Greyshaft -> RE: Air to Air Combat trivia (9/9/2005 12:24:25 AM)
quote:
ORIGINAL: RBWhite They were now considered a second rate & obsolete war plane, Summer of 1940.
I'd quibble over that point. The Stuka was still a first rate dive-bomber but the Battle of Britain showed that it could only function effectively where the Luftwaffe held air superiority. Stukas were certainly effective dive bombers in the front line in the Russian campaign until the Luftwaffe lost air superiority. After that point some were transitioned to tank busters.
quote:
Most if not close to all were eventually replaced by the FW109.
Not sure how you figure that. The Me109 is a fighter, and although some were configured as fighter bombers they were still primarily considered fighters. Potential replacements for the Stuka included the jet propelled Henschel 132 (do not confuse this with the Henschel 123 biplane!) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henschel_Hs_132
RBWhite -> RE: Air to Air Combat trivia (9/9/2005 12:38:15 AM)
I'm sorry, FW-190.
My fingers got ahead of my eyes
Henschel Hs 132 - Only three prototypes were under construction in March of 1945, they were almost completed when the war ended.
All three were captured by the Soviets
SemperAugustus -> RE: Air to Air Combat trivia (9/9/2005 5:21:20 AM)
quote:
Kwenu.com\biafra\biafran_babies
Link doesn't work for me... I was trying to think of modern conflicts involving propeller planes, the only other one I could think of where both sides had aircraft was the Biafra war. The information I have read about doesn't give much info on the actual losses suffered by the Nigerian airforce.