What is one plane that is underappreciated for how effective it was in combat?

[Venomstick121]

I did mean the 129...
I could be biased though, I read Panzerjager by Martin Pegg which have me quite the liking for this little bird...gave an effective counter to armored breakthroughs, too.
View attachment 756955

When you throw a 75 on any thing it becomes a decent armor breaker

 

[Trav02]

With regards to the gun, maybe...don't think I'd want to try tank-busting in a B-25H.
Very few machines saw combat with the 75mm very late in the war.
The lion's share was done with the mk 101 and mk103 30mm cannons, which was effective for most situations till the end, I believe.
That Panzerjager book talks about the attempt ls to fit a Pak 40 in a Ju88 then they tried a 129 when that failed ...I can PM or post those pages if you'd like...

 

[Venomstick121]

With regards to the gun, maybe...don't think I'd want to try tank-busting in a B-25H.

Why not?

 

[Trav02]

Just my opinion, but the gun has a low muzzle velocity and needs to be manually loaded-will need to fly higher, straighter runs if you want to get more than 1 round off -not sure of armour on the 25 but think you'd get chewed pretty good, it's a big target too.Ju88 was washed out for the same reasons.
IIRC, read somewhere (book had some errors, take it with a grain of salt) that the Soviets pulled their A-20s from the deck-level bombing/strafing/infantry support role because of losses.
Takes a special-purpose aircraft to survive down there.
This is from a JU88 unit during Barbarossa, book is Junkers Ju88 kampgeschwader on the Russian Front

 

[Shortround6]

Why not?

The problem is not so much with the gun itself but the ranges and aiming.
Using a gun that can shoot through the back of a Panther tank at close to 1000yds, should do the trick.....
except.......
They never got off more than 3 shots when attacking a freighter on one firing pass.
The sight system sucked, they were not using a telescope like a tank did. Do you really want the pilot flying at 250-280mph 50-150 ft off the ground squinting through scope that distorts his vison/depth perception?
The plane moves so much from shot to shot that every shot is a first shot, there is no correcting from the results of the first shot since the plane has changed location by hundreds of yds.

B-25s (and Ju-88s) are rather large targets compared to fighters (or even Hurricane IIDs or Ju 87s)
Hurricane IIDs or Ju 87s sometimes got several hundred pounds of extra armor when playing tank buster.
This was pretty much to defend against rifle caliber guns, Trying to armor against 20mm guns (or most 12.7mm guns) was very hard (read heavy).

 

[Admiral Beez]

How about the Folland Gnat? Designed by W.E.Petter of Westland Whirlwind and Lysander, English Electric Lighting and Canberra fame.

This diminutive trainer come fighter earned the nickname, Sabre Slayer during the Indo-Pakistani War.

Gnat – The IAF’s Small “Sabre Slayer”

The Gnat’s hour of glory came during the 1965 Indo-Pakistani War. The IAF’s Gnat pilots quickly learned to engage the Pakistan Air Force (PAF) Canadair F-86 Sabre jet, considered the best dogfighter of the period. In all, seven Sabres were shot down.

www.sps-aviation.com

 

[Trav02]

When you throw a 75 on any thing it becomes a decent armor breaker

Like you said, though, with the right setup it can be nasty...

 

[pbehn]

How about the Folland Gnat? Designed by W.E.Petter of Westland Whirlwind and Lysander, English Electric Lighting and Canberra fame.

View attachment 757074

This diminutive trainer come fighter earned the nickname, Sabre Slayer during the Indo-Pakistani War.

Gnat – The IAF’s Small “Sabre Slayer”

The Gnat’s hour of glory came during the 1965 Indo-Pakistani War. The IAF’s Gnat pilots quickly learned to engage the Pakistan Air Force (PAF) Canadair F-86 Sabre jet, considered the best dogfighter of the period. In all, seven Sabres were shot down.

www.sps-aviation.com

One of my earliest memories of anything to do with aeroplanes was seeing the Red Arrows at Middleton St George, th Gnat was far too pretty to ever be considered for combat, almost sinful TBH.

 

[Admiral Beez]

One of my earliest memories of anything to do with aeroplanes was seeing the Red Arrows at Middleton St George, th Gnat was far too pretty to ever be considered for combat, almost sinful TBH.

I'm amazed they could get two 30mm cannons and 230 rounds (115 per) into the tiny frame.

Per Wikipedia the Indian-produced variant was even better.

 

[pbehn]

I'm amazed they could get two 30mm cannons and 230 rounds (115 per) into the tiny frame.

View attachment 757108Just leave out the fuel, simples

Just forget about the fuel, simples.

 

[Admiral Beez]

Just forget about the fuel, simples.

I think Petter took this approach in most of his fast aircraft, with his Lightning needing a belly bulge just to be relevant to its intended mission. Petter's Whirlwind could have had much better endurance had the wings between the engines and fuselage been used for fuel, with the radiators under the wings rather than within them. As it was, just two tanks in the outer wings were the entirety of his design's fuel allotment.

 

[Shortround6]

Just forget about the fuel, simples.

Actual fit new wing.
Drawing is of the HAL Ajeet.
The Gnats did not have the integral fuel tank/s in the wing which made the Ajeet look like a long range aircraft.
910 liters in a Gnat without drop tanks.

 

[ThomasP]

re the Whirlwind

Just providing underwing DTs for the Whirlwind would ~double the combat/operational radius. I suspect this would have occurred if the aircraft had been slotted for a future.

re the EE Lightning

To be fair, when the Lightning was designed the need for fast climb and top speed was seen as more important than range - returning to base radioactive crater was considered secondary to best chance of successful intercept.