Thread 64328774

post photos of 1935-1945 aviation
civilian and military from this era
No 'warbirds' (<-post-war restorations), videogame screencaps or drawing
High resolution photographs (not pictures for ants)

>>64328774 (OP)
Anon don't mind me asking where you got these photos? They are downright pornographic at times.

>>64330651
Sabre powered brother

>>64330651
>>64333571
Always thought the Tempest was overrated. No 2 stage supercharger in the Sabre or Centraus crippled them over 20K ft. Brits were lucky the Luftwaffe didn't have high altitude bombers like the B-29 and lacked numbers of the Ta-152/Fw-190D.

>>64329386
first off (in your searching) check wikimedia.org
also there are many excellent WWII aviation and vintage aviation blogs and forums

>>64333835
They weren't a high altitude optimized design, but the supercharger installation could have been upgraded for both the Sabre and Centaurus
Mk VI was peak Sabre

>>64334395
highly kino image

Coastal command livery sexo

>>64335718
schweet

>>64333500
>>64329386
>File: 051118-F-1234P-049
search af.mil for more A-20 pics in this same series

>>64333835
If the luftwaffe actually had jack shit for hi alt bombers you dont think the Brits would've focused design and modifications with that in mind?

>>64336315
Fuck me, I love flying boats so much. The Mariner might be one of the single most underrated aircraft of the war in its niche. The French had some underrated ones too.

>>64336415
great picture fr fr

>>64335038
>>64336404

Regardless of the situation vs Luftwaffe, I still mark the Tempest down below the Mustang/Thunderbolt/Hellcat/Griffon Spitfires due to lack of 2 stage supercharger limiting its performance envelope. Don't see the point of the Tempest, the Typhoon was more than capable as low level attack right up to the end of the war, and Spits fast enough for V1 interception at low and mid altitudes.

>>64337991
>Mustang/Thunderbolt/Hellcat/Griffon Spitfires
(You)'re a wrong midwit.

>>64338048
No, you are a wrong midwit actually

>>64338070
(You) are a wrong midwit.

>>64338075
No, you are.

>>64338081
(You) are a wrong midwit
and it is entertaining to see how that insta-triggered (You)
(You) are also a videogamerstreamerlarptard.

>>64338084
You are a midwit.
It is entertaining to see you insta-triggered.
You are also a video game streamer larper retard.

>>64338092
That's not going to work, videogamerstreamerlarptard.
(You) were the insta-triggered one when named by Truth, Midwit.

>>64338106
It is going to work video game streamer larper retard.
You were insta-triggered.
You are a wrong midwit.

>>64338115
I don't stream larp or videogame, Midwit: (You) do
still triggered by Truth = (You)

>>64336415
>>64337377

>>64328774 (OP)
God, I love the whirlwind. Such a nice and beautiful plane. It's a shame it's prime window only lasted a few months and it missed most of it.

>>64339226
It was a nice idea and had potential, unfortunately its design powerplant didn't live up to that.

>>64339888
Target tug?

>>64338135
You do stream and larp and play video games.
You are a midwit
You are triggered.

Shot down and spent 50 years in a lake

>>64342860

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shadow_(psychology)

>>64343191

https://www.historynet.com/last-of-the-buffalos/

>>64336404
RAF had a few high altitude interceptors in development after the Ju 86P and R reconnaissance bomber overflights, but aside from specialized Spitfires their only other project was the twin-Merlin Westland Welkin of which several dozen were built but unused for combat operations.
Luftwaffe's other high altitude bombers after the failed and poorly-administered Bomber B (Ju 288) project were the He 274 (a turbosupercharged design derivative of the 177 programme) and Ju 388K, neither of which made it past pre-production development prototypes.

>>64335011
Ah, a fellow wikimedia.org frequenter.

>>64345546
Lots of good stuff on there, and of what's been uploaded the metadata can help in finding external sites and resources with more of same/similar
Finding, seeking out vintage photographs is kind of like a long term slow burn detective expedition

>>64344599
I forget the details of the operation, but in true Russian fashion some oligarchs stole the plane and then sold it for $$$ to the USN who didn't give a shit about no Commie country's war history and wanted it restored in USN colors
That fate has been averted for now, but since it's still US-owned I hope there won't be renewed interest in raping it by magapedes since the lease is coming up again soon

>>64335011
>>64335893
Thanks anons shall have a look when I can. Thanks also for the comfy thread.

>>64346777
>1899x1080
checked, nice

>>64348163
an impressive project, but the 75 mm main armament by year 1944 was found to have been relatively useless in comparison to smaller caliber autocannon.
XA-38 was one of those later-war Allied projects allowed to continue in preparation for the planned ground invasion and occupation of Japan. The multiple ground attack underwing P-82 Twin Mustang stores (.50 cal gun pods) are another example of this.
Also the XA-38 didn't have substantially greater performance than the as-new Douglas A-26 Invader nor did it have the A-26's light bomber adaptability. (Despite having slightly more powerful engines: and no, I don't buy the R-3350 B-29 engine as the 'main reason' XA-38 was cancelled either, it just wasn't a useful or value-added weapon system overall despite its impressive aeronautical performance. The R-3350 B-29 engine argument might ?? partly apply to the earlier-in-time Boeing XPBB-1 Sea Ranger naval flying boat, but that wasn't the sole reason there either because in the XPBB-1 instance, the manufacturer's Renton facility was needed in 1942-43 for production of the B-29 airplane itself.)

>>64336840
what's the story on these

>>64336840 The PZL 38 is a heavy fighter Poland was trying to develop. HTTPs://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PZL.38_Wilk

>>64345794
>>>/pol/

>>64349833
No I'm genuinely worried. Granted it's such a tiny thing in the grand scheme of things and the lease runs til 2028, it will probably escape notice

>>64350883
>I'm genuinely worried.
So is everyone else who wants to talk politics on this board. I could not care less about your sincerity or lack thereof, I came here to talk about weapons. If you can't do that without bringing your political baggage into it you can politely fuck off.

Here's an inline B-17 for everybody's trouble.

>>64351128
Another angle then and fuck Pensacola

>>64352840
nice pic but not World War II and post-1945

>>64353873 You are thinking of the jet engine version.

>>64353886
Nope, the XB-35 had its first flight in 1946. Are you perhaps thinking of the N-9M?

>>64353886
another way (for United States aircraft pics) to distinguish is the insignia :
the XB-35 posted # 64352840 has a wing insignia with a narrow red stripe through the bars, meaning it is post-June 1947 when the U.S. Air Force had been created and all airframe insignia USN/USAF were changed to include that red bar
Those pictures/airplanes don't belong itt

factory fresh F4U-4 in flight summer 1945

>>64352003
holes on seat are nasty.

>>64353873
>>64353886
>>64353919
>>64353938
>Achktually, it's from 1947, not 1945

>>64355528
yep another summer 1945 pic
didn't see war service but the Hornet had first flown in late summer 1944

>>64355638
Here's the post-WWII aviation thread : >>64351042
>Achktually
Fuck off back to plebbit, Brainlet.
and take (You)r FAGGOT boomermemes with (You)

>>64355809
>yep another summer 1945 pic
Nobody asked. Nobody likes a pedant and that’s probably why you don’t have any friends.
>faggot
Buddy, you’re the one going through pictures on a Azerbaijani knitting forum to cry about which ones aren’t exactly within the date limits. You haven’t seen a pussy since the day you were born.

>>64355971
Just shut the fuck up boomer

>>64356662
nice but that one doesn't fall into WWII aircraft (though prototype first flew in Dec 1944, it didn't enter operational service until a few years later. Perhaps ? it could've been developed and entered service on a faster timeline as Coastal Command needed a Beaufighter replacement and the Type 164 Brigand did use parts of older designs like the Type 163 Buckingham<--that itself had engineering and flight test development problems and its cancellation had been a blow to Bristol as a manufacturer/company)
It's similar in that latecomer respect to Douglas Aircraft's AD Skyraider, and the Fairey Spearfish <--which never made it to service in part because of its flight performance but also the large Royal Navy aircraft carriers it was intended to operate from were canceled; each of those first flew in summer 1945 just as the war was ending

>>64356835
Dude, nobody wants to hear your impression of Spongebob at the boating museum. Nobody cares that you memorized a plane encyclopedia. Can you shut the fuck up and just look at the planes?

He may have been a madman and a philanderer, but damn did Howard Hughes know how to build a sexy plane.

>>64357683
he did, except that was a postwar project
(that like its competitor the Republic XF-12, each got started late in the war but by the time flight testing came around had been superseded by jets)
Both the XF-11 and XF-12 with corncob engines are exceedingly fascinating apocalypse-of-piston airplanes

Another interesting prop-to-jet transition project in the 1944-1946 timeframe, is the Douglas XB-42 (aka 'Mixmaster') that had a counter-rotating rear fuselage propeller. Later post-war variants of this had two turbojets underwing, and a twin-turbojet (replacing the Allison V12s) derivative became America's first jet bomber to fly in early 1946, the XB-43 'Jetmaster'.

>>64359167
Still looking for who the fuck asked any of the 12 times you copypasted wikipedia.

>>64360088
checked Fuck (You) plebbitard boomerbook FAGGOT

>>64359167
I know. I'm posting them just to piss you off at this point, you assmad pedant.

>>64360499
checked, see post immediately above (You)rs plebbitard boomerbook Faggot.

>>64360488
Checked. We fuckin' now or what?

>>64338134
what do I think about A20s?

>>64362405
>600x396
are you on a phone? Larger/higher res pics

>>64363306
That aint no Mustang. The UK came up with that name.

>>64363318
yeah it's just the filename
it's P-51-2 (s/n 41-37321) a repossessed Mustang Mk IA aka North American NA-91, in flight near Inglewood, California
October 1942

This is an odd bird. A Lancaster MkII (which replaced the Merlins with radial Hercules engines due to manufacturing shortfalls for Merlins that were later rectified) outfitted as a testbed for a primitive jet engine.

>>64371578
neat cgi

>>64376629
very nice

>253x181
maybe a bigger pic

>>64382140
One guy here obsessed with the Warwick. What are those 4 extensions from the rear engine nacelles?

>>64383729
no, it's just under-represented (better than post-war 'warbird' same-picrel-for-the-ten-millionth-time of Spitfire/Mustang at the 2012 airshow flyby). That pic is a prototype with rear-nacelle gun turrets

>>64387910
and for pic #128 we have a warbird

>OP
>No 'warbirds' (<-post-war restorations)

Lol hybrid tank.

without a doubt the only good thread on /k/

>>64391629
Three Consolidated PBY-5A Catalinas of patrol squadron VP-52 in the south-west Pacific in December 1943. VP-52 was based at Port Moresby, New Guinea at that time and was engaged in so-called Black Cat (nighttime) operations.

>>64391575
thanks
I try keeping it active (only a dedicated few contributors seem interested at all)

nice

>>64360672
Man, the Nazis and their diesel engine airplanes...

>>64402501
yeah they even had much larger ones than the 222 projected

>>64342860
Shut the fuck up cretin.

>>64404546
You shut the fuck up cretin.

>>64404546
So does anyone want another thread?

or do we consign as was done a decade ago entirety of the board /k/ to the videogamelarpstreamairsoftcosplaytards

>>64407943
>videogamelarpstreamairsoftcosplaytards
/k/ was taken over by ukraine cheerleader redditards years ago

>>64408844
checked, same difference/thing