Best World War II Aircraft?

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

FBJ do you by any chance have any tables showing the ammount of cargo, number of troops and so forth that was carried by the C-47 in WW2?

 

[Wespe]

The reason why that War wasnt won was because of political interferance...

-The US had enough time to finish of that war and use their logistic superiority, before politics came in-

This is quite true, but whats ur point??? Production is not in question here... Do u honestly believe that the 262 made more of a difference in WW2 than the C-47 did???

-No not during WWII- but it set a milestone in future airforce layouts.

I hope not cause u are very misinformed then... Read this whole thread if u havent....

-Dont get it sorry-

As for having something in common, the c-130 took over the role of primary transport from the c-47, and used the lesson learned to make a better aircraft...

-come on those two planes have nothing in common-
-the ramp was taken over from the Ju 90 or Arado-
-taking over the role, doesn't proof any common attributes-
-The Tiger took over the Pz.IV, so what do they have in common?
-The Tiger incooperated lessons learned from the PzIV- does that make the Pz IV the master piece of ingenuity ?

The C-47 had a desisive impact on the war due to its logistic performance and production setup which showed the way for future production layouts of modern aircraft factories, agreed
And the Me-262 had a desisive impact on the layout of any post war airforce.
It was the upcomming of the German jet fighter Me-262 that made props fade away into history.
So both are right in their opinion, right ?

Wespe

 

[lesofprimus]

Right, but I think u ar downplaying the role the C-47 had in the C-130's developement...

 

[Wespe]

We agree? I never said in my post that the Me-262 was the best aircraft of WW2.

By the way Wespe whether you wish to realize it or not the C-47 influenced all post war transport aircraft from the way the intereriors were designed to the cockpit layout.

We agree on the Havard, off course nothing else.

 

[Wespe]

Right, but I think u ar downplaying the role the C-47 had in the C-130's developement...

You probably are right on that one, because I am definatly not an expert on Transportplanes.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Because it is fact that the Me-262 other than being an innovative aircraft had not impact on the war and was no where the greatest aircraft of WW2. Infact no jet engined aircraft of WW2 can even be considered.

I am still waiting for your proof and facts. I still dont think you have anything substantial.

Oh and on the C-47 read FBJs post up there. I am sure will you not believe it because the C-47 was not built by Messerschmitt or Junkers....

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Oh and on your downplay of the C-47 in allied victories here is some info:

"During World War II, the armed forces of many countries used the C-47 and modified DC-3s for the transport of troops, cargo and wounded. Over 10,000 aircraft were produced in Long Beach and Santa Monica, California and Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. The C-47 was vital to the success of many Allied campaigns, in particular those at Guadalcanal and in the jungles of New Guinea and Burma where the C-47 (and its naval version, the R4D) alone made it possible for Allied troops to counter the mobility of the light-travelling Japanese army. Additionally, C-47s were used to airlift supplies to the embattled American forces during the Battle of Bastogne. But possibly its most influential role in military aviation was flying The Hump from India into China where the expertise gain would later be used in the Berlin Airlift in which the C-47 would also play its part.

C-47 Skytrain - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"Every branch of the U.S military and all the major allied powers flew it. The U.S. Navy version was the R4D. The British and the Australians designated it the Dakota (a clever acronym comprised of the letters DACoTA for Douglas Aircraft Company Transport Aircraft). The aircraft operated from every continent in the world and participated in every major battle. By the end of World War II, more than 10,000 had been built. For all of its official and unofficial names, it came to be known universally as the Gooney Bird. General Dwight D. Eisenhower, Supreme Commander of Allied Forces in Europe, termed it one of the most vital pieces of military equipment used in winning the war.

The ubiquity of the Skytrain-Dakota-Gooney Bird transport, and its ability to operate from very rough forward airstrips, made it familiar to millions of Allied forces stationed around the world. The C–47 and its rel-atives not only pioneered in-theater wartime routes but also served as VIP transports, general personnel transports, troop carriers, glider tugs, paratroop assault transports, cargo transports, airborne ambulances, air-sea rescue craft, and special operations aircraft. Supporters of the airplane liked to quote a remark attributed to Gen. Dwight D. Eisenhower: "Four things won the Second World War—the bazooka, the Jeep, the atom bomb, and the C–47 Gooney Bird."
"
C-47 Skytrain

 

[FLYBOYJ]

FBJ do you by any chance have any tables showing the ammount of cargo, number of troops and so forth that was carried by the C-47 in WW2?

I'll try to find one...

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Good because that would be more proof for our side of the arguement, even though we dont really need it because no counter proof has been given.

 

[Wespe]

WRONG!!!! The set up of crew positions, the location of power levers and propeller controls, feathering buttons gages on the co-pilots side and even a specialized cargo door, all refined in later models such as the C-87 and later the C-130 but all descendants from the C-47. Just on reliability and fulfilling it's designed mission the C-47 has any WW2 fighter beat hands down. If the Me 262 had a 25% FMC rate at any given time I'd be surprised. There's not much you could do with a bomber destroyer that has 25 or 50 hour engines on it and that's not taking anything away from the -262, it was a great and innovative aircraft. You have to look at the whole picture. Even in it's earliest form, I'd like to see an Me 262 fly a non precision approach with 1 mile visibility...

It is a matter of definition towards setting an inovative trend and its actual impact. I agree to the features that you describe as having derived from the C-47, but it doesn't make the C-47 to the forefather of todays Transport planes in my eyes, but that is just my opinion.
I think it was the Germans who brought up ejection seats, but I would refrain myself from saying that all modern ejection seats derive from the German one.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

And the Me-262 had a desisive impact on the layout of any post war airforce.
It was the upcomming of the German jet fighter Me-262 that made props fade away into history.
So both are right in their opinion, right ?

Wespe

NO - although innovative, as a safe reliable combat aircraft it was crap. Had the war progressed and engineers had the ability to fine tune some of the idiocyncracies, the Me 262 might of been competitive with even 2nd generation jet combat aircraft (Mig-15, F-86, etc.). It was too little too late to make any real difference but it's psychological impact would be it's biggest achievement.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Please Wespe post your facts. We are all waiting.

Also please post facts that prove the Me-262 as the most versatile aircraft of WW2 as you claim. You also have said that in the Best Aircraft with Different Roles thread.

Why dont you list every role that the aircraft could truely perform.

In this forum buddy you have to come up with hard facts to prove a point...

 

[lesofprimus]

Glad to see that u finally agree that the 47 did infact influence the 130...

 

[lesofprimus]

In this forum buddy you have to come up with hard facts to prove a point...

Especially when coming from a noob...

 

[Wespe]

Come on guy's

we are turning in circles. I have never stated any doubts about the C-47 abilities or impact it had on logistics.

I stated that the Me-262 is to me the greatest aircraft of WWII, because it marked a new era in aeronautics and future layouts of modern air forces, therefore it moved the props into history.
I stated that in comparable mission spectrum the Me-262 could do the same as any prop but at 200km plus.

Those are facts, and if someone doesn't want to recognize these facts, than I dont have a problem, but please don't state, that I have not given any.

Wespe

 

[mkloby]

I stated that the Me-262 is to me the greatest aircraft of WWII, because it marked a new era in aeronautics and future layouts of modern air forces, therefore it moved the props into history.

So according to that post - there shouldn't be any military prop driven A/C in use today. That's odd, because off the top of my head I can name the E-2, C-12, C-130, T-34, T-6, MV-22 (proprotors), P-3, T-44... and I'm probably missing some. Props did not fade into history due to the turbojets, and certainly the 262 didn't move them into history.

You're missing all the guys' arguments. Try thinking what A/C was the most influential in the role it played in WWII. The Me-262's actual contribution to the war effort was overall rather small, and certainly pales in comparison to that of the C-47.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

I stated that the Me-262 is to me the greatest aircraft of WWII, because it marked a new era in aeronautics and future layouts of modern air forces, therefore it moved the props into history.

The jet didn't make "props" obsolete, if anything it enhanced the propeller/ turbine combination. The Jet made the reciprocating engine obsolete (in some cases). "Props" are still around for a reason and I don't think you fully grasp how propulsion systems evolved and are actually used today. With that said and again repeating the C-47 introduced a cockpit layout, systems and functions that are the design norm in ALL aircraft today - that's one of the things that make it the greatest aircraft of WW2 and of all time...

 

[Burador]

NO - although innovative, as a safe reliable combat aircraft it was crap. Had the war progressed and engineers had the ability to fine tune some of the idiocyncracies, the Me 262 might of been competitive with even 2nd generation jet combat aircraft (Mig-15, F-86, etc.). It was too little too late to make any real difference but it's psychological impact would be it's biggest achievement.

I wouldn't say that the Me-252 was a crap. I wonder if you have flown one. But even if you did I would surmise that the 262 you'd be flying would be a degraded one. Negative statements about the plane would be highly suspicious for it would surely come from Allied propaganda since it first flew until the present time, just as the Allies have done with the Bf-109. From what I understand the only real problem with the jet was its steel turbine not made of titanium alloy which required it to be replaced every few hours of operation. The jet was really capable, it was not just a bluff machine.

 

[Wespe]

So according to that post - there shouldn't be any military prop driven A/C in use today. That's odd, because off the top of my head I can name the E-2, C-12, C-130, T-34, T-6, MV-22 (proprotors), P-3, T-44... and I'm probably missing some. Props did not fade into history due to the turbojets, and certainly the 262 didn't move them into history.

You're missing all the guys' arguments. Try thinking what A/C was the most influential in the role it played in WWII. The Me-262's actual contribution to the war effort was overall rather small, and certainly pales in comparison to that of the C-47.

You don't get it do you? "the most influential in the role it played in WWII" did I ever state that the C-47 did NOT PLAY AN INFLUENTIAL ROLE IN LOGISTICS????

You try to show me your knowledge about the inventory about the USAF or what?
It is obvious to me, that todays modern and desisive fighter aircraft are jet propelled and not props. No matter if the Argentinians are producing Pampas (cant remember the dam name right now) and Brazilians Tucanos.
Since the Me-262 did go into action in March 45, off course their was no big contribution to WWII on German behalf, and every kid knows Germany lost the war. And because the US won, everything that contributed to WWII must off course be American or in the worst case British, otherwise how could they have won? And the best tank in WWII was the Sherman, because it influenced the Abrahms (they both have a cannon) and It contributed to winning the war.
If every future discussion comes down to contribution (winning) towards the WWII, than what do you want to discuss about ?

The Ta 152 better than .......
Answer NO because it didn't contribute
The 109 better than .....
Answer NO because it didn't contribute
MK 108 better than ...........
Answer NO because it didn't contribute
Did the Germans have anything at all?
Answer NO because it didn't contribute


Anything else?

 

[FLYBOYJ]

I wouldn't say that the Me-252 was a crap. I wonder if you have flown one.

50 hour (if you were lucky) engines, and airframes with dissimilar metal construction, (if you even know what that is) little or no corrosion control process during construction and no I really wouldn't want to have flown on in its WW2 combat form. BTW I have flown jets and know what it takes to maintain and operate them. Can you say the same?

But even if you did I would surmise that the 262 you'd be flying would be a degraded one. Negative statements about the plane would be highly suspicious for it would surely come from Allied propaganda since it first flew until the present time, just as the Allies have done with the Bf-109.

Wrong again pal, if you read my earlier post you would find I have nothing but admiration for German WW2 aircraft which I know were superior to many allied birds.

From what I understand the only real problem with the jet was its steel turbine not made of titanium alloy which required it to be replaced every few hours of operation. The jet was really capable, it was not just a bluff machine.

Read my post again pal, there was a lot more than that which was needed to make it a safe reliable combat machine - it was too little too late. For a noob here I suggest you read several threads on get your facts straight about what some of the membership have said earlier in this thread, let a lone our backgrounds in aviation....