfect for a small, slow plane to zig zag under cover of line of sight. Only airborne radar works and even that has problems.
    3
  18.  @robertkalinic335  not really: the I-16 will either be trying to intercept german bombers or german fighters. If bombers, it will place itself in a position that will leave it vulnerable to attacke; if fighters, the 109 can simply acelerate away and manouver at speed in whatever way it suits it.
    3
  19.  @robertkalinic335  like who? Finland's pilots were far superior than the soviets, specially in the early war, which allowed them to use their poor aircraft pool to maximum efect. Italy was equiped with similar planes, generation-wise, with good crews, but the air component in Russia was tiny, and what was left was pulled on in February 1943. The rest? Irrelevant.
    3
  20.  @scottgiles7546  a big episode...
    2
  21. Imo the Seahawk was the most elegant jet of the age.
    2
  22. The first air-dropped lifeboat was British, with first deployments in February 1943. The first US model wasn't ready untill early 1944.
    2
  23. That series is from the mid 1980s. Most likely at the time much of this was classifed. Also, afaik the series happened in the US, in an environment completely diferent from these events.
    2
  24. When you really put the pedal to the metal...
    2
  25.  @robertkalinic335  on the I-18; yes it was extremely manouverable, like the Zero. But, like the Zero, the enemy quickly found the correct tactic; use speed against it. An Me-109 would just zoom in, rapid fire, and zoom away.
    2
  26.  @Farweasel  by 1940/42 China had basically either obosolete models or nothing at all, and the performance diference between Zero and P-40 wasn't enough for proper "zoom & boom" tactics (which the US would take time to learn, anyhow); but the Zero never evolved, whereas the allies, specially the US, did.
    2
  27.  @robertkalinic335  I get you but, the point is: no german pilot was dumb/poorly trained enough to try to dogfight a -16.
    2
  28. A B-58 flying such a mission to kill a satelite? That's right out of early Tom Clancy !
    1
  29.  @majormissile5596  ooh yeah, good point. That's another that keeps going and going and going...
    1
  30.  @GreenBlueWalkthrough  ????
    1
  31. Another excelent video!
    1
  32.  @teslashark " Zerstörer " was actually the german name for the class of heavy bomber-killing fighters that included the Me-110. :)
    1
  33.  @teslashark  dat is goot :D
    1
  34. Italy had 240 of the export version with cannon, half built by Fiat, afaik serving until 1973.
    1
  35.  @CptCrazyWolfMan01  oh yeah that was a good one too.
    1
  36. During WWII USAAF PB4Y-2 Privateers quite often intercepted IJN's Kawanishi H8K and H6K flying boats on patrol. The USAAF's better training and skills usually gave the Privateer the upper hand, despite the flying boats heavy armament. Still. these weren't dedicated "interceptors"... this whole set up demands an anime!
    1
  37.  @cerealata9035  paging aerial steampunk writers...
    1
  38. Telescoping wing ? Never heard of this! Thank you!
    1
  39. Ok that's weird... the french magazine LOS just printed an article on the submarine!
    1
  40.  @Farweasel  yes, just in that case it was Japan vs China.
    1
  41.  @robertkalinic335  the russians lucked out the Yak-1; Yakovlev was a specialist race aircraft builder, so everything they build was fast . And the Yak-1 wasn't the 1st miltary aircraft he made, the SovAF had allready been very impresside with the Yak-4 bomber. Hence the comissining of the Yak-1.
    1
  42.  @robertkalinic335  yes but it was a close thing. They could have easily gone for some I-16 clone.
    1
  43.  @robertkalinic335  the Hungarian air force was tiny and fully equiped by the germans; while Romania's AF was a little larger apart from the IAR-80 fighter (which was a par with the Me-109E) was almost fully equiped by the germans, so tactics and experience were shared. Spain had not aircraft in Russia and slovakia didn't exist, being part of german-conquered Czechoslovakia ...
    1
  44.  @robertkalinic335  combat experience and tactics are linked to equipment used and unified command. If you use the same equipment and fight for the same side then yes, you share experience. As for Slovakia, afaik between 1938 and 1990 it was part of Czechoslovakia, unless you're refering to a partial independence in 1938 (5 months...) or as a german client state in 1939-1945. Either way it had no independent aviation of it's own.
    1
  45.  @robertkalinic335  I never said "act as one organisation", but share experience and tactics. They fought on the same side and used the same equipment, what else would they do? As for Tiso and his pseudo-nation, he was just another nazi puppet, and it suited the germans to have him there to control it, rather than having to control it themselves. In terms of actual direct contribution, it was meaningless.
    1
  46.  @robertkalinic335  " we talked about axis members aviation." precisely. In this, and pretty much all practical purposes, WW2 "slovakia" didn't exist; it was a political fiction, fed by nazy germany.
    1