Best World War II Aircraft?

[evangilder]

Technically, it was more than a basically stretched DC-2, it pretty much was a DC-2. The DC-3 used about 85% of the DC-2 components. The additional 15% new is the main reason for the number change. Plus I thnk they were looking to distinguish the standard size DC-2 with the wide-body passenger liner.

[Glider]

Originally Posted by Elvis

Another interesting question. I wonder how the German trainers compare, too.

On the subject of training procedures, that's been a debate of great conjecture for many years.
Here's all I've really ever heard on the subject.
The Americans used trainers that were easy to fly so as to nurture the trainees into being comfortable with the concept of flying.
As time goes on, the trainee moves onto higher performance aircraft, ultimately leading to the actual front line planes of the day.
The British docterne was to have a plane that was simple to fly, but wasn't neccessarily "easy" to fly. They felt this kept the student alert and educated them quickly in what it took to keep the airplane in the air.
It's my understanding that the British trainee moved straight from the Tiger Moth into a "training version" of whatever aircraft they were to fly into battle.

Which way is better?
I don't think there is a "better" way, just two different ways of achieving the same goal.
It seems to me that the British skipped a couple of steps in their training (or the Americans added a couple?), combining steps into each step.
I've taught, what seems like, a million people in the "rigors" of doing my job (don't ask ) and my opinion is, you show 'em what its all about and let 'em fly.
Either they get it or they don't.

How the axis powers trained their pilots, I don't know. I don't think I've ever seen anything on that.

Elvis

The CW started with the Tiger Moth and then moved on to more advanced aircraft such as the Miles Master, Harvard before going to normally older versions of operational aircraft.

Stirlings were often used as an introduction to the Heavy Bombers later in the war and earlier Wellingtons, Whitleys and Hampdens carried out this task. As I am sure you would expect, Spit II's for an introduction to fighters.
Strangely I haven't heard of Hurricanes being used as an introduction to fighters, they probably did but I haven't picked that up.

[pbfoot]

Originally Posted by Glider

The CW started with the Tiger Moth and then moved on to more advanced aircraft such as the Miles Master, Harvard before going to normally older versions of operational aircraft.

Stirlings were often used as an introduction to the Heavy Bombers later in the war and earlier Wellingtons, Whitleys and Hampdens carried out this task. As I am sure you would expect, Spit II's for an introduction to fighters.
Strangely I haven't heard of Hurricanes being used as an introduction to fighters, they probably did but I haven't picked that up.

They used the Hurricane and P40 over here as an OTU aircraft the following is a link where some old Tiffy pilots recall otu in the Hurricane
Aerial Visuals - Theater Lobby

[Kruska]

Originally Posted by Elvis

How the axis powers trained their pilots, I don't know. I don't think I've ever seen anything on that.
Elvis

Hello Elvis,

Regarding Axis / Luftwaffe Flight Training

Despite the often mentioned opinion that the Luftwaffe’s initial success was based on its “well trained pilots” I see it quite differently.

The entire subject on flight training was never captioned by the Luftwaffe Leadership; one of the main reasons was its neglect regarding the selection and sourcing of “qualified” flight instructors, a thoughtful plan that defined the demand of needed pilots in regards to a developed air force strategy, and the Flight schools themselves.

The only existing fighter flying school was closed down in Spring 36 in order to transfer the personal into frontline squadrons which were supposed to demonstrate Luftwaffe power during the Rhineland occupation. The school was only reactivated in March 1939. The newly formed 2nd fighter school was depleted of its personal in order to fill up the frontline ranks during the Czech crisis.

Due to the massive buildup of the Luftwaffe and the future development of the war the tendency to deplete the flight schools of its valuable instructors was a common practice throughout the entire war.

So it weren’t really well trained pilots from a fresh pilot pool, but rather experienced pilots and flight instructors drawn away from their possibility to create and sustain new well trained pilots, that gave the Luftwaffe an early edge over its even more poorly trained or tactically obsolete enemy air forces. (France had very well trained pilots with an average of 225 flying hours but a miserable tactical layout) still they made the Luftwaffe suffer a 25% loss of its force.

Another big negative factor was the Nazi doctrine that race was predominant above everything; as such the psychological test for air cadets was abolished in 1942 since it would have placed scientific evaluation, mathematical and rational based conclusions above the believe of having morally and racially superior pilots.

Therefore it comes as no surprise that many of the pilots could not cope with the stress factors from 1943 onwards and that many squadron or wing leaders were placed in command without having the necessary psychological qualification.

Besides this the Luftwaffe had more or less no dual control frontline fighters on which the cadets could have collected experience as the US pilots did via its (OTU’s) or the Commonwealth’s (BCATP). Even the Luftwaffe’s Ergaenzungsstaffeln (OTU’s) were pressed into action and thus sustaining again losses and depleting the numbers of flight instructors or half-way trained new pilots.

Regards
Kruska

[Elvis]

Kruska,

Thank you for that informative and well-written overview of Luftwaffe pilot training.
It sounds similar to the Japanese flight training program.
The jist I've always picked up on was that the American flight training "rotation program" was quite innovative for the time, although it boggles my mind that no one ever thought that up sooner, because its such a simple idea.
You'd think that it would've been started around 1915 or '16. But then, that was a different war, too.
...and maybe that's a good thing for us that they didn't incorporate that in their programs.
Who knows how much longer the war could've been stretched out, or how that would've affected the outcome of some the battles.

----------------------------------------

Evangilder,

I think we're both saying the same thing.
Your last post outlined why wrote that the DC-3 was basically a "stretch DC-2".
Good call on the wider body. I'd forgotten about that.




Elvis

[Kruska]

Originally Posted by Elvis

The jist I've always picked up on was that the American flight training "rotation program" was quite innovative for the time, although it boggles my mind that no one ever thought that up sooner, because its such a simple idea.

Elvis

Hello Elvis,

The US where the only wargoing nation that from the very beginning strongly empathized on the flight training of its pilots, and using a training and evaluation program very similar to its unique or typical American approach of mass production techniques. Therefore the US IMO had the best overall pilots during WW2 and maybe until today.

Regards
Kruska

[pbfoot]

Originally Posted by Kruska

Hello Elvis,

The US where the only wargoing nation that from the very beginning strongly empathized on the flight training of its pilots, and using a training and evaluation program very similar to its unique or typical American approach of mass production techniques. Therefore the US IMO had the best overall pilots during WW2 and maybe until today.

Regards
Kruska

I beg to disagree.
In what manner was was US training superior to that of the BCATP?

[Kruska]

Originally Posted by pbfoot

I beg to disagree.
In what manner was was US training superior to that of the BCATP?

Hello pbfoot,

The RAF averaged about 70 flight hours on frontline a/c, in 1942 whilst the US boys spend already 120 - 160 hours at OTU’s by that time. Tedder had forwarded/demanded an upgraded training plan already in 1934, however BCATP got only started after the war began 17.12.1939, it wasn’t till end of 1940 till the installations were ready and as such could only present results at the frontline from 1942 onward. As such it took Britain 8 years (respectivly 3 years) to come up to a level which the USAAF already managed to attain after 1 year.
The loss rate without combat cause was at less than 0.5/1000 flHours for the USAAF during the entire war, and even in 1944 the 8th recorded less than 1.8/1000flHours.
Unfortunately I do not have the RAF figures but maybe you could help me out on this.

Most essential would also be the availability of trainer a/c which was partially a problem for the RAF till 42. Interesting is therefore the ratio of the USAAF orders in regards to % of trainers build to all military a/c.

1939 1940 1941
Sept. Dec. March Juni Sept. Dec. March Juni Sept. Dec.
30% 30% 34% 42% 47% 52% 57% 61% 61% 60%

Below would be the desolate figures of the Luftwaffe

Ratio of trainer a/c to total production 1937-1944

Year: 1937 1938 1939 1940 1941 1942 1943 1944
Source: LW 24,2% ?. 23,3% 18,2% 9,0% 7,0% 9,2% 9,1%
Source: USSBS ? ? 13,4% 12,3% 7,5% 7,5% 8,1% 7,7%

So taking all the above into account and adding the bonus of the USAAF having far better trainers and combat a/c then the RAF the result would certainly be in favor for the US boys.

Sorry but somehow the columns start to get messed up after I paste them.

Regards
Kruska

[pbfoot]

I find that kind of funny since the training sylabus as far as flying instruction has changed little over the years and the training in Canada is still continuing to this day for many NATO countries .
Take a look at the US aces and see how many were trained in Canada.
The fact being most of the initial instuctors in the BCATP were American

[Kruska]

Hello pbfoot,

Sorry but I wouldn’t know very much if not to say nothing about Canada’s pilot training efforts during WW2. However the US pilots had a far higher flying/hours experience in frontline fighters then the RAF; despite common regulations?
As for NATO in Goose Bay, I can ascertain you that the practical flight experience, during training and after being stationed in active squadrons (Combat Ready Status) of present Luftwaffe pilots is nowhere compared to US or RAF Pilots.

During my stay in Oklahoma we took 2-3 hour sessions in C-141 and C-5a flight-simulators at random per day, the allowance for the Luftwaffe at Euro NATO Joint Jet Pilot Training (ENJJPT) in Sheppard AFB, was at most 8h in total.

Only the Waffenlehrerlehrgänge "Tornado" at Holloman AFB which are held 2 x 6 month per year, enable or clear for active frontline duty in crisis areas - such as presently Afghanistan - which certifies not even 12% of all present Luftwaffe fighter units.

Regards
Kruska

[pbfoot]

NATO training is carried out at Moose Jaw , Portage le Prairie and Cold Lake
NFTC
Goose was just lo level training and I must admit the best I saw there was the simulated airfield attacks by the F4's and Tornados of the GAF amazing having 4-8 aircraft coming from all directions at 50'agl at high speed crossing the field at the same time.
Were you in the Goose?

[Kruska]

No I wasn’t in Goose Bay, it is just that some Luftwaffe pilots told me about 2years ago that they felt very inferior to their comrades from the RAF, US and French Air force during "Maple Flag 39" at Cold Lake.

Thanks for the NFTC link. good stuff - worlds best!!!

Regards
Kruska

[Old Wizard]

Originally Posted by Kruska

No I wasn’t in Goose Bay, it is just that some Luftwaffe pilots told me about 2years ago that they felt very inferior to their comrades from the RAF, US and French Air force during "Maple Flag 39" at Cold Lake.
Regards
Kruska

That reminds me of a total shock my son and I had while fishing Touchwood Lake [it's in the Cold Lake / Lac La Biche area]. It was early morning on a calm sunny day when 2 F-15s flew over at about 500ft and scared the crap out of us. Then we noticed an AWACS flying high overhead and saw several other fighters pass over the lake during the day...but not right over top of us like the first 2.

[Kruska]

Hello Old Wizard,

could that be the reason why we (Luftwaffe) decided to shift low level flight manouvers to Canada?

Regards
Kruska

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

The Luftwaffe also uses a base in Arizona as well.