nadinbrzezinski
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Aug-10-09 03:26 PM
Response to Original message |
| -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 |
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread