Matrix Games Forums

The Dresden, Hiroshima and Nagasaki arguement again???

No real sympathy, since the unfortunates in the cities above certainly didn't have any sympathy for their victims in places like Coventry, Warsaw and Nanking, nor anywhere else.

Certainly took the fight out of the Germans and Japanese for over 60 years.

You called Milord? LOL

OK, just wanted your opinion. When we put that in our Eniacs and get final result we will send it to CIA. Watch out [:D]

[/quote]

You make an insult in nearly every post you write.

Then when return fire is received; you weep over your treatment.[8|]

[/quote]


Yawn. [>:]
I don't weep. I have long time ago passed Usenet baptism so no worries you can put all barrage, I can handle it.

And this post without any insult to you. I guess that we passed all major things. It was really fun, I cannot remember when I had so much fun and this nearly comes close to some legendary Usenet flames.

Smead salute.


Mario

Nagasaki AND Hiroshima were necessary evils and were military targets. The Japanese had no plans on surrendering and out side of dropping the bombs there were 2 alternatives. Complete blockade which would have caused millions of deaths or a land invasion where we would have lost hundreds of thousands of men and would have effectively wiped out the Japanese race considering they were willing to fight to the last man using pitchforks.

ORIGINAL: Knuckles_85

Nagasaki AND Hiroshima were necessary evils and were military targets. The Japanese had no plans on surrendering and out side of dropping the bombs there were 2 alternatives. Complete blockade which would have caused millions of deaths or a land invasion where we would have lost hundreds of thousands of men and would have effectively wiped out the Japanese race considering they were willing to fight to the last man using pitchforks.

OK, I agree with that.

ORIGINAL: Knuckles_85

Nagasaki AND Hiroshima were necessary evils and were military targets. The Japanese had no plans on surrendering and out side of dropping the bombs there were 2 alternatives. Complete blockade which would have caused millions of deaths or a land invasion where we would have lost hundreds of thousands of men and would have effectively wiped out the Japanese race considering they were willing to fight to the last man using pitchforks.

without going into debate was it neccesary or not, Japan actually had some plans on surrending (but it is debatable how serious Japanese were with that plan...)

Probably they will surrender when Stallin wipe out Manchuria[:D]

Seaplanes in general seemed to be poor performers, but here is one that soldiered on through the whole war, and filled it's role fairly well:

Those plans were never taken serious by the military leadership. Even after the bombings it took the Emperor bypassing the military infrastrusture to surrender.

Seaplanes?  No problem!![8D]



Mark IX serial MJ892 powered by a Merlin 45. The performance of this aircraft was superb and with a top speed of 377 mph the fastest floatplane of the entire war.

The Catalina was one of the most underated planes of WWII. It was quite effective and served it's users well![:)]

Anyone got a pic of a WWII era torpedo plane? I'm getting all excited about CAW and I just know there will be plenty, but I have never really seen one. I am woefully plane ignorant.

Hows about some Recon planes like the types in CAW and WiTP? Both sides is great, Japanese or US. Teach me!

SoM

Fairey Swordfish, Grumman Avenger, Nakajima B5N2 "Kate" (note that the Kate is carrying one of the modified artillery shells turned into AP bombs for Pearl Harbor):

I'm wondering, reading that AAR over at CAW site, is there any place to do some quick comparative readngs on Pacific Theater WWII aviation? I'm really thinking broad comparisons, like Japanese planes have better range and speed than US, or the like - so I know what types of tactics to employ. This is one of the major reaons I never could fathom (no pun intended) UV or WiTP, because I am woefully uneducated on the unit capabilites.

SoM

Generally, Japanese aircraft are much longer-ranged than USN counterparts, because their frames are lighter. That's the main Jap advantage: they can strike effectively first. Of course, said advantage erodes when the US gets better fighters and more AAA.

Try this link:

http://www.century-of-flight.freeola.co ... _frame.htm

The downside of the longer range of the Japananes aircraft was their inability to take much punishment - hence the loss rates even when their elite aircrew were around which increased heavily with more average flyers (facing improving/increasing allied opposition).

Nice! All this helps to get ready for my battle on the sea! I'm guess early Japanese weaponry (like torpedoes) were more deadly and accurate as well?

SoM

By a good margin. Early war American torpedoes were rather notoriously unreliable.

ORIGINAL: Paul Vebber

262 was step ahead of time
Father of jet planes

Is that criteria satisfied you enough Paul

So the Wright Flyer was ahead of its time, and the father of piston engine planes. Doesn't make it "best" anything...

Here was a plane way ahead of its time [:'(]

Designed with specially reinforced wings to slice through other planes [X(] Though the pilots prone position in the nose doesn't seem to be a ery smart choice gien that emplyment concept...[:-]

But its would have been the first steath fighter

The Northrop N9M. Said to be very difficult to land.

My favorite WWII plane is the one that didn't get shot down, shot up, or shot at. Probably a PBY.

ORIGINAL: mlees

Seaplanes in general seemed to be poor performers, but here is one that soldiered on through the whole war, and filled it's role fairly well:

Somebody didn't do his research. Those markings never appeared with that paint scheme. You'd think if a guy had enough bucks to buy a PBY, he'd at least paint it up like the real thing.