Tomahawk wrote:
You can state all the facts all you want, but at the end of the day, the a/c that performs, wins. Never mind its place in history, it's a "winner". The XB-70 set many speed records: WINNER! Most people don't even have any knowledge that there WAS a Russo-Finnish War, and it's too late to teach them about it now. On top of being a "loser", the F2A doesn't have any aesthetic appeal, either. It's a butt-ugly design from a mismanaged company. They have nothing to get excited about. There won't be a stampede toward it at Oshkosh, unless there's a P-51D parked behind it! It's a plane no one cares about, not then, and certainly not now. People vote with their feet.
Of twenty F2A-3's defending the island during the Battle of Midway, , the U.S.M.C lost thirteen pilots and aircraft, in its only combat with U.S. forces.
They did manage to account for three Vals, a Zero, and a Kate.
Spitfires and Hurricanes had constant-speed metal props in time for the Battle of Britain (again, winners), 1 1/2 yrs before Pearl Harbor.
The Buffalo went into production and also went into combat, clearly it was a winner.
The XB-70 didn't go into production. Clearly it failed during testing. I won't call it a loser though.
A Buffalo would be a huge attraction if it made an appearance at Oshkosh. Bigger than any P-51D or other exotic aircraft which exists in greater numbers.