Best flying boat/amphibian of WWII?

[ccheese]

You ought to see the two remaining Martin Mars flying boats practising water drops on Vancouver Island BC.

You mean like this ....

These were uploaded by FlyboyJ some time ago...

Charles

 

[Lucky13]

Sweeeeeet Mr C!

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Somehow I don't see any other of the flying boat/amphibians doing the same amount work of as the Catalina....ASW, torpedo/dive bombing attacks, rescue, transport, ambulance (I think)...certainly not the torpedo/dive bombing attacks at night....

The Dornier Do 24 did everything the Cat did. It was a jack of all trades for the Germans.

Btw Adler, what do you think about the Blohm Voss BV 138?

I dont have much an opinion on it. I would have to read up on it some more.

 

[Flyboy2]

Better question would be what was the worst seaplane. Too many good ones (Dornier, Cat, Sunderland, ect) to pick a really good one. But a really bad one, that might be easier.

If we are looking for worst, the Be-4 (KOR-2) was pretty bad. The thing could barely even stay afloat in the water. It wasn't allowed to be used based out of water, which is slightly inconvinient for a flying boat

 

[Soren]

What comparison can you make Soren?

Was it's performance superior?

Well here's its performance figures:

Top speed: 390 km/h
Service Ceiling: 7300m
Range: 6,100 km
Cargo load: 8 tons

I can't think of any other WW2 flying boat with such performance ?

It was one massive a/c:

 

[pbfoot]

Well here's its performance figures:

Top speed: 390 km/h
Service Ceiling: 7300m
Range: 6,100 km
Cargo load: 8 tons

I can't think of any other WW2 flying with such performance ?

It was one massive a/c:

Martin Mars all the numbers are about the same except it had a larger payload and they made more then 4 of them

 

[Soren]

Thats completely wrong Pbfoot;

The Martin Mars has service ceiling of a mere 4,450m, a top speed of 354 km/h and crucially no defensive armament. Oh and only 6 were made, while 13 BV-222's were made.

As for cargo load capability, how much could the JRM Mars carry ?

The BV-222 could carry 92 troops, while the JRM Martin could carry 133.

Furthermore the JRM Mars first entered service in June 1945.

 

[pbfoot]

Thats completely wrong Pbfoot;

The Martin Mars has service ceiling of a mere 4,450m, a top speed of 354 km/h and crucially no defensive armament. Oh and only 6 were made, while 13 BV-222's were made.

As for cargo load capability, how much could the JRM Mars carry ?

The BV-222 could carry 92 troops, while the JRM Martin could carry 133.

Furthermore the JRM Mars first entered service in June 1945.

apology was thinking of BV 238

 

[Juha]

Soren
H8K was definitely better and it entered service in early 1942
Max speed 467 km/h
Max range 7180 km
service ceiling 8760m

Only thing in which 222 was better was as transport plane but after all 222 was a civil design when H8K was designed as maritime patrol a/c.

Juha

 

[Soren]

I'd say the BV-222's defensive armament was better, and it could carry a larger cargo load as-well.

 

[Vincenzo]

H8K and BV 222 are one for patrol other for trasport it's not a good comparison.
but the defensive armament of H8K is good (5 guns and 5 mgs if i remember right)

 

[Juha]

Now H8K had 5 20mm cannon and 4 7,7mm mgs and a tail turret was always a plus. As I wrote as transport 222 was better.

Juha

 

[Soren]

apology was thinking of BV 238

Pbfoot the BV-238 was faster, larger and had a longer range than both.

The BV-238 is the largest and heaviest a/c of WW2.

 

[Soren]

Now H8K had 5 20mm cannon and 4 7,7mm mgs and a tail turret was always a plus. As I wrote as transport 222 was better.

Juha

The BV-222's armament was better as-well with 3x 20mm 5x 13mm guns, and better controlled as-well. And the guns mounted on the wings provided an excellent area of fire.

 

[pbfoot]

Pbfoot the BV-238 was faster, larger and had a longer range than both.

The BV-238 is the largest and heaviest a/c of WW2.

and they are all sitting on the bottom of a lake

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

and they are all sitting on the bottom of a lake

Yeap the only completed one was sunk by 3 P-51D's at a lake in Schleswig-Holstein in Germany.

I wonder why no one has gone down and taken pictures of her. Would be neat to see it. If she were still some what intact, it might be neat to raise her, restore her and put her in a museum.

 

[Juha]

Soren
Quote: "better controlled as-well"

Have you facts or is that again only your oppinion?

5*20mm + 4* 7,7mm vs 3*20mm + 5 * 13mm, which was better? It is very close even if 7,7 mm was rather useless weapon in later war years but MG 131 wasn't .5" Browning or 12,7mm Berezina either.

Juha

 

[ToughOmbre]

Best to me means produced in numbers and with a proven track record in many, if not most theaters and in a variety of missions.

13 BV-222's, or 13 of any aircraft for that matter, could not have had any impact at all.

TO

 

[parsifal]

The h8Ks performance figures are as follows

Max Speed: 289 mph (465 kmh
Weights: empty 40520 lb, fully loaded: 71650 lb
Range: 4443 miles (7150 km)
armament: 5 x 20mm 4 x 7.7mm, 4409 lbs bombs, or 2 x 1764 lb torps. As a transport, the Emily could move up to 64 troops, depending on their role, this might be as few as 29.

BV 222 carried a normal defensive armament of 3 x 20mm and 5 x 13mm. AFAIK, the BV 222 was not used as a bomber, it was used mostly as a transport, buts carrying capacity was very impressive, with 76 equipped troops able to be carried, although once again this could vary depending on the role they were being carried for.

 

[Juha]

Hello Parsifal
for Emily I have seen 29 passanger or 64 troops, that was for the transport version H8K-2L. I have interpired that meaning 64 soldier or 29 navy officers and gentlemen but Your explanation might well be the correct one.

Juha