Talk:Heinkel He 51

Image

Think Image:000608082.jpg/Image:Bulgarian Heinkel He 51.jpg might be a Heinkel He 51. /Lokal_Profil 01:33, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes - that appears to be a He51. Good spot.Nigel Ish (talk) 11:44, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Switched arount the images so that the "normal" plane is in the infobox and the seaplane is later in the article. /Lokal_Profil 00:57, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Also the german article seems to have some images. /Lokal_Profil 01:34, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Aircraft of comparable role, configuration, and era

I took out the Brewster Buffalo, and put in the Boeing P-12 and also the Boeing P-26 Peashooter instead.

My reasoning is that both were Army models primarily, and produced in numbers. The P-12 is the closest aircraft to the He 51 in Configuration, but the P-26 is a little closer in terms of Era. (The USA was a leader in aircraft throughout this era.) However, the specifications and armament of the P-26 are very similar to the He 51, plus the fixed gear and open cockpit make it an advanced bi-plane in everything but the double wing!

What I wanted to bring up here is that the US Navy had a number of candidates that would fit in nicely here, like the Grumman F2F and Grumman F3F, both 1930's biplanes with the innovation of retractable gear – but they were Navy – and the numbers produced are nothing like those for the P-12.

BUT ANOTHER CONSIDERATION IS THAT THE HE 51 USED A LIQUID COOLED ENGINE!!

The US Army Air Corps purchased in the 1930's the P-6 Hawk, a late 1920's biplane that saw constant engine up-grades, and the Berliner-Joyce P-16. Both of these used liquid cooled aircraft engines, like the He 51. However, they did not see the production numbers like the radial engine aircraft of the era.

So, when we look at comparable aircraft, should we focus on the engine Type (liquid cooled, or Radial air cooled?), or the Specifications (biplane, speed, guns, bombs), or the Era (date, war usage, etc.)?

Bit of a conundrum, I know. This was a period of rapid development and constant adjustment in aircraft.

I must say, after looking at this for a while, perhaps stressing the fact that it was a liquid cooled engine might be one of the most important characteristics, and the one most worth comparing. But if so, it must be noted somewhere as the prime criteria for selection.

Alternately, we could make TWO sections here, one for comparable aircraft with liquid cooled engines, and the other for comparable aircraft with radial air cooled engines?

James 202.44.215.80 (talk) 08:16, 2 November 2020 (UTC)