This thread will eventually be moved to the "History" forum. If you can't cite the source, I don't want to see it here. You've gotta post numbers, references to those numbers, and preferably numbers taken from the archives. Granted, nobody's perfect, but at least make it good.
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Korean War MiG/Saber exchange rates...
Collapse
X
-
There are couple of (incomplete) sources that maybe used to start initial descussion;
Last edited by lurker; 17 Jan 06,, 21:40.
-
Originally posted by lurkerThere are couple of (incomplete) sources that maybe used to start initial descussion;
I once talked to an old man - pilot who fought there.... he remembered that they had bad feeling fighting against americans and british..... especially british. They still remembered them as allies and he personally had experience of their support from british pilots near Murmanks in 1942-43. He remembered that both sides were quite ethic.... all avoided shoting right to the cabin and never shot a parashuting pilot..... while in WW II this was a common pratice.... a decending German/Russian pilot could easily get load of shells, and hitting right into the bomber's cabin was most desirable.
Comment
-
Mig-15 vs F-86 Sabre Stats, taken from http://home.att.net/~jbaugher1/p86_11.html (lists all eng. sources at the bottom).
As you see Mig-15 have a much better trust-to-weight, huge advantage in vertical maneuver, speed is aboout the same, Mig can fly higher. F-86 is more maneuverable, and have weak weapons.
There were documented cases when Mig's returned having absorbed up to 50 (!) .50 bullets.Last edited by lurker; 17 Jan 06,, 20:44.
Comment
-
Ho hum. I can post linked resources that claim a healthy F-86 kill advantadge, but i've already done so numerous times in past threads. Horrido, what did you go and drudge this back up for?
LOL...
PS: 50 bullets is less than a seconds firing time for the F-86s six Cal.50BMGs. That 'weak' armament suite is the same one that won the airwar over europe in the wings of the P-51D. Again....
Comment
-
Originally posted by M21SniperHo hum. I can post linked resources that claim a healthy F-86 kill advantadge, but i've already done so numerous times in past threads. Horrido, what did you go and drudge this back up for?
LOL...
PS: 50 bullets is less than a seconds firing time for the F-86s six Cal.50BMGs. That 'weak' armament suite is the same one that won the airwar over europe in the wings of the P-51D. Again....
The P-51 won the air war over Europe???? It certainly played a part...... but won the whole war? Thats way too much of an overstatement.
As I see it, the spitfires and hurricanes played the most important fighter role over Europe.
P-51, I would say kicked real butt in the pacific warLast edited by Yarmuk; 17 Jan 06,, 23:57.
Comment
-
Originally posted by YarmukThe P-51 won the air war over Europe???? IT certainly played a part but wouldnt it be too far to say that it won the whole war
In the Pacific theater, I'd have to stick to my personal favorite, the F-4U Corsair.
Comment
-
Toss in the F6F Hellcat j, and we're in total agreement. :)
The P-51D provided local air superiority to bomber formations all the way to berlin and back(Unless released for low level egress strafing attacks. P-51s did tremendous damage to German rail lines and other infrastructure during the war). This allowed for much larger and more accurate daylight bombing raids all across germany, even as our bomber loss rates plummeted. Within 9 months of the introduction of the P-51 Mustang into the ETO, the Luftwaffe had been shattered, allowing the Allies complete air supremacy for Operation Overlord. I can post about a gillion links that echo everything j and i said. Seeing as how none of us was there, where do you think i came up with my opinion to begin with? I don't just make this stuff up.
Comment
-
Originally posted by M21SniperHo hum. I can post linked resources that claim a healthy F-86 kill advantadge, but i've already done so numerous times in past threads. Horrido, what did you go and drudge this back up for?
LOL...
PS: 50 bullets is less than a seconds firing time for the F-86s six Cal.50BMGs. That 'weak' armament suite is the same one that won the airwar over europe in the wings of the P-51D. Again....
p.s. I doubt that F-86 can swallow just one 37mm shell.Last edited by lurker; 18 Jan 06,, 00:23.
Comment
-
[QUOTE=lurker]Well, I think F-86 was the last one armed with .50's, all the latter were cannon armed. I don't know why .50 were dragged by USAF to 1950s while all the others were putting cannons already. Why dont you post the weight of fire per sec?
It's not worth the effort. "A lot" is sufficient for me.
Originally posted by lurkerp.s. I doubt that F-86 can swallow just one 37mm shell.
The US stuck with .50s for as long as it did because when you look at what we were shooting at, it was completely adequate to the task.
Comment
-
Originally posted by M21SniperThe 37mm sucked for air combat, it was mainly for anti-bomber use. ROF and velocity were far too low for jet-jet combat.
The US stuck with .50s for as long as it did because when you look at what we were shooting at, it was completely adequate to the task.
imho, All that was to get the stupid idea that "A-bombing would be a picnic" out of some heads.
p.s. Btw, Soviets got their hands on first F-86 exactly like that - he got hit by ONE 37mm right behind the cockpit. Damaged the ejection seat, and was forced to land on water.Last edited by lurker; 18 Jan 06,, 00:57.
Comment
-
"Freak" hits may be freak, but they do occur.
The 'golden BB' is what US pilots call a 1:million shot. I call it bad luck...
LOL.
At any rate, the US was never forced to fight big heavy bombers, so never had any need to field larger guns. Once the Tu-4 was in service in decent numbers the USAF switched up to a 20mm gun fit.
Comment
-
Originally posted by M21Sniper"Freak" hits may be freak, but they do occur.
The 'golden BB' is what US pilots call a 1:million shot. I call it bad luck...
LOL.
At any rate, the US was never forced to fight big heavy bombers, so never had any need to field larger guns. Once the Tu-4 was in service in decent numbers the USAF switched up to a 20mm gun fit.
Remember when USN abandoned .50's for 20mm for anti-aircraft use? ;)
Comment
-
I agree that switching to cannon calibers was eventually the right course of action, and i think that if you look at it historically the US military wasn't really hurt at all by waiting so long to make the switch.
F-86s shot down a hell of a lot of Mig-15s with .50cal fire. Six of those throw a hell of a lot of lead and give an extremely dense shot stream(I am sure that's not the right term, lol).
The USAF eventually ended up with the M-61 Vulcan, and that's about as good an all-around dogfighting cannon as has ever been devised. Massive firepower and a heavy caliber in a pretty compact lightweight package. Hard to go wrong there.
Comment
-
Originally posted by M21SniperI agree that switching to cannon calibers was eventually the right course of action, and i think that if you look at it historically the US military wasn't really hurt at all by waiting so long to make the switch.
F-86s shot down a hell of a lot of Mig-15s with .50cal fire. Six of those throw a hell of a lot of lead and give an extremely dense shot stream(I am sure that's not the right term, lol).
Btw, how about this table? [1] ;)
Comment
Comment