• Watch Out for Scammers!

    We've now added a color code for all accounts. Orange accounts are new members, Blue are full members, and Green are Supporters. If you get a message about a sale from an orange account, make sure you pay attention before sending any money!

Maggie’s Motivational Pic Thread v2.0 - - New Rules - See Post #1

C781C0E4-8B64-4B01-A4CA-68181ADA9292.jpeg
 
Historical question - why was the P-38 so successful but the Me-110 such a flop?
Just my take on it ,a 1000 small things different to make it great? A bigger engine alone isn't enough to improve an airplane,the whole plane must be modified it's mind boggling to me all the thing that have be in sync. Imagine the aeronautical engineers from WW II experiencing aircraft now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: McReef


Meanwhile, as Santa crosses air space toward Poland, a recently activated AEGIS system fires a standard missile III. Santa, deploying countermeasures, engages his recently acquired Russian nuclear cruise system. The resulting nuclear incident is denied by both the Russian Federation and the United States. Mrs Claus is not amused....
 
Historical question - why was the P-38 so successful but the Me-110 such a flop?

I'm no expert but my impression is that the '38 was designed about 5-7 years after the 110; that's a lot of time in "technological progress" time. Also, the 38 was a single-seater built solely as a fighter/interceptor. The 110 was designed as a fighter-bomber and required 2 or 3 crewmen as I recall. I thought it had a bomb bay, but I can't find anything on that.

The 38 had more power with its' turbo'd superchargers, and twin booms certainly gave it more structural stability and better maneuverability.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Barneybdb
  • Like
Reactions: Barneybdb