Thread: Stability and Control characteristics of the Early Mark Spitfires
View Single Post
  #651  
Old 08-02-2012, 10:35 AM
6S.Manu 6S.Manu is offline
Approved Member
  
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Venice - Italy
Posts: 585
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by NZtyphoon View Post
What this doesn't say is that pilots who have trust and confidence in the handling and capabilities of their aircraft will carry that confidence into battle, which, in itself of tactical value.
Having confidence in the plane is a lot different from confidence in yourself... confidence in the machine is the one who kills you... it's one of the reason people get killed in motor accidents.

Quote:
Originally Posted by NZtyphoon View Post
Secondly, the claim that aerobatic manoeuvres and handiness as a dogfighter are somehow tactically archaic flies in the face of modern fighters such as the Su-27 or F-16 or F-22 which were deliberately designed to be good at aerobatics and be handy in a dogfight, if need be.
That statement it's clearly referred to the WW2, when it's WAS archaic.
__________________

A whole generation of pilots learned to treasure the Spitfire for its delightful response to aerobatic manoeuvres and its handiness as a dogfighter. Iit is odd that they had continued to esteem these qualities over those of other fighters in spite of the fact that they were of only secondary importance tactically.Thus it is doubly ironic that the Spitfire’s reputation would habitually be established by reference to archaic, non-tactical criteria.