In a battle between Eurofighter and F-35, both pilots claim defeat

[AZrailwhale]

Yeah? So? Like I said, just think if they had not wasted money on a loser and actually built more useful combat aircraft.

Fortunately for the world they were stupid in that regard.

The Do-335 was actually a good design that German industry was capable of actually producing in useful numbers. It was at least as good as the British Tempest and Fury fighters.

 

[Bleipriester]

You mean like the V-2 which cost more than the damage it did? Or the V-1 that was so poorly guided that it was lucky to hit a city? Or the Jagdtiger which consumed vast quantities of fuel and scarce, skilled manpower to do nothing that the Jagdpanzer IV couldn’t do? Or the Me-262 whose engines lasted less than twenty running hours? Or the Admiral Hipper cruisers who cost more than the handful of ships they sunk? Or the He-177 that was more dangerous to its crews than the allies? Or the Me-163 that killed more of its pilots by blowing up from lots hyperbolic fuel than the number of bombers it shot down? How about the Natter that was so dangerous it was practically a suicide weapon? Oh and then we have the Maus, a barely mobile pillbox that no bridge in Europe could safely carry? Tell us some examples of that superior German design.

Don´t forget the huge Elephant tank that had pistol engines powering electric engines.
You missed my point. Not all of these designs were successful. But the search for superior weapons will result in byproducts.
As for the Me 262, it was a great aircraft, no doubt. A pioneer.
Overall, we can say that we cannot convert giant heavy tanks into medium tanks. The Soviets also made ultra heavy tanks.
But the production numbers say the truth. Me 109 in the air and Panzer IV on the ground were the standard weapons.
The Me 262 was decided to be the new standard in 1945. The shift was ongoing. It could have been in 1943 but the Germans did not risk a sharp decrease in 109 output which would have been the consequence. It also can be doubted that the Me 262 would have been more successful than the Me 109. While it was a new aircraft design with jet engines, the armament was still the same: guns and R4M missiles. The great advance would have been guided missiles, though.

 

[Captain Caveman]

Did you watch the video? It is about the Sidewinder, not the Harrier itself.

Yes I did.

 

[Bleipriester]

Yes I did.

So we can agree that we have no information about how the battles would have developed if the Harrier didn´t have the advantage of the Sidewinder?

 

[Captain Caveman]

So we can agree that we have no information about how the battles would have developed if the Harrier didn´t have the advantage of the Sidewinder?

There's much more to the Harriers than just the sidewinder missiles.

 

[AZrailwhale]

Don´t forget the huge Elephant tank that had pistol engines powering electric engines.
You missed my point. Not all of these designs were successful. But the search for superior weapons will result in byproducts.
As for the Me 262, it was a great aircraft, no doubt. A pioneer.
Overall, we can say that we cannot convert giant heavy tanks into medium tanks. The Soviets also made ultra heavy tanks.
But the production numbers say the truth. Me 109 in the air and Panzer IV on the ground were the standard weapons.
The Me 262 was decided to be the new standard in 1945. The shift was ongoing. It could have been in 1943 but the Germans did not risk a sharp decrease of 109 output which would have been the consequence. It also can be doubted that the Me 262 would have been more successful than the Me 109. While it was a new aircraft design with jet engines, the armament was still the same: guns and R4M missiles. The great advance would have been guided missiles, though.

The P-80 had engines with over a hundred times the service life of the Jumo 004s on the Me-262. Even the very conservative Gloster Meteor had better serviceability, was faster and longer ranged.

The Soviets never made ultra heavy tanks during WWII and their heavy tanks weighed about the same as German Panthers.

 

[Bleipriester]

There's much more to the Harriers than just the sidewinder missiles.

Sure, but the video highlights the Sidewinder.

 

[Captain Caveman]

Sure, but the video highlights the Sidewinder.

Correct.

 

[AZrailwhale]

There's much more to the Harriers than just the sidewinder missiles.

Without the all-aspect Sidewinders from US war stocks, the Argentinian Mirages would have eaten the Sea Harriers for lunch. The RAF GR3 Harriers were far inferior to the Sea Harriers and lacked radar being intended for ground support, not aerial combat like the Sea Harrier.

 

[Bleipriester]

The P-80 had engines with over a hundred times the service life of the Jumo 004s on the Me-262. Even the very conservative Gloster Meteor had better serviceability, was faster and longer ranged.

The Soviets never made ultra heavy tanks during WWII and their heavy tanks weighed about the same as German Panthers.

Neither P80 nor Meteor were operational during WWII . They were not used in WWII. The P80 was only crashing down, injuring or killing its pilots. The Meteor was unstable in the air, it could not be deployed. In addition, the German engines were smaller and better than the British ones. Both planes don´t count, they saw no missions in WWII.

 

[Captain Caveman]

Without the all-aspect Sidewinders from US war stocks, the Argentinian Mirages would have eaten the Sea Harriers for lunch. The RAF GR3 Harriers were far inferior to the Sea Harriers and lacked radar being intended for ground support, not aerial combat like the Sea Harrier.

No. There's more to the Harriers than the sidewinders, those with history knowledge of the conflict knows that. They will know about the training of the British pilots, the inexperience of the Argentine pilots, Argentine plane parts problems, the manoeuvring abilities of the aircraft etc.. It was a shame the Harrier was retired.

 

[westwall]

The Do-335 was actually a good design that German industry was capable of actually producing in useful numbers. It was at least as good as the British Tempest and Fury fighters.

But still obsolete. The FW-190 D9 was every bit as good as any allied fighter, and better than most, the Luftwaffe would have been far better served if they had produced those in quantity.

 

[westwall]

You think that was stupid, ok, fine. But it was not. The Germans were well aware of the fact that they could not compete with the industrial capacity of the Allies. Therefore they relied on superior design.

Which they couldn't produce anyway. So, hi tech, but no product.

Sounds like a loser.

And it was.

 

[Bleipriester]

Which they couldn't produce anyway. So, hi tech, but no product.

Sounds like a loser.

And it was.

What about this, then?

 

[westwall]

The P-80 had engines with over a hundred times the service life of the Jumo 004s on the Me-262. Even the very conservative Gloster Meteor had better serviceability, was faster and longer ranged.

The Soviets never made ultra heavy tanks during WWII and their heavy tanks weighed about the same as German Panthers.

The P-80 used the engine from the Meteor.

So did the Mig 15!

 

[westwall]

What about this, then?

What about what? Germany lost.

Duh...

 

[AZrailwhale]

Neither P80 nor Meteor were operational during WWII . They were not used in WWII. The P80 was only crashing down, injuring or killing its pilots. The Meteor was unstable in the air, it could not be deployed. In addition, the German engines were smaller and better than the British ones. Both planes don´t count, they saw no missions in WWII.

The Meteor was operational during WWII and was used to intercept V-1s. The P-80 entered squadron service in February 1945 in Italy. So it just barely saw service in the war. Regardless, both the P-80 and Meteor were operationally and technically superior to the Me-262. Only a nation in the dire straits of Germany would have cleared unproven and dangerous aircraft like the 262 and 163 for operational service.

 

[Bleipriester]

What about what? Germany lost.

Duh...

Don´t be a clown. It would not have lost against one of the Allies. All were required.

 

[AZrailwhale]

The P-80 used the engine from the Meteor.

So did the Mig 15!

The prototype P-80 used the Halford H-1 engine from the Meteor. The production versions used a larger and more powerful American engine. The MiG used a unlicensed copy of the Rolls Royce Nene reverse engineered from one gifted to the USSR.

 

[westwall]

No. There's more to the Harriers than the sidewinders, those with history knowledge of the conflict knows that. They will know about the training of the British pilots, the inexperience of the Argentine pilots, Argentine plane parts problems, the manoeuvring abilities of the aircraft etc.. It was a shame the Harrier was retired.

Actually the Argentine Air Force gave a very good accounting of itself. They were hampered by very low loiter time over the target, literally measured in a few minutes, and the AIM9L was a world beater. Had it not been for that missile the Harriers would have had a far different outcome.

Argentine pilots were very well trained, and had a very high morale, and elan, they pushed attacks home and inflicted terrible losses on the RN.

The one saving grace that the RN had was the Argentine Navy never told the Air Force how to properly fuse their bombs for anti ship use due to interservice rivalry, thus the large number of bombs which hit their targets but failed to explode