Most innovative aircraft of WW2 ?

• Sep 30, 2011

• #21

davebender

1st Lieutenant

6,446

155

Jan 18, 2009

Michigan, USA

Let's approach this from another angle. Why do you think the Il-2 was an innovative design?

 

• Sep 30, 2011

• #22

woljags

Staff Sergeant

1,358

8

Dec 28, 2010

maidenhead uk

i would have thought that the heinkel he 219 nightfighter would fit this thread to a tee

 

• Sep 30, 2011

• #23

pbfoot

1st Lieutenant

6,974

33

Apr 14, 2005

niagara falls

davebender said:

Let's approach this from another angle. Why do you think the Il-2 was an innovative design?

Click to expand...

armoured engine, crew compartment, anf fuel tanks it was IMHOthe first sucessful purpose built ground attack aircraft definately light years ahead of the Lysander and HS 126

 

• Sep 30, 2011

• #24

davebender

1st Lieutenant

6,446

155

Jan 18, 2009

Michigan, USA

Are you suggesting WWI era purpose built ground attack aircraft were unsuccessful? How about ground attack aircraft produced during the 1920s and 1930s?

 

• Sep 30, 2011

• #25

pbfoot

1st Lieutenant

6,974

33

Apr 14, 2005

niagara falls

davebender said:

Are you suggesting WWI era purpose built ground attack aircraft were unsuccessful? How about ground attack aircraft produced during the 1920s and 1930s?

Click to expand...

Please suggest some alternatives , I have no qualms about eliminaating First War aircraft

 

• Sep 30, 2011

• #26

davebender

1st Lieutenant

6,446

155

Jan 18, 2009

Michigan, USA

The Hs-123 comes to mind. It was highly regarded for CAS in Spain, Poland and Russia from December 1936 to mid 1944. General Wolfram von Richthofen liked the Hs-123 so much he asked if production could be restarted. That was during January 1943.

The newer Il-2 was superior to the Hs-123 just as the newer A-1 Skyraider was superior to the Il-2. More engine power = more payload, greater endurance and more armor to protect critical systems. But these aircraft were all highly regarded for CAS.

 

• Sep 30, 2011

• #27

buffnut453

Captain

8,095

13,449

Jul 25, 2007

Cambridgeshire, England

pbfoot said:

armoured engine, crew compartment, anf fuel tanks it was IMHOthe first sucessful purpose built ground attack aircraft definately light years ahead of the Lysander and HS 126

Click to expand...

Errr...The Lysander and Hs126 were army cooperation and observation aircraft not ground attack.

 

• Sep 30, 2011

• #28

pbfoot

1st Lieutenant

6,974

33

Apr 14, 2005

niagara falls

buffnut453 said:

Errr...The Lysander and Hs126 were army cooperation and observation aircraft not ground attack.

Click to expand...

But what is the difference between Army cooperation and ground attack . What was the purpose of those bombs on the Lysander if not ground attack

 

• Sep 30, 2011

• #29

S

Shortround6

Major General

22,932

16,126

Jun 29, 2009

Central Florida Highlands

Army Cooperation included short range reconnaissance, including aerial photos, Artillery spotting/direction, Communications (ferrying officers from place to place) or picking up messages. Westland Lysander


and any other job you can think of. Light bombing was just one more duty and a minor one.

 

• Sep 30, 2011

• #30

davebender

1st Lieutenant

6,446

155

Jan 18, 2009

Michigan, USA

Army cooperation aircraft replaced artillery spotting balloons which were employed by the thousands during WWI. They are also used for short range photo recon. The limited payload is normally used for small marker rockets and bombs. Some of the more powerful versions such as the German Fw-189 had forward firing MGs or 20mm cannon for use against targets of opportunity. However it was no substitute for a Ju-87D or Hs-129 in attacking ground targets. Weapons payload was too small and the aircraft was not armored for protection against ground fire.

 

• Sep 30, 2011

• #31

davebender

1st Lieutenant

6,446

155

Jan 18, 2009

Michigan, USA

Field Marshal Rommel didn't need no stinkin pilot. He liked to fly the Fi-156 himself while viewing the battlefield.

FI-156 "Storch"

June 22, 1944. PM Churchill visited the Normandy battlefield. He flew in a Fi-156 piloted by Air Vice Marshal Sir Harry Broadhurst.

 

• Sep 30, 2011

• #32

pbfoot

1st Lieutenant

6,974

33

Apr 14, 2005

niagara falls

Shortround6 said:

Army Cooperation included short range reconnaissance, including aerial photos, Artillery spotting/direction, Communications (ferrying officers from place to place) or picking up messages. Westland Lysander


and any other job you can think of. Light bombing was just one more duty and a minor one.

Click to expand...

They sure blew that then , a Tiger Moth would be far better suited for that then a Lysander To me Army Coperation at that period of time was ground support Its like saying used car or pre enjoyed automobile.

 

• Sep 30, 2011

• #33

S

Shortround6

Major General

22,932

16,126

Jun 29, 2009

Central Florida Highlands

Pre war army cooperation and 1942 army cooperation were not the same thing. just like many aspects of air warfare were not, in practice, what it was thought they would be in prewar theory/planning.

The War-time Diaries of Edward Alexander Packe

 

• Sep 30, 2011

• #34

CharlesBronson

Senior Master Sergeant

3,568

89

Jan 11, 2005

Cordoba - Argentina

In my modest opinion the most inovative was the P-39, it introduced severl characteritics never seen before. Somebody could argue that the most innovative were the jets, probably but I still like the Airacobra.

 

• Sep 30, 2011

• #35

pbfoot

1st Lieutenant

6,974

33

Apr 14, 2005

niagara falls

Shortround6 said:

Pre war army cooperation and 1942 army cooperation were not the same thing. just like many aspects of air warfare were not, in practice, what it was thought they would be in prewar theory/planning.

The War-time Diaries of Edward Alexander Packe

Click to expand...

Recently was at the local library researching something and its funny about the propaganda articles that were published back then , there were several articles about about 110 Sqn later renumbered to 400 sqn RCAF . I assume that article from 41 could be viewed in the same vein.
and I also agree the P39 was an advanced aircraft and deserves consideration but then again she was local piece of work

 

• Sep 30, 2011

• #36

davebender

1st Lieutenant

6,446

155

Jan 18, 2009

Michigan, USA

I agree. Mid engine. The Ferrari of WWII fighter aircraft.

Unfortunately the execution was poor. Fix the airframe handling issues, replace the Allison engine with a RR Merlin engine and replace the unreliable hub cannon with an MG151/20. Then we'd all be debating whether the 1942 P-39 was superior to the Spitfire Vb and Me-109F4. 8)

 

• Oct 1, 2011

• Thread starter
• #37

Readie

Chief Master Sergeant

4,324

87

Apr 15, 2011

Plymouth, England

Still seeking the most innovative plane chaps...

The one that broke the most new ground.

Operational success is not necessarily a parameter.

Cheers

John

 

• Oct 1, 2011

• #38

S

Shortround6

Major General

22,932

16,126

Jun 29, 2009

Central Florida Highlands

Broke new ground that lead to further development or was just different but didn't go anywhere?

 

• Oct 1, 2011

• Thread starter
• #39

Readie

Chief Master Sergeant

4,324

87

Apr 15, 2011

Plymouth, England

Hello SR6,
This is what I seek..

1. something new or different introduced.
2. the act of innovating; introduction of new things or methods.

I suppose you could say that the jet / rocket plane was an innovative solution, but I really wanted to try and find the piston engined most innovative aircraft of WW2.

So, the use of the Lysander was innovative landing SOE agents in occupied terrority but, I'm not convined that the plane itself was.

The carrier borne planes in the PTO were rapid developments of an excisiting idea. The Corsair etc took this to a new level in firepower, strenght etc.

Any ideas?

Cheers
John

 

• Oct 1, 2011

• #40

S

Shortround6

Major General

22,932

16,126

Jun 29, 2009

Central Florida Highlands

Try this;

Budd RB Conestoga - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It may not have been the first with several features and it may not have been a success but after the rotary wing aircraft most everything else is just variations. 6 engine transport vs 4 engine transport and so on.