The airplane that did the most to turn the tide of the war. (1 Viewer)

[Shortround6]

Very True. The French Air Force fought the Battle of France like it did the Western Front during the Great War. Fighters roamed the skys looking for an opportunity. The French had nothing like the Integrated Weapon System of Fighter Command, with its Radar Network, Centralized Combat Information Center, and excellent communications.

Unfortunately the RAF in the Expeditionary force was not much in advance of the French. It wasn't just the lack of radar, it was the lack of centralized command of the air and lack of communications. The Fighter squadrons fought their war, the bombers of the RAF Advanced Air Striking Force fought their war and the Lysanders of the army co-operation squadrons fought their war.

 

[SaparotRob]

Imagine, French bombing flight togs design by Chanel

It's better to look good than to bomb good.

 

[Thumpalumpacus]

I thought that was more Greek than French?

Beats me, I never heard of it having any national connotation.

 

[fannum]

I haven't scanned the thread, but has anyone mentioned the C-47?

Too often, we're at the mercy of PR, and while Betty Grable looked good on the nose of an aircraft, without hundreds of Rosie the Riveters, there would be no aircraft. Napolean observed that "An army marches on its stomach" and it's said that the road from Moscow to Berlin was littered with Spam cans and Studebaker trucks. Brilliant leadership wins battles, but Logistics wins wars. You will find that stated by Eisenhower, Churchill, Marshall, Arnold, Nimitz and LeMay ... even by tacticians like Rommel, Patton, Burke and Zhukov.

If this was a list of vehicles or ships, I'd say the Stude truck and Liberty ship, and aerial, there's no challenge to the Dakota/Skytrain. Look at the supplies flown across the Atlantic, North Africa, Burma, Aleutians as well as the constant air drops and forward base replenishments to Anzio, El Alamein, Bastogne and Cannes. How else would we have would we have delivered paratroops and gliders to Sicily, Anzio, Normandy, Holland or across the Rhine?

Then again, it all could have been for naught without the Berlin airlift.

You may lust for the sleek and zoomy stripper or music video dancer, but it's the plump girl next door with the overbite and nasal twang that you come home to and ensures that you have grandkids.

 

[SaparotRob]

I haven't scanned the thread, but has anyone mentioned the C-47?

Too often, we're at the mercy of PR, and while Betty Grable looked good on the nose of an aircraft, without hundreds of Rosie the Riveters, there would be no aircraft. Napolean observed that "An army marches on its stomach" and it's said that the road from Moscow to Berlin was littered with Spam cans and Studebaker trucks. Brilliant leadership wins battles, but Logistics wins wars. You will find that stated by Eisenhower, Churchill, Marshall, Arnold, Nimitz and LeMay ... even by tacticians like Rommel, Patton, Burke and Zhukov.

If this was a list of vehicles or ships, I'd say the Stude truck and Liberty ship, and aerial, there's no challenge to the Dakota/Skytrain. Look at the supplies flown across the Atlantic, North Africa, Burma, Aleutians as well as the constant air drops and forward base replenishments to Anzio, El Alamein, Bastogne and Cannes. How else would we have would we have delivered paratroops and gliders to Sicily, Anzio, Normandy, Holland or across the Rhine?

Then again, it all could have been for naught without the Berlin airlift.

You may lust for the sleek and zoomy stripper or music video dancer, but it's the plump girl next door with the overbite and nasal twang that you come home to and ensures that you have grandkids.

It's like we were separated at birth.

 

[MiTasol]

I haven't scanned the thread, but has anyone mentioned the C-47?

Too often, we're at the mercy of PR, and while Betty Grable looked good on the nose of an aircraft, without hundreds of Rosie the Riveters, there would be no aircraft. Napolean observed that "An army marches on its stomach" and it's said that the road from Moscow to Berlin was littered with Spam cans and Studebaker trucks. Brilliant leadership wins battles, but Logistics wins wars. You will find that stated by Eisenhower, Churchill, Marshall, Arnold, Nimitz and LeMay ... even by tacticians like Rommel, Patton, Burke and Zhukov.

If this was a list of vehicles or ships, I'd say the Stude truck and Liberty ship, and aerial, there's no challenge to the Dakota/Skytrain. Look at the supplies flown across the Atlantic, North Africa, Burma, Aleutians as well as the constant air drops and forward base replenishments to Anzio, El Alamein, Bastogne and Cannes. How else would we have would we have delivered paratroops and gliders to Sicily, Anzio, Normandy, Holland or across the Rhine?

Then again, it all could have been for naught without the Berlin airlift.

You may lust for the sleek and zoomy stripper or music video dancer, but it's the plump girl next door with the overbite and nasal twang that you come home to and ensures that you have grandkids.

Several, including me, have listed the C-47 and its many cousins (most people do not realise the C-41, C-48, C-49, C-50, C-51, C-52, C-68 and C-84 are also DC-3 derivatives).

A little known fact is that during the Berlin Air Lift there was more tons of air cargo being carried out of Madang airport in Papua New Guinea into the PNG highlands per day than was carried into Berlin - and that operation lasted far longer.

Most of it was carried by DC-3s and derivatives (Ansett had 53 based in Madang from memory) although other operators were also using Ju-52 and Bristol Freighter aircraft as well as Dak's.

 

[fannum]

Thank you, Rob and MiTas, and I just wasn't willing to dig through 75 pages of fluff and egotistical graphic displays.

Sure, a lot of us get excited about sleek and powerful, but my Ferraris and bombshell girlfriends usually only did one thing well (and always thought they did it better than reality) but needed a pickup for reliable transport and supply getting, as well as an expensive entourage. And, OMIGWAD, did the new wear off real quick!

Note that Douglas Commercial the Third has been replaced by the stodgy C-130, which has kept kicking through Khe Sanh, Entebbe, Desert Storm, Kabul and every flood, quake and typhoon since '50s, and will still be in the military inventory long after we're gone ... and based on the pale performance of "improved competitors," will quite likely to still be in production on it's 100th birthday!

 

[SaparotRob]

The C-130 is my kind of plane. And you can bring the whole gang along!

 

[fannum]

Several, including me, have listed the C-47 and its many cousins (most people do not realise the C-41, C-48, C-49, C-50, C-51, C-52, C-68 and C-84 are also DC-3 derivatives).

Of course, most of those were essentially the same plane either conscripted or dinkered with just a bit, a product of our then quaint and curious Air Force designation system ... more driven by politics and appropriations than reality.

Don't forget the R4D-8/C-117 significant upgrade, or the many two and three engine Basler, etc. turbine versions, or the Russian built Li-2, or the Japanese built Nakajima L2D, or the Fokker built units, or the CG-17 troop glider, and while only a couple flew with Edo floats, over 30 sets were built to support the invasion of Japan.

Workhorse does not begin to describe the DC-3/C-47.

 

[MiTasol]

Oh bother

I left out the most interesting C-47 derivative - the XCG-17 glider. From Wiki.

The conversion, carried out at Clinton County Army Air Field, was completed on June 12, 1944, with the aircraft undergoing its initial flight test shortly thereafter.[7] The flight testing of the XCG-17 proved that the aircraft was satisfactory; compared with conventional gliders in service, the aircraft possessed lower stalling and higher towing speeds than conventional gliders, as well as gliding at a significantly shallower angle.[4][10]

 

[SaparotRob]

Oh bother

I left out the most interesting C-47 derivative - the XCG-17 glider. From Wiki.

The conversion, carried out at Clinton County Army Air Field, was completed on June 12, 1944, with the aircraft undergoing its initial flight test shortly thereafter.[7] The flight testing of the XCG-17 proved that the aircraft was satisfactory; compared with conventional gliders in service, the aircraft possessed lower stalling and higher towing speeds than conventional gliders, as well as gliding at a significantly shallower angle.[4][10]

Wow.

 

[Thumpalumpacus]

Note that Douglas Commercial the Third has been replaced by the stodgy C-130, which has kept kicking through Khe Sanh, Entebbe, Desert Storm, Kabul and every flood, quake and typhoon since '50s, and will still be in the military inventory long after we're gone ... and based on the pale performance of "improved competitors," will quite likely to still be in production on it's 100th birthday!

Long live the Herc. Rode in a few in the early 90s, loud but usable.

 

[tyrodtom]

To me reversing the tide means to turn things around, not accelerate the rate of getting better.

IMO that only applies to 2 aircraft, the Spitfire and Hurricane in the Battle of Britain.
At the start I looked as if the Luftwaffe was going to flatten the RAF, leaving the defense to the Royal Navy, and a depleted Army.
We may know now that Germany didn't have a chance of carrying out a successful invasion, but most in Britain didn't know that at the time.
Morale could have got low enough that Britain gives up, surrenders and drops out of the war.

The RAF managed to hurt the Luftwaffe enough that it couldn't continue operations at the level that it had built up to in August 1940, and that is mostly because of the Spitfire and Hurricane.

Not even the Dauntless reversed the winning streak the Japanese was having at Midway, they had already been partly blunted at the Battle of the Coral Sea.

No other aircraft even comes close truly reversing the tide in WW2.

 

[Warspite63]

To me reversing the tide means to turn things around, not accelerate the rate of getting better.

IMO that only applies to 2 aircraft, the Spitfire and Hurricane in the Battle of Britain.
At the start I looked as if the Luftwaffe was going to flatten the RAF, leaving the defense to the Royal Navy, and a depleted Army.
We may know now that Germany didn't have a chance of carrying out a successful invasion, but most in Britain didn't know that at the time.
Morale could have got low enough that Britain gives up, surrenders and drops out of the war.

The RAF managed to hurt the Luftwaffe enough that it couldn't continue operations at the level that it had built up to in August 1940, and that is mostly because of the Spitfire and Hurricane.

Not even the Dauntless reversed the winning streak the Japanese was having at Midway, they had already been partly blunted at the Battle of the Coral Sea.

No other aircraft even comes close truly reversing the tide in WW2.

Agreed. I posted something similar upthread a ways.

 

[yulzari]

To me reversing the tide means to turn things around, not accelerate the rate of getting better.

IMO that only applies to 2 aircraft, the Spitfire and Hurricane in the Battle of Britain.
At the start I looked as if the Luftwaffe was going to flatten the RAF, leaving the defense to the Royal Navy, and a depleted Army.
We may know now that Germany didn't have a chance of carrying out a successful invasion, but most in Britain didn't know that at the time.
Morale could have got low enough that Britain gives up, surrenders and drops out of the war.

The RAF managed to hurt the Luftwaffe enough that it couldn't continue operations at the level that it had built up to in August 1940, and that is mostly because of the Spitfire and Hurricane.

Not even the Dauntless reversed the winning streak the Japanese was having at Midway, they had already been partly blunted at the Battle of the Coral Sea.

No other aircraft even comes close truly reversing the tide in WW2.

And of these two the Hurricane made the greatest difference.

 

[NevadaK]

To me reversing the tide means to turn things around, not accelerate the rate of getting better.

IMO that only applies to 2 aircraft, the Spitfire and Hurricane in the Battle of Britain.
At the start I looked as if the Luftwaffe was going to flatten the RAF, leaving the defense to the Royal Navy, and a depleted Army.
We may know now that Germany didn't have a chance of carrying out a successful invasion, but most in Britain didn't know that at the time.
Morale could have got low enough that Britain gives up, surrenders and drops out of the war.

The RAF managed to hurt the Luftwaffe enough that it couldn't continue operations at the level that it had built up to in August 1940, and that is mostly because of the Spitfire and Hurricane.

Not even the Dauntless reversed the winning streak the Japanese was having at Midway, they had already been partly blunted at the Battle of the Coral Sea.

No other aircraft even comes close truly reversing the tide in WW2.

I'm pretty sure that the USSR would say that the tide kept rising until either winter 1941/42 or 1942/43.

In my opinion, trying to identify an aircraft that did the most to "turn the tide of the war" is practically impossible since the war had many tides and theaters. At the very least, we should identify aircraft that affected the course of multiple theaters, or at the very least can be conclusively demonstrated to have hastened the war's end. As I see it, there are three options:

The C-47 and its variants: Profound impact on logistics and operations and the only aircraft to be produced by opposing combatants (Japan built 400+). Also built by the Soviet Union. Found in every theater of the war. The Jeep of the air.
The A6M Zero: I've argued for this one based on the unintended consequences of its use. As an advanced fighter, it allowed the Japanese to imagine, plan and execute the Pearl Harbor attack. Consequently, the USSR learned of the attack prior to December 1941 and was able to moved resources crucial to stopping the German advance on Moscow. Consequently, American sentiment about the war rose to almost universal support and commitment to the war effort resulting unprecedented levels of war production that contributed to almost every allied armed force.
The B-29: Not because of the atomic bomb, but because for a time it was the only weapon system capable of attacking Japan directly. At a time when most planners estimated that the war would continue until late 1947/early 48 the B-29's efficacy was such that it helped significantly demoralize the Japanese population and hasten the wars end.

As aircraft, I like the Spitfire and Hurricane but to say the Battle of Britain was when the tide of the war turned overlooks that the war continue to expand for another year or two with conflicts yet to come that dwarf the BoB in scale.

 

[tyrodtom]

You could say the Zero helped start the war (or tide ) in the Pacific, and the B29 certainly helped end the war in the Pacific, but neither turned the tide.

If Britain had opted out of the war in late 1940, who knows how that would have effected world affairs from that point on.
You can't dismiss the effect of the outcome of the BOB.

 

[EwenS]

I'm pretty sure that the USSR would say that the tide kept rising until either winter 1941/42 or 1942/43.

In my opinion, trying to identify an aircraft that did the most to "turn the tide of the war" is practically impossible since the war had many tides and theaters. At the very least, we should identify aircraft that affected the course of multiple theaters, or at the very least can be conclusively demonstrated to have hastened the war's end. As I see it, there are three options:

The C-47 and its variants: Profound impact on logistics and operations and the only aircraft to be produced by opposing combatants (Japan built 400+). Also built by the Soviet Union. Found in every theater of the war. The Jeep of the air.
The A6M Zero: I've argued for this one based on the unintended consequences of its use. As an advanced fighter, it allowed the Japanese to imagine, plan and execute the Pearl Harbor attack. Consequently, the USSR learned of the attack prior to December 1941 and was able to moved resources crucial to stopping the German advance on Moscow. Consequently, American sentiment about the war rose to almost universal support and commitment to the war effort resulting unprecedented levels of war production that contributed to almost every allied armed force.
The B-29: Not because of the atomic bomb, but because for a time it was the only weapon system capable of attacking Japan directly. At a time when most planners estimated that the war would continue until late 1947/early 48 the B-29's efficacy was such that it helped significantly demoralize the Japanese population and hasten the wars end.

As aircraft, I like the Spitfire and Hurricane but to say the Battle of Britain was when the tide of the war turned overlooks that the war continue to expand for another year or two with conflicts yet to come that dwarf the BoB in scale.

There Is a myth about the Soviets moving troops westward from the Far East in Oct/Nov 1941 in time for the Battle for Moscow.

The Soviet-Japanese Neutrality Pact was signed on 13 April 1941. That allowed planning to begin to move divisions West and those movements began immediately following the commencement of Operation Barbarossa on 22 June 1941.

Soviet–Japanese Neutrality Pact - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

The ‘Siberian’ Divisions and the Battle for Moscow in 1941-42 | Operation Barbarrosa

Yamamoto began the planning for an attack on Pearl Harbor in Jan 1941, just as the A6M2 ws entering carrier eervice. That was at a time when only 4 of the PH carriers were in service (the Shokakus didn't complete until Aug/Sept 1941). The Japanese did not decide to go to war until Aug 1941, after the US oil embargo was imposed on them, which itself followed their occupation of the southern part of French Indochina.

To say that it "allowed the Japanese to imagine, plan and execute the Pearl Harbor attack" is IMHO a gross exaggeration. The object of the exercise was to sink firstly the US Pacific Fleet battleships and then the carriers. A6M2 was going to achieve that. The principal weapon was going to be torpedo and heavy AP bomb equipped B5N2 Kates.

 

[NevadaK]

There Is a myth about the Soviets moving troops westward from the Far East in Oct/Nov 1941 in time for the Battle for Moscow.

The Soviet-Japanese Neutrality Pact was signed on 13 April 1941. That allowed planning to begin to move divisions West and those movements began immediately following the commencement of Operation Barbarossa on 22 June 1941.

Soviet–Japanese Neutrality Pact - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

The ‘Siberian’ Divisions and the Battle for Moscow in 1941-42 | Operation Barbarrosa

Yamamoto began the planning for an attack on Pearl Harbor in Jan 1941, just as the A6M2 ws entering carrier eervice. That was at a time when only 4 of the PH carriers were in service (the Shokakus didn't complete until Aug/Sept 1941). The Japanese did not decide to go to war until Aug 1941, after the US oil embargo was imposed on them, which itself followed their occupation of the southern part of French Indochina.

To say that it "allowed the Japanese to imagine, plan and execute the Pearl Harbor attack" is IMHO a gross exaggeration. The object of the exercise was to sink firstly the US Pacific Fleet battleships and then the carriers. A6M2 was going to achieve that. The principal weapon was going to be torpedo and heavy AP bomb equipped B5N2 Kates.

Greetings EwenS,

There is no disagreement about when the USSR began moving troops, however, we may interpret the reasons for it differently. Soviet intelligence, especially Richard Sorge, had provided intel that Germany was preparing Barbarossa. This was largely ignored with disastrous results. The Soviet Union was distrustful of the Japanese and had maintained significant forces in the east. Along with providing intel on Barbarossa, Sorge provided intel on German efforts to motivate Japan to attack the USSR. This was considered by the Japanese, but ultimately in the summer the decision was made to prepare for war with America. Sorge provided this intel and with his improved stature within the Soviet Union, accepted as trustworthy. This intel was what allowed the Soviet Union the confidence to move the majority of troops from the east. That intel came in the summer, not the fall. Sorge was arrested in October, ending that source of intel.

Regarding the Zero, the attacking force was comprised of three types: Kates, Vals , and Zeros each with a specific mission assignment. As I understand it, Japanese naval aviation strategy considered fighter coverage an essential component and would not have entertained an attack on Pearl Harbor without the Zero or a plane of similar ability. Simply put, without the Zero there's no fighter escort and no planning for Pearl Harbor doesn't.

My two cents.

 

[GrauGeist]

Simply put, without the Zero there's no fighter escort and no planning for Pearl Harbor doesn't.

By the time of Pearl Harbor, there were less than 400 A6Ms (all types) in service.

The A6M was not a consideration for the planning of Pearl Harbor. The fact that Kido Butai being Japan's front line carrier force was first to transition to the A6M, saw them in force.

The A5M, which was still a capable fighter, would have been employed as cover if the A6M had been delayed or not worked up in numbers. The A5M continued in service until May '42, when sufficient numbers of A6Ms had been delivered fleet-wide.

It was politics that put the attack in place, not the hardware.