-
There seems to be an uptick in Political comments in recent months. Those of us who are long time members of the site know that Political and Religious content has been banned for years. Nothing has changed. Please leave all political and religious comments out of the forums.
If you recently joined the forums you were not presented with this restriction in the terms of service. This was due to a conversion error when we went from vBulletin to Xenforo. We have updated our terms of service to reflect these corrections.
Please note any post refering to a politician will be considered political even if it is intended to be humor. Our experience is these topics have a way of dividing the forums and causing deep resentment among members. It is a poison to the community. We appreciate compliance with the rules.
The Staff of SOH
-
Please see the most recent updates in the "Where did the .com name go?" thread. Posts number 16 and 17.
SBD Dauntless released.
- Thread starter Deano
- Start date
M
MCDesigns
Guest
I was going to say that or the SB2U Vindicator
K
Ken Stallings
Guest
I wish sometimes you would appreciate how frequently people show their respect for your service by overlooking your views on this subject.
The efforts of the Wildcat, Devastator, and Dauntless crews, with their sacrifices against the best the IJNAF could throw at them, ensured that later own more advanced aircraft such as the SB2C could enjoy the successes they earned.
Without question, the SBD earned immortal status due to the events of Midway. Some was luck, much was pure courage and sacrifice by the TBD crews who drew down the Zero's and prevented them reorganizing before the SBD's delivered a coup de grace on the Japanese carrier force the IJN never could recover from.
Nevertheless, in terms of relative qualities, the one aircraft that the USN had on hand in that vital first year that was superior to the Japanese equvalent was the Douglas SBD Dauntless. The Val wasn't as good. Thus it was also due to the quality of the SBD that when the opportunity presented itself, those crews were able to deliver the punch that lives on in human history.
When an aircraft and their crews deliver the blow which was the turning point of the PTO, it cannot be ignored, nor expected to be. This is why so many people are thrilled by the many releases of this classic warbird. Why you seem to so consistently wish to rain on that parade is vexing and disappointing. My personal respect for your service is without qualification, and is based upon a detailed study of the war which I've spent a large portion of my life doing.
My own rather limited experience has given me an added insight into the personal courage you demonstrated on each sortie you flew. And again, that personal respect has no bounds. But I cannot understand how your own courage and service can translate into the comments you make each time the SBD is rendered in virtual form. And I would please ask you consider what is being said here in reply. Too many people respect you and feel uncomfortable replying in this way. Perhaps you think I'm being unfair, but unfortunately, I think I'm being very fair and I wish I didn't feel it necessary to be so.
Sincerely,
Ken Stallings
Ken, exactly what I thought....
I bought the Vertigo SBD Dauntless last week, and am really impressed with the beautiful looks and the nice flying with it.
It also fits very nice in my FSX Solomon 1943 project.
The only thing I would nag about is the front upper canopy frame when looking out the VC. It looks a bit rough-textured.
I look forward the Wildcat and hope that a Airacobra will be on a future release list!
Cheers,
Mark
I bought the Vertigo SBD Dauntless last week, and am really impressed with the beautiful looks and the nice flying with it.
It also fits very nice in my FSX Solomon 1943 project.
The only thing I would nag about is the front upper canopy frame when looking out the VC. It looks a bit rough-textured.
I look forward the Wildcat and hope that a Airacobra will be on a future release list!
Cheers,
Mark
Some people lack big picture perspective because the historical event that they experienced first hand was VERY personal. I've been involved first hand in a few "historical" events. What I saw and experienced was much diffrent than what others saw; the human experience I guess. I've spent over 20yrs of my life speaking with vets of many conflicts ALL of them have a diffrent story/experience to tell. Just an observation.
Example: As much as I dislike the M-16A1/2 rifle it has saved my life a few times, there for I love the little piece of junk! LOL
I'm off to fly my dive bomber!!:salute:
Example: As much as I dislike the M-16A1/2 rifle it has saved my life a few times, there for I love the little piece of junk! LOL
I'm off to fly my dive bomber!!:salute:
Wow! How do you know this? Did I miss a poll or something?
I would never go out on a limb and speak for other members like this since I, nor anyone for that matter, really have any way of knowing beyond assumption how other people feel about Helldiver's comments. But, I can speak for myself and I have no problem with them. Given his experience, maybe he knows something the rest of us don't.
Regardless, his comments seem quite benign to me. Afterall, they largely pertain to renditions of airplanes in a video game and are opinion. I don't know why this would become an issue to the extent that a post of this nature would be necessary, and I have a hard time understanding how his comments are "raining" on some parade.
Maybe you can enlighten me as to how Helldiver's comments are of such concern that they are an issue. And, please tell me to whom they are an issue.
Thanks
I for one am glad to see development and release of these historic aircraft. The SBD was a design of the famous Robert Hineman who later designed the equally classic and capable A4. His guiding principle in the A4 design was "simplicate and add lightness", believing that bigger is often.. lots bigger. The SBD might be summed up as "less is more".
Capt "Winkle" Brown , well known test pilot for the Royal Navy seemed a bit astounded, "This is the plane that was the terror of the Pacific war"? His conclusion, a plane that suceeded despite itself, a tribute to the skill of it's crews. It did have the lowest loss rate per mission of any USN aircraft of the war.
Perhaps just good enough at everything.
Dive bombers are fun to fly, I did the FM for the Outhouse one of several years ago. Especially tucked into a nearly verticle dive trying to keep the sights and lead on the target.
Cheers: T
Capt "Winkle" Brown , well known test pilot for the Royal Navy seemed a bit astounded, "This is the plane that was the terror of the Pacific war"? His conclusion, a plane that suceeded despite itself, a tribute to the skill of it's crews. It did have the lowest loss rate per mission of any USN aircraft of the war.
Perhaps just good enough at everything.
Dive bombers are fun to fly, I did the FM for the Outhouse one of several years ago. Especially tucked into a nearly verticle dive trying to keep the sights and lead on the target.
Cheers: T
K
Ken Stallings
Guest
I remember reading about a comparison between the war experiences of two aircraft with somewhat similar performance -- the Fairey Battle and the Douglas Dauntless. The experiences could not have been more diametrically opposed. Opposed except in one area -- the boundless courage of the men who flew them into harm's way.
Yet, up against two of the best fighters of the opening of the war -- the Me-109 and the A6M Zero, the Battle was butchered at a shocking level and the Dauntless succeeded to a history making level.
In looking at payload, speed, range one thing was not compared -- maneuverability. The Dauntless was surprisingly nimble for a two-man dive bomber. It was also better armed with two .50 cal machine guns on the top cowling. Among the many missions the SBD was pressed to perform was fleet defense, and it was able to shoot down a Val or Kate attack aircraft. The aircraft was also rock solid and stable in the dive, which meant that a well trained pilot could ram home the bomb with amazing accuracy.
This stability when combined with excellent maneuverability for a bomber was a nice combination. When you add in the stability during an approach to land on a carrier, it's really little surprise the aircraft was so loved by their crews.
Yes, more raw speed to escape a fighter attack, and more payload to deal more damage to the enemy were undeniable qualities later aircraft like the Avenger and Helldiver enjoyed. But no other aircraft in the USN earned such a war-changing record. In looking at raw impact to the enemy, the closest second place likely goes to the Hellcat which effectively destroyed the remainder of the IJNAF fighter arm in the Marianas Turkey Shoot. The great difference is that the Dauntless accomplished its achievement when the outcome of the war remained in doubt.
Destroying one quarter of the enemy's total carrier force as it existed in June 1942, in one day, is an achievement no other single aircraft can claim.
Ken
Perfect! I was hoping you would as that's how I acquired your F6F.
warchild
Charter Member
I gotta admit, i dont know much about the dauntless, nor its successor, and frankly i have damned little time for reading anything that isnt aerodynamics related.. Part of senility i guess, always having to relearn everything over again.. some of those formu;as though can be well,, daunting.. But i digress..
Having been in combat, as others here have as well, i know this much. The first rule of battle is that when the fighting starts, all plans are null and void.. Midway was a cluster F**k, we all know this, but i cant fault anyone for "botching" it up.. That had to be hella confusing and scary beyond imagination. The dauntless did a wonderful job with the men that were flying her, But i think back to another battle, where another plane made history, and that was the battle for the Bismark.. Again botched, but sheesh, the brits had taken two major blows and disarray was the mode of the day. yet, it was one little world war one kingfisher with one guy hanging out of the cockpit, held onto the plane only by his feet so he could judge the top of the waves, that got the job done.. The helldiver was a good plane. maybe not as historical as the dauntless, but the men who flew her were no less heros. They helped end the war..
We hold machines up to the light and put them on pedestals, but always, its the human element that is the true history maker.
Having been in combat, as others here have as well, i know this much. The first rule of battle is that when the fighting starts, all plans are null and void.. Midway was a cluster F**k, we all know this, but i cant fault anyone for "botching" it up.. That had to be hella confusing and scary beyond imagination. The dauntless did a wonderful job with the men that were flying her, But i think back to another battle, where another plane made history, and that was the battle for the Bismark.. Again botched, but sheesh, the brits had taken two major blows and disarray was the mode of the day. yet, it was one little world war one kingfisher with one guy hanging out of the cockpit, held onto the plane only by his feet so he could judge the top of the waves, that got the job done.. The helldiver was a good plane. maybe not as historical as the dauntless, but the men who flew her were no less heros. They helped end the war..
We hold machines up to the light and put them on pedestals, but always, its the human element that is the true history maker.
K
Ken Stallings
Guest
appels and oranges comparison
No, it was not.
Of course, if you wish to expand upon your claim I would read your points.
Ken
deathfromafar
Charter Member
First off, to Team Vertigo, you folks did a hell of a job building this Dauntless. I have bought both this one and the Hellcat and feel they were two of the best buys I've made in FS models in some time.
With regards to the debate on the two Dive Bombers, hell, they both did their jobs and with brave crews. Like any other air crewmen, aviators defend their birds against any and all comparisons. We know the reputation garnered by the Dauntless and it's crews. Based on accounts in a couple of WW2 Naval Aviation books I have from the 1970's, the Helldiver had a lot of things going for it numbers wise. The one constant pilots noted was the bugs the plane had up till the SB2C-4 came along. Like a lot of planes(even the B-29), sometimes it took time to iron out all the wrinkles. Nonetheless, I always liked the look of both planes. They and their crews earned their place in history.
With regards to the debate on the two Dive Bombers, hell, they both did their jobs and with brave crews. Like any other air crewmen, aviators defend their birds against any and all comparisons. We know the reputation garnered by the Dauntless and it's crews. Based on accounts in a couple of WW2 Naval Aviation books I have from the 1970's, the Helldiver had a lot of things going for it numbers wise. The one constant pilots noted was the bugs the plane had up till the SB2C-4 came along. Like a lot of planes(even the B-29), sometimes it took time to iron out all the wrinkles. Nonetheless, I always liked the look of both planes. They and their crews earned their place in history.
warchild
Charter Member
or even a 1930s fairy swordfish
errr ummm..
ya got me there :
: sory, and thanks for the correction.. Pam