Best World War II Aircraft? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Aggie08
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Reliability was AFAIK excellent.
How many flew after the war and today is completely irrelevant Evan, many great a/c from then don't fly today. The reason the Ju-290 Ju-252 didn't enjoy the same success as the DC-3 is that not many were produced and most were destroyed during the war, and as was the factory that made them. Had Germany won it would've been a different story.
evangilder
"Shooter"
I disagree. The DC-3 was already becoming famous before the war even began. How many fly today is not only relevant, but testament to the great design of these aircraft. They have been used by militaries and countries all over the world and are still in use for their original purpose even today. If that's not relevant, what the hell is?
The DC-3 is the greatest aircraft EVER made.
The DC-3 is the greatest aircraft EVER made.
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
Why do you think that I am wrong pbfoot ? The C-69 Constellation (Or L-49) didn't outperform the Ju-290 or Ju-252 in any way except speed. The Ju-290 -252 both flew further, could carry more, had defensive armament and had a rear loading ramp.
Remember the larger Super-Constellation didn't appear till 1950.
And I certainly don't see how the C-54 is a match for the Ju-290 or -252.
Thats odd for you to say since the DC-3 is a taildragger itself, and the Ju-290 -252 don't suffer from the only problem of the taildragger design both being able to load from a rear loading ramp:
Not when they clearly had something better.
The tail dragger configuration of the DC-3 was its only limitation in my book and there were not a lot of ground loop accidents because you were able to see over the nose unlike many other large taildraggers of the day, plus it was extremely easy to fly and land.
When you put performance, reliability, safety, ease of maintenance and the ability to make revenue as an airliner, all that combined placed the DC-3 ahead of any cargo plane of its day and that's why so many allied AND German aircraft (surplus) used in the post war flat out didn't see wide use or last long - they didn't have "all the above" plus the ability to make the airlines money - the DC-3 did and that's why it will remain the greatest aircraft of WW2 and of all time.
pbfoot
1st Lieutenant
Reliability best internal aero engines ever made I believe when the Israelis were getting the Jewish folk out of Ethiopia in the late 40's one had taken off with of 76sob and landed with 77 . People have started campfires in them as they were being evaced out the stories abound .Yes the Ju's were a great transport and their legacy was famous in Canada as bush planes but they were no c47s. I'll enclose this pic of a 47 with the nose of a f104 tacked on and
Attachments
evangilder
"Shooter"
And an appropriate moniker!
Well the exact same can be said about the Ju-290. It had no problem with vision over the nose, it didn't ground loop, it was easy to fly and a pleasure to fly as-well. The Ju-290 had the added benefit of longer range, much larger load carrying capability, defensive armament and speed.
The Ju-290 also did excellently as an airliner after the war.
Again the reason it didn't enjoy the same sucess as the C-47 can be attributed to many things, but most importantly is that German lost the war and therefore production stopped.
Greatest a/c of all time ? Well you see thats where I get off the train, cause although it was a great a/c it couldn't do everything. The C-47 did NOT win the war for the Allies, it was a vital link alright, but so were many other a/c.
Fact is the C-47 was a good transport airplane, but IMO it lacks the defensive armament, load capability speed to be called the best. The DC-3 did admireably in civil use, being very rugged and dependable, but so did many others. Another reason for why the DC-3 stayed in service for as long as it did was the relative ease with which spare parts could be acquired - something which would've been a nightmare postwar for the Ju-290 as production of it had ended, this meant that contrary to the DC-3 its lifetime as an airliner was limited.
How many that fly today is completely irrelevant, cause like I pointed out many great aircraft from back in time don't. The C-47 design wasn't some magic design, it wasn't the only multiple engined aircraft which could fly home on one engine, far from it.
For me the subject of the best a/c of all time is a very debatable one, cause lets think about it, we're litterally talking about millions of millions of a/c made over time, all of which we have to narrow down to one, the best - a hard task. Therefore when talking about which a/c is the best of all time it is all opinion and you can't make blanket statements like "The DC-3 is the greatest a/c ever made", to claim this is absurd when you think about all the other great a/c built over time really. Infact IMO there is no such a thing as the greatest single a/c of all time, only when you divide it into the best of different classes of a/c such as:
Best transport
Best fighter
Best airliner
Best civil plane
Best cargo
etc etc...
It is all a matter of opinion. The DC-3 is famous because of its actions during World War II [and beyond] but I would never claim it to be technically superior to the other cargo carriers of the day; the C-46 was technically superior.
If you're going to claim the greatest of aircraft of all time, it's a simple matter of "What aircraft performed its job(s) the best?". Did the Spitfire do a better job at being an interceptor than the B-17 being a bomber?
If you're going to claim the greatest of aircraft of all time, it's a simple matter of "What aircraft performed its job(s) the best?". Did the Spitfire do a better job at being an interceptor than the B-17 being a bomber?
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
If it was that great why didn't its operators seek to have it produced after the war?
Defensive armament? The Russians armed their - that's a non issue here. Had US C-47s needed to be armed, they would of been....
Nope - it wasn't "operationally and economically viable as a modern airliner" - no spares, no product support and I would love to see a comparison of maintenance and operating costs - again not to diminish its capability in its day but if it was really that great it would of been produced after the war.
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
That's the whole point - it was easily built, it's cost was reasonable, there were plenty of them, the product support for the aircraft was immense, it was easily flown, gave great performance, was reliable and made money for its operator. You may find aircraft with one, two or even three of these attributes but when compared to "the whole package" the DC-3 takes it.
evangilder
"Shooter"
No, the C-47 did not win the war for the allies, but it was called one of the most important weapons of the war by the Supreme Allied Commander. But I suppose that is irrelevant to you as well.
If the other aircraft were that good, they would still have been made because of their clearly great design and would still be in use today, regardless of who won the war. The Israelis bought surplus German fighters in their early days. But what transports did they buy? The C-47.
Sorry, but the Germans losing the war is irrelevant. Good designs transcend victories and defeats.
If the other aircraft were that good, they would still have been made because of their clearly great design and would still be in use today, regardless of who won the war. The Israelis bought surplus German fighters in their early days. But what transports did they buy? The C-47.
Sorry, but the Germans losing the war is irrelevant. Good designs transcend victories and defeats.
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
I did some research on the Ju 290 and according to what I found only 2 were used in the post war ear - One by Spain and one by the Czechs as the Letov L.290.
Comparing the Ju 290 to the DC-3 is apples and oranges as the 290 was a much larger aircraft - I would compare it to the DC-6 or the L-049 which both were clearly superior to the 290. Again, if it was able to fill a civilian market in the post war years, operators would of been quick to acquire them or see the production line re-opened.
Comparing the Ju 290 to the DC-3 is apples and oranges as the 290 was a much larger aircraft - I would compare it to the DC-6 or the L-049 which both were clearly superior to the 290. Again, if it was able to fill a civilian market in the post war years, operators would of been quick to acquire them or see the production line re-opened.
I disagree, you can't just re-open a production line like that, the factory was gone, and you'd have to spend millions on starting organizing a new one. It was much easier to use an abundantly existing a/c instead.
And what exactly makes the L-049 better than the Ju-290 ?? The Ju-290 could carry more further, featured a loading ramp, and had defensive armament. I'd like to see the C-47 equipped with defensive armament, esp. since I only see two places where its at all possible.
Sorry but I call a BS on that one. Any self respecting country isn't going to just completely copy another country's designs and then use it, its very bad propoganda if they do.
And what exactly makes the L-049 better than the Ju-290 ?? The Ju-290 could carry more further, featured a loading ramp, and had defensive armament. I'd like to see the C-47 equipped with defensive armament, esp. since I only see two places where its at all possible.
Sorry but I call a BS on that one. Any self respecting country isn't going to just completely copy another country's designs and then use it, its very bad propoganda if they do.
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
Any aircraft could be armed - the L-049 flew faster, higher and could carry more people...
BTW - C-47 were eventually armed if that really matters.
Spain and the Czechs built the 109 - Spain built the He 111 and France built the Storch. Bad propaganda? An operator could care less - we're talking the post war here and if if the aircraft design was sound, cost effective to operate and the right price no one is going to care where its linage came from...
Bottom line there were hundreds to DC-3s operating before the war and it was recognized as the premier airliner. During the war it was rapidly produced, easily flown, was cost effective to operate and got the job done. It hung around for another 65 years and I believe there are at least still 200 of them operating. I'm sorry but there isn't any other aircraft from any WW2 air forces coming close to that operating history, and it's not because the allies won the war.....
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
evangilder
"Shooter"
Really, besides the aircraft that Joe mentioned, what about Me-262s built by the Czechs. The V2 was the basis for the early American space program. What about the VW Beetle?
Face it, the DC-3 was the best.
AL Schlageter
Banned
- 220
- Oct 9, 2007
Didn't the Russian version of the DC-3, the Li-2, carry a turret. The Japanese had their version, the Showa/Nakajima L2D Tabby.
Then there is the AC-47 Spooky.
-3× 7.62 mm (0.30 in) General Electric GAU-2/M134 miniguns, 2,000 rounds/gun
or
-10× .30 in Browning AN/M2 machine guns
-48× Mk 24 flares
All those are small a/c fighters. And the V-2 wasn't directly copied, it was just used as a basis as a certain German scientist was head of the space rocket program.
If everything which proved excellent during WW2 was directly copied then how come the Pzkpfw. V wasn't directly copied by any country ?? Its simple, the factory was down, so spare parts was a nightmare to get hold of, just ask the French who used the tank after war.
Face it, not every great invention is directly copied, it might very well influence the design built by the other nation though, no doubt, but directly copying a design simply isn't good propoganda.
If everything which proved excellent during WW2 was directly copied then how come the Pzkpfw. V wasn't directly copied by any country ?? Its simple, the factory was down, so spare parts was a nightmare to get hold of, just ask the French who used the tank after war.
Face it, not every great invention is directly copied, it might very well influence the design built by the other nation though, no doubt, but directly copying a design simply isn't good propoganda.
The AC-47 is a gun ship for crying out loud! It is a sitting duck for any fighter as it has no rear, top, front or bottom defensive armament. Like I said the C-47 couldn't be equipped with any effective defensive armament, it could only really mount guns on its sides.
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
The Soviets never complained even though the rudder pedals of their Tu-4s and DC-3 were still cast with the "Douglas" and "Boeing" logos respectively....
Users who are viewing this thread
Similar threads
