Most Overrated aircraft of WWII.....?

[gruad]

????HUH????

The FW-190 is often in arguments as one of the finest piston planes ever produced.

Just because it was expensive to build doesn't mean it didn't live up to the hype.

And while the P-39 didn't perform up to American standards in the PTO or ETO, it did very well in India/Burma and I think the Russian kills in it showed what it could do when given to a determined force.

I would have to go with Jank and pick the P-51. It's given all the glory, it's the cadillac of the sky, etc. Well you know what?????? I wouldn't have a cadillac. Comfy car for sure. But Lord help your wallet when it breaks. And if you shot it with anything bigger than a .22, it was going down.

3P51 s could be built for 2P47s.

The P47 was most likely to come home when hit, but the P51 was a better escort.

Pilots cried when they had to switch to the Mustang, as the P47 offered so much pilot protection.

The P51 is still a great plane though, the P47 is underrated.

 

[SaparotRob]

I don't know if underrated is the right word regarding the P-47. I think undervalued or under appreciated might be closer to the mark. It has never been described as fragile and I can't recall reading the Thunderbolt as being under gunned. Again, without the drop tanks for whatever reason, it couldn't do what the USAAF needed most in a fighter.

 

[Thumpalumpacus]

Pilots cried when they had to switch to the Mustang, as the P47 offered so much pilot protection.

I've read that sentiment going both directions. I think it was Blakeslee who accepted his P-51s the day before a mission, and told his pilots "You can learn to fly them on the way to the target." They'd transitioned from Spits to Jugs, which they hated, and then to -51s, which at least suited the commander's favor in flying. I don't know how many holdover Spit pilots they had at that time, but I imagine those still flying would be happy with the change to the -51 as well.

So I don't think it was all one-sided. That's natural, it seems to me; pilots with time in an airframe often come to appreciate its strong points even as they understand it has weak points too. And changing steeds in the middle of a war brings on difficulties of its own.

 

[Thumpalumpacus]

I don't know if underrated is the right word regarding the P-47. I think undervalued or under appreciated might be closer to the mark. It has never been described as fragile and I can't recall reading the Thunderbolt as being under gunned. Again, without the drop tanks for whatever reason, it couldn't do what the USAAF needed most in a fighter.

Keep in mind that until 1943 the USAAF didn't realize that they needed a fighter with range. They kept thinking those -17s and -24s were going to elbow their way in and out of Reich airspace without long escort.

 

[XBe02Drvr]

They'd transitioned from Spits to Jugs, which they hated, and then to -51s,

If you'd got used to bouncing nimbly around the battlefield in your twin .50 equipped scout jeep, you might find an M4 Sherman a bit of a lug if it was forced on you without warning, consent, or any training, don't you think?

 

[pbehn]

Keep in mind that until 1943 the USAAF didn't realize that they needed a fighter with range. They kept thinking those -17s and -24s were going to elbow their way in and out of Reich airspace without long escort.

By 1943 the people who believed a fighter escort were not needed were in a very small minority. The P-51B/C started to arrive in mid 1943 as proof of that. The Schweinfurt Regensburg raid was escorted as far as was possible at the time and the strategy used was to try to minimise losses. IMHO the raid was made because commitments to a strategy had been made before the materials and men needed were in place.

 

[Thumpalumpacus]

By 1943 the people who believed a fighter escort were not needed were in a very small minority. The P-51B/C started to arrive in mid 1943 as proof of that. The Schweinfurt Regensburg raid was escorted as far as was possible at the time and the strategy used was to try to minimise losses. IMHO the raid was made because commitments to a strategy had been made before the materials and men needed were in place.

Not with the USAAF. Mustangs didn't pull bomber escort for the 8th until Dec 1943, after a few months of shouting in the halls of the Pentagon.

Of course -38s and -47s escorted bombers so far as range went, but until summer of 43, there was no real hue-and-cry to escort bombers all the way to target. It took a couple of disastrous raids for that to happen.

Of course the Americans committed to long-range bomber penetrations, but they did so understanding that they didn't have any fighter that could go there and back. Only after first and second Schweinfurt did us Amis really push for full-mission escort.

 

[Thumpalumpacus]

If you'd got used to bouncing nimbly around the battlefield in your twin .50 equipped scout jeep, you might find an M4 Sherman a bit of a lug if it was forced on you without warning, consent, or any training, don't you think?

Absolutely. Hell, I hate going from my small truck to my mom's granny-Toyota. We all develop comfort-zones, and only get outside them for exigencies or requirements, I think.

And who in Hell wants to learn the ins and outs of a new plane while some jackass is trying to put you under?

I think one reason why we all seem to agree that the pilot matters as much as the equipment is because a good pilot who knows his crate -- inferior though it might be to the enemy's -- can get more out of it than an enemy who is transitioning into a new bird and doesn't know its ins and outs. Obviously not a 100% solution.

I'm no pilot, so my opinion is worth every penny you paid for it.

 

[GrauGeist]

Let's not forget that RAF Spitfires escorted US bombers on missions into France and other targets in early 1943 (where range permitted) until they were replaced by the P-38.

 

[Thumpalumpacus]

Let's not forget that RAF Spitfires escorted US bombers on missions into France and other targets in early 1943 (where range permitted) until they were replaced by the P-38.

Indeed. But long-range penetration missions were still done sans escort past Holland or Belgium. The awareness was slow in the building, as history shows.

 

[pbehn]

Let's not forget that RAF Spitfires escorted US bombers on missions into France and other targets in early 1943 (where range permitted) until they were replaced by the P-38.

RAF Spitfires escorted the Schweinfurt raid until P-47s took over to escort to Eupen which is on the border between Belgium and Germany

 

[XBe02Drvr]

And who in Hell wants to learn the ins and outs of a new plane while some jackass is trying to put you under?

I think one reason why we all seem to agree that the pilot matters as much as the equipment is because a good pilot who knows his crate -- inferior though it might be to the enemy's -- can get more out of it than an enemy who is transitioning into a new bird and doesn't know its ins and outs. Obviously not a 100% solution.

I'm no pilot, so my opinion is worth every penny you paid for it.

Well your opinion seems to be very much IAW history, so it's at least worth the two bits that opinions seem to rate around here.

 

[XBe02Drvr]

Indeed. But long-range penetration missions were still done sans escort past Holland or Belgium. The awareness was slow in the building, as history shows.

The Reich's awareness wasn't slow in building, was it? LW waiting at the border to take the handoff from the escorts.

 

[Thumpalumpacus]

The Reich's awareness wasn't slow in building, was it? LW waiting at the border to take the handoff from the escorts.

Yeah, lol, I was writing about awareness inside the Army Air Forces. The Germans wasted no time in meting out lessons ... but USAAF generals too often leaned on doctrine.

 

[XBe02Drvr]

but USAAF generals too often leaned on doctrine.

What was that about "comfort zones"?

 

[pbehn]

Absolutely. Hell, I hate going from my small truck to my mom's granny-Toyota. We all develop comfort-zones, and only get outside them for exigencies or requirements, I think.

And who in Hell wants to learn the ins and outs of a new plane while some jackass is trying to put you under?

I think one reason why we all seem to agree that the pilot matters as much as the equipment is because a good pilot who knows his crate -- inferior though it might be to the enemy's -- can get more out of it than an enemy who is transitioning into a new bird and doesn't know its ins and outs. Obviously not a 100% solution.

I'm no pilot, so my opinion is worth every penny you paid for it.

The pilot only matters when other factors are almost equal, that is why aircraft improved by about 200HP per year as the war progressed, no amount of pilot skill will get a Hurricane to escort a B-17 to Berlin.

 

[Thumpalumpacus]

What was that about "comfort zones"?

Something I was going to put on my last post, but deleted for brevity's sake, seems a little more appropriate here:

One of my favorite USAAF generals is George Kenney, because he didn't care too much about doctrine or other fancy stuff. He just wanted the job done. So you want to put a B-25 at 100' ASL and skip the bombs into ships? Okay -- does it work? Yes? Well, get after it, Ranchhand.

He wanted bold sonsabitches who'd press home low and fast, and used whatever airplanes at hand. No mewling about how the book said it should be done, no attachment to his favorite schemes. Parafrags? No problem, we'll figure it out. I've got P-40s for half my fighter force? Okay, we'll figure out coverage with -38s flying high.

He had an enlisted man's sense of improvisation and gave it a general's stamp of approval, doctrine be damned. That's a guy I'd happily serve under. None of this bomber-mafia bullshit or fighter-pilot elitism.

It's almost like he didn't trust his comfort-zone. ... unlike so many other general officers from all the branches.

 

[Thumpalumpacus]

The pilot only matters when other factors are almost equal, that is why aircraft improved by about 200HP per year as the war progressed, no amount of pilot skill will get a Hurricane to escort a B-17 to Berlin.

I understand technical advances and limitations. That wasn't my point. Do you not agree that a pilot who knew his Hurricane intimately would have some advantage over a pilot just learning his Me-109E, technical aspects of the airframe aside?

Knowing what you're doing with the machine you're operating is nothing to sneeze at.

 

[XBe02Drvr]

That's a guy I'd happily serve under. None of this bomber-mafia bullshit or fighter-pilot elitism.

It's almost like he didn't trust his comfort-zone. ... unlike so many other general officers from all the branches.

Exact opposite of his counterparts in IJN and IJA.
"Win this war; forget about the last one!"

 

[Thumpalumpacus]

Exact opposite of his counterparts in IJN and IJA.
"Win this war; forget about the last one!"

Exactly. And he'd flown in the last war, had a few kills as a back-seater and then SPAD pilot, so it wasn't like he didn't have his own memories and experiences. He just didn't languish in them. He understood it was a different war with different gear and needed a different approach. That flexibility marks him as a really smart guy, in my book.