Best World War II Aircraft?

[Soren]

Well nearly every twin engined a/c of the war could be used as a bomber (Th Mosquito for example), but not nearly to the extent of a/c like the Ju-290, I mean the DC-3 had ZERO defensive armament.

The DC-3 was designed as a transport & passenger a/c and performed best in these roles, as a bomber it would've been miserable. Slow, none to poor defensiev armament, very light bomb load etc etc, add to that the operating alt which would've been very low as a bomber because of the much added weight of the bombs & armament.

[Soren]

Originally Posted by DerAdlerIstGelandet

I do not think you can say that the Ju 290 was able to be used in more roles. Please list all the roles that the Ju 290 could perform and all the roles that the C-47 could perform. Lets put this one to the test. Do not take me wrong, I am sure the 290 could perform more roles. It was a bigger aircraft and capable of performing more roles. I just don't think you give the C-47 eneogh credit.

Ok this confuses me abit, what is your position exactly ?

I mean you say "I do not think you can say that the Ju 290 was able to be used in more roles" and then you say "I am sure the 290 could perform more roles. It was a bigger aircraft and capable of performing more roles."

I agree that it was capable of performing more roles more effectively than the DC-3, no doubt about it. The Ju-290 was used as a long range heavy bomber, heavy transport, large passenger a/c & recon plane. The DC-3 was used as transport & passenger a/c during the war, that's it. After the war it was used in numerous other roles.

The Soviets experimented with some DC-3 designs, but none proved successful besides the original.

[kool kitty89]

Originally Posted by Soren

Well nearly every twin engined a/c of the war could be used as a bomber (The Mosquito for example), but not nearly to the extent of a/c like the Ju-290

Huh? The Mosquito was designed as a bomber.

And the Li-2 could be armmed with a 12.7 mm UBK dorsal turret and 3 flexible 7.62 mm ShKAS. Up to 4x 250 kg bombs could be carried underwing on racks. (for short range missions, half that for longer range)

And as to its operational use (in addition to Juha's previous statement)

Lisunov Li-2: the Soviet DC-3, reviewed by Scott Van Aken

The aircraft was also modified when it entered Russian Air Force service to act as a bomber and night attack aircraft, so bomb bays were incorporated along with external bomb racks and an upper fuselage turret for defense. This turret was also incorporated into the cargo/passenger versions as the PS-84/Li-2 had to operate in a hostile environment, often without fighter cover.
===
Also included are numerous war-time exploits of these planes as they often had to carry out bombing raids or cargo missions without fighter escort. PS-84/Li-2s were the main equipment of several bomber regiments as there was little in the way of a pure cargo requirement until much later in the war.

Originally Posted by FLYBOYJ

The B-18 actually competed against the B-17 and although eventually found inferior, it was widely used as a trainer, same with the B-23. Both aircraft were used in ASW operations and I think the B-18 was one of the first aircraft to carry MAD equipment in the ASW role.

The B-23 was also the first operational US bomber with a glazed tail turret.

[Soren]

The B-23 isn't the DC-3, they are quite different.

As for the Russian use of the Li-2 as a bomber, it was no success, and 4x 250 kg bombs, heck a Fw-190 can carry more! By comparison the Ju-290 could carry up to 8 tons of bombs. And the defensive armament of the Li-2 was like I said, miserable.

The DC-3 simply couldn't be used as an effective bomber, so that really can't be counted as one of its capabilities. You are seriously overrating the a/c.

The Ju-290 could by comparison operate highly effectively in all of its roles, esp. as a heavy bomber and transport a/c.

[Soren]

Now if being the best is all about being simple & cheap, then I think the Ju-52 deserves a mention. This a/c was also used well after the war for a variety of roles. But I wouldn't consider it the best a/c of the war or ever to fly at all.

[Soren]

Btw, what makes the DC-3 a much better a/c than the DC-4 for example ?

[Soren]

IMO the best WW2 a/c is the a/c which could substantially outdo each of it's main contempories in its field while being cheap & simple to make. But then comes the question, was there such an a/c ?

The DC-3 was an important a/c, but it wasn't the best at anything. It was cheap, simple & very dependable and could carry out a number of roles well, that's it.

[pbfoot]

Originally Posted by Soren

Now if being the best is all about being simple & cheap, then I think the Ju-52 deserves a mention. This a/c was also used well after the war for a variety of roles. But I wouldn't consider it the best a/c of the war or ever to fly at all.

That depends where you live , I'm sure aviation meant alot in Europe but it was nowhere near as important as it was in North America or Australia . The Junkers aircraft were well respected in the aviation communities

[FLYBOYJ]

Originally Posted by Soren

Btw, what makes the DC-3 a much better a/c than the DC-4 for example ?

Simplicity. The DC-4 brought in a new era when airliners weren't operated on dirt and grass strips anymore. In the post war years the DC-3 was looked upon like the 737 or the A319/320 is today. It was perfect for short/medium routes and in the end was more cost effective to operate.

Originally Posted by Soren

. It was cheap, simple & very dependable and could carry out a number of roles well, that's it.

And that's what made it "the best."

[Juha]

Soren
Quote:” As for the Russian use of the Li-2 as a bomber, it was no success”

Again you have ready opinion on a/c on which you clearly only just heard. I’m not claiming that Li-2 was a good bomber, but at least it was used attacks against for ex. many Axis held cities.

Quote:” The Ju-290 could by comparison operate highly effectively in all of its roles, esp. as a heavy bomber and transport a/c.”

Can You enlighten us against what targets Ju 290s were used as highly effective heavy bomber? And I don't mean its use as a patrol bomber against shipping.

Allied didn’t have later in the war need to use converted/modified transports as patrol bombers because they could use versions (PB4Y-1 and Liberator GRs) of a good long range bomber, B-24, as patrol bomber before a dedicated long-range patrol bomber version, PB4Y-2 Privateer, was ready.

[Soren]

I've known about the Li-2 forever pretty much Juha, but I never considered it a bomber, and it wasn't either.

As for the Ju-290, the LW's emphazis on fighters and more defensive kind of war Germany was fighting at the time of the Ju-290's introduction meant it didn't get the chance to prove its worth in the heavy bomber role like the Allied bomber designs had plenty of opportunity to. But that doesn't take away the fact that it was excellent for the role, being well armed, fast & being able to carry a very large loadout.

[Juha]

Soren
Why then
Quote:” Was the DC-3 for example capable of acting as a bomber ? No”

if you knew that it was used by several regular bomber regiments on hundreds of bombing sorties over long period of time.

Juha

[Glider]

Originally Posted by Soren

Well FLYBOYJ I guess we have to agree to disagree on this.

The DC-3 didn't evolve any more than most other a/c, and I doubt it was anymore easily adapted than most other a/c either. The thing that made the DC-3 a success was mainly that it was reliable & cheap, something which often seems to win out over superior performance & technology.

It could well be argued that because the DC3 only basically needed more powerful engines to deal with the increased payloads, and instruments to deal with developments over the 70+ (and counting) years of operational use. Proves that it was the best aircraft of the war, it was right from the start and the nearest thing to perfect for its role you will find.
Its also worth remembering that it has always, and often still does tend to operate in the most difficult environments in the world from the Arctic to Deserts. Many designs have been mooted as being the replacement DC3 and none of them have come close.

The nearest WW2 plane that I can think of in these terms, minimum change and long life would be the Harvard Trainer. Again it was right for the job.

Re the Ju290 even if the aircraft had been put into post war production (and its a good point, if it was so good, then why wasn't it) does anyone seriously see it as still being in use?

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Originally Posted by Soren

Ok this confuses me abit, what is your position exactly ?

I mean you say "I do not think you can say that the Ju 290 was able to be used in more roles" and then you say "I am sure the 290 could perform more roles. It was a bigger aircraft and capable of performing more roles."

I agree that it was capable of performing more roles more effectively than the DC-3, no doubt about it. The Ju-290 was used as a long range heavy bomber, heavy transport, large passenger a/c & recon plane. The DC-3 was used as transport & passenger a/c during the war, that's it. After the war it was used in numerous other roles.

The Soviets experimented with some DC-3 designs, but none proved successful besides the original.

Yeah my post was worded a bit wrong.

What I am saying is this. You can not say that the DC-3 could not be used as a bomber. It was capable of it and was used as a bomber.

In the end the Ju 290 was a more capable aircraft. No denying it. They are two different kinds of aircraft though and to compare them is wrong in my opinion.

I am sure that in the end we would find that both were capable of performing the same duties. Just performing them in different capacities.

Transport
Cargo
Bomber
Observation/Recon

And due to longevitiy the DC-3 was able to be used as:

Attack
Electronic Warfare

Originally Posted by Soren

I've known about the Li-2 forever pretty much Juha, but I never considered it a bomber, and it wasn't either.

As for the Ju-290, the LW's emphazis on fighters and more defensive kind of war Germany was fighting at the time of the Ju-290's introduction meant it didn't get the chance to prove its worth in the heavy bomber role like the Allied bomber designs had plenty of opportunity to. But that doesn't take away the fact that it was excellent for the role, being well armed, fast & being able to carry a very large loadout.

Since it did not prove its worth, it can not be in contention, nor can we consider it a heavy bomber.

Same logic as you give for the DC-3...

[drgondog]

Originally Posted by Soren

I've known about the Li-2 forever pretty much Juha, but I never considered it a bomber, and it wasn't either.

As for the Ju-290, the LW's emphazis on fighters and more defensive kind of war Germany was fighting at the time of the Ju-290's introduction meant it didn't get the chance to prove its worth in the heavy bomber role like the Allied bomber designs had plenty of opportunity to. But that doesn't take away the fact that it was excellent for the role, being well armed, fast & being able to carry a very large loadout.

Soren - your points are valid.. one of the reasons I don't do "best" debates very often is there is no framework to make judgements.

Having said that I think the DC-3/C-47 is one of the 'greatest' aircraft ever designed and bulit simply because it is providing value around the world 64 years after the last one was built.. but we can't say that for the Mustang, the Me 262, the Ju 290, the Spit, the Me 109 the B-29.

Kinda like the last one still flying gets some votes for "best".

IF it is one of the 'greatest of all time', it certainly is a candidate for best of WWII. If it is not a candidate for greatest of all time what would you nominate to place above the Gooneybird?