Butt-ugly airplanes

[wmaxt]

Here are what some of the other countries around the world were trying to do while Kelly Johnson was designing the P-38. The first is Holland's Fokker D.XXIII - a novel concept for the times, but poorly refined, under-powered, and using a very poor airfoil. The second is Gloster's F.9/37 which was the absolute contemporary of the P-38. It certainly never had the looks of the Lightning.

LOL

Then you are forgetting about the Fokker G.1, which was allready available in 1936. Even before the FW-189.

You just have to admit that the P-38 was a good copy with the techniques learned from the G.1 that was tested by the RAF and other things learned in the years after that. And still it took until the J version to get a succesfull fighter. The first series had a lot of serious problems, where the Fokker G.1 was known as the secondbest allied fighter in 1940 (after the Spitfire) 8)

The P-38 was an independent design.

The P-38 was compettive from the first. In the MTO it achieved a 6/1 P-38 kill ratio almost exclusivly with pre-J models. In the ETO there were problems primarily Attitude/training, Fuel and lack of heat add all problema it still did the job it was sent to do drop bomber losses from 10 % ave. to 4/5% ave. It's also not mentioned often there were substantial losses in ground attack in the ETO Air to air it achieved a 4/1 P-38 kill ratio.
In the Pacific it was always superior to it's competition too.

The late J/L aircraft could not only take it to the enemy but was competitive/dominant to all commers in any environment!

 

[mosquitoman]

I've posted this in the other ugly planes thread but it's so bad it deserves to go in here for anybody who hasn't seen it

 

[cheddar cheese]

Thats cool! 8)

 

[JCS]

Yea sure is...






......If you like things that are extremely ugly

 

[Nonskimmer]

Well, enemy pilots might laugh themselves to death I suppose.

 

[Ome_Joop]

Here are what some of the other countries around the world were trying to do while Kelly Johnson was designing the P-38. The first is Holland's Fokker D.XXIII - a novel concept for the times, but poorly refined, under-powered, and using a very poor airfoil. The second is Gloster's F.9/37 which was the absolute contemporary of the P-38. It certainly never had the looks of the Lightning.

Pff the P-38 is (just like the FW-189 Uhu) a copy of the Fokker G1 wich was a real beauty!

http://www.fokkerg-1.nl/

BTW Is this Ugly?

Fieseler Fi-167

 

[Aggie08]

I don't think so, the landing gear looks a little squarish for me but overall it's not a bad lookin plane.

 

[cheddar cheese]

I like the Fi-167. Not exactly dripping with beauty but its ok.

 

[wmaxt]

Here are what some of the other countries around the world were trying to do while Kelly Johnson was designing the P-38. The first is Holland's Fokker D.XXIII - a novel concept for the times, but poorly refined, under-powered, and using a very poor airfoil. The second is Gloster's F.9/37 which was the absolute contemporary of the P-38. It certainly never had the looks of the Lightning.

Pff the P-38 is (just like the FW-189 Uhu) a copy of the Fokker G1 wich was a real beauty!

http://www.fokkerg-1.nl/

BTW Is this Ugly?

Fieseler Fi-167

The Lightning guy is correct.

The P-38 was not a copy it's design is officialy given a date of March 12, 1936. And was totaly indipendant of other designs in the US or abroad.

wmaxt

 

[Smokey]

A Farman
Imagine the noise the pilots heard (if it ever flew)

1930s Canadian Vickers Velos
The test pilots flew it only under protest, and it was known as "The Dead Loss" around the factory.

Aeronca C3 "Flying Bathtub"

All from this link
http://www.popularaviation.com/UgliestPlane.asp?Page=1

 

[HealzDevo]

That one with the piston engine set in the front taking up the whole thing, what is it? Whatever it is I think it would be hard to find an uglier plane than that... The big propeller just ruins it somehow...

 

[Negative Creep]

A face only its mother could love

Some people like it, to me it looks like a child's toy

Would look nice if it weren't for the fact someone appears to have cut most of the rear section out and glued it back together

Again, the proportions are all wrong

This Polish Zubr that was posted in the 'Worst Aircraft' thread also caught my ete. It appears to have been knocked together in a shed. Comically ugly

 

[Marcel]

Koolhoven FK.55 Very ugly in my opinion. Was quite a remarkeble plane in 1936, retractable wheels, Engine behind the pilot (hey where did I see that before )
Two counter-rotating propellers....
According to Koolhove history:

The plane has flown one single short flight. On 30th June 1938 test pilot Thomas Coppers took off - and immediately started a turn to land again - with the wind! - Koolhoven ran to the plane, to see what had happened. Both men had a short, furious discussion. We do not know what was said, but one thing is certain - the FK-55 never flew again.

Crew 1
Engine 1× Lorraine Petrel 860 hp
Maximum speed 520 km/h
Range 850 km
Starting weight 2280 kg
Wingspan 9.6 m
Overall length 9.3 m

 

[HealzDevo]

Hang on, that is the Avro Manchester I think you are posting there, isn't it? The RAF big bomber is it? If so tell us the picture source so that if there are any more I can find them. The Avro Manchester even with google and AlltheWeb.com searchengine seems to be one of the hardest aircraft to find pictures of. But that is only the Avro Manchester II. The Avro Manchester I is even harder to find pictures of...

 

[Gnomey]

The British bomber is an Armstrong Whitworth Whitley...

 

[Marcel]

Hang on, that is the Avro Manchester I think you are posting there, isn't it? The RAF big bomber is it? If so tell us the picture source so that if there are any more I can find them. The Avro Manchester even with google and AlltheWeb.com searchengine seems to be one of the hardest aircraft to find pictures of. But that is only the Avro Manchester II. The Avro Manchester I is even harder to find pictures of...

The Avro Manchester II is better known as the Lancaster, I'm sure you'll find dozens of pictures of it

 

[Negative Creep]

Didn't the Manchester basically look identical to the Lanc, bar the twin engines and shorter wings?

 

[Gnomey]

Didn't the Manchester basically look identical to the Lanc, bar the twin engines and shorter wings?

Yes, pretty much.

Manchester

Lancaster

 

[HealzDevo]

Yes, but I consider them two separate aircraft. The Lancaster is a development of the Mancester II but it is not the Manchester bomber by itself. I already have a lot of pictures of the Lancaster and I happen to like the Manchester. Incidently the Avro Manchester I was a biplane bomber developed near the end of WWI but never saw production. That is why most people forget that the Avro Manchester that developed into the Lancaster was the Avro Manchester II.

 

[GADGET]

I found this:

Sure is ugly