The 109's didn't have additional fuel lines until E7 and you are correct about the quality. The first tanks they used were made of plywood, prone to leaking and also had a suspected tendency to self ignite. Alot of pilots refused to carry droptanks all together at the early stages of the war because of that.

The USAAF's were made of paper and all tanks on any airplane leak quite bit.

Its normal, in fact you have to be careful as some airplanes will go a step farther and siphon right out the vent tubes if your not careful.

Interesting, Do you have a source on this?

If the fueler did not ground the airplane properly then any aircraft tank can ignite when fueled.

My sauce

I was not 100% correct when stating that the plywood tanks were used in BoB. They were used and developed before BoB and they had a tendency to "unglue" themselves, causing terrible leaks. They did develop a metal variant for the E-7 but the drag penalty showed to be quite critical, especially for an aircraft designed as a "clean fighter" such as the 109.

http://www.virtualpilots.fi/en/featu...to-misc007.jpg

That is a website that lists no references.

Here are some of our 300 Liter Drop tanks:

http://www.white1foundation.org/parts/droptank.jpg

http://www.white1foundation.org/parts/shop1.jpg

Think about it. It is very easy to test the integrity of a tank or if a glue will hold up to fuel. It is done all the time in fact by home builders in the US. Are the Germans just extraordinarily stupid as a race or is the author of your website not very familiar with the details of real airplanes?

Simply put, your source makes some pretty hard to swallow claims without referencing a single source.

Here is a Henschel 123 with a Drop Tank in Spain...

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_KezhQ6waZT...600-h/dfgt.jpg

Here is more info on the Allied paper drop tanks....

http://home.earthlink.net/~charlesfelton/id19.html

Well if you should find these claims hard to swallow, Crummp, that is pretty much your problem. So instead of posting USAF and RAF solutions to the droptanks(which has very little to do with the Luftwaffe versions BTW), you could always prove me wrong instead of acting like a wounded pig.

I simply point out that your proof is "somebody wrote it on the internet" and you think I am somehow wounded?

:rolleyes:

The correct response is to find a credible source.

No, when you challenge someone upon any matter YOUR correct response would be to counter the info in an orderly fashion using facts, not just going on and on about other solutions that doesn't relate. Otherwise you pretty much come out as a whiner.

Prove me wrong and I'll stand corrected, nemas problemas.:)

What?

You made the claim the Germans couldn't build a drop tank that worked. I asked for your source and you gave out a gaming site that does not reference any sources either.

In fact, it not only makes unsubstantiated claims but erroneously tries to link the issues with the Ta-154 laminates.

The Ta-154 laminates occurred because of the harmonics of the aeroelasticity properties of the wing. Germany did not have the large scale high velocity wind tunnels that would have caught this issue in development. In fact, nobody had them in the 1940's.

The epoxy used was too strong in the Ta-154 for the application and broke down the structure of the supporting wood. The epoxy was changed to a reduced strength formula with more flexibility and this issue was solved.

Your article sounds stupid when it tries to link chemical breakdown of the glue due to fuel and the Ta-154 development.

To test adhesive resistance to chemical compounds simply involves the very difficult process of dropping a hunk of dried glue you think is suitable for your application into a jar of the chemical compound and letting it set. You pull it out on occasion to check to see if the hunk of glue is still solid....

You think maybe the Germans were smart enough to use the industry standard of dropping a chunk of dried glue into a jar of gasoline and watching it for weeks?

I find your theories hard to swallow, Crumpp. Got any source on that?

I got the report from Focke Wulf on microfiche reel. We are restoring a FW-190 so the Ta-154 stuff is of passing interest. We do have the only Revi-16B for the Schräge Musik complete with calibration tool set know to still exist. We donated it to the Smithsonian.

AFAIK, the a usable quantity of the substitute was not available and the Ta-154 was canceled by Focke Wulf. IIRC, only ~8 Ta-154's were ever built.

You can order the reels here:

Just write them and tell them the specific subject you want. Reels are $30.

http://www.nasm.si.edu/research/arch...s/captured.cfm

It is the original documentation from the company. The Focke Wulf collection is the largest of the Axis Captured Documents and we access it frequently in our restorations.

Your straw man aside....the discussion is about the claim drop tanks were suspected of exploding....

What person who has first hand knowledge uttered the words or what report investigates the incidents of German drop tanks being "suspected"??