The best airplane?

[PittsDriver]

Yeah, against inferior Japanese planes that caught fire if you just looked at them. Not saying Bong or any others weren't heroes and great pilots, but by that time Japanese planes were inferior and most of the experienced Japanese pilots were gone.

We're getting way off topic here but I'm not sure what your point is? Wouldn't what you're asserting have been an advantage for the Mustang and Corsair pilots also? Yet, the #1 ace was a Lightning driver. A little background found on another board:

The P-38 fought in all theaters and even more importantly was the AAF air superiority fighter in all of them when it arrived on scene. When it arrived it was out numbered, lacked tactical experience, and had green pilots and support crew. When follow on aircraft arrived P-47 & P-51s control of the air had been won (the ETO was 2/3 P-38 1/3 P-51 during this period).

The P-51 did not make a significant contribution anywhere but the ETO, in fact in the Pacific a little ditty ran "Don't give me a P-51...you'll run out of sky" There were still reports of P-51s losing tail sections in maneuver fights in April, '45.

Art Haiden makes a point of saying that the P-51 was easier to train pilots and got the job done (escort) but for dogfighting, he (and many others who flew both) wanted a P-38. On another forum a nephew of a P-51 pilot related this piece of advice about a P-38/P-51 match-up. "If your going to fight (a P-38 with a P-51 you better start a lot higher and faster to have a chance" The P-51 had the advantage in a turning fight above 250mph. Climb, initial dive, high speed roll, and acceleration were P-38 advantages. Speed in an L model was close, and the P-38 had an effective gun package out to 1,000yrds making it very diffucult to get away.

In '44/45 the P-38 cost ~$98,000, P-47 ~$87,000 and the P-51 ~$54,000.

 

[Anthony]

There were more P-38's in the Asian theater due to their range. No question, great plane and one of the sexiest of all time. I just think the European theater offered better competition for our pilots and the P-38 served there as well.

Yeah, way off topic, sorry.

 

[Everskyward]

It totally baffles me that a person could be bored or turned off by the notion of taking a purpose built aerobatic aircraft up in the sky and learning to safely and proficiently exercise the kind of freedom that's only accessible in this way - total 3 dimensional freedom.

I found my thrill in helicopters, all that above and more. Really.

I've tried both helicopters (I have an add-on commercial and about 125 hours) and acro (about 10 hours last year in a Super D and a Pitts) and I'd have to say they are both cool... and different. If I had to pick an aircraft it would be something fun and not a utility machine. I had a great time learning some of the acro sequences and can see myself enjoying the competitions. I really must get back into it next year. I got a little sidetracked with learning other things this spring and summer and spent my acro money on getting my basement finished.

 

[Ted]

First let me say that I've got the float rating and enjoyed it immeasureably. I own a pure traveling airplane and get plenty of use out of it. But...

Kodiaks and Caravans on floats? Man, you'll never get those things to do a good loop. People get way too hung up on getting a bunch of utility out of airplanes and end up not enjoying them after a while. When you were a 10 year old kid making model airplanes and reading all those old Ballantine's books on WWII aircraft, were you dreaming about someday flying a Caravan on floats? Heck no!

Seriously guys, you need one good serious dose of aerobatic adrenalin rush. Just once. And then come back and tell me your money is no object, hotsy snotsy dream aircraft is a truck on floats... I don't think so

Well, first off if you read back that wasn't what I wanted, I wanted a King Air.

Second, it really depends on what you want out of flying and what you get out of flying. I haven't done any aerobatic flying, but I do want to learn how, and I would like to have access to a plane that I can do it in. Maybe I'll go get my tailwheel and learn some aerobatics after I've done the ratings I have left on my list.

Yes, when I was little and dreaming of cars (not airplanes) I was dreaming of Ferraris and Lamborghinis. Now I love my Ford Excursion and my Jaguar (ok, the Jaguar is in the same general line as the Ferrari and Lamborghini, just worth a lot less money and still more practical). Having an aerobatic aircraft would just be for going out and turning AvGas into exhaust. The King Air I want? That lets me go places, which I want to do. It lets me bring friends, which I want to. It also is better for the challenging parts of flying that I want to do - hard IFR flying, let's figure flight into known icing conditions, and all those associated things. To me, all that stuff is fun. Call me crazy, you wouldn't be the first.

Perhaps you think that the appeal in flying is therefore because of the lifestyle it affords me. While I will agree that is definitely part of the appeal, I wouldn't have bothered continuing with it, certainly not to the level I have and want to further, were it not for a love of flying itself. For me, the simple pleasure of breaking out and skiing the tops of clouds is plenty to make me smile, say to myself "Wow," and marvel at the wonderous beauties of the earth that I can behold.

 

[PittsDriver]

For me, the simple pleasure of breaking out and skiing the tops of clouds is plenty to make me smile, say to myself "Wow," and marvel at the wonderous beauties of the earth that I can behold.

Well said...

 

[flyingcheesehead]

First let me say that I've got the float rating and enjoyed it immeasureably. I own a pure traveling airplane and get plenty of use out of it. But...

Kodiaks and Caravans on floats? Man, you'll never get those things to do a good loop. People get way too hung up on getting a bunch of utility out of airplanes and end up not enjoying them after a while. When you were a 10 year old kid making model airplanes and reading all those old Ballantine's books on WWII aircraft, were you dreaming about someday flying a Caravan on floats? Heck no!

Seriously guys, you need one good serious dose of aerobatic adrenalin rush. Just once. And then come back and tell me your money is no object, hotsy snotsy dream aircraft is a truck on floats... I don't think so

OK, let me amend my choice then.

I want a Grumman Albatross, freshly restored and updated with all the latest gadgets and gizmos, outfitted as a flying motor home, with a Pitts S2C in the baggage compartment.

If you look back at my posts in the past, you'll see that I've been jonesing for a fast twin-engine known-ice aerobatic amphibious fun traveling airplane for a long time.

 

[Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe]

I've never done aerobatic flight. I also have a very low tolerance for G forces; a 2-G pullout from a dive has been enough in the past to make me lose it. Could I get past that point?

Bob Hoover (per his autobiography) taught himself aerobatics to get over a problem with motion sickness.

Note: I am not recommending you learn yerself aerobatics - Yes, Bob Hoover did it, but he's Bob Hoover and you and I ain't.

 

[Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe]

IFor me, since I already have the only perfect aircraft ever produced (a Pitts)

Well, at least one person thinks the design can be tweeked with a couple improvements http://iac78.org/members/P-rex.htm

 

[PittsDriver]

Well, at least one person thinks the design can be tweeked with a couple improvements http://iac78.org/members/P-rex.htm

Yeah, a few people have thought that before. They were all wrong. You might get it to do something better than before like the mods Sean Tucker's made but then it won't have the manners that it had before either. The S-2C is perfect just like it is. Well... you can never have too much power. But other than that, it's just perfect. And heat for my feet - if I could have that without paying any weight penalty, I'd want that. But that's it.

 

[PittsDriver]

OK, let me amend my choice then.

I want a Grumman Albatross, freshly restored and updated with all the latest gadgets and gizmos, outfitted as a flying motor home, with a Pitts S2C in the baggage compartment.

If you look back at my posts in the past, you'll see that I've been jonesing for a fast twin-engine known-ice aerobatic amphibious fun traveling airplane for a long time.

Hey, I know a guy with one of those. Don Reynolds has an Albatross that he keeps out at Warrenton (KHWY). It's the one that had an engine fire while the journalist from Flying magazine was taking a test hop at Oshkosh several years ago. I don't think it's for sale though...

 

[flyingcheesehead]

Hey, I know a guy with one of those. Don Reynolds has an Albatross that he keeps out at Warrenton (KHWY). It's the one that had an engine fire while the journalist from Flying magazine was taking a test hop at Oshkosh several years ago. I don't think it's for sale though...

An aerobatic Albatross? Or one with a Pitts in the baggage compartment?

 

[wabower]

Sock warmers? They work for most of a day's skiing, how cold is it?

Yeah, a few people have thought that before. They were all wrong. You might get it to do something better than before like the mods Sean Tucker's made but then it won't have the manners that it had before either. The S-2C is perfect just like it is. Well... you can never have too much power. But other than that, it's just perfect. And heat for my feet - if I could have that without paying any weight penalty, I'd want that. But that's it.

 

[PittsDriver]

Sock warmers? They work for most of a day's skiing, how cold is it?

My kids gave me a pair of battery powered socks but do you have any idea how distracting it is to have a pair of D cell batteries attached to your ankles when you're pulling +6/-5 G? Guess I should have used the chemical kind...

I have to admit, an Albatross would be interesting to own under the conditions of the OP. Same with a DC-3.

Wes