MLU FORUM  

Go Back   MLU FORUM > GENERAL WW2 TOPICS > WW2 Military History & Equipment

Notices

 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #3  
Old 25-02-23, 11:20
Jakko Westerbeke Jakko Westerbeke is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2020
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 341
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hanno Spoelstra View Post
All kidding aside, I think the B24 is underrated as a bomber. It was more capable and versatile than the B17 which may look “better”. Probably because of media attention in “Memphis Belle”?
It also doesn’t look as slick, which probably explains why the media liked the B-17 better, and IIRC, the B-24 had a reputation for not being as easy to fly.

Sort of aside: some years ago, I went to the war museum in Ramskapelle, Belgium. On driving up, the first thing I saw was the whole forward fuselage of a B-24 on the lawn outside … That turned out to be a 1:1 scale plywood replica made for a film, as I recall, but still, it was rather impressive.
Reply With Quote
 


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
How to misunderstand a knock on the door. maple_leaf_eh The Sergeants' Mess 1 18-07-15 20:43
Knock me down with a feather, M43 under my nose Robin Craig Post-war Military Vehicles 15 10-02-14 01:51


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 11:24.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Maple Leaf Up, 2003-2016