Worst aircraft of WW2? - Page 35 - Aircraft of World War II

Twitch · 02-06-2006, 11:41 AM

In my opinion only, I'd LOVE to be up against a Buffalo in a Zero!

plan_D · 02-06-2006, 11:58 AM

Not a single one, but seven Spitfire Vs were lost to Buffalos of the Finnish Air Force.

FLYBOYJ · 02-06-2006, 02:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Twitch

In my opinion only, I'd LOVE to be up against a Buffalo in a Zero!

As shown in some earlier posts, if the Buffalo kept the fight up at high speeds it might have a chance!!!

plan_D · 02-08-2006, 04:11 AM

Y'know what's funny, Joe ... ? You put the Buffalo up for the vote of worst plane of World War II on Pg.8 of this thread! See ... you must have learnt something while on this site.

FLYBOYJ · 02-08-2006, 07:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by plan_D

Y'know what's funny, Joe ... ? You put the Buffalo up for the vote of worst plane of World War II on Pg.8 of this thread! See ... you must have learnt something while on this site.

Yep! Seen the light!!!

DerAdlerIstGelandet · 02-10-2006, 09:37 PM

Funny how that works huh?

FLYBOYJ · 02-10-2006, 09:54 PM

YEP!!

V-1710 · 02-19-2006, 02:28 AM

Speaking of Brewster's, how about the Buccaneer?

JonJGoldberg · 03-02-2006, 01:44 AM

...I've been thinking and thinking. So many come to mind, & so many are French, or Polish... but I'm leaning towards the Polish aircraft in whole. I think the 'Hawk' was the best aircraft in the French 'fighter' inventory; as for the Poles there are those 'PZLs'... Those poor souls in 11s, & 24s... OK there were a few possible exceptions PZL P-50, maybe, Dewoitine D.520, maybe... Why maybe? They were 'dead end' designs. They may have been barley the equivalent of their fielded adversaries, but they both seem not to offer any design growth.

GregP · 03-06-2006, 12:01 AM

I vote for the L.W.S. Zubr. It was designed with underpowered engines, and then proper engines were installed, all without beefing up the airframe. As a result, the Zubr had an operational life of ONE mission! After that, teh Polish Air Force used it as an airfield decoy!

Just think, maybe it could have been flown somewhere by unknowing crewsadn then was found to unairworthy, stranding the crews wherever they happend to be at the time! Maybe that's why the Polish air force was overrun so easily!

blue swede · 03-07-2006, 12:23 PM

I have to agree with an earlier posting, that the worst aircraft would be the Me163 Komet. Maybe it belongs in a new aircraft grouping, "Desperation Aircraft". The Japanese would have some aircraft to contribute.

cheddar cheese · 03-07-2006, 03:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GregP

I vote for the L.W.S. Zubr. It was designed with underpowered engines, and then proper engines were installed, all without beefing up the airframe. As a result, the Zubr had an operational life of ONE mission! After that, teh Polish Air Force used it as an airfield decoy!

Just think, maybe it could have been flown somewhere by unknowing crewsadn then was found to unairworthy, stranding the crews wherever they happend to be at the time! Maybe that's why the Polish air force was overrun so easily!

I think with this suggestion we have a viable compititor to the Ba-88...more stats and info?

MikeNZ · 03-07-2006, 09:21 PM

I've just come to this board & have read this entire thread - fascinating!!

Can I suggest some rules?

1/ The a/c must have seen active service, not been immediately relegated to training/target/transport duties
2/ the a/c must not have had a development that went on to be successful (eg Manchester -> Lancaster, Me-210 (surprised no-one mentioned it) -->Me-410)
3/ Obsolescence is not sufficient reason (so Battle & TBD are out)

Seems the top contender is the Breda 88 hands down.

I'd like to suggest another contender - I don't think it is in the same class as the Breda, but the Short Stirling was not a sparkling success!

the 1st of the British 4-engined heavies it was designed with a short wingspan to fit into existing hangers, and carried all the shortcomings of that decision with it for its like. It had limited ceiling, limited load carrying capacity, and although manouvreable for a 4-engined bomber this wasn't enough to help it much!

Other marginal WW2 designs include the P43 Lancer - predecessor of the P-47 it served in small numbers in China to no great note, as did the P-66 Vanguard - rejected by the RAF although apparently liked by USAAF pilots who flew the type while it was defending the West Coast of the USA in 1941-1942!

the lancaster kicks ass · 03-08-2006, 03:31 AM

i think everyone's trying to go for aircraft that saw active service, but i believe obsolesance is a reason fer it being bad, just because it's out of date that doesn't stop it being an appauling aircraft! and the stirling wasn't nearly as bad as some of the other aircraft suggested, interestingly though in the same way they restricted her wingspan to less than 100ft in order to get her into the hangars, she was also known as the packing crate bomber because some her her fusilage sections had to be able to fit into a standard RAF aircraft packing crate........

cheddar cheese · 03-08-2006, 03:24 PM

I agree with Mike, Obsolescence alone is not a good enough reason...the CR.2 was obsolete, but had WW2 been 4 or 5 years earlier it would have been one of the very best fighters...(Even though it was designed in 1938...forget I said that

)

There is bad by the standards of the day and then there is just bad. The Fairey Battle was outdated, and very poor for use in World War 2...The Ba-88 was just a horrifically poor aircraft, and is bad at any time.

02-06-2006, 11:41 AM	#511
Twitch Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: City of the Angels California Posts: 809	In my opinion only, I'd LOVE to be up against a Buffalo in a Zero! __________________

02-06-2006, 11:58 AM	#512
plan_D Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 11,978	Not a single one, but seven Spitfire Vs were lost to Buffalos of the Finnish Air Force. __________________ "When you go home tomorrow, don't expect anyone to know what you have been through. Even if they did know, most people probably wouldn't care anyway. Some of you may get the medals you deserve, many more of you will not. But remember this, all of you are now members of the front-line club, and that is the most exclusive club in the world." - Lt. Col. Matthew Maer CO 1st Battalion, the Princess of Wale's Royal Regiment. Camp Abu Naji, Oct. 2004 To those in that club.

02-08-2006, 04:11 AM	#514
plan_D Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 11,978	Y'know what's funny, Joe ... ? You put the Buffalo up for the vote of worst plane of World War II on Pg.8 of this thread! See ... you must have learnt something while on this site. __________________ "When you go home tomorrow, don't expect anyone to know what you have been through. Even if they did know, most people probably wouldn't care anyway. Some of you may get the medals you deserve, many more of you will not. But remember this, all of you are now members of the front-line club, and that is the most exclusive club in the world." - Lt. Col. Matthew Maer CO 1st Battalion, the Princess of Wale's Royal Regiment. Camp Abu Naji, Oct. 2004 To those in that club.

02-10-2006, 09:37 PM	#516
DerAdlerIstGelandet Der Crewchief Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Ansbach, Germany Posts: 33,150	Funny how that works huh? __________________ fly boy:"isnt that the first jet bomber becasue i have flown one in a flight sim before and i know how it handles"[/I]

02-10-2006, 09:54 PM	#517
FLYBOYJ IP/Mech THE GREAT GAZOO Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Colorado, USA Posts: 16,049	YEP!! __________________ "IF ITS RED OR DUSTY, DON'T TOUCH IT"

02-19-2006, 02:28 AM	#518
V-1710 Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2005 Posts: 163	Speaking of Brewster's, how about the Buccaneer?

03-06-2006, 12:01 AM	#520
GregP Banned Join Date: Jul 2003 Posts: 110	I vote for the L.W.S. Zubr. It was designed with underpowered engines, and then proper engines were installed, all without beefing up the airframe. As a result, the Zubr had an operational life of ONE mission! After that, teh Polish Air Force used it as an airfield decoy! Just think, maybe it could have been flown somewhere by unknowing crewsadn then was found to unairworthy, stranding the crews wherever they happend to be at the time! Maybe that's why the Polish air force was overrun so easily!

03-07-2006, 12:23 PM	#521
blue swede Junior Member Join Date: Nov 2005 Posts: 28	I have to agree with an earlier posting, that the worst aircraft would be the Me163 Komet. Maybe it belongs in a new aircraft grouping, "Desperation Aircraft". The Japanese would have some aircraft to contribute.

03-07-2006, 09:21 PM	#523
MikeNZ Junior Member Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 2	Some rules then? I've just come to this board & have read this entire thread - fascinating!! Can I suggest some rules? 1/ The a/c must have seen active service, not been immediately relegated to training/target/transport duties 2/ the a/c must not have had a development that went on to be successful (eg Manchester -> Lancaster, Me-210 (surprised no-one mentioned it) -->Me-410) 3/ Obsolescence is not sufficient reason (so Battle & TBD are out) Seems the top contender is the Breda 88 hands down. I'd like to suggest another contender - I don't think it is in the same class as the Breda, but the Short Stirling was not a sparkling success! the 1st of the British 4-engined heavies it was designed with a short wingspan to fit into existing hangers, and carried all the shortcomings of that decision with it for its like. It had limited ceiling, limited load carrying capacity, and although manouvreable for a 4-engined bomber this wasn't enough to help it much! Other marginal WW2 designs include the P43 Lancer - predecessor of the P-47 it served in small numbers in China to no great note, as did the P-66 Vanguard - rejected by the RAF although apparently liked by USAAF pilots who flew the type while it was defending the West Coast of the USA in 1941-1942!

03-08-2006, 03:31 AM	#524
the lancaster kicks ass Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2003 Posts: 19,945	i think everyone's trying to go for aircraft that saw active service, but i believe obsolesance is a reason fer it being bad, just because it's out of date that doesn't stop it being an appauling aircraft! and the stirling wasn't nearly as bad as some of the other aircraft suggested, interestingly though in the same way they restricted her wingspan to less than 100ft in order to get her into the hangars, she was also known as the packing crate bomber because some her her fusilage sections had to be able to fit into a standard RAF aircraft packing crate........ __________________ "Reminds me of the time I sank the Tirpitz" comments a Spitfire pilot, "One pass of course, old boy."

03-08-2006, 03:24 PM	#525
cheddar cheese Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: WSM, England Posts: 20,387	I agree with Mike, Obsolescence alone is not a good enough reason...the CR.2 was obsolete, but had WW2 been 4 or 5 years earlier it would have been one of the very best fighters...(Even though it was designed in 1938...forget I said that ) There is bad by the standards of the day and then there is just bad. The Fairey Battle was outdated, and very poor for use in World War 2...The Ba-88 was just a horrifically poor aircraft, and is bad at any time.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode