Traveling_Home
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Aug-07-09 04:10 PM
Response to Reply #8 |
|
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_difference_betwee... What is the difference between pursuit and fighter planes? In: Airplanes and Aircraft
fighter aircraft is general term for any aircraft that is designed to engage another aircraft in combat - pursuit aircraft are fighters designed for speed to be able intercept other aircraft such as intercepting bombers before they reach their target or "racing" to provide support - because pursuit aircraft have to be built to be faster than other aircraft, in the past they had to compromise agility and contolability for speed - modern jet fighters like the F-22 are capable of both speed and agility and therefore there is not enough difference to have a seperate catagory of pursuit fighter the P-38 lightning of WWII was a very fast pursuit fighter, at least 2 are known to have hit the sound barrior in a dive (though they were destroyed doing so) but they were definitly not very agile with those twin props and booms - the peak of performance in pursuit fighters was the F-104 starfighter that was little more than a very large jet engine with short stubby wings and was incredibally fast - but it was very hard to control and fly and land - but it was designed to intercept russian bombers before they could reach the USA and it did that very well
The terms "pursuit" and "Fighter" were used by the US to describe aircraft types for the same role. The Army used the term "Pursuit", which was a term used by the british. The Navy used the term "Fighter" and the aircraft were assigned to fighter squadrons, known as VF (meaning Heavier-than-Air Fighter). Eventually, the Air Force adopted Fighter.
|
| -Question for all the World War II experts on DU |
taterguy |
Aug-07-09 04:04 PM |
#0 |
-
Weight and size. n/t |
A HERETIC I AM |
Aug-07-09 04:05 PM |
#1 |
 -
Weight and size of what? |
taterguy |
Aug-07-09 04:07 PM |
#5 |
-
Of the payload. |
A HERETIC I AM |
Aug-07-09 04:19 PM |
#16 |
-
Really? Have you seen the size of the A-bomb? |
rockymountaindem |
Aug-07-09 04:05 PM |
#2 |
 -
And at that it barely got off the ground! |
POAS |
Aug-07-09 04:06 PM |
#4 |
-
Because a P-38 is a fighter aircraft. |
enlightenment |
Aug-07-09 04:06 PM |
#3 |
 -
I don't think it would have even fit under a P-38. |
rockymountaindem |
Aug-07-09 04:07 PM |
#7 |
 -
Then why does it start with a P instead of an F? |
taterguy |
Aug-07-09 04:07 PM |
#8 |
  -
P = pursuit |
Rincewind |
Aug-07-09 04:09 PM |
#10 |
  -
P stood for Pursuit |
Traveling_Home |
Aug-07-09 04:10 PM |
#11 |
  -
Because at the time fighters were called "pursuit" aircraft |
NoPasaran |
Aug-07-09 04:11 PM |
#12 |
   -
To be more specific, the Army Aircorp used P. |
Recovered Repug |
Aug-08-09 02:06 PM |
#57 |
  -
Prop vs Jet (f) |
Confusious |
Aug-09-09 02:42 AM |
#68 |
 -
The Army built a special device to hoist it up from beneath the aircraft. |
Octafish |
Aug-07-09 04:26 PM |
#21 |
-
The aircraft itself was also heavily modified... |
Usrename |
Aug-08-09 11:09 AM |
#46 |
-
Because |
Rincewind |
Aug-07-09 04:07 PM |
#6 |
-
B-29 had the range and the payload capacity |
NoPasaran |
Aug-07-09 04:08 PM |
#9 |
-
Because a P-38 is a relatively small fighter plane and the atomic bomb was very very heavy.. |
ddeclue |
Aug-07-09 04:11 PM |
#13 |
 -
I'll remember they did have mid air refueling in those days |
taterguy |
Aug-07-09 04:14 PM |
#14 |
-
I think ddclue meant they did NOT have aerial refueling in those days. n/t |
A HERETIC I AM |
Aug-07-09 04:22 PM |
#18 |
 -
Probably but I can never resist calling someone out for a sloppy post |
taterguy |
Aug-07-09 04:24 PM |
#19 |
  -
nothing wrong with what I said... you just can't resist calling people out regardless of a reason.. |
ddeclue |
Aug-07-09 04:31 PM |
#26 |
  -
Hey, your post should have had a comma after 'probably,' and a period after 'post.' |
damntexdem |
Aug-07-09 04:40 PM |
#31 |
 -
True, Sir: That Seems To have Been a Typo |
The Magistrate |
Aug-07-09 04:24 PM |
#20 |
-
As a side note, I find the development of the procedure fascinating. |
A HERETIC I AM |
Aug-07-09 04:33 PM |
#27 |
-
My dad commanded both KC-97 and KC-135 squadrons |
enlightenment |
Aug-07-09 04:41 PM |
#33 |
-
If you've ever seen aerial refueling up close |
customerserviceguy |
Aug-07-09 05:03 PM |
#35 |
-
nope they never did it operationally until the days of the Cold War. |
ddeclue |
Aug-07-09 04:28 PM |
#23 |
-
This is a joke, right? |
sarge43 |
Aug-07-09 04:18 PM |
#15 |
 -
I wanted a history lesson, not a math problem |
taterguy |
Aug-07-09 04:19 PM |
#17 |
  -
OK. The fucker couldn't get off the ground with a payload of 2/3th of its weight. |
sarge43 |
Aug-07-09 04:28 PM |
#24 |
 -
It's not a matter of where it grips it! It's a matter of weight ratios! |
rockymountaindem |
Aug-07-09 05:48 PM |
#38 |
  -
You certainly know a lot about swallows |
taterguy |
Aug-07-09 06:33 PM |
#40 |
 -
! |
Warren Stupidity |
Aug-07-09 06:19 PM |
#39 |
 -
Thank you for inserting that gratuitous note of personal derision in your comments. |
Bucky |
Aug-07-09 04:40 PM |
#32 |
-
Good. My work here is done. n/t |
sarge43 |
Aug-07-09 04:43 PM |
#34 |
-
Always pleasant watching someone lash out with attitude like that over mere questions, innit? (nt) |
Posteritatis |
Aug-08-09 07:32 PM |
#63 |
-
They should have just shot a proton torpedo down the exhaust port. |
HiFructosePronSyrup |
Aug-07-09 04:27 PM |
#22 |
 -
Exhaust port of what? |
taterguy |
Aug-07-09 05:13 PM |
#36 |
-
Japan. Nippon. Yamato. |
HiFructosePronSyrup |
Aug-07-09 05:45 PM |
#37 |
-
B29 was the first bomber with pressurized cabins for the crew. |
Avalux |
Aug-07-09 04:28 PM |
#25 |
 -
Older bombers hit the high altitudes without pressurized cabins. |
backscatter712 |
Aug-08-09 12:19 PM |
#54 |
-
The B-29 was a big bomber, able to carry the bombs. And it had enought range from Tinian to Japan. |
damntexdem |
Aug-07-09 04:35 PM |
#28 |
 -
Tinian was a Japanese Island |
taterguy |
Aug-08-09 04:33 PM |
#60 |
-
It was a protectorate beforehand, not part of Japan proper |
Posteritatis |
Aug-08-09 07:34 PM |
#65 |
-
Ya gotta be pretty fast to answer questions on some topics here. |
Greyhound |
Aug-07-09 04:37 PM |
#29 |
-
Oh God, Tater, you don't still believe that whole A-Bomb hoax, do you? |
Bucky |
Aug-07-09 04:37 PM |
#30 |
-
Didn't the Germans use small fighter aircraft... |
Iggo |
Aug-07-09 07:12 PM |
#41 |
 -
FW-190s were actually large fighters |
taterguy |
Aug-08-09 06:47 AM |
#42 |
  -
Oh, that's right. I remember now. |
Iggo |
Aug-08-09 10:04 AM |
#43 |
 -
You ARE joking right???? |
ddeclue |
Aug-08-09 10:07 AM |
#44 |
  -
Are you the only person on this site that doesn't have Animal House memorized? |
taterguy |
Aug-08-09 11:59 AM |
#51 |
 -
ROFL! |
lumberjack_jeff |
Aug-08-09 07:38 PM |
#66 |
 -
Don't be silly. Germany didn't have aircraft carriers in World War II |
taterguy |
Aug-09-09 06:03 AM |
#70 |
 -
Actually the Germans did have one carrier..... |
whistler162 |
Aug-10-09 03:30 PM |
#75 |
 -
You're joking right? Germans? |
NutmegYankee |
Aug-08-09 11:18 AM |
#48 |
-
Let him, he's on a roll |
taterguy |
Aug-08-09 11:56 AM |
#50 |
-
. |
Iggo |
Aug-08-09 01:42 PM |
#56 |
-
"When the Germans bombed Pearl |
Strong Atheist |
Aug-10-09 03:11 PM |
#72 |
-
Interesting side note for you taterguy... |
Hobarticus |
Aug-08-09 10:20 AM |
#45 |
 -
Next bomber off the drawing board after the B-29 was... |
hayu_lol |
Aug-08-09 11:10 AM |
#47 |
-
Ah yes, six turning and four burning... |
backscatter712 |
Aug-08-09 12:23 PM |
#55 |
 -
Oops. My ass actually fell completely off after reading that! |
A HERETIC I AM |
Aug-08-09 05:04 PM |
#61 |
 -
BWAH-hahahaha!!! |
Hobarticus |
Aug-08-09 07:24 PM |
#62 |
 -
LOL (nt) |
Posteritatis |
Aug-08-09 07:32 PM |
#64 |
-
XC-99 |
Terry in Austin |
Aug-10-09 03:33 PM |
#76 |
-
Because the P-38 was on their keyring. |
Vickers |
Aug-08-09 11:18 AM |
#49 |
 -
Still have mine. |
cherokeeprogressive |
Aug-08-09 12:06 PM |
#52 |
  -
You beat me to it. I have my P-38 somewhere |
alfredo |
Aug-10-09 03:52 PM |
#78 |
 -
cute. |
Morning Dew |
Aug-08-09 12:06 PM |
#53 |
-
I can send you one if you'd like. I actually have two sizes of them, |
Vickers |
Aug-08-09 03:27 PM |
#59 |
-
Hey, that would be neat! |
Morning Dew |
Aug-09-09 01:38 AM |
#67 |
-
It was 10 feet long, over 2 feet in diameter, and weighed 4½ tons. |
krispos42 |
Aug-08-09 02:07 PM |
#58 |
-
I love this place for all the answers you can get to a question like this |
CreekDog |
Aug-09-09 03:47 AM |
#69 |
 -
How many different ways can you say that an A-Bomb was too heavy to be carried by a P-38? |
taterguy |
Aug-10-09 03:02 PM |
#71 |
-
about 37 ways |
CreekDog |
Aug-10-09 03:47 PM |
#77 |
-
B-29 big arsed bomber, P-38 twin fuselage twin engine |
whistler162 |
Aug-10-09 03:24 PM |
#73 |
-
payload |
nadinbrzezinski |
Aug-10-09 03:26 PM |
#74 |