Author Topic: durability and ruggedness (Read 1985 times)

Viking · « **Reply #45 on:** June 04, 2007, 12:37:52 PM »

It's too far to sail for such simple pleasures.

Karnak · « **Reply #46 on:** June 04, 2007, 02:55:21 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by TimRas
In reality there were cases where it became unglued in midair, without being hit by enemy fire, especially in the Far East.

You can count the number of times that happened on the fingers of one hand.

I would hardly use that as a basis of its durability.

Tilt · « **Reply #47 on:** June 04, 2007, 03:28:55 PM »

Pliot landed this one

lagger86 · « **Reply #48 on:** June 04, 2007, 05:03:48 PM »

I vote the FM2. I call it "the nimble pig". It shrugs off 50 cals well. In a furball I treat 303 or 50 cal strikes as "turn indicators". I fought CFYA(and lost horribly) one night Hurri mk1 vs FM2....let's just say I presented a target the entire time and he didn't miss much, yet the fights lasted a while. Of course they were 303's, but still I think he put about 2000 of them into that FM2 before I started losing all my parts. F6F's are sturdy as well, but the engine gets shot out by ack quite easily(just my opinion).

TimRas · « **Reply #49 on:** June 07, 2007, 12:38:49 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Karnak
You can count the number of times that happened on the fingers of one hand.

I would hardly use that as a basis of its durability.

Nor would I. (De Havilland did change the casein based glues to formaldehyde glues though). I also would not use "reputation" (or anecdotes) as any basis. You have any data on "The wooden skin did not tear away when hit by cannon rounds like aluminium did" ?

Karnak · « **Reply #50 on:** June 07, 2007, 09:01:31 PM »

Formal test data? No.

MK108 vs Blenheim:

MK108 vs Mosquito PR.Mk XVI (two or more hits):

Further, the structural members in a Mossie are physically larger due to being made of wood, so losing a chunk of a given size leaves a corrispondingly larger amount of material remaining and thus more strength remaining.