Hawker Typhoon & Tempest -1 reply

  • 1
  • 2

Please wait...

Tanked

Dread pwns me!

50 XP

21st February 2005

0 Uploads

451 Posts

0 Threads

#1 13 years ago

I was reading a little info about these aircraft and about how they were good ground attack planes. What strikes me most is how solidly built the appear; they look like flying tanks to me. Does anyone have any general thoughts on these aircraft and their impact on the European war?




[130pz.]Kading

I take what n0e says way too seriously

50 XP

9th April 2005

0 Uploads

2,794 Posts

0 Threads

#2 13 years ago

the typhoon was ment to replace the obsolete hurricane. it was a failure as a fighter due to its low wing surface area. however, it was fantastic as a ground attacker because of its steady flight pattern. the tempest was designed as an update of the typhoon. it was far more successfull due to its bigger wings. it was the best propeller driven fighter that the brits had at the end of the war.




Guest

I didn't make it!

0 XP

 
#3 13 years ago

i thourt the spitfire was the best?




Fuzzy Bunny

Luke, I am your mother.

50 XP

2nd May 2005

0 Uploads

6,274 Posts

0 Threads

#4 13 years ago

They're not _that_ sturdy...

:-)




Dr.Fritz

Promiscuous Girl

50 XP

6th July 2005

0 Uploads

5,842 Posts

0 Threads

#5 13 years ago

I know that both the Typhoon and Tempest were very fast. Trust me. Combat Flight Sim 3. Hell yeah!




MrFancypants Forum Admin

The Bad

217,014 XP

7th December 2003

0 Uploads

20,003 Posts

6 Threads

#6 13 years ago
ANZACSASi thourt the spitfire was the best?

I think the Spitfire XVI was better at higher altitudes, but the Tempest was better armed and faster at low altitudes. The Tempest was also used to destroy the V1 because it was the only plane fast enough to intercept them.




Wooly_Bully

I love my ball

50 XP

31st January 2005

0 Uploads

2,538 Posts

0 Threads

#7 13 years ago

The Gloster Meteor was used to deal with V1s aswell.




cc.

2 excited 4 shark week

50 XP

25th May 2004

0 Uploads

3,076 Posts

0 Threads

#8 13 years ago

I was always partial to the spitfire. I think one of those compare shows had the spitfire vs the BF109. It came out ontop.

Nice avatar btw wooly bully




LordKhaine

I sing the body electric...

50 XP

5th October 2003

0 Uploads

612 Posts

0 Threads

#9 13 years ago
MrFancypantsI think the Spitfire XVI was better at higher altitudes, but the Tempest was better armed and faster at low altitudes. The Tempest was also used to destroy the V1 because it was the only plane fast enough to intercept them.

They also used modified P-51s and spitfire mk XIV's to chase down V1's. And the Spitfire was a better high altitude fighter, but down low the Tempest was quicker, tougher, and packed a very mean punch. If the spitfire compares to the BF-109, the Tempest compares to the FW-190.




Gauntlet

Dead rather than Red!

50 XP

25th April 2004

0 Uploads

4,346 Posts

0 Threads

#10 13 years ago
Campin' CarlI was always partial to the spitfire. I think one of those compare shows had the spitfire vs the BF109. It came out ontop.

I think those comparison shows are realy sucky...




  • 1
  • 2