Best World War II Aircraft?

[FLYBOYJ]

?? I thought the first flight for the 52 was 1952 and production ops in 1955 - whereas the C-130 first flight was 1954 with ops in 1956?

The 52 is still projected to extend into 2020+

It would have been #1 on my list but was focused on WWII for the C-47.

All true....

I would tend to swing to he 130 based on some of its combat and covert exploits, not that the B-52 didn't have any....

 

[Ramirezzz]

B-52 has certainly good points in this pool, but ironically (and luckily) it was never been used in its primary role as a nuclear weapons carrier.

 

[drgondog]

B-52 has certainly good points in this pool, but ironically (and luckily) it was never been used in its primary role as a nuclear weapons carrier.

Which is why I rank it so highly (for one reason). It was SAC in the context of the Big Stick for so many years.

 

[evangilder]

Oh, it carried plenty of nuclear weapons in the cold war days. Thankfully, it never had to drop them.

 

[Crumpp]

Which is why I rank it so highly (for one reason). It was SAC in the context of the Big Stick for so many years.

It was SAC and represented the frontline of our manned nuclear deterrent. What a great plane.


All the best,

Crumpp

 

[renrich]

Am in the process of reading a book by Clay Blair entitled "Hitler's U Boats" I expect to be an "expert" on the subject(if I can remember anything he says) if I ever finish the book. It is extremely detailed. Anyway, he states that some of the B24s used for ASW duty had much of the bomb bay taken up by extra fuel tanks(which is not surprising) but also all the MG turrets removed and 4-20mm fixed guns installed in the nose. First I ever heard of that. Must have been exciting strafing a sub with 4-20mms in a B24.

 

[Wildcat]

Am in the process of reading a book by Clay Blair entitled "Hitler's U Boats" I expect to be an "expert" on the subject(if I can remember anything he says) if I ever finish the book. It is extremely detailed. Anyway, he states that some of the B24s used for ASW duty had much of the bomb bay taken up by extra fuel tanks(which is not surprising) but also all the MG turrets removed and 4-20mm fixed guns installed in the nose. First I ever heard of that. Must have been exciting strafing a sub with 4-20mms in a B24.

Rich, most of the RAF's Coastal Command Liberator varients carried an extra fuel tank in the bomb bay to give the a/c VLR capability. The Liberator MkI, which was specially modified for 120 sqn RAF, was armed with 4x 20mm cannons in a bulge under the forward fuselage plus hand operated MG's in the beam and tail positions.

 

[renrich]

Thanks Wildcat, Keeping some mgs in the tail and elsewhere would make sense in case of running into a JU88. I wonder if a B24 ever actually strafed a u boat with those 20 mms?

 

[renrich]

Wild cat, another thought on the B24 and ASW. I have read that the B24 was very heavy on the controls with a lot of muscle needed to maneuver it. I wonder how that aspect would allow it to work in and out of a dive angle in order to bring those 20 mms into play?

 

[Goodrapid]

I suppose a quad 20mm can be quite damaging for a sub even if one would start firing, say, a kilometer away. Provided one has a reasonably large ammo supply and gets the fall of shot proper, one might perhaps hit the boat with a few percent of the rounds during those 5-10 seconds.

Although it must have been quite the experience to pull up a Liberator from even a shallow dive, even with two pilots.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Actually the B-24 was supposed to be an easy flying aircraft (contrary to legend) unless it looses an engine or suffers damage (especially in the wings). When the Davis airfoil was incorporated into the design I think little thought was given to the performance of the aircraft on 3 or even two engines...

 

[Graeme]

all the MG turrets removed and 4-20mm fixed guns installed in the nose. Must have been exciting strafing a sub with 4-20mms in a B24.

You can just make out the 'Blister Pack' in this photo of the Liberator I. They retained the hand held Brownings, but A&AEE was critical of this, describing them as ineffective, as after only 5 seconds of firing, they required a 60 second cooling period before refiring. Vickers guns were requested.

Trivia for the day..the 4-20mm blister pack could be re-armed in in the air by two men in 75 seconds.



They also trialled the 'Sub Killing' Type C rocket projectile pack, with 8-RP launchers on a Liberator Mark III (FL927/G). Ground firing buckled the bomb doors and broke perspex windows, but air firing caused no problems. I don't know how, but they could reload the rockets in flight. So they strengthened the bomb doors and carried on with the testing. Results revealed that the best method of attack with the rockets was firing them at the end of a shallow dive of 15-20 degrees and pulling out at 250ft, using about 2G.

 

[Goodrapid]

Great pictures of that very upgunned/uprocketed B-24.
Must have felt like being of the receiving end of a volley from a Mi-24 chopper. Reload in flight....I like it.

 

[Soren]

Wouldn't want to be in a surfaced enemy U-boat if that thing came by! Not only does it have lots of rockets guns, it's gonna drop bombs after you as-well! Yikes!

 

[kool kitty89]

The Li-2 could also cary 2x 7.62mm MG's in waist gunner positions near the tail. (one MG on each side) The turret had onle a 7.62mm in early models, but was later replaced with a 12.7mm UBK haevy machine gun. (remember the UBK's performance was almost as good as the M3 Browning, with 820-850 m/s velocity and up to 1050 rpm)

Still volnerable to head-on attack (though some were fitted with a single 7.62mm in the nose iirc) and from below, but was decently protected from above and modestly from the sides and rear.

 

[Crumpp]

after only 5 seconds of firing, they required a 60 second cooling period before refiring.

That is true for the M2 Aerial Weapon as well.

Here are the burst limits:

 

[kool kitty89]

But in the same time the Soviet gun would have fired many more rounds.(at its maximum cyclic rate) Did the M3 have similar firing time limits? (if around the same time, many more rounds would be able to be fired per burst, obviously due to the high ROF)

 

[Crumpp]

All machineguns have burst limits kool kitty89. Just like any other machine, they have operating parameters.

 

[kool kitty89]

I know, but if the time limit is the same, the one with the higher ciclic rate will have more firepower.(assuming similar ballistics)

And on the DC-3/C-47/variants there of, if not the best all-around a/c in history, it is probably the most sucessful in its overall design and usage.

 

[Soren]

The higher the RoF the quicker the heating of the barrell, thus time limits would be shorter for weapons with a higher RoF.