Best World War II Aircraft?

[Soren]

I've known about the Li-2 forever pretty much Juha, but I never considered it a bomber, and it wasn't either.

As for the Ju-290, the LW's emphazis on fighters and more defensive kind of war Germany was fighting at the time of the Ju-290's introduction meant it didn't get the chance to prove its worth in the heavy bomber role like the Allied bomber designs had plenty of opportunity to. But that doesn't take away the fact that it was excellent for the role, being well armed, fast being able to carry a very large loadout.

 

[Juha]

Soren
Why then
Quote:" Was the DC-3 for example capable of acting as a bomber ? No"

if you knew that it was used by several regular bomber regiments on hundreds of bombing sorties over long period of time.

Juha

 

[Glider]

Well FLYBOYJ I guess we have to agree to disagree on this.

The DC-3 didn't evolve any more than most other a/c, and I doubt it was anymore easily adapted than most other a/c either. The thing that made the DC-3 a success was mainly that it was reliable cheap, something which often seems to win out over superior performance technology.

It could well be argued that because the DC3 only basically needed more powerful engines to deal with the increased payloads, and instruments to deal with developments over the 70+ (and counting) years of operational use. Proves that it was the best aircraft of the war, it was right from the start and the nearest thing to perfect for its role you will find.
Its also worth remembering that it has always, and often still does tend to operate in the most difficult environments in the world from the Arctic to Deserts. Many designs have been mooted as being the replacement DC3 and none of them have come close.

The nearest WW2 plane that I can think of in these terms, minimum change and long life would be the Harvard Trainer. Again it was right for the job.

Re the Ju290 even if the aircraft had been put into post war production (and its a good point, if it was so good, then why wasn't it) does anyone seriously see it as still being in use?

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Ok this confuses me abit, what is your position exactly ?

I mean you say "I do not think you can say that the Ju 290 was able to be used in more roles" and then you say "I am sure the 290 could perform more roles. It was a bigger aircraft and capable of performing more roles."

I agree that it was capable of performing more roles more effectively than the DC-3, no doubt about it. The Ju-290 was used as a long range heavy bomber, heavy transport, large passenger a/c recon plane. The DC-3 was used as transport passenger a/c during the war, that's it. After the war it was used in numerous other roles.

The Soviets experimented with some DC-3 designs, but none proved successful besides the original.

Yeah my post was worded a bit wrong.

What I am saying is this. You can not say that the DC-3 could not be used as a bomber. It was capable of it and was used as a bomber.

In the end the Ju 290 was a more capable aircraft. No denying it. They are two different kinds of aircraft though and to compare them is wrong in my opinion.

I am sure that in the end we would find that both were capable of performing the same duties. Just performing them in different capacities.

Transport
Cargo
Bomber
Observation/Recon

And due to longevitiy the DC-3 was able to be used as:

Attack
Electronic Warfare

I've known about the Li-2 forever pretty much Juha, but I never considered it a bomber, and it wasn't either.

As for the Ju-290, the LW's emphazis on fighters and more defensive kind of war Germany was fighting at the time of the Ju-290's introduction meant it didn't get the chance to prove its worth in the heavy bomber role like the Allied bomber designs had plenty of opportunity to. But that doesn't take away the fact that it was excellent for the role, being well armed, fast being able to carry a very large loadout.

Since it did not prove its worth, it can not be in contention, nor can we consider it a heavy bomber.

Same logic as you give for the DC-3...

 

[drgondog]

I've known about the Li-2 forever pretty much Juha, but I never considered it a bomber, and it wasn't either.

As for the Ju-290, the LW's emphazis on fighters and more defensive kind of war Germany was fighting at the time of the Ju-290's introduction meant it didn't get the chance to prove its worth in the heavy bomber role like the Allied bomber designs had plenty of opportunity to. But that doesn't take away the fact that it was excellent for the role, being well armed, fast being able to carry a very large loadout.

Soren - your points are valid.. one of the reasons I don't do "best" debates very often is there is no framework to make judgements.

Having said that I think the DC-3/C-47 is one of the 'greatest' aircraft ever designed and bulit simply because it is providing value around the world 64 years after the last one was built.. but we can't say that for the Mustang, the Me 262, the Ju 290, the Spit, the Me 109 the B-29.

Kinda like the last one still flying gets some votes for "best".

IF it is one of the 'greatest of all time', it certainly is a candidate for best of WWII. If it is not a candidate for greatest of all time what would you nominate to place above the Gooneybird?

 

[pbfoot]

If it is not a candidate for greatest of all time what would you nominate to place above the Gooneybird?

Waiting for this reply

 

[fly boy]

ok why not put in a poll of like the top 5 aircraft and then go from there?

 

[wingnuts]

ok why not put in a poll of like the top 5 aircraft and then go from there?

Maybe a Top Ten would be even better, not only the best in an individual role but at a period in the war.

Another way of looking at it is what would be the consequences if any particular aircraft had NOT been produced at the time.

In the early part of the war in the pacific the Mitsubishi A6M Reisen/Zero would probably be the best coupled with the experiance and training of the pilots but by wars end both were outclassed.

Many others types only appeared or were used in large numbers towards the end ...as in the Me262, F4U Corsair etc.

...or in the case of German and Japanese aircraft appeared when resources were in short supply. as in the later Japanese fighters, other German jets and Arado232

 

[kool kitty89]

Juha, was the Li-2 used mostly for night time raids?

The B-23 isn't the DC-3, they are quite different.

As for the Russian use of the Li-2 as a bomber, it was no success, and 4x 250 kg bombs, heck a Fw-190 can carry more! By comparison the Ju-290 could carry up to 8 tons of bombs. And the defensive armament of the Li-2 was like I said, miserable.

1,000 kg was more than 2x what the Blenheim could carry, and the same as the Do 17 and Ju 86. It's a decent load for a light bomber.

Now if being the best is all about being simple cheap, then I think the Ju-52 deserves a mention. This a/c was also used well after the war for a variety of roles. But I wouldn't consider it the best a/c of the war or ever to fly at all.

I was thinking about bringing the Ju 52 up. It was the closest thing the Germans had to the C-47. It was simple, reliable, and cheap. Of course it was less capable than the DC-3/C-47, being slower, shorter ranged, and with a smaller payload. It was quite modern when it was introduced, but was half a generation behind the DC-3: an all-metal monoplane but with corugated skin construction and fixed landing gear. Also remember that it was originally a single engined design. It had quite a long life too, operating well into the '80s.

The DC-3 was a revolutionary aircraft at in its time; a fast, clean, stressed skin monoplane with "wide body" monoque fuselage, large freight doors, good range and pasenger capacity. It had very good handling and control characteristics and (despite being a taildragger) had good visibility from the cocpit on the ground. It was reliable, cheap, and easy to maintain and proved capable of competently adapted to many alternate roles.

 

[drgondog]

Waiting for this reply

I respect Soren's opinion - and I have my own issues on defining a 'best'.

The Gooney was one hell of an airplane after its all said and done - whether it is or was the best is pretty subjective - I just can't find another airplane to place above it without even trying to define 'roles and multi mission capability'

Just like the BUF - how do you define a better airplane for leading edge and total threat as durable as the B-52?

 

[Soren]

I really don't see the DC-3 as the best a/c ever, not at all. But like Bill correctly points out this is a very subjective matter.

I mean the ones who vote for the DC-3 primarily vote for it because it was cheap, dependable has a long service record. And while certainly being a criteria in my book for "the best ever" it is but ONE of many.

Many people also insist that the T-34 is the best tank ever, and again because it was cheap dependable, but again I must disagree. One reason being that on the open battlefield the T-34 proved to be nothing but gunfodder for German tanks, and that fact alone leaves it from taking 1st place in my book.

But like I've always said, the DC-3 was a great a/c, one of the all time greats. But IMO it simply isn't the best a/c of all time, and the reason is that it wasn't tailored to do any role besides carrying passengers and hauling medium transport loads.

 

[pbfoot]

But like I've always said, the DC-3 was a great a/c, one of the all time greats. But IMO it simply isn't the best a/c of all time, and the reason is that it wasn't tailored to do any role besides carrying passengers and hauling medium transport loads.

well what was better ? I realize its subjective but you I'm sure have a something in mind

 

[Soren]

To be honest I haven't got any a/c in mind for that title, too many a/c to choose between. I simply have to divide into categories before I can call anything "best".

There is no best at everything.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

But IMO it simply isn't the best a/c of all time, and the reason is that it wasn't tailored to do any role besides carrying passengers and hauling medium transport loads.

And that's all it had to do to be one of the reasons why the allies won WW2.

While I could agree with objectiveness in picking "the greatest" or "the best" of anything, the record of this aircraft cannot be denied. I think one needs to separate that there were aircraft larger and faster, and in some cases more advanced, but as stated earlier, a harmonized design coupled with a need placed this aircraft into greatness and its greatest accomplishment (aside from being a major tool in allowing the allies to win WW2) was probably allowing the average "Joe" all over the world to buy a plane ticket for a reasonable price and get to a destination safely and in comfort

 

[Juha]

KK
yes, ADD was like BC most of the war a night bombing force.

Soren
Quote:" open battlefield the T-34 proved to be nothing but gunfodder for German tanks"

Now in 45 your gunfodder ended up in Berlin but German überpanzers in junkyards. So clearly T34 in real world was a bit better than mere gunfodder. Eastern front wasn't one flat field either. Was T-34 the best tank in WWII, I don't know, maybe not but it wasn't mere gun fodder either.

Juha

 

[wingnuts]

One of the worlds oldes DC3s (an original not an ex C47) flew over my house yesterday, and it's not an unusual event. The ex Ansett Airlines DC3 VH-ABR "Kanana" was built in 1938, easy to tell from other DC3/C47s as it has the original Wright Cyclone engines.... a different note to the more usual PW Twin Wasps

JetPhotos.Net Photo » VH-ABR (CN: 2029) Ansett Airways Douglas DC-3 by Nathan Long

VH-ABR Douglas DC-3

Aviation Photos: VH-ABR

C-47 Skytrain - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Soren]

Soren
Quote:" open battlefield the T-34 proved to be nothing but gunfodder for German tanks"

Now in 45 your gunfodder ended up in Berlin but German überpanzers in junkyards. So clearly T34 in real world was a bit better than mere gunfodder. Eastern front wasn't one flat field either. Was T-34 the best tank in WWII, I don't know, maybe not but it wasn't mere gun fodder either.

Juha

On the open battlefield the T-34 was gunfodder, that's just how it was Juha. Fortunately for the Soviets however not all battles took place on te open plains, but there was a fair deal of close range combat as-well.

Oh and one more snide remark and I'll ignore you from now on, and this time it'll be for good.

 

[Marcel]

Where is the snide remark? I see him only disagreeing with you...

 

[Glider]

I think its fair to say that when the T34 and KV1 went into action, it was the PzIII 50L42 and PzIV 75 L24 that were the cannon fodder. Which is why they were such a shock

There is a tendancy to look at the later developments and there is no doubt that the Tiger I and Panther (once they were reliable) were better tanks mitigated to some degree by the T34/85

 

[Juha]

Soren
Quote:"Oh and one more snide remark and I'll ignore you from now on, and this time it'll be for good."

Of course you can ignore me, we live in free world, thanks to Allied troops.

Glider
IMHO PzIII 50/L42 and PzIV 75/L24 were not cannon fodder either, but hard pressed. IMHO Soviet T-26s and BTs were cannon fodder when they faced uparmoured Pz IIIs and IVs.


But on aviation. IMHO at times Germans forgot that best is the worst enemy of good. Look for example Bomber B program. They could have replaced JU 88A by Ju 88B but thought that the improvement was not enough and continued Ju 88A production while waiting for Bomber B, only after it was cristal clear even to LW high command, that Bomber B program was failure, the improved Ju 88B was put in production as Ju 188.

Juha