Why do German planes look so good?

Because you're a wehraboo

File: Do 217 E-4.jpg (33KB, 478x228px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 478x228px

>>33162797
You don't have to be a wehraboo to accept the truth.

File: He 111 H-6.jpg (54KB, 700x320px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 700x320px

Best bombers.

>>33162773
we had this thread yesterday

>>33162797
wehraboo>japonaboo>allyboo>ameriboo

File: Ju 88 A-13.jpg (883KB, 2000x1148px) Image search: [Google]

883KB, 2000x1148px

>>33163000
This to the max.

File: pe-8 (1).jpg (70KB, 1148x640px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 1148x640px

>>33163000
Slavboo coming through, dirty lesserboo peasants need not apply.

See, they're aesthetic, but the Germans somehow were unable to improve beyond fuel injection and small dosages of power adders so they lost.

Meanwhile, America may not be super complex in their engine design, but when you're talking about compression ratios below 10.1, yeah, there's no replacement for displacement.

>>33163000
Concur.

>>33162980
Why did the Nazis never manage to produce a real heavy bomber the likes of the B-17?

>>33165159
Systems development in a large aircraft like a World War 2 heavy bomber is an art in and of itself. Planes get harder to build as they get bigger, and a large bomber wasn't a high strategic priority.

File: 177a-3r1[1].jpg (32KB, 778x346px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 778x346px

>>33165159

They did.

It was, however, a giant crapper due to the retarded doctrine Udet wanted to shoehorn it into.

>>33165230

They did eventually come out with a proper strategic bomber in the form of the HE 274, but the prototypes, which were being developed in France, were abandoned due to allied advances.

>>33165159
because Luftwaffe doctrine emphasized dive-bombing, so all designers had to shoehorn that capability into everything. This requirement is fine for small stuff like Ju87s for supporting a blitzkrieg but its impossible for a large strategic bomber to divebomb

better question is why did they not produce many 4 engine bombers?

>>33165280

The 177 is a much better comparison, a four-engined bomber of similar dimensions, armament and payload. I would argue that the 177 was the more advanced plane, but such technology came at the cost of having the nickname "Luftwaffe lighter" for a good reason.

>>33165159
The main reason for heavy bombers was range.

The Allies needed to be able to bomb Germany all the way from the UK, but Germany only had to reach from the coast of France to the UK to bomb the Allies.

>>33163000
>Japanaboo
I honestly have no response to this

File: 1409329960168_wps_26_Action_Station_images_of_.jpg (175KB, 962x732px) Image search: [Google]

175KB, 962x732px

>>33162980
>Best bombers.

I'm pretty sure that bongoloids score that thing.

>>33162797
>>33162909
>>33163000
>wheraboo
So basically a neo-pol family friendly way of saying Naziboo

>>33162773
>Why do German planes look so good?

Because you've never seen a Spitfire.

>>33162773
Because the bad guys have to have cool looking shit, it makes them more sinister

>Inb4 /pol/tards whine pathetically about me calling literal nazis bad guys

Alternatively, German industries have always had good design skills, and the aesthetic was something that was paid attention to for psycological intimidation and propaganda purposes. And it didn't hurt that the utter retards running the show pissed away all of their R&D money on wunderwaffe.

>>33163000
I guess it's somewhat boring to be an Ameriboo, since we're the clear winners in any sort of contest and are better at literally anything than everyone.

You can continue being an edgy Nazi, it makes it interesting when you stand up for the "little guys"

>>33163000
>Japonboo

Are you literally retarded?
Actually, don't answer that, you think Nazis are cool, that's something of a foregone conclusion.

>>33166590
Wehraboos like Germany/ the Wehrmacht without implicit support for nazi ideology or atrocities.

Typical Wehraboo statement: "The Wehrmacht did nothing wrong and only fought for their country, the SS were the bad ones."

Naziboos like Nazi Germany while politically and ideologically aligning themselves with its stances and actions.

Typical Naziboo statement: "Hitler was right. Gas the kikes, race war now."

>>33163064
Way to completely undermine your own argument by posting the most ugly, aesthetically worthless piece of garbage of the entire war. Holy fucking shit, I think my eyes are burning. I hope whoever designed that thing died painfully.

>>33162773

I mean, their camo patterns looked pretty damn cool, but I don't think Germany as a whole had better looking planes than any other country. Every country had good looking planes, and also ugly ones, but that comes down to your personal taste anyways. Some people would call a certain plane ugly, but then ugliness as a result of utility has its own aesthetic

USA had P-51D, B-25, B-17, P-38 which most people agree are beautiful, but some love the PBY Catalina. UK had the Spitfire and Mosquito, but people would go back and forth on whether or not the Lancaster was beautiful or ugly.

Germany had the Bf-109 and the FW-190, both of which I think can't touch American fighters in terms of clean smooth aesthetic, but their ruggedness combined with their paint schemes gives them an aesthetic of their own. I think a lot of German plane designs looked pretty dated (more jagged angles and older-style canopies and cockpit glass) but they had their own sort of look, combined with the nostalgia of viewing Nazi Germany like we do, it's a "team" kind of thing. Like in vidya games where different teams/races/whatever have distinct designs

I'd like to see somebody spend the time to render every noteworthy plane of the war in the exact same, plain camo, let's say silver, and then compare them side to side and see how good each one looks. I think certain models which were known to have certain paint plays a lot into our perception of them

File: 130221984382.jpg (63KB, 553x204px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 553x204px

>>33162773
So graceful, so flammable.

>>33166880
Thanks for the clarification

>>33165024
The allies always had the technological upper hand. Building V2s didn't do jack shit for Germany. Making some invention that wasn't impossible space magic, that could be mass produced, like a proximity fuse, or an advanced bomb sight, or a naval fire control computer, was what actually won the war.

The Nazis were so fucking stupid. It's actually kind of hilarious how they overlooked such simple advancements in favor of answering questions that nobody asked. And when all was said and done, all of the stuff that they invented we just stole when we were finished bulldozing them, so it was pointless anyway.

>>33165409
Also, in typical german fashion they tried to find advanced solutions that were simply too complicated. All of the advantages of having four engines but only two propellers were mitigated by the complexity of the system.

>>33166956
Virtually none of those things would have had much utility for a nation with no strategic bombing force or surface fleet to speak of.

File: 0c1613aff72c05cef9cb841f4e2c8dd1.jpg (45KB, 980x705px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 980x705px

Actual aesthetics coming through
water cooled faggot need not apply
>1943
>not mounting 8 .50 call machine guns on your fighters
Come the fuck on

>>33167062
>non-bubble p-47
nausea

>>33166843

Go watch a WW2 era U.S flight senpai film, then watch a German one.

You'll immediately see why they lost.

Much as I like Willi's designs, and some of the lovely little Henschel biplanes, the Germans were doomed from the start.

They just could not produce quality, in volume.

If one ever gets the chance to work on WW2 era German, British etc material, I highly suggest taking the offer. Dealing with the material firsthand is in itself very educational.

>>33167096

Not sure why that changed to "sempai"..

"Flight Senpai", AKA "first hop" film is what I intended.

>>33167031
There were others besides those examples.

>no strategic bombing force or surface fleet

Well there's your problem then. At least one of those things they could have invested resources in instead of, say, barely-fuctional proto-cruise missiles.

Also, proximity fuses were useful as fuck no matter which nation you were.

>>33167062

I've wrenched on 2800's.

Most of that bird is fairing for the turbosupercharger ducting to feed the bitch. (the engine).

The 2800 is a stupid tough mill worthy of respect, but the work done on the P-38 and the GE turbo feeding that V1710 Allison contributed more to win the war.

It led to the jet age, far more than some apply to the 003 BMW or 004 Jumo, from the metallurgical side.

>>33167096
Where can I find these "US Flight Senpai Films"?

>baka P-51-chan! I-it's not like I want you to penetrate my airspace or anything!

>>33167259

I laughed too.

Like old Tenement Funster's "Cowboys and Indians" rename.

Aesthetics don't win war. Dem cucked aryan bois had to learn that the hard way.

File: P-51.jpg (2MB, 3600x2400px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3600x2400px

>>33167062
How cute, a fucking barrel with wings. Too bad it can't fly 1,500+ miles at 440mph.

>tfw you're the best looking fighter of all time and everyone knows it.

File: Homare and 2800.png (2MB, 1216x563px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1216x563px

>>33167223

I swung by the Pima Air and Space museum when I went to the Grand Canyon. They have both a 2800 and a Nakajima Homare on display, and the contrast between the two engines was just night and day.

To an extent, the 2800 almost feels overbuilt, like the BAR.

>>33167223
No doubt the Allison was more advanced performance wise, I just love the tough, massive double wasp radial. Something about it gives me the good feels

File: P-47N.jpg (159KB, 1600x1025px) Image search: [Google]

159KB, 1600x1025px

>>33167353

It could fly even farther and faster.

>>33167353

Nah.

File: p47n15_1920x1080_logo_com_e4486459b14b0b46ce12c880d1f02624.jpg (261KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

261KB, 1920x1080px

>>33167458
P47N = Sexual Tyrannosaurus

>>33167223
What do you do that affords you the opportunity to work on original war birds?

>>33167458
Lol the P-51H will kick the shit out of the P-47N any day of the week.

>>33168007
well it better be, because the P-47N is the counterpart to the P-51D. The counterpart to P-51H is P-47M, and that's a much fairer matchup.

File: do335-112.jpg (140KB, 634x307px) Image search: [Google]

140KB, 634x307px

hey guys what's going on in this thread

>>33165159
I think a lot of it comes down to doctrine.

If you're fighting wars that last less than 6 months what use is really a heavy/strategic bomber? Better to go all in on dive bombers that can support your advance.

File: Reggiane_Re.2005_Sagittario.jpg (80KB, 760x589px) Image search: [Google]

80KB, 760x589px

Sbagliato!

"Never exceed speed: 980 km/h (609 mph)"
>980 km/h (609 mph)

>>33165024
These were all supercharged engines though. Lower compression -> less detonation tendencies -> higher limit manifold pressure (more boost) -> POWAH

File: Bundesarchiv_Bild_146-1995-042-37,_Schwerer_Bomber_Messerschmitt_Me_264_V1.jpg (14KB, 800x472px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 800x472px

>>33165159
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amerika_Bomber