Remove the fantasy - Ar-234

[Butcher]

"The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence." Meaning that the burden of proof is opposite of your implication. This is exactly why Lyric has done his in depth research.

where's the proof?

[WWhiskey]

How often did a plane leave it's manufacturer with it's guns installed or not installed? if they were not installed when they got to the field but the mounts were built for them at the factory does this affect our longstanding policy of no field mods?
I am not going to argue either way, I want the front firing guns we have proof of, but just like the jug ammo load, what was used in the field was not necessarily what the factory limits allowed
 and if a pony could carry 1000lbs bombs and rockets when it left the factory but didn't in the field for one reason or another, who are we to say it is incorrect while trying to adhere to the policy of factory spec'd correct?
 how many B-25's were factory built with 75 MM guns in them?
  It is a game,, I love that it brings out the best in some of us, and I have learned more about WW2 airplanes than I ever thought I would because of it,
 Great research BTW on every ones side as best I can tell, but I would argue that first hand knowledge, from the pilots that  flew them would be way more valuable than books written  50 to 60 years later!  just my opinion
 someone once told me P-38's never escorted B-29's, so I spent the better part of a month searching, to no avail ,,, till suddenly, there it was,, they did !  I posted it long ago, and it was a blast researching it, I couldn't find it now without probably another 2 weeks of looking,    my point is, lack of proof, doesn't mean it didn't happen, proof means it did,  
 
Another way of looking at this would be to understand the difference between the 234's that did carry them (C's are all we have proof of so far?) and the B that we have no proof of having carried them,, tho we know they were capable,, they had the mounts,
 how different is the C model that did to the B model we have now?  I read that some C's had 4 engines maybe? but some had 2?  do we need to re name our 234 a C? and if so,, when will we be getting the twin 20MM alongside the pilot?

 and lastly,, I am not worth a darn with the rear gun of the 234, If it goes, so be it,, if it stays great as well,, I have just been watching this  for days and wanted to chime in   I'll shut up now!

[Chalenge]

You are engaging in the argument of ambiguity through an "appeal in ignorance." You know that Mustangs flew in Korea with the same loadout that you want removed from WWII era aircraft while stating a lack of evidence that it actually flew that way during WWII. Feigning ignorance isnt helping your argument because the simplicity of the situation outweighs the complexity of the possibility not existing until Korea.

You need to come to understand the principle of Occam's Razor (perhaps) to understand that the burden of proof is on you. It is your extended list of assumptions that places doubt on the scenario. The principle being that the hypothesis with the fewest assumptions is therefore the simplest explanation.

"It could and did at some point therefore it did earlier as well" versus "It could and did at some point and there are no pictures of it doing so earlier therefore it didnt earlier."

Besides... I have seen pictures of that loadout in photographs from WWII so you just dont own enough books. RE: easiest explanation.

[lyric1]

Another way of looking at this would be to understand the difference between the 234's that did carry them (C's are all we have proof of so far?) and the B that we have no proof of having carried them,, tho we know they were capable,, they had the mounts,
 how different is the C model that did to the B model we have now?  I read that some C's had 4 engines maybe? but some had 2?  do we need to re name our 234 a C? and if so,, when will we be getting the twin 20MM alongside the pilot?

 

C model is a very different aircraft all had 4 engines none had 2.
C model had forward firing guns as standard.
C model fuselage was not shaped the same as the B model.
C model never flew combat.

http://www.warbirdphotographs.com/LCBW10/Ar234C3-16f-s.jpg

[Butcher]

Besides... I have seen pictures of that loadout in photographs from WWII so you just dont own enough books. RE: easiest explanation.

Quite possible could be true, however I am looking for source of information that's factual, not just "hear say"

And for your information, most of the books/AAR's/documents I have go back far as 1940s, I don't recall a single book written past 1975, nice attempt to troll however.

Edit I just found it, only 500lb bombs were used with 4 rockets per wing, not 6. Only when drop tanks were used (75gal) then 6 rockets were permitted, or 10x HVAR rockets and no drop tanks, Source? USAF.
I even have photos to go along with it.

[FLS]

"The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence." Meaning that the burden of proof is opposite of your implication. This is exactly why Lyric has done his in depth research.

You have it backwards. It actually means that no evidence of guns on the 234b doesn't mean they didn't have guns. It just means you don't have the evidence. It's not implication it's logic.  The funny thing is Lyric posted the evidence, you all just missed it.

[Karnak]

I support either the reduction of the P-51D's loadout or the increase of the Mosquito Mk VI's.  I can find photos of the Mossie with four rockets and a droptank under each wing.  Drop tanks and the 500lb underwing bombs used the same mounting point.


 

[Butcher]

I support either the reduction of the P-51D's loadout or the increase of the Mosquito Mk VI's.  I can find photos of the Mossie with four rockets and a droptank under each wing.  Drop tanks and the 500lb underwing bombs used the same mounting point.


 

The Typhoon was upgraded recently with its correct armaments, I would argue both P51 and mossy need to be upgraded as other aircraft that need it.

[titanic3]

  Chuwie and vDallas will not be happy. 

[WWhiskey]

http://www.economicexpert.com/a/Arado:Ar:234.html


Ar-234B-2 configured as bomber
Description
Role   Bomber
Crew   One, pilot
First Flight   
Manufacturer   Arado
Dimensions
Length   12.6 m   41 ft 6 in
Wingspan   14.1 m   46 ft 4 in
Height   4.3 m   14 ft 1 in
Wing area   26.4 m²   284 ft²
Weights
Empty   5,200 kg   11,464 lb
Loaded   
Maximum takeoff   9,850 kg   21,715 lb
Powerplant
Engines   2x Junkers Jumo 004B-1 turbojets
Thrust   18 kN   4091 lb
Performance
Maximum speed   742 km/h   461 mph
Combat range   800 km   500 miles
Service ceiling   10,000 m   32,810 ft
Rate of climb   762 m/min   2,500 ft/min
Wing loading   kg/m²   lb/ft²
Thrust/Weight   
Avionics
Avionics   
Armament
Guns   2x 20 mm MG 151

rearward firing, not always fitted
Bombs   2x 500 kg (1,100 lb)

or 1x 1,000 kg (2,200 lb) or 1x 1,400 kg (3,180 lb)




2 Ar 234B

The RLM had already seen the promise of the design and in July had asked Arado to supply two prototypes of a bomber version as the Ar 234B. Since the aircraft was very slender and entirely filled with fuel tanks, there was no room for a bomb bay and the warload had to be carried on external racks. The added weight and drag reduced the speed to "catchable" so a set of 20 mm guns was added to a tail stinger for defence. Since the pilot had no view to the rear they had to be aimed through a periscope. The system was generally considered useless and many pilots had the guns removed.





 also the 234c-8 was proposed with 2 engines tho I don't know if any were ever built it
  

[Lusche]

http://www.economicexpert.com/a/Arado:Ar:234.html
[...]

That's basically just a copy of the Wikipedia article. 

[WWhiskey]

That's basically just a copy of the Wikipedia article.  

   Arado Ar 234 Blitz3    Arado Ar 234B-21,2,3,4    Arado Ar 234C3
Type    Bomber3, Reconnaissance3    Bomber1,2,4, Reconnaissance1    
Crew    13    11,2,4    
Engine (Type)    2: Junkers Jumo 004B turbojets3    2: BMW 003A-1 turbojets2
2: Junkers Jumo 004 B4
2: Junkers Jumo 004B-1 Orkan turbojets1    4: BMW 003A turbojets3
Thrust - BMW         1,764 lb2
7.85 kN2    1,760 lb3
7.9 kN3
Thrust - Junkers    1,980 lb3
8.9 kN3    1,975 lb1, 1,980 lb4
8.8 kN1    
Dimensions              
Span    46 3.5"3
14.11 m3    46'1, 46' 3"4, 46' 3.5"2
14.44 m1,2    
Length    41' 5.5"3
12.64 m3    41'1, 41' 5.5"2, 41' 6"4
12.64 m1,2    
Height    14' 1.25"3
4.3 m3    14'1, 14' 1"4, 14' 1.5"2
4.29 m1,2    
Wing area         284.17 ft2 2, 294 ft2 1
27.3 m2 1,2    
Weight              
Empty         11,440 lb1, 11,464 lb2,3
5,200 kg2,3, 5,300 kg1    
Normal load         18,540 lb3, 18,541 lb4
8,410 kg3    
Loaded         21,560 lb1, 21,6052, 21,715 lb3
9,800 kg1,2, 9,850 kg3    
Performance              
Speed @ 19,685' /
6,000 m         461 mph2,4
742 kph2    
Speed @ 20,000' /
6,000 m         460 mph1
742 kph1    
Speed @ 26,250' /
8,000 m    460 mph3
740 kph3         
Speed @ 32,810' /
10,000 m    435 mph3
700 kph3         
Climb to 19,685' /
6,000 m    12.8 minutes3    12.8 minutes2    
Service ceiling    32,810'3
10,000 m3    32,810'2, 33,000'1,4
10,000 m1,2    
Range    1,013 miles3
1,630 km3    1,010 miles1, 1,013 miles2, 1,103 miles4
1,630 km1,2    
Range with max bomb load    684 miles3
1,100 km3         
Armament              
Rear firing    2: 20 mm3    2: 20 mm MG 1514    
Bombs    3,307 lb3
1,500 kg3    3,300 lb4, 4,400 lb1, 4,409 lb2
1,995 kg1, 2,000 kg2    

Sources:

1    Aircraft of WWII, General Editor: Jim Winchester, 2004
 2   Fighting Aircraft of World War II, Editor: Karen Leverington, 1995
 3   Aircraft of WWII, Stewart Wilson, 1998
  4  World War II Airplanes Volume 1, Enzo Angelucci, Paolo Matricardi, 1976
http://www.wwiivehicles.com/germany/aircraft/bomber/arado-ar-234.asp


            Arado Ar 234 Blitz3              Arado Ar 234B-2

Armament              
Rear firing      2: 20 mm3                  2: 20 mm MG 1514    


of the 270 or so built how many were accounted for? and is there proof that not one had a gun in it?

[hlbly]

Prove it. There is no evidence that is true. None.

LOL that won't matter to him .

[hlbly]

Most of them didn't Butcher. Now prove that none of them did. You might also ask yourself why the AH version has them.

Prove a negative ?

[hlbly]

I'm not going to argue with uninformed idiots.

Personal attacks ? FLS are you ever right ? If you ever had an original thought it died of loneliness .