George, we uploaded it. As a matter of fact, it’s been in our video gallery section. OK, just making sure you know:)
Thanks ww2admin,
Oops, maybe I should visit there more often. Right under my nose all this time. 
A year or two ago, we took a look at that screenshot (I have it on DVD from the History Channel) and we still could not determine with 100% accuracy what it was, but it was 99% not a Tiger Tank.
That’s a brilliant piece of footage.
It’ great to hear a bit of narration on how and why they fired that way.
Amazing that the pilot mentioned the myth that they were able to KO a tank by firing at the ground and bouncing bullets up into its unarmoured belly.
Fact is, the underneath of tanks were armoured. They normally had the same thickness of armour as fitted to the top of the tank, and it would be impossible for a .50 bullet which had hit, and bounced off the ground, to penetrate the armour fitted on the belly ( it would have not only been blunted by the impact on the ground, it would also have lost a great deal of its velocity)
Top/Belly armour fitted to the main German tanks late-war
Pzr IV 10mm/10mm
Tiger I 25mm/25mm
Panther 16mm/16mm
As you can see, there is no advantage to bouncing rounds off the ground into the belly.
And the "bounce " had to be in an perfect angle to penetrate, if is some truth in that chance.
According to one source that I’ve read:
M-2HB Browning .50 Caliber Machine Gun:
muzzle velocity of 2,930 fps to maximum range of 1,250 yards.
M-8 .50 Cal. API (Armour Piercing, Incendiary) round can penetrate
an inch of armour plate at 1,000 yards.
from Arsenal of Democracy, Tom Gervasi, Grove Press, 1977, p 222
One inch = 25.4 mm
Does anyone else have information on armour penetration capability of .50 cal. AP rounds?
Thanks for the link Panzerknacker.
I guess the 19 mm for 1939-46 includes armour piercing rounds.
Great feedback guys.
guess the 19 mm for 1939-46 includes armour piercing rounds
.
It does it was the maximum armor penetration of that round.
Mustang
only from the point of “good-looking” I like many us warplanes. the B-26 marauder or B-26 invader are very nicely shaped planes from any angle. I also like the mustang, it sure was one of the most modern and effective piston-engine fighters and in addition to this a beautiful machine.
thr p 47 is a too fat assed bird (I do not like the design so much), but much feared for its strafing-activities and for being a fast fighter (could dive as fast or even faster as late versions of the 109).
jens
I would have to say the B-29 Superfortress and the P-51 Mustangs would have to be my favs.
My favorite American fighter is the P-51D Mustang.
The Mustang had legs.
Unparalled range that enabled the USAAF to successfully bomb targets deep into enemy territory. More of a strategic rather than tactical edge. However, what good is a fighter if it isn’t there to battle with the enemy?
The Mustang excelled in it’s arena of combat.
Superior high altitude performance. This is the place where Mustangs were needed to protect the “Heavies”.
Outstanding visibility from the cockpit.
The axiom lose sight, lose fight comes to mind.
Last but not least I have personally flown a Mustang!
http://www.wargamer.com/articles/P-51d_flight/
My favorite US bomber is the B-24 Liberator. Jimmy Stewart flew 20 combat missions (usually the tough ones) in them, was a B-24 Squadron Commander (703rd), Group (453rd) and Wing (2nd) Operations Officer and at the end of the war, Wing Commander (2nd Combat Bomb Wing) rising to the rank of Colonel.
There are many great US/UK/USSR and warplanes. However, the Mustang is my favorite US fighter. The Hellcat is a close second on the US side.
i would say b 17 and p51
I like the P-40 TOMAHAWK. Not the newest, fastest, or most graceful, just a lot of heart and soul…from what I’ve hear. B-25…Doolittle raid.
The P-51 for my favorite fighter an the B-29 for the bomber
reasons:
The P-51 its speed and agility were unsurpassed and it had enough range to give our bombers protection all the way to target and back.
the B-29 again it could operate above the celing of all axis fighters and had a massive payload for its day (Jimmy Doolittle loved this bomber)
Cavalry Gunner
B-29 again it could operate above the celing of all axis fighters
From the ww2 aviation site…
Ki-45 Toryu (‘Nick’) twin-engined fighter, succesfully used by 4th & 53rd Sentais against Superfortresses over Japan
A6M7 Model 63 Zero (‘Zeke’) single engined Navy carrier fighter, one of the old hands of the Navy but performed poor at high altitudes, good maneuvrability however.
Ki-61 Hien (‘Tony’) single engined interceptor, most succesful user by far was the famous 244th Sentai under Maj Teruhiko Kobayashi (over 100 kills), although 56th Sentai engaged Superfortresses over Kyushu as well.
Ki-44 Shoki (‘Tojo’) single engined high altitude interceptor, astonishing rate of climb (5,000 m in just over four minutes) and good performance at 10,000 m as well. The 23rd, 47th and 70th Sentai used them in ramming attacks against B-29s to great effect.
Ki-100 Goshikisen single-engined fighter, derived from the Focke Wulf 190 and a very succesful fighter, performance slightly less at altitude but very maneuvrable, fast roll rate, tight turning capabilites.
J2M3 Raiden (‘Jack’) single-engined Navy fighter, I don’t know a lot about these, so all info is especially welcomed. For sure they were the Navy’s most succesful B-29 ‘killer’.
Although they didnt shoot down huge numbers, they could and did operate at the height of the B-29.
p-51 mustang the best no question asked . but i also like the p-47 thunderbold