Wartime Versus Restored Warbirds for FSX????

[PRB]

Well, I voted for the wartime look, but of all my FSX P-38s, the FSD Red Bull one with the modern cockpit is the one I fly the most, just because the VC is so darned beautiful. I have to be careful though because the airspeed indicator is in knots, and I'm used to landing at 100 MPH!

 

[Helldiver]

With all due respect Ken, I was never in the PTO. Never sailed a mile in the Pacific. There was some Navy presence in the ETO. In fact I got some kind of ribbon from France, come to think of it.
No I was never in the U S Army Air Corps but it didn't mean I shut my eyes on what went on.
The other thing is, just to be correct, the Navy took 52 B-17G and the US Coast Guard took another 17.
I don't know about "Roger A. Freeman's excellent "B-17 Fortress at War" published back in 1977" Where was Roger during the war? How factual is he?
They started deliveries in September of 1943 but the Gs did not get squadron strength until spring of 1944.
I still love the B-17F and will pick the SB2C over any SBD.
Just one old man's opinion

 

[Ken Stallings]

I don't know about "Roger A. Freeman's excellent "B-17 Fortress at War" published back in 1977" Where was Roger during the war? How factual is he?
They started deliveries in September of 1943 but the Gs did not get squadron strength until spring of 1944.

He was in England during the war. But more important to this discusion, the man is considered one of the best aviation historians in the world during his professional career. He passed away from cancer in 2005. He was born in 1928, so the war "happened on his watch" also! Matter of fact, if we can reference your age of 81 as you publish, he was actually about two years your senior during the war.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roger_A._Freeman

Not many aviation historians have an entry in Wikipedia!

He wrote at least 52 books on World War II aviation! Here is a listing of what he authored:

http://www.librarything.com/author/freemanrogera

Frankly, Freeman did his own research into the after action reports of the units. If he documented that the B-17G entered the war in fall of 1943, then I believe it. Are you now saying that according to your personal experience in the US Navy that it took the USAAF over half a year to go from delivery to merely squadron strength in a bomber considered vital to the war effort?

Sorry, but I'm finding that to be a reach!

But, let's say you are right about that insight. Are you reinterating your original statement that by spring of 1944 that the air war in the ETO was already won? Because your original comment is that by the time the B-17G "showed up the air war was won." Those were your words I quote there. So, is that what you are confirming now, that the air war in the ETO was won by spring of 1944? Again, D-Day happened on June 6th, 1944. Most people consider that date to be summer of 1944.

I just wish you'd be less critical of designers who release aircraft that you would prefer they not release. You have a right to your personal perspective. But, someone doesn't have to "be there" to research and draw historical facts from the official record. Freeman's works have stood the test of time and peer review. His works are endorsed by numerous senior USAAF commanders who made the decisions and commanded the actions that his works have documented for the lay person to read and benefit from.

I'm not historically inept on the air war of World War II, Helldiver. Like a lot of people, I stand in awe of what those men did to win that war and you played a part. If someone were to criticize and attempt to lessen your role, and those of your fellow Navy SB2C crews, then I assure you I'd be as resolute to defend their role as I am in this case.

A lot of damn good men died flying the B-17G in the ETO. I think they deserve better than to allow one to say their sacrifices were made only after the war was won.

Respectfully offered,

Ken Stallings

 

[Ken Stallings]

BTW: I must acknowledge my error regarding your service. I thought I remembered you referencing your participation at the battle of Leyte Gulf in the SB2C. Clearly, I was wrong about that and apologize for that error.

Ken

 

[pilottj]

one thing to note, the WW2 birds in those days, did have some crowded skies but they didn't have to contend with heavy class B type controlled airspaces, SIDS/STARS...etc. I am sure for aircraft still in service such as a C-47 would probably have some nav equipment do help navigate with todays airspace.

 

[Ken Stallings]

one thing to note, the WW2 birds in those days, did have some crowded skies but they didn't have to contend with heavy class B type controlled airspaces, SIDS/STARS...etc. I am sure for aircraft still in service such as a C-47 would probably have some nav equipment do help navigate with todays airspace.

That's another good point.

During the war, the crew aircraft like the bombers and cargo aircraft generally had ADF's but that was the extent of most navigational equipment. Although the British did some good work with such things as Oboe and early ground mapping radar named H2N.

My overall view is I really appreciate the passion so many designers have to create such excellent virtual warbirds. Especially when they release it as freeware it represents a heck of a gift to people who never flew these aircraft in the war. In terms of keeping the passion alive to read about the wars and understand their deeper meanings, I think few things can kindle that passion like the virtual warbirds for FS and CFS.

Cheers,

Ken

 

[Helldiver]

"if we can reference your age of 81 as you publish, he was actually about two years your senior during the war."
NOPE, THIS ENGLISH FARMER WAS BORN MAY 11, 1928. I WAS BORN JUNE 12TH 1928.

 

[CheckSix]

I dont know much about that English farmer but I can imagine he may have watched as the USAAF flew from airfields that were once his families crop fields... Just a small sacrifice the little people of Europe paid... You know, for the greater good and all.

Respect where respect is due.

 

[TeaSea]

one thing to note, the WW2 birds in those days, did have some crowded skies but they didn't have to contend with heavy class B type controlled airspaces, SIDS/STARS...etc. I am sure for aircraft still in service such as a C-47 would probably have some nav equipment do help navigate with todays airspace.

You've hit my dilemma...I love the original configuration cockpits, but part of the joy for me is flying the navigation systems. The fighters do not have them, and while the bombers occasionally have them, they are pretty primitive.

I usually end up flying the MAAM and Default C-47 because of the Nav capabilites....I like the old nav stuff, just none of it in the fighters.

 

[icycle]

Okay, yes, we have established both gentlemen were age 16, in May & June of 1944, respectively (both approx. the same age as my father).

So, yes, they both "lived in the era". In Roger Freeman's case, he was about a year too young or so, to see the war, but did live in Essex, and as a boy, was drawn to the airplanes and pilots of the RAF/USAAF. Yes, he was a self-taught historian, but his exhaustive research, and attention to detail, made him respected among historian's and "experts" in his field.

Respect the opinions of all offered on the pros & con's of the B-17G vs. B-17F (or the SBD vs. SB2C for that matter). Although I don't agree about the B-17G arriving until after the war was essentially won, I do respect that opinion. (91st BG "dailies" from their historical website do list B-17G A/C tail-codes being dispatched on missions from Oct 1943, however).

But back to the original thread, there is, I guess, room for both "period" and "warbirds". The beauty of FSX is that you can make it what you want - just some things require more work than others

Cordially,
Bill

 

[Helldiver]

That's right, I was 16 in 1944 when I joined the Navy, as was about 10% of my boot company. All we wanted to do was to kill Japs. I got gypped, being sent to the Atlantic Theatre.
As far as period aircraft being "modernized" it's your Flight Sim. Fly them which ever gives you pleasure.

 

[Ken Stallings]

I dont know much about that English farmer but I can imagine he may have watched as the USAAF flew from airfields that were once his families crop fields... Just a small sacrifice the little people of Europe paid... You know, for the greater good and all.

Respect where respect is due.

Thank you!

 

[Ken Stallings]

That's right, I was 16 in 1944 when I joined the Navy, as was about 10% of my boot company. All we wanted to do was to kill Japs. I got gypped, being sent to the Atlantic Theatre.
As far as period aircraft being "modernized" it's your Flight Sim. Fly them which ever gives you pleasure.

I would not say you got gypped. You served with honor and contributed your part for victory.

Would I be right to guess convoy protection duty?

Ken

 

[pilottj]

you know, going from point A to B in somthing like the P-47 isnt impossible, actually fairly easy if you have dual monitors and you can open it's little moving map 'sectional' or turn on skyvector or somthing. It is actually quite a nice VFR cross country cruiser. Quite a good teacher of 'pilotage' and 'dead reckoning'...two very important skills to have as a pilot. So one is probably not going to practice any VOR holds or IAPs in it or somthing but got a hangar full of sooo many other airplanes, there are plenty of others that can do it.

You know its funny, when I first saw GA aircraft with all glass cockpits like the Cirrus, I was a little hesitant to embrace that technology myself, having been taught and quite comfortable with older analog instruments. But now, that technology is simply a part of our flying lives and it was invented to help us out. I was flying a 172SP that had a moving map display around SFO airspace a few years back and I was really glad that map was there to tell me instantly and exactly where that airspace was.

I think this whole thread could relate to a similar topic such as fancy bells and whistles in cockpits these days such as moving maps, G1000s...etc. There is certianly a defined skill we have as pilots to be able to navigate off of a navaid or read a sectional and determine our position. Do these modern conveniences take way from the 'flying' When I first saw the Cirrus type aircraft, I thought so, but having enjoyed some of the benefits first hand in that 172SP, I think it adds to the situational awareness greatly and frees us up a little.

Ken, do you think things like moving maps in your cockpits take away the challenge/skill of aerial navigation, or add to your situational awareness?

Cheers
TJ

 

[Ken Stallings]

Take away from the fun and challenge? Not in the slightest!

Add to your situational awareness? Absolutely!

I hold no nostalgia value in old technology. It is the actual flying that brings the joy. The latest generation of glass systems have brought synthetic vision to GA. These superimpose a 3D rendering of the runway and has boxes you fly through to represent localizer course and glideslope.

It is intuitive and safer, easier to interpret and adjust to. The older generation of avoinics simply were the best that could be done at the time. There was nothing nostalgic about getting lost, or losing your situational awareness, especially in the soup down low on an instrument approach.

As an instructor, I also tend to reject the adage that "you gotta learn the old way," because that presumes there is only one old way. If you really want to get "old school" you go flying without charts. But that would be foolish. In the same way, I believe rejecting the newer technology because of some presumed belief it makes you a lesser pilot is misplaced nostalgia.

My view has always been you embrace technology that makes you safer and more effective.

When charts first came out, "old school" pilots said, 'Bah humbug, a good pilot memorizes his area!"

When basic flight instruments came out, "old school" pilots said, "Bah humbug, a good pilot flies by the seat of his pants!"

When radio aids came out, "old school" pilots said, "Bah humbug, a good pilot uses a compass and a stopwatch!"

When GPS and moving maps came out, "old school" pilots said, "Bah humbug, a good pilot knows how to interpret a CDI!"

When datalink weather came out, "old school" pilots said, "Bah humbug, a good pilot knows how to read the weather himself!"

What I can assert by fact is that as each of these technologies were adopted, accidents went down. I've actually had a few pilots look at the XM Satellite Weather on my aircraft and say they didn't want it on their's! No joke! I do not understand such reactions. Knowledge is power man! Show me where the bad weather is and I can use common sense to avoid it.

Sure, the old "it can break" adage is true for everything. But the only adage that's really true is that a good pilot should know all of the skills listed above. He should also embrace the new methods. There is a good analogy from martial arts. It says that a good warrrior should not become too attached to one weapon, but rather be adept with all of them! The same is true for a good pilot.

Ken

 

[oakfloor]

I wish we could get both restored and modern style FSX warbirds, Who needs a gunsite, armour plate and all the xtra weight of tube radios, guns and drag from bomb shackles? flying a 51' would be more fun with out all this slowing it down. Most warbirds pilots that fly today have little of this old equipment on board, IMHO.

 

[CheckSix]

Ken that is the most intelligent and well thought out post I have read in a long time. Thank you for that!

 

[IanP]

I agree pretty much with what Ken said as well.

It's a simple statistic that many aircraft accidents around the world are still CFIT - Controlled Flight Into Terrain, or caused by loss of situational awareness and ultimately control in poor visibility. Provided you don't get into information overload territory, which can be even more dangerous, simple and easily read instruments such as a moving map and a glass panel with trend bars/markers are vastly more likely to help you recover from a situation than ambiguous instruments like a CDI / old HSI and the seat of your pants.

That said, though, certainly in Europe and I'm sure also in the US, there are also still a lot of "lost" calls on ATC frequencies from pilots who despite all the advice and warnings, fly with battery-powered GPS units that then run flat and they haven't been tracking the flight using "conventional" methods. Technology can and does fail, so you really do need to keep track of yourself using the "basics" as well as allowing the technology to help you.

On topic, I still much prefer "period" warbirds to modernised ones. That's personal preference, though. I want to understand the aircraft in a historical context. If I was flying a Spitfire cross country in the real world, I'd be using a VHF radio and a GPS, not relying on the WW2 equipment fit!

Cheers,

Ian P.

 

[SADT]

Hi,

I prefer My warbirds to be to manufacturers specs or to combat specs - including gunsight. There must be an awful lot of meth labs around KNUW as thats where I seem to strafe the most. For fighters with long range such as the Wildcat or P-51, give me a GPS any day along with a period ADF and VOR.

 

[DHC120]

I fly Warbirds (WWII Bombers and USAAF Trainers) set-up the way my Dad would have flown them.. Simple radios, some with no radios.. some "new", some showing "some age"..
The men and women who flew AAC planes had no choice in the matter.. That was all there was to be had..