Underrated aircraft of WW2

superunknown · 05-25-2005, 09:24 PM

What do you think is the most underrated aircraft of WW2, you are not allowed to include prototypes or aircraft that never saw operational service.

I propose first of all the Vultee Vengeance, outdated? maybe, but in the CBI theatre these dive bombers of the RAF provided close air support to the ground troops on a daily basis, in arguably the worst theatre of the war. They have been wrongly slated in the past with myths such as "They couldn't operate without fighter escort", this is utter crap, most Vengeance missions flew outside of the escort fighters range, and operated more often than not without any fighter cover at all. The pilots that flew them praised their concrete construction, and the ground troops praised their ability to drop their ordanance right on target, often within 50 metres of their own troops without casualties. This aircraft may have been considered as useless elsewhere in the world, but in Burma it was a life saver. A forgotten aircraft, with the forgotten air force, supporting the forgotten army.

plan_D · 05-25-2005, 10:32 PM

They weren't the Forgotten Army. You can't forget something you never knew...

GT · 05-26-2005, 01:23 AM

Update.

plan_D · 05-26-2005, 05:51 AM

The Hawk-75 (Mohawk) was under-rated! After recently reading about it (yesterday) I've realised it was a great aircraft and highly under-rated. It was better than the Spitfire Mk.I at everything but speed, armament and dive.

8 Mohawk IVs were the only defence for North-East India until 1943 saw the introduction of many new aircraft including Spitfire Mk.Vs and VIIIs.

The FAF also had them in service but I don't know how it went with them. I imagine well, since the FAF were an amazing air force.
Information on the Hawk-75 in FAF service would be...quite good...

superunknown · 05-26-2005, 05:54 AM

That took some skill, parking the aircraft int he doorway like that!

He would have made it too, if it wasn't for those pesky wings....

Yes, the B-26 Marauder, given a bad rap just because someone removed the ballast and didn't fit the guns. Another sound aircraft that is underrated.
The Mohawk would have to be in this category too, it was never developed to it's full potential, instead they slapped it around until it became the P-40...oh dear.

plan_D · 05-26-2005, 06:02 AM

The Vickers Vildebeest was a piece of crap but it never gets any mention despite the fact it provided valuble service as a ground attack aircraft in Burma until 1942.

mosquitoman · 05-26-2005, 06:09 AM

Couldn't agree more with those suggestions, another one that should be added to that list is the Whitley- the first aircraft to drop agents into Poland, the first aircraft to sink a U-Boat using ASV (although after the war they found out it was just badly damaged) and one of the first aircraft to bomb Germany. Not a bad acheivement for the slab-sided monster

plan_D · 05-26-2005, 06:17 AM

Oh yeah, and welcome to the site superunknown. You kind of melted in and no one seems to have noticed.

superunknown · 05-26-2005, 06:27 AM

Thank you very much,

nudge nudge, say no more.

plan_D · 05-26-2005, 06:29 AM

Most spotter planes and recce planes are under-rated because they're not sexy fighters or mean bombers...

No, but seriously, the Lysander, L-5 and Fi-156 were all more than capable recce aircraft but you don't hear anyone saying, "The Lysander was good"...except lanc and that's only 'cos the Lysander is British.

Your wife, is she a goer...eh...does she go? Eh..

GT · 05-26-2005, 09:46 AM

Update.

FLYBOYJ · 05-26-2005, 10:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by superunknown

Yes, the B-26 Marauder, given a bad rap just because someone removed the ballast and didn't fit the guns. Another sound aircraft that is underrated.

The Mohawk would have to be in this category too, it was never developed to it's full potential, instead they slapped it around until it became the P-40...oh dear.

Quote:

Originally Posted by plan_D

The Hawk-75 (Mohawk) was under-rated! After recently reading about it (yesterday) I've realised it was a great aircraft and highly under-rated. It was better than the Spitfire Mk.I at everything but speed, armament and dive.

8 Mohawk IVs were the only defence for North-East India until 1943 saw the introduction of many new aircraft including Spitfire Mk.Vs and VIIIs.

The FAF also had them in service but I don't know how it went with them. I imagine well, since the FAF were an amazing air force.
Information on the Hawk-75 in FAF service would be...quite good...

I couldn't agree more. The B-26 is a perfect example of the lack of understanding in flying multi-engine aircraft (2 engines) that was exhibited by the USAAF. Engine out at take off, feathering procedures, engine out landings, etc. needed to be done to perfection and a pilot with 200 hours in not going to cut it, especially in combat with that type of aircraft!

As far as the Mohawk is concerned, one was recently restored at the Chino museum. The test pilot, Steve Hinton stated in an article about the aircraft that it flew well, was very maneuverable and was just slightly slower than the P-40. Hinton has flown dozens of restored warbirds and will probably give you the best modern-day perspective of WW2 combat aircraft performance.

cheddar cheese · 05-26-2005, 10:11 AM

Underrated? Lets see...The Re-2000