Aircraft of World War II - Warbird Forums
 



Go Back   Aircraft of World War II - Warbird Forums > World War II - Aviation > Polls

Polls Polls and discussion on their results.

View Poll Results: Which bomber is most overated in today's popular opinion?
B-17 13 18.06%
B-24 0 0%
B-25 1 1.39%
B-26 0 0%
B-29 9 12.50%
A-26 0 0%
Hudson 2 2.78%
TBF / TBM 0 0%
SBD 2 2.78%
Lancaster 5 6.94%
Mosquito 1 1.39%
Wellington 3 4.17%
Sunderland 4 5.56%
PBY 1 1.39%
Fw 200C 5 6.94%
Ju 88 0 0%
Ar 234 0 0%
Mistel combinations 3 4.17%
G4M Betty 1 1.39%
Ki-67 Peggy 0 0%
P1Y Frances 1 1.39%
D3A Val 0 0%
Swordfish 1 1.39%
SM 79 0 0%
Cant Z 1007 1 1.39%
Il-2 Shturmovik 5 6.94%
Ju-87 Stuka 11 15.28%
other 3 4.17%
Voters: 72. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 07-29-2008, 11:17 AM   #31
Senior Member
 
Juha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Helsinki
Posts: 1,560
Quote: "Portal probably should've replaced him and brought in somebody that was more of a team player or a more adaptive personality."

Timshatz. I agree with that. maybe 5th Group CO, Cochrane?, would have been a good successor.

Juha
Juha is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2008, 01:59 PM   #32
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Phila, Pa
Posts: 3,799
Quote:
Originally Posted by Juha View Post
Timshatz. I agree with that. maybe 5th Group CO, Cochrane?, would have been a good successor.

Juha
Man, that's a very good question. Problem with arm chair generaling is you are limited in what you know about the personalities and situations existing. What little I know is of the little that is written about the subordinate commanders of BC. Harris has plenty written about him, the others have considerable less.

Probably comes down to Bennett vs Cochrane. Neither were nice people (Bomber Command seemed to have more than it's fair share of abrasive personalities). Just from results, I guess I would go with Cochrane. He did a tremendous job with 5 Group. He was a good 15 years older than Bennet and seemed closer to a Leigh-Mallory type in terms of his character.
timshatz is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2008, 03:16 PM   #33
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: niagara falls
Posts: 5,935
Quote:
Originally Posted by timshatz View Post
Man, that's a very good question. Problem with arm chair generaling is you are limited in what you know about the personalities and situations existing. What little I know is of the little that is written about the subordinate commanders of BC. Harris has plenty written about him, the others have considerable less.

Probably comes down to Bennett vs Cochrane. Neither were nice people (Bomber Command seemed to have more than it's fair share of abrasive personalities). Just from results, I guess I would go with Cochrane. He did a tremendous job with 5 Group. He was a good 15 years older than Bennet and seemed closer to a Leigh-Mallory type in terms of his character.
It would have never been Bennett he was Austrailian and that would not fly in that period. Bennett being a colonial and all . I'm trying to recall the Name of the first colonial RCAF,RAAF,RNZAF that was given command of something larger then a squadron and it didn't occur until mid 42
pbfoot is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2008, 04:25 PM   #34
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Phila, Pa
Posts: 3,799
Yeah, Bennett was the only one of the Bomber Group Commanders that didn't get Knighted after the war.

Speaks volumes.
timshatz is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2008, 05:02 PM   #35
Senior Member
 
syscom3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Orange County, CA
Posts: 10,784
Quote:
Originally Posted by kool kitty89 View Post
A big advantage of the B-17 to contemporaries was the service ceiling. (Making it less vulnerable to flak and more difficult to intercept)
The higher you go, the less accurate you are.

There were more than a few times when 8th and 15th AF bombers had to do repeat visits to a target simply because they kept missing it.
__________________
"Pilot to copilot..... what are those mountain goats doing up here in the clouds?"
syscom3 is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2008, 05:41 PM   #36
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: niagara falls
Posts: 5,935
Quote:
Originally Posted by timshatz View Post
Yeah, Bennett was the only one of the Bomber Group Commanders that didn't get Knighted after the war.

Speaks volumes.
I don't believe anyone from 6 group did either but I'm not sure if or if not Canadians could recieve honours or titles at that period of time . I know they can't now
pbfoot is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-2008, 09:00 AM   #37
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Phila, Pa
Posts: 3,799
Not suprised if the put to the Canadians. That's the problem with being a colonial. Always of the wrong side of the blood line.

Quick question about Canada during the war. It is my understanding that Canadian citizens didn't have to leave the country during the war if they didn't want to. All the guys overseas were volunteers. While you could be drafted, you couldn't be shipped overseas without your permission.

Is that accurate?

Apologies in advance for the major thread drift.
timshatz is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-2008, 04:27 PM   #38
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: niagara falls
Posts: 5,935
Quote:
Originally Posted by timshatz View Post
Not suprised if the put to the Canadians. That's the problem with being a colonial. Always of the wrong side of the blood line.

Quick question about Canada during the war. It is my understanding that Canadian citizens didn't have to leave the country during the war if they didn't want to. All the guys overseas were volunteers. While you could be drafted, you couldn't be shipped overseas without your permission.

Is that accurate?

Apologies in advance for the major thread drift.
yes thats correct but I believe in late 44 45 they stated the process to use the draftees as replacements only 2500 went overseas and 80 kia

Last edited by pbfoot; 07-30-2008 at 06:02 PM.
pbfoot is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-2008, 06:51 PM   #39
Hop
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 399
Quote:
Yeah, Bennett was the only one of the Bomber Group Commanders that didn't get Knighted after the war.

Speaks volumes.
There's a page on Bomber Command Group commanders at RAF History - Bomber Command 60th Anniversary

It looks like 13 got knighthoods, 30 didn't. All of those who got knighthoods had higher level jobs than commanders of BC groups.

Quote:
It would have never been Bennett he was Austrailian and that would not fly in that period. Bennett being a colonial and all . I'm trying to recall the Name of the first colonial RCAF,RAAF,RNZAF that was given command of something larger then a squadron and it didn't occur until mid 42
Bennett was in the RAF, not one of the dominion forces. Keith Park was in a similar situation, he was an Air Vice Marshall by early 1940.

I think the barrier to dominion force officers achieving high rank early in the war was both the smaller size of the dominion forces pre war, and the semi independence from the RAF.
Hop is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-2008, 10:14 PM   #40
Member
 
solo's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Thailand
Posts: 40
Send a message via MSN to solo
I would votes for B-17 but.......I prefer PBY.
__________________
"NO Signature"
solo is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-2008, 10:38 PM   #41
Senior Member
 
Thorlifter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Dallas, Tx
Posts: 4,693
Joining in this discussion late, but voting for the B-17.
__________________
Thorlifter is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 07-31-2008, 12:39 AM   #42
Senior Member
 
ONE_HELLCAT's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Ventura County
Posts: 192
I love the B-17, and it certainly is a wonderful plane, but I think you see more people talking about it than most other bombers.
ONE_HELLCAT is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 08-01-2008, 06:05 PM   #43
Senior Member
 
Negative Creep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 840
Send a message via MSN to Negative Creep
Ju-87. Slow, outmoded and vulnerable and shown up as soon as air superiority wasn't certain. Best impact was a psychological one but in terms of light bombing I'd rather have a squadron of 109's any day
__________________
"We attack tomorrow under cover of daylight"
"Daylight sir?"
"Yes it's the last thing they'll be expecting, a daylight charge over the minefield"
Negative Creep is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 08-01-2008, 06:29 PM   #44
Senior Member
 
kool kitty89's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 2,412
But is the Ju 87 really the most overrate in current popular oppinion?
kool kitty89 is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 08-02-2008, 12:00 AM   #45
Senior Member
 
Oreo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: South Carolina
Posts: 277
Quote:
Originally Posted by kool kitty89 View Post
But is the Ju 87 really the most overrate in current popular oppinion?
Good question! I think in popular opinion nowadays the Ju 87 is actually under-rated. In D and G forms it soldiered on late into the war, socking it to the Russians, in a dogged, determined way. And then there's Rudel to consider-- perhaps the best, or most accomplished combat pilot of all time, and a 7-victory fighter ace while flying Stukas! Yet everyone today seems to think the Stuka was just death-trap. Not my choice to fly into combat with, but Mr. Rudel thought otherwise! (Or was it Rugel? Y'all know who I mean! 11,000 lifetime comabt sorties? Ringing a bell, anyone?)
Oreo is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:28 PM.
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2010, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2
Ad Management plugin by RedTyger
Design by HTWoRKS


1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124