Most Overrated aircraft of WWII.....?

The most over-rated aircraft of WW2


  • Total voters
    409

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

Huh? The Spitfire Mk.I entered service with 19 Sqn at RAF Duxford in August 1938, a full year before war was declared. Am I missing something in your logic?
It is semantics based on the Spitfire not being used in combat until Dunkerque, it ignores the fact that the Spitfire was still in use when the war actually ended, in the far east.
 
It is semantics based on the Spitfire not being used in combat until Dunkerque, it ignores the fact that the Spitfire was still in use when the war actually ended, in the far east.

I believe he was referring to the fact that the Bf 109 was involved with Germany's invasion of Poland on September 1, but the Spitfire wasn't "at war" until September 3, when France and Britain declared war on Germany.
 
I believe he was referring to the fact that the Bf 109 was involved with Germany's invasion of Poland on September 1, but the Spitfire wasn't "at war" until September 3, when France and Britain declared war on Germany.
Like is said its semantics, you dont have to be at war to operate an aircraft, I dont know when the last operation of a Bf 109 in combat was either.
 
I would have assumed that to be in service for the entire war, my own logic says it was being used from August 1939 to October 1945, i.e. before the outbreak and after the surrender.

To say the Spitfire was not just because of it not being "in action" until a couple of days after the war started is ridiculous at best.

By that logic, the B-17 doesn't even come close to qualifying, I mean, no it wasn't in combat until December 7, 1941 but it was still in service since before September 1, 1939. Or am I missing something?
 
Likewise the F4U & P-38 were in US service by Dec 7th but not Sept 39. Well, maybe the P-38
 
Where did I say that the fact that the Bf 109 saw 2 days' more combat than the Spitfire was of any great import or significance?

If you look back to my post no. 2,148 I was replying to a poster's obviously semantic-pedantic-irrelevant point that the Mitsubishi Zero did not serve throughout the entire 6-year war – so it's pretty clear what I think about the 2-day difference.

Why I selected the Spitfire as most "overrated aircraft" is due to the fact the almost no Spitfires were posted or served outside of the UK until the middle of 1942 – almost halfway through the war – the Spit was a UK based fighter only for the first 3 years.

The Spitfire played little to no role in the invasion of Poland, the invasion of Norway, nor did it play any substantial role in the Battle of France either. It was the Hawker Hurricane which fought and destroyed aircraft of the Luftwaffe in most of these places. Very, very few of the Luftwaffe's losses in aerial combat were due to the guns of the Spitfire up to the French armistice at the end of June 1940.

Similar story in the Battle of Britain, I think we all know which aircraft shot down the majority of Luftwaffe over the UK in 1940 – just as Hawkers would also lead the kill rate in the the second Battle of Britain in 1944 against thousands of incoming V-1 missiles.
 
Where did I say that the fact that the Bf 109 saw 2 days' more combat than the Spitfire was of any great import or significance?

If you look back to my post no. 2,148 I was replying to a poster's obviously semantic-pedantic-irrelevant point that the Mitsubishi Zero did not serve throughout the entire 6-year war – so it's pretty clear what I think about the 2-day difference.

Why I selected the Spitfire as most "overrated aircraft" is due to the fact the almost no Spitfires were posted or served outside of the UK until the middle of 1942 – almost halfway through the war – the Spit was a UK based fighter only for the first 3 years.

The Spitfire played little to no role in the invasion of Poland, the invasion of Norway, nor did it play any substantial role in the Battle of France either. It was the Hawker Hurricane which fought and destroyed aircraft of the Luftwaffe in most of these places. Very, very few of the Luftwaffe's losses in aerial combat were due to the guns of the Spitfire up to the French armistice at the end of June 1940.

Similar story in the Battle of Britain, I think we all know which aircraft shot down the majority of Luftwaffe over the UK in 1940 – just as Hawkers would also lead the kill rate in the the second Battle of Britain in 1944 against thousands of incoming V-1 missiles.
Truth be told, the Moraine-Saulnier MS.406 first clashed with the Bf109 in September during the "Phoney War" on the Western Front (France's half-hearted attempt to rescue Poland) and was still in service with the Finns by May 1945 - so for the European theater, it would be a dead heat between the Bf109 and MS.406 for longevity.
 
The Wellington was in use from 1938-53.
BTW, the Heinkel 111 was in combat action from 1937 to 1958 (on this date in the CASA 2111 form), also in the Sidi Ifni war, with Ala de Bombardeo Ligero 27 (27th Light Bombing Wing) in CAS/COIN role, along with the T-6 Texan.

Edited for clarity: The Sidi Ifni war spaned from 1957 to 1958 and the Heinkel 111 first combats were in 1937 during the Spanish Civil War.
 
Last edited:
In terms of longevity in service well past its sell-by date of a WW2 aircraft, the A-26/B-26 Invader is up there, first deployed in late WW2, the last combat worthy example was retired from the Honduran Air Force in 1980. In that time the type has seen action in a large number of conflicts by a wide variety of operators all over the world.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back