Best Planes of WWII

[LilMak]

Oh and could you find one of those 'serious' top ten lists please. Thanks.

Does google not work on your computer? Let me help you. In the search line type "Top 10 aircraft of all time." Make sure you note the source of those lists. It's up to you to decide if Plane and Pilot, AOPA, and others are 'serious'.

Common aircraft that show in those lists are...Wright Flyer, SR-71, ME262, P-51, Space Shuttle, Cessna 172, J-3 cub, and yes the DC-3/C-47.

[WaffenVW]

I have no way of knowing what you consider 'serious'.

[Zimme83]

Worth mentioning is that the Dc-3 makes the list because of the impact it had on the civilian air transportation. It is a very good plane but it weren't faster, bigger etc than other transport aircrafts during WW2, The greatest asset was that it was available in great numbers and it did the job good enough so there wasn't any urgent need for a new transport aircraft.

But it's a tricky question with no clear answer. Quantity is quality as well but on the other hand, It had not helped the Axis if they had the C-47, it hadn't change the outcome in any way. C-47:s instead of Ju-52:s had not helped the Germans at Stalingrad in any significant way.
For transport aircrafts is the rule: Good enough planes in sufficient numbers. But there are rarely any cutting edge technology involved in transport aircrafts. Just strip a B-17 or B-24 of the guns, remove bomb bay, add a cargo door and you have a transport aircraft just as good as the C-47.

But the C-47 should be among the candidates for sure, but imo it won't beat planes like the Spit or 109 as the "best" WW2 plane.

[LilMak]

There's no substitute for the right tool. You can use a sledge hammer to drive a nail but it's not necessarily the right tool for the job. Both the P-51 and the C-47 fall into that category. The right tool delivered at the right time. There were better fighters than the P-51 and there are better cargo aircraft than the Goon. But they both did their intended job (arguably of course) better than any other.

[WaffenVW]

Then I ask again: How did the Goon do 'the job' better than any other? What makes it 'the best'?

[LilMak]

Then I ask again: How did the Goon do 'the job' better than any other? What makes it 'the best'?

Sigh...everything. It was efficient, extremely rugged, adaptable, dependable, had good range, excellent short field and unimproved field capabilities, easy to maintain, good flying qualities, pretty manuverable, and could do all of it while hauling a load. It didn't just do one thing, it did everything and did it well. The only other "C" plane that is in its class is the C-130 which is also not the biggest, fastest, uberest plane to ever take to the sky but has the record to prove that it is among the best aircraft ever fielded.

Also, the lowley VW Beetle, one of the greatest cars ever produced. Also not the biggest, fastest, uberest ever built but, none the less, among the greatest cars in history. By all rights it should've never survived the ashes of post war Germany. But it did and is probably the most recognized car on earth.

[Ack-Ack]

The P38 started  to see significant action in the PTO only from early 1943, only about 6 months before the F6F and with much lower intensity since it was far from the action. The P38 is not the plane that killed the IJN aces.

The P-38 was not far from the action at all, it was in the thick of it in the SWPA.  It was the dominant USAAF plane in the PTO.

[Zimme83]

A big issue with the debate is that is that it is too much about who won, Win the war =/= better planes. The allied did not won the war because they had better planes/tanks/etc. They won because they had a much larger capacity to build them.
Combat record has very little to to with how the plane itself was. If it were all about combat record the B-239 outclass the opposition...

[LilMak]

A big issue with the debate is that is that it is too much about who won, Win the war =/= better planes.

Not as much as you might think. The Germans, for the most part, had the best stuff all around. The greatest fighter to come out of the war was the 262. It was a war changing machine but came too little too late.

The engineers and test pilots at Grumman tested a sample of all the aircraft available in the ETO at the time while making design considerations for the next airplane to take over for the Hellcat. This included most of the available British, German, and American fighters. The two airplanes they were most impressed with were the 190 and the Jug. The liked the 51 and spit but decided both were essentially too fragile to be balanced war machines (probably because of radiators). Especially for the Navy. The resulting design based on what they learned was the Bearcat. Which pretty much represented the pinnacle of piston fighter design for Grumman.

[BaldEagl]

Well, this thread went downhill fast.

First of all LilMak jumps in with a suggestion create divisiveness and derail the thread.  I'm sure he'll say it was his legitimate choice but the OP asked for each countries "shining star".  The C-47?  Really?  That's the best the US had to offer?  So why didn't we forsake all else in favor of C-47 production?

Furthermore the OP goes on to list an international list of fighter aircraft.  While he didn't specifically ask for fighter aircraft only that was clearly his intent.  More evidence of LilMak's intentional derailing of the thread.

Then WaffenVW, an obvious Luft fan, keeps fanning the flames.

Anyway, thanks boys for derailing what started out as a good thread that's now no longer worth the pixels it's written on to read.

[glzsqd]

I would have to say the F6F as much as it pains me(F4U lover).

[darkzking]

p39 or the p63 

[WaffenVW]

I don't think this thread has been derailed at all, and everyone is behaving within acceptable limits imho. Me a Luft fan??? Whatever gave you that idea? 

LilMak, I can't agree with you on those qualifiers simply because any number of WWII transport planes share those in equal measure. The DC-3 was an iconic aircraft and one of the best airliners of the 1930s (perhaps the best). However its prolific post-war career and longevity was a result of the market being flooded by cheap surplus C-47s, not because it was better or even on par with 1940s and 1950s aircraft. We'll just have to agree to disagree.

[Zimme83]

No 1 rule in this debate: This question has no right answer, it is all about personal opinions.

[LilMak]

Well, this thread went downhill fast.

First of all LilMak jumps in with a suggestion create divisiveness and derail the thread.  I'm sure he'll say it was his legitimate choice but the OP asked for each countries "shining star".  The C-47?  Really?  That's the best the US had to offer?  So why didn't we forsake all else in favor of C-47 production?

Furthermore the OP goes on to list an international list of fighter aircraft.  While he didn't specifically ask for fighter aircraft only that was clearly his intent.  More evidence of LilMak's intentional derailing of the thread.

Then WaffenVW, an obvious Luft fan, keeps fanning the flames.

Anyway, thanks boys for derailing what started out as a good thread that's now no longer worth the pixels it's written on to read.

The OP said this...
"This might have been answered before but I'll ask it anyways.

Which planes during WW2 were considered the shining stars of their country, in realistic and overall performance from their role(s)?"

The title of the thread is "Best planes of WWII" No where did it say fighter, bomber, liaison, cargo or anything specific. The C-47's ROLE was to move stuff. It PERFORMED that ROLE  exceptionally.

I respect your opinion but perhaps, before you accuse me of dearailing a thread by giving my honest opinion and essentially calling me a troll, you should practice your reading comprehension. Just because my OPINION doesn't conform to what you think it should doesn't make it wrong. The only one derailing this thread is you.

There is exactly ONE cargo aircraft modeled in AH. Mabey because it's the measuring stick by which every other is compared and the picture that comes into everyone's head when they think of WWII cargo aircraft/airborne operations/glider towing/or flying the hump. Or maybe because the perfomance numbers were easy to obtain and that's why.

This thread could go on for eons and never come to a consensus. I'm OK with that. VW at least challenged my stance and I have not convinced him. I'm cool with that too.