Search results

  1. WI: China never enters the Korean War?

    This is actually quite easy to bring about. All that has to happen is for the UN (i.e. 8th Army) unit's to stop at the 50 mile demarkation line delared by Mao. There may well have been a chance to get the line moved to 50 KM with a bit of back channel discussion. War is over before Christmas...
  2. Could the United States/Britain win WW2 alone?

    This is, of course, the real question. The odds are that the Reich would be stupid enough to do something that would keep the Allies going strong (the intense desire by Hitler to directly strike at the U.S. is one example, and the one I use in my current T/L). The likelihood that the facts...
  3. Could the United States/Britain win WW2 alone?

    Actually this post was in response to to another poster lauding the B-36, an aircraft that was, IMO, fatally flawed (one can argue the reasons, but the aircraft's deficiencies speak for themselves) despite its breathtaking range and service ceiling. The Reich could have come up with aircraft...
  4. Could the United States/Britain win WW2 alone?

    The Reich had "X" amount of available production for engines, airframes and all the other bits needed to construct aircraft. Those were a finite resource. This POD does NOT change that The German industrial machine was churning out fighters as rapidly as it could. The POD does NOT change that...
  5. Could the United States/Britain win WW2 alone?

    The Reich never had the shipping needed to take North Africa. The Allies fleet controlled the water and nothing in this scenario changes that.
  6. Could the United States/Britain win WW2 alone?

    The B-36 was only combat ready in January of 1949 (about 11 months ahead of the B-47B) and not available in useful numbers (considering combat readiness issues) until mid-1949. There was a reason the Air Force slid the B-50 (aka B-29D) under Congress' nose in late 1947 and it's name was the...
  7. Could the United States/Britain win WW2 alone?

    The Ta 152 was barely able to get out of its own way at 48,000 feet. An excellent aircraft at 41K, it was quite literally at the end of its tether at 48K The Ta-183 was a pipe dream, nothing more, nothing less. While there are lots of comments on how much the MiG-15 resembled in the popular...
  8. Poll: Which one is the better night fighter?

    :eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek: The Japanese didn't HAVE a decent night fighter, they barely had BAD nightfighters worthy of the name. The J1N1 Irving was the nest of the lot, but it had very questionable radar and was unable to really fly at altitude to...
  9. Poll: Which one is the better night fighter?

    With the OP it is always wise to cover all the bases. A 6 pounder?:eek: Was somebody flying Panther tanks or do you just like a bit of an edge?;)
  10. Gatling Weapons of WWII

    The British equipped most of their fighters with 20mm cannon from 1941 onward. This was around the same time the U.S. made the move to all .50 cals and eventually settled on six guns per aircraft as the standard layout. Isn't that misunderstanding more or less = ALL Bard posts?:D Wouldn't a...
  11. Poll: Which one is the better night fighter?

    If I just go other (there is no time period set), I have to go with the F-22 :D If it is WW II/Korea I would say the F3D Skyknight. Hell of a good aircraft, maybe the best U.S. fighter you never heard of. Pure WW II would probably be the Mosquito, with the excellent F4U-N (especially the...
  12. The Big One

    That is one of my on-going theories. There is also the chance that, while the OP is off the wall, a reasonable deiscussion can be craft out of it. The Sherman Tank thread actually has a few good posts, even if none are by our favorite OP.
  13. The Big One

    The B-36 would have been an absolute revolution in WW II, the B-29's impact squared. A single B-36 could haul the same bomb load to any part of Germany that took 18 B-17s to carry and could do so from above the max ceiling of any fighter (and most AAA) available. This being said, the B-36 was...
  14. Gatling Weapons of WWII

    Even for you, this post is chock full of fail.
  15. Gatling Weapons of WWII

    The 1.1 was more of a quad like the pom-pom or 40mm than a four barrel. The air application is a non-starter. The weight would put an end to things before it began. Ammo is HEAVY, the 4,000 round (one minute firing) magazine for the 7.62 minigun is 234 pounds (the weapon itself is actually...
  16. The Type XXI U-boat

    The boat's commanders also were often less than aggressive in pressing attacks (rather like the very early war U.S. skippers). As stated, the boats had potential to be a problem IF. The IF part wasn't very likely.
  17. The Type XXI U-boat

    The Japanese actually had a very similar, although better, design called the Sen Taka. They didn't get any into the water until the war was effectively over and none made a patrol. The boat, especially with the Type 95 torpedo, could have been a roral pain (assuming the IJN actually figured...
  18. WI the early M4 Sherman was a good tank?

    The Army had the right idea with the A-23, which was a SBD without a tailhook, but the bomber generals, understandably, wanted to get more medium bombers, so the A-23 just died from neglect. The SBD was a much more capable and flexible aircraft than the Ju-87, but both were examples of planes on...
  19. WI the early M4 Sherman was a good tank?

    The move to the Fighter-bomber version of the Fw-190 was actually just part of an international trend. The RAF, USAAF and USN all moved to the FB concept at the same time mostly due to the ability of high performance fighters to also carry a real bombload (classic example is the F4F could carry...
Top