Most innovative aircraft of WW2 ? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Readie
- Start date
Anyway, a very pretty bird.Shortround6
Lieutenant General
Well, if you already had a pressure cabin that worked good enough for passengers it isn't that much of a stretch to to make smaller cabins with a bit more pressure for bomber crews.
Lighthunmust
Banned
So would I be correct in assuming the B-29 was not very innovative because a tubular fuselage and pressurization was nothing new, remote control of guns was nothing new, and having a bomb load greater than the B-17s and B-24s was nothing new? What was innovative in the design of the B-29? Was it only innovative for putting all the best technology in a single package and succeeding at what is was designed to do?
Last edited:
- Thread starter
- #65
Readie
Chief Master Sergeant
Hmmm, are you sure it's the wood, and not another aspect of this aircraft that makes you suggest it?
Actually no...I have tried not to mention the two things I usually do and thus far have succeeded.
- Thread starter
- #66
Readie
Chief Master Sergeant
During much of the war the Mosquito was one of the fastest aircraft in the sky on either side, and one of the most manoeuvrable - in mock combats it could climb faster and turn more quickly than a Spitfire. The Mosquito inspired admiration from all quarters
"In 1940 I could at least fly as far as Glasgow in most of my aircraft, but not now! It makes me furious when I see the Mosquito. I turn green and yellow with envy.
The British, who can afford aluminium better than we can, knock together a beautiful wooden aircraft that every piano factory over there is
building, and they give it a speed which they have now increased yet again. What do you make of that?
There is nothing the British do not have. They have the geniuses and we have the nincompoops. After the war is over I'm going to buy a British
radio set - then at least I'll own something that has always worked."
Hermann Göring, January 1943
Apart from the 'yellow with envy' ( was something lost in the translation?) this is praise indeed.
The Mosquito inspired a German imitation, the Focke Wulf Ta 154 Moskito, which, like the original, was constructed of wood.
Cheers
John
"In 1940 I could at least fly as far as Glasgow in most of my aircraft, but not now! It makes me furious when I see the Mosquito. I turn green and yellow with envy.
The British, who can afford aluminium better than we can, knock together a beautiful wooden aircraft that every piano factory over there is
building, and they give it a speed which they have now increased yet again. What do you make of that?
There is nothing the British do not have. They have the geniuses and we have the nincompoops. After the war is over I'm going to buy a British
radio set - then at least I'll own something that has always worked."
Hermann Göring, January 1943
Apart from the 'yellow with envy' ( was something lost in the translation?) this is praise indeed.
The Mosquito inspired a German imitation, the Focke Wulf Ta 154 Moskito, which, like the original, was constructed of wood.
Cheers
John
Last edited:
BV-141. It used the prop circulation and torque to make an asymmetrical aircraft fly symmetrically.
Also the Arado 232 which could takeoff in 200 meters and taxi over huge ditches due to its
22 sets of wheels. Might have made a difference in the Stalingrad supply missions had it been
available in more numbers.
- Thread starter
- #68
Readie
Chief Master Sergeant
That's innovation for sure.
I would vote the Germans as the greatest innovators in the aircraft industry around WW2.
Cheers
John
I would vote the Germans as the greatest innovators in the aircraft industry around WW2.
Cheers
John
Shortround6
Lieutenant General
Is it innovation if nobody uses the idea/technique again?
- Thread starter
- #70
Readie
Chief Master Sergeant
Hello SR6,
At the risk of appearing pedantic, I would mildly suggest that if no one thought of the idea in the first place then it couldn't be used again.
Cheers
John
Shortround6
Lieutenant General
Sorry, just trying to get at what was innovation and what was just novel. Or perhaps a novelty? An idea may be new and it may work but if it is never used again is it "innovation"
"At the risk of appearing pedantic" from wiki " Innovation differs from invention or renovation in that innovation generally signifies a substantial positive change compared to incremental changes."
"At the risk of appearing pedantic" from wiki " Innovation differs from invention or renovation in that innovation generally signifies a substantial positive change compared to incremental changes."
- Thread starter
- #72
Readie
Chief Master Sergeant
Touche.
Not a novelty, a new idea? , a new way of doing something?, imagination?
So, the first power operated turret in a bomber would be an innovation at the time. any further progress with turrets would be developmental.
Cheers
John
Shortround6
Lieutenant General
Yes, maybe remote turrets or the application of fire control computers to remote turrets would be innovation but going from 1 gun to 2 or 4 in power turret would not. Or going from 1 power turret to 3.
Constant speed propellers were an innovation but going from 3 blades to 4 was not (and not new either).
The BV 141 was certainly novel, it was new, it was inventive, it did work but it was never copied/used again on any plane built in any numbers at all. It had about zero impact on the progress of aviation. Maybe it did deserve better? But it didn't "innovate" any changes did it?
Constant speed propellers were an innovation but going from 3 blades to 4 was not (and not new either).
The BV 141 was certainly novel, it was new, it was inventive, it did work but it was never copied/used again on any plane built in any numbers at all. It had about zero impact on the progress of aviation. Maybe it did deserve better? But it didn't "innovate" any changes did it?
michaelmaltby
Colonel
".... I would vote the Germans as the greatest innovators in the aircraft industry around WW2."
That's perhaps the subject of a new thread ...
Nazi Germany had an energy about it - for all its other glittering horrors - and Germany (the people) had the scientific and industrial talent - and Der Feuher and The Party gave that talent focus and opportunities.
I would argue that the same innovativeness was present in the German WW1 aircraft industry (including the Dutchman Folker).
MM
That's perhaps the subject of a new thread ...
Nazi Germany had an energy about it - for all its other glittering horrors - and Germany (the people) had the scientific and industrial talent - and Der Feuher and The Party gave that talent focus and opportunities.
I would argue that the same innovativeness was present in the German WW1 aircraft industry (including the Dutchman Folker).
MM
Shortround6
Lieutenant General
I would not be so sure about that. In the late 30s the people of many nations were "airminded" to an extent that is hard to believe now. Airplanes and air travel/warplanes were sort of like computers and the internet today. It was the "future" and governments and private organizations spent money to develop it in many ways. Some of which seem quite naive or down right silly today. The plane in every garage idea for one. Governments and publishing companies sponsored contests for cheap, easy to fly aircraft. Most airlines operated on government subsidies, in addition to the governments providing the airports. Any small country with any industrial base at all was trying to build it's own aircraft. Pilots that set records got parades in capitol cities and invited to state dinners. They were celebrities right up there with movie stars.
See: Douglas Corrigan - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Aviation was seen as the business to be in by many up and coming inventors, engineers and entrepreneurs no matter what country they were in.
See: Douglas Corrigan - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Aviation was seen as the business to be in by many up and coming inventors, engineers and entrepreneurs no matter what country they were in.
I think the He100 was very innovative....how to reduce the drag for an inline engine without a radiator......at the same time take the world airspeed record (albeit with a modified wing) then produce a production fighter only to have politics get in the way..
Attachments
Lighthunmust
Banned
I disagree. From what I understand about the management of talent by the little corporal and his cronies is that they were more of a wrong than right. Much of the talent was not focused and resulted in wasted on the following: pursuing perfection (which is the enemy of good enough) so you never have sufficient quantity, allowing numerous manufactures to make similar equipment that results in incredible logistic problems, engaged in more management by cronyism than their enemies, and channeling resources into weapons projects that while innovative were impractical and resulted in limiting resources to weapons that were actually used to win the war. This is not providing focus, it is hubris. This is not providing opportunities, it is irresponsible indulgence in fantasy.
michaelmaltby
Colonel
".... Much of the talent was not focused and resulted in wasted on the following"
I don't disagree. But nonetheless hair-brained, innovative Nazis like the Horten Brothers got funded ... Politics .. Nazi Politics coupled with a national preoccupation with "perfection" got in the way. In contrast - no Manhattan Project would be possible under Nazi conditions. Yet the resources that were committed to syn-oil production at prices 4-5 times world crude pb price in pursuit of German "self-sufficiency" - were enormous and focused and well-executed.
But great aircraft innovation has emerged from Germany whatever the rationale.
MM
I don't disagree. But nonetheless hair-brained, innovative Nazis like the Horten Brothers got funded ... Politics .. Nazi Politics coupled with a national preoccupation with "perfection" got in the way. In contrast - no Manhattan Project would be possible under Nazi conditions. Yet the resources that were committed to syn-oil production at prices 4-5 times world crude pb price in pursuit of German "self-sufficiency" - were enormous and focused and well-executed.
But great aircraft innovation has emerged from Germany whatever the rationale.
MM
Last edited:
Lighthunmust
Banned
I agree. See #4 below.
Lighthunmust
Banned
Thank goodness politics did get in the way. If it didn't we would all be denied the pleasure of innumerable Bf109 versus everything arguments and the continuing mystery of the Bf109 landing gear design contribution to losses.
I may be may be wrong but I think the generic layout of most current and proposed fighters is something like the following: cockpit in front of the engine, tricycle gear, primary gun armament in fuselage, electricity flowing through wires to operate controls, and canopy with 360 degree view. I think most of us know which innovative piston engine WW2 fighter had all of these characteristics on September 1, 1939.
