LordLetto

Bf-109Z "Zwilling", The German F-82 Using the BF-109

i'm still for it. with how insanely powerful of an anti-everything fighter the F-82E is with it being machine gun jesus with its 14x M3i'm still for it. with how insanely powerful of an anti-everything fighter the F-82E is with it being machine gun jesus with its 14x M3s, the axis deserves to have a comparable fighter. and with 4 MK 108s, 1 MK 103, and still able to pack bombs, the BF 109Z-1 is a powerhouse.

 

also seeing as it was built in 1943, it predates the F-82 but i'm just digressing.

  • Upvote 1
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A German F-82? 

 

Based on the arguably best Bf-109?

 

Sure, why not? 

 

All that extra wing area might make it a better turner too.

 

Just compared it’s wing loading to the F-82 and it’s a LOT lower, so this thing would be really, really maneuverable in both vertical and horizontal planes. Possibly better than the SO.8000.

Edited by MH4UAstragon
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, MH4UAstragon said:

A German F-82? 

 

Based on the arguably best Bf-109?

 

Sure, why not? 

 

All that extra wing area might make it a better turner too.

 

Just compared it’s wing loading to the F-82 and it’s a LOT lower, so this thing would be really, really maneuverable in both vertical and horizontal planes. Possibly better than the SO.8000.

Don't forget, it can also be armed with up to 5 30mm Mk. 108s, so it will be an extremely dangerous fighter,

medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/25/2015 at 1:01 PM, SUBW00FER said:

I thought this plane never flew...where is the data coming from?

 

Edit http://forum.warthunder.com/index.php?/topic/234805-add-the-zwilling/

 

Some one else wanted this to be added and a lot of people disagreed with it because it was a paper plane that never flew. Gaijin has to make up a fake FM for the 109z that may or may not be correct. There are so many better german fighters that could be added. Paper planes only should be added to countries that is lacking planes. Thats why japan got the r2y2s. Germany has plenty of planes and this is not an issue. With that said, The Zwilling is not needed in war thunder. 

 

Neither were the Do-335 and Ho-229 needed. Also the BF 109 Z existed.
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/5/2017 at 6:18 AM, Admiral_Aruon said:

i'm still for it. with how insanely powerful of an anti-everything fighter the F-82E is with it being machine gun jesus with its 14x M3i'm still for it. with how insanely powerful of an anti-everything fighter the F-82E is with it being machine gun jesus with its 14x M3s, the axis deserves to have a comparable fighter. and with 4 MK 108s, 1 MK 103, and still able to pack bombs, the BF 109Z-1 is a powerhouse.

 

also seeing as it was built in 1943, it predates the F-82 but i'm just digressing.

It inspired the F-82(I think).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Foxtrot_X said:

It inspired the F-82(I think).

 

no. though it is noted as being similar by the F-82 wiki page. the F-82 was intended as a Very Long-Range (VLR) escort fighter protect B-29s as they underwent 2000+ (3200km) mile bombing journeys without the need for refueling.

medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/5/2017 at 6:18 AM, Admiral_Aruon said:

also seeing as it was built in 1943, it predates the F-82 but i'm just digressing.

it was the inspiration for the f82

Just now, Foxtrot_X said:

it was the inspiration for the f82

sorry did not see previous comment

 

On 2/3/2018 at 2:12 AM, Admiral_Aruon said:

 

 the F-82 was intended as a Very Long-Range (VLR) escort fighter protect B-29s as they underwent 2000+ (3200km) mile bombing journeys without the need for refueling.

I know that. I'm not that dumb.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Foxtrot_X said:

it was the inspiration for the f82

 

lets conveniently ignore the fact that the f82's program started before the us even managed to have a steady amount of ground troops in europe thus making the idea that the bf 109z inspired the f82 a flat out conspiracy theory conceived only by some of the most delusional wehraboos

 

at least its slightly harder to disprove than the idiotic idea that the horten flying wings inspired northrop

Edited by Nope
  • Upvote 1
medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Nope said:

 

...thus making the idea that the bf 109z inspired the f82 a flat out conspiracy theory conceived only by some of the most delusional wehraboos

Just now, Foxtrot_X said:
13 hours ago, Nope said:

 

...thus making the idea that the bf 109z inspired the f82 a flat out conspiracy theory conceived only by some of the most delusional wehraboos

Ouch. I don't appreciate being trash-talked by someone who clearly has never heard of grammar. 

Yeah. I can play your game too buddy. Also, if I can find the video that I got the information from I'll show it to you. If not, you can say you're right.

On 11/3/2017 at 8:44 AM, kornek21 said:

 

it did NOT fly.

Yes. It[He-111Z]. Did. >:(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/25/2015 at 1:01 PM, SUBW00FER said:

I thought this plane never flew...where is the data coming from?

 

Edit http://forum.warthunder.com/index.php?/topic/234805-add-the-zwilling/

 

Some one else wanted this to be added and a lot of people disagreed with it because it was a paper plane that never flew. Gaijin has to make up a fake FM for the 109z that may or may not be correct. There are so many better german fighters that could be added. Paper planes only should be added to countries that is lacking planes. Thats why japan got the r2y2s. Germany has plenty of planes and this is not an issue. With that said, The Zwilling is not needed in war thunder. 

 

First of all, the term luft42 plane is preferable for German aircraft and blueprint plane for non-German aircraft.

 

fTlS3k3rfJgPvoKfQ_9u34_Eshr4dkmQ0FtsokC1                   uiwksUzNcnBxRBIjnSFFWLxVx2nDLmTF5u_kHBlM

This is a paper plane!                                                      This is a luft46 plane, NOT a paper plane!!!!

 

Secondly the BF 109 Z was built and it shouldn't be too hard to get specifications for this plane. Changing the characteristics of the BF 109 f probably would suffice. There are even sources that give a pretty good estimation of what the flight characteristics would be.

 

Finally if the Zilling has a place in World of Warplanes and a few other World War II airplane games, it has a place in War Thunder.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Foxtrot_X said:

 

 

I keep seeing people saying things were built; i don't see the proof. Also "Paper" plane just is a catch-all for aircraft that never reached prototype stage; cause you know what blueprints are made of right :O (We could also call them Prussian Blue Planes; since historically that was the dye used for blueprints)

And your source even states that everything found on the Bf-109z is contradictary; that several were destroyed in air raids etc.

So basically there is nothing solid here; except some performance figures that were apperently estimates (Which really does not bode well)

 

Until more evidence is found this is still pure paper so -1

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, IOC_000 said:

I keep seeing people saying things were built; i don't see the proof. Also "Paper" plane just is a catch-all for aircraft that never reached prototype stage; cause you know what blueprints are made of right :O (We could also call them Prussian Blue Planes; since historically that was the dye used for blueprints)

And your source even states that everything found on the Bf-109z is contradictary; that several were destroyed in air raids etc.

So basically there is nothing solid here; except some performance figures that were apperently estimates (Which really does not bode well)

 

Until more evidence is found this is still pure paper so -1

 

*Luft46 plane


 fTlS3k3rfJgPvoKfQ_9u34_Eshr4dkmQ0FtsokC1                            uiwksUzNcnBxRBIjnSFFWLxVx2nDLmTF5u_kHBlM
(This is a paper plane!                                                      This is a luft46 plane, NOT a paper plane!!!!)
, and the absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence. You should learn that, and keep an open mind and heart to other people's ideas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Foxtrot_X said:

 

 

Why does "Paper plane" make you so salty? (Like i'm legit curious)

Also Evidence of evidence does indeed not mean it never existed; it still begs for more investigation though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, IOC_000 said:

Also Evidence of evidence does indeed not mean it never existed; it still begs for more investigation though.

*Evidence of absence

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, IOC_000 said:

Why does "Paper plane" make you so salty? (Like i'm legit curious)

The term paper plane is very dismissive to the ingenious and very interesting looking designs that either budget or government stupidity prevented from leaving the drawing board stage. Paper plane is a simple, and usually bland glider that is made from folding. Calling blueprint and Luft46 planes “paper planes” is very dismissive and a bit disgraceful to the actual aircraft.

 

Also, if you're going to include a capital letter at the beginning of your sentence, please include correct punctuation and grammar throughout the sentence. I'm not trying to be mean, but it's a pet peeve of mine when people have part of the sentence follow grammar rules and then the other part not follow it. Just don't use Correct punctuation and grammar at all if it suits you better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Foxtrot_X said:

The term paper plane is very dismissive to the ingenious and very interesting looking designs that either budget or government stupidity prevented from leaving the drawing board stage. Paper plane is a simple, and usually bland glider that is made from folding. Calling blueprint and Luft46 planes “paper planes” is very dismissive and a bit disgraceful to the actual aircraft.

 

Also, if you're going to include a capital letter at the beginning of your sentence, please include correct punctuation and grammar throughout the sentence. I'm not trying to be mean, but it's a pet peeve of mine when people have part of the sentence follow grammar rules and then the other part not follow it. Just don't use Correct punctuation and grammar at all if it suits you better.

I wouldn't say calling them paper planes is dismissive, since it doesn't just mean Luft 46 aircraft. The term can apply for any aircraft that never left the drawing board, though I don't think the term can be accurately applied to aircraft that were at least built as a mock up, like the B-33, or Me-329. Luckily the Bf-109Z is not a paper plane, however it never flew upon completion and there is no photographic evidence of the actual completed prototype which is a shame. It'd be a good fighter to have nonetheless, and should be in game.

Edited by VengefulChipmunk
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, VengefulChipmunk said:

I wouldn't say calling them paper planes is dismissive, since it doesn't just mean Luft 46 aircraft. The term can apply for any aircraft that never left the drawing board,

That's why I said blueprint plane for non-German aircraft. 
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Foxtrot_X said:

Ouch. I don't appreciate being trash-talked by someone who clearly has never heard of grammar. 

Yeah. I can play your game too buddy. Also, if I can find the video that I got the information from I'll show it to you. If not, you can say you're right.

 

grammer is 4 week

 

also that video better have proper evidence that the us managed to get word of a luftwaffe prototype that hasnt even been tested yet without setting foot in europe, thus making access to such information even more difficult considering really strong planes that were actually tested only when the usaac or usn fought said aircraft, captured said aircraft or won the war

 

i mean the 262 was being tested yet the british still didnt want to send meteors out for live combat out of fear that the germans would learn to make proper jet engines despite the luftwaffe already having multiple jet engines, so how would the us even know about the 109z until well after d-day where the ground troops could actually capture key locations and when the idea of a twin fuselage heavy fighter was proposed to the ordnance branch in late 1943

 

lets also ignore how twin fuselage designs flew successfully before the war with some belonging to the british, who were close allies with the usa

 

or maybe the 109z did inspire the f-82 even though the aircraft was already in production before wwii ended

 

its almost as if the f82 is a project developed in parallel with the 109z without either side knowing what the other is doing

medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Speaking of the British, we had a design for a Twin Spitfire, the mock up was destroyed during a Luftwaffe bombing raid and the project was scrapped, though I have yet to find a source as to confirm whether this is true or not.

medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, VengefulChipmunk said:

Speaking of the British, we had a design for a Twin Spitfire, the mock up was destroyed during a Luftwaffe bombing raid and the project was scrapped, though I have yet to find a source as to confirm whether this is true or not.

Really?

Image result for Twin Spitfire

Related image

Related image

Related image

https://www.google.com/search?q=Twin+Spitfire&newwindow=1&rlz=1CALEAI_enUS723US727&tbm=isch&source=iu&ictx=1&fir=qv_5jO1ACKu3mM%3A%2CMq02QTITq1icpM%2C_&usg=__SU3wY50jJuoD13xxt_w1TMf6SU0%3D&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj3t5yD65nZAhVF5YMKHferCzYQ9QEIKDAA&biw=1198&bih=615&safe=active&ssui=on#imgrc=4ioI_wMpnxV36M:

All I found on the subject were a few (obviously photoshopped) images, and a Revell kit, which doesn't say much. No offense. I've actually imagined a Twin SpitfireAdd another of other aircraft fuselages that are Zwilling versions of the original ones and I'd love to see an airplane like that fly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.