![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]() B-17? |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
gatt wrote in news:212qgk.ete.19.1
@integratelecom.com: B-17? Well, the Avro Lincoln was probably a good bit heavier than the 17, and also probably the Lancaster, but I think maybe the Focke Wulf 200 was a bit bigger than either. It certainly had more range, though probably not the payload of even the 17. The postwar Avor Tudor is the only other giant taildragger I can think of that might be in competition wiht those. I can't think of any Russian aircraft that might be in contention, but if anyone could have, it would have been them! Bertie |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Bertie the Bunyip" wrote in message ... gatt wrote in news:212qgk.ete.19.1 @integratelecom.com: B-17? Well, the Avro Lincoln was probably a good bit heavier than the 17, and also probably the Lancaster, but I think maybe the Focke Wulf 200 was a bit bigger than either. It certainly had more range, though probably not the payload of even the 17. The postwar Avor Tudor is the only other giant taildragger I can think of that might be in competition wiht those. I can't think of any Russian aircraft that might be in contention, but if anyone could have, it would have been them! Bertie The 17 would still be heavier, if we stuffed your fat ass in it. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Maxwell" luv2^fly99@cox.^net wrote in
: "Bertie the Bunyip" wrote in message ... gatt wrote in news:212qgk.ete.19.1 @integratelecom.com: B-17? Well, the Avro Lincoln was probably a good bit heavier than the 17, and also probably the Lancaster, but I think maybe the Focke Wulf 200 was a bit bigger than either. It certainly had more range, though probably not the payload of even the 17. The postwar Avor Tudor is the only other giant taildragger I can think of that might be in competition wiht those. I can't think of any Russian aircraft that might be in contention, but if anyone could have, it would have been them! Bertie The 17 would still be heavier, if we stuffed your fat ass in it. Awww, still with the blind lames, Good luck with that fjukkktard. I'm not going anywhere... And I haven't even broken a sweat yet. Bertie |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Maxwell wrote:
The 17 would still be heavier, if we stuffed your fat ass in it. Clearly you have absolutely nothing whatsoever to contribute. *plonk* |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
gatt wrote in news:214kqd.dfs.19.1
@integratelecom.com: Maxwell wrote: The 17 would still be heavier, if we stuffed your fat ass in it. Clearly you have absolutely nothing whatsoever to contribute. *plonk* Uh oh, now you've done it. you're on the lits now Bertie |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Uh oh, now you've done it. you're on the lits now Bertie Don't really have anything to ask or say to you. Just wanted to make sure I make the next list. I was dropped from last one )-: |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "gatt" wrote in message ... Maxwell wrote: The 17 would still be heavier, if we stuffed your fat ass in it. Clearly you have absolutely nothing whatsoever to contribute. *plonk* Oh worrra worra, I have been kill filed by a sock puppet. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Maxwell" luv2^fly99@cox.^net wrote in news:KaPdk.18084$3q7.16364
@newsfe15.lga: "gatt" wrote in message ... Maxwell wrote: The 17 would still be heavier, if we stuffed your fat ass in it. Clearly you have absolutely nothing whatsoever to contribute. *plonk* Oh worrra worra, I have been kill filed by a sock puppet. Soon you'lll slip away. Just like Tinkerbelle. C'mon everyone, believe in Maxie ! Bertie |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
on 7/10/2008 7:46 PM Bertie the Bunyip said the following:
gatt wrote in news:212qgk.ete.19.1 @integratelecom.com: B-17? Well, the Avro Lincoln was probably a good bit heavier than the 17, and also probably the Lancaster, but I think maybe the Focke Wulf 200 was a bit bigger than either. It certainly had more range, though probably not the payload of even the 17. The postwar Avor Tudor is the only other giant taildragger I can think of that might be in competition wiht those. I can't think of any Russian aircraft that might be in contention, but if anyone could have, it would have been them! Like, say, the Petlyakov Pe-8? AKA the TB-7? It was the only four-engine bomber the Soviets had during WW II. Its max takeoff weight was 35,000 kg vs a bit less than 30,000 kg for the B-17. 39 meter wingspan vs 32 meters. A photo: http://www.aviation.ru/Pe/8/Pe-8.jpg |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Conventional v tricycle gear | [email protected] | Piloting | 117 | July 16th 08 12:04 AM |
Landing Gear Parts, Antique Part, EXP Airplane Auction | Bill Berle | Home Built | 0 | November 24th 04 05:11 PM |
Landing Gear Parts, Antique Part, EXP Airplane Auction | Bill Berle | Aviation Marketplace | 0 | November 24th 04 05:11 PM |
Landing Gear Parts, Antique Part, EXP Airplane Auction | Bill Berle | Owning | 0 | November 24th 04 05:11 PM |
WarPac War Plans-any conventional? | Matt Wiser | Military Aviation | 1 | December 8th 03 09:29 PM |