Worst A/C of ww2

[Oldman731]

A lot of this is just us using the benefit of hindsight.

The Battle for instance was considered a modern aircraft when it was introduced in the mid 30s, capable of carrying twice the bombload at much higher speeds and greater range than the biplanes it replaced. By 1940 it was obsolete, partly due to Fairey's attempts to give it more power being prevented by the ministry of production. However its decimation in May 1940 was as much to do with stupid RAF tactics as the aircraft itself. The Battles were sent out in small groups at low level and usually unescorted to attack bridges and armoured columns protected by masses of AA and fighters. Any similar plane of the time (Kate, Stuka, Devastator etc.) would have suffered the same fate in the same circumstances. In fact later in the war these planes did suffer exactly the same fate.

 The idea of the Defiant was to formate with enemy bombers and use the turret to blast away at them from outside their guns defensive arcs. This wasn't a totally stupid idea when looked at from a pre-war perspective. Enemy bombers coming from Germany would be outside of the range of escorting fighters so Defiants might have done OK. However the Defiant was still a bad idea in so much as a Hurricane could still have done its job better at less cost. The Defiant's mauling in 1940 was as a result of the RAF commiting them to engagements in range of enemy fighters. They should have been kept up in the north of England freeing up Spitfires and Hurricanes for the south. Of course this is me using the benefit of hindsight.

There is much wisdom in this.

I'd go with the He-162.  It was a bad idea at the time as well as in practice.

- oldman

[Old Sport]

I was going to say the Boeing P-26 simply because it was so desperately obsolete. But then I read:

Captain Jesus A. Villamor led the P-26As of the 6th Pursuit Squadron, the only ones of their type to see action in World War II, and they were flown with great courage by their Filipino pilots. On December 12, 1941, Villamor brought down a Mitsubishi G3M2 of the 1st Kokutai over Batangas. Lieutenant Jose Kare even managed to shoot down a Mitsubishi A6M2 Zero with his obsolete Boeing on December 23. Generally, however, pitted against overwhelming numbers of superior enemy aircraft, the Peashooters proved as ineffectual as their name implied. The last surviving Filipino P-26s were burned on Christmas Eve to prevent their falling into enemy hands.

Best.

[ToeTag]

Me 321

Me 323

[Gianlupo]

A lot of this is just us using the benefit of hindsight.

Well, considering the topic, I'd say that it implies hindsight, don't you think?

On the other hand, just saying "worst A/C" is maybe too generic, we could define better what we mean when we say "worst".

[Reaper90]

I'd go with the He-162.  It was a bad idea at the time as well as in practice.

??  

What's so bad about the concept of a lighter, cheaper, more maneuverable jet fighter that can be built and put into service much more quickly than its counterparts?

If you're referring to the concept of it being "so easy to fly" that 'Hitler Youth' would be sent up in them with little training, that was fantasy and never was even close to being realized. The Luft squadrons that eventually got the He-162 were all very veteran units, as it was considered to be a plane that required a very expert pilot due to its very light controls. But it had huge potential and ability, and in its limited use was somewhat successful.

Arguably it did have some teething problems due to being rushed into service, namely faulty adhesive causing delamination in the wings at speed, but that was corrected, and was a production problem, not a design flaw....

At least a couple of RAF Tempests and one Spitfire are known to have been downed in air-air by He-162s during the "Salamander's" very limited combat exposure.... the vast majority of He-162s destroyed were strafed on the ground or crashed during emergency landing attempts, due mainly to very limited fuel capacity causing pilots to run out of fuel before making it safely back to base.

[MiloMorai]

MiG-1

[Ack-Ack]

well, the defiant wasent really a BAD idea....its just that it was too easy to catch on to.


if you think about it, most fighters had there guns pointing towards the FRONT. and when your trying to dogfight your trying to get on your enemies SIX.

The defiant basically created with a "haha fooled ya!" idea in mind.which at first it gave a nasty surprise to those used to fighters shooting from the front and not from the back.

but, it became easy to catch on to. and thats why i think the defiant failed.


i DO think the defiant would of been good as a bomber attacking.

just replace those 4 .303s with say, 2 .50cals or maybe even a 20mm, then fly under a bombers wing and just shoot its wings off from underneath, safely out of reach of the bombers defensive guns.

By 1942, German bombers were faster than the Defiant, and yes, it was a very bad idea for a combat plane design that was supposed to be a fighter.  What genius thinks that it's a great design idea to not have forward firing guns on a fighter?

ack-ack

[Ack-Ack]

I was going to say the Boeing P-26 simply because it was so desperately obsolete. But then I read:

Best.

There is no official record of Villamor's kills in the P-26 and is largely considered to be false since there is nothing to verify the kills.  The only official kill credited to the PAF while flying the P-26 was Kare's kill against a Zeke and that kill was verified by coast watchers that witnessed the fight and the Zeke crashing into the ground.


ack-ack

[Baumer]

What genius thinks that it's a great design idea to not have forward firing guns on a fighter?

Well I guess not everyone learned this lesson, the F-4 didn't have a forward firing gun when the USN and USAF accepted it either.

[B-17]

maybe not, but it had other, possibly more dangerous things pointing forwards.

[Oldman731]

What's so bad about the concept of a lighter, cheaper, more maneuverable jet fighter that can be built and put into service much more quickly than its counterparts?

If you're referring to the concept of it being "so easy to fly" that 'Hitler Youth' would be sent up in them with little training, that was fantasy and never was even close to being realized. The Luft squadrons that eventually got the He-162 were all very veteran units, as it was considered to be a plane that required a very expert pilot due to its very light controls. But it had huge potential and ability, and in its limited use was somewhat successful.

Arguably it did have some teething problems due to being rushed into service, namely faulty adhesive causing delamination in the wings at speed, but that was corrected, and was a production problem, not a design flaw....

At least a couple of RAF Tempests and one Spitfire are known to have been downed in air-air by He-162s during the "Salamander's" very limited combat exposure.... the vast majority of He-162s destroyed were strafed on the ground or crashed during emergency landing attempts, due mainly to very limited fuel capacity causing pilots to run out of fuel before making it safely back to base.

You've identified some of the reasons that made it a bad idea at the time.  In a broader sense it was yet one more example of the Nazis dispersing their available resources on too many projects, rather than focusing on a proven few.  This was especially unwise with a project that was so leading-edge at the time - those are the ones you rush at your greatest peril, as your faulty construction examples illustrate.  The notion that it would be flown by Hitler Youth (or at least by large numbers of pilots with minimal training) was central to the concept.  Otherwise there was already a well-tested jet that the veterans were flying.

- oldman

[Imowface]

Well I guess not everyone learned this lesson, the F-4 didn't have a forward firing gun when the USN and USAF accepted it either.

TBH didnt the F-4 do very bad against MiG's compaired to the norm for the US against Korea

[Reaper90]

In a broader sense it was yet one more example of the Nazis dispersing their available resources on too many projects, rather than focusing on a proven few.  

I think the point that won over the German brass on the He 162 was the fact that the "proven few" planes weren't getting the job done. The prop fighters they had were suffering under the brute force of the allies numerical superiority, and they needed to untilize their technological superiority in order to regain the upper hand. The Me 262 was complex, took a long time to build, depended heavily on materials that were in very very short supply, and was unreliable.. all things that, coupled with it not being fully employed as a fighter until it was too late, meant it never had the chance to have a great impact.

The He 162 could be built much more quickly, used much more easily accessible materials, was cheaper, and was by all accounts a dream to fly.

This was especially unwise with a project that was so leading-edge at the time - those are the ones you rush at your greatest peril, as your faulty construction examples illustrate.

From my understanding that issue arose with only one prototype aircraft, and led to a fatal crash. It was corrected, and was no longer an issue.

The notion that it would be flown by Hitler Youth (or at least by large numbers of pilots with minimal training) was central to the concept.  

I think that notion is highly debateable. It may have been lobbied for with that plan in mind, but that notion was abandoned before the He 162 ever got close to production. The core argument FOR the He 162 was ALWAYS that it was cheap, easy and quick to produce, thus they could put several into service for every one 262 that went to a squadron. The notion of kids flying it was merely window dressing for the concept in order to sell it to a desperate regime.

Otherwise there was already a well-tested jet that the veterans were flying.

If anything they should have abandoned the Me 262 and focused solely on the He 162 and other aircraft of its type.... given the relative capabilities of the two, and the numerical disadvantage they faced versus the allies, I would put my money on them being better off with the H2 162 given they could produce 2-3 of the Heinkel for every one of the 262 they could build.

[Delirium]

The Spruce Goose




It was started in 1942, finished in 1947. It barely took off, 30 feet of so off the water, and it never flew again. Even the Ba88 did better than this thing did and for less money.

Final cost? A paltry $38 million...

[Gianlupo]

Dang, I couldn't win not even this time!