Related Video Collections
All Comments
Best World War 2 airplanes, Allied and Axis? Here's my picks:
Allies..
Supermarine Spitfire(RAF)
P-47 Thunderbolt(USAAF)
B-24 Liberator(USAAF)
Avro Lancaster(RAF)
B-17 Flying Fortress(USAAF)
P-38 Lightning
Corsair(USN)
F6F Hellcat(USN)
Wellington(RAF)
Short Stirling (RAF)
P-40 Warhawk(Claire Chennault's Flying Tigers, USAAF)
B-25 Mitchell(USAAF, also the bombers used in Doolitlle's raid on Tokyo, they were launched from carriers!)
C-47 Skytrain
B-29 Superfortress(most famous being the "Enola Gay" used to drop 'The Bomb' on Hiroshima)
Axis:
Mitsubishi Zero-sen
Fw-190
Me-109
Stuka dive-bomber(what a terrifying sound that must have been to hear!)
Me-262(first fighter jet, most early jet fighters came from plans taken from the Germans!)
He-111
(I don't know what else the Axis powers used as bombers and transports)
Are there any you would add to the list? | | you forgot the following planes, Mosquito(RAF),P-51(USAAF),JU-52 main german transport,IL-2m stormovich flying tank,YAK-3,JU-87 stuka,JU-88 german medium bomber,FW-200 condor german long range patrol bomber,B-26 marauder(USAAF),Dauntless(USN) Avenger(USN),HALIFAX(RAF), C-54(USAAF) Constellation(USAAF) ,PBY-5 catalina(USN) He-115 german float plane bomber, DO-17 german bomber, bf-110c German fighter,Me-410 german, P-61 (USAAF) P-63 (USAAF), METEOR(RAF) , TEMPEST (RAF), TYPHOON(RAF), KATE (IJN) VAL(IJN),JUDY(IJN),JILL(IJN),GRACE(IJN)G… (IJAAF) A-20 havoc (USAAF) ,SM-79 (Italian bomber), G-55 (italian fighter), swordfish (RN) Albacore (RN), Helldiver (USN) , He-163 KOMET 1st rocket fighter, Salamander german wooden jet fighter, Me 323 gigante 6 engined transport, sunderland (RAF) WHIRLWIND (RAF) ,well I hope this broadens your horizons some to new planes you may not now about. | How would you feel if you found the following about the Atom Bomb were true? For a few years now I have been looking into any information i can find on this story, since it involves a very sad story burried within.
1944, the US is trying to decide, if it is needed, how to transport an atomic bomb to Japan for most effect.
Airplanes at the moment were ruled out for weight problems.
The best solution at the time was considered a cargo ship.
Port Chicago, California: Black sailors worked the worst jobs in the navy, and were the ammunition handlers in the port. they were kept in horrible living conditions and treated more like slaves then naval personel.
cant remember the exact date)
one morning: A explosion rips through Port Chicago destroying a number of ships and most of the docks area.
After cleanup is done, 50 blacks refuse to return to work and are charged with Mutiny. Most would not live to see Bill Clinton pardon them.
Facts:
1. the commander of Port Chicago started out as a team member at Los Alamos (the place in new mexico where A bombs were tested), he was made commander of Port Chicago soon before that morning. After the explosion, he was given a commision. Word is his last assignment was part of the crew of the Enola Gay that dropped the first bomb on Japan.
2. A naval photographer was across the bay and caught the explosion and destruction on film.
3. Two odd containers were on the docks during that time, and both had very heavy security measures.The morning of the explosion- no secutiry.
4. A blinding white flash and mushroom cloud were reported from survivors of Port Chicago. (very nuclear sounding).
5. the rumble from the explosion (and the white light) were spotted and felt as far as 167 miles away at a mountain side post.
Theory put by some researchers: An atomic bomb was in the cargo holds but did not go off intentionaly. Instead the explosion from the ammunition exploding in a miss handling operation, cooked off the explosive charges around the warhead causing a nuclear reaction. However this part does not explain why the place was fully operational within days and to this day is a naval air station.
my question though is this.
what would you think if it was proven that a Atomic bomb, to test the effects on a port was done in the US?
| It makes total sense. First, the testing was done in a remote area of the desert, then on a really remote Pacific atoll. So it makes total sense that they would then test a large bomb at a munitions depot in north central California only 20 miles away from Oakland and Alameda and another 10 to San Francisco.
SInce someone got happy with the "thumbs down", I think I should clarify. I was being ironic. I was pointing out that it makes no sense at all to test a nuclear bomb at an active munitions depot, and even less sense if that depot is near a massively populated area. To enforce my argument, I pointed out that all the other testing was done in extremely remote locations. |
|