The 10 Best Aircraft of World War II That Never Saw Service

[fubar57]

CANCELLED: The 10 best aircraft of World War II that never saw service

Hindsight is a glorious thing. From the safe distance of several decades it is blindingly obvious that many of the aircraft thrown into the maelstrom of combat during the Second World War were wors…

hushkit.net

Just browsed through this; I'll let you guys go nuts

 

[pbehn]

Spitfire MkIII? I always felt the Spitfire could have been developed further.

 

[GregP]

A decent attempt by someone not really in tune with the way things went in the real world.

 

[GrauGeist]

Oh boy...

This one (from the G.56 section) is glorius:
"The G.56 was essentially the same airframe mated to a considerably more powerful Daimler Benz DB 603 engine, this engine was considered too large to be fitted into the Messerschmitt Bf 109".

I will say the bit about the He280 was fairly accurate.

 

[fubar57]

The Top Ten US Navy Aircraft of World War II

Obviously it’s in there but is it number one? It is striking both how few different types the US Navy operated during World War II, particularly from carriers, and how nearly all of them were…

hushkit.net

 

[pinehilljoe]

Surely the Bell XFL Airabonita should be on the top ten list of WW2 aircraft that never saw production

 

[GregP]

Maybe, except for the fact that the stigma of the P-39 followed it around like stink on a dog pile.

If I recall correctly, that airplane is buried off the end of the Patuxent River runway, along with quite a few other significant airplanes.

 

[pinehilljoe]

Maybe, except for the fact that the stigma of the P-39 followed it around like stink on a dog pile.

If I recall correctly, that airplane is buried off the end of the Patuxent River runway, along with quite a few other significant airplanes.

I live in MD and have been to the Pax River Museum, they have a nice collection.

 

[GrauGeist]

I believe that the XF5F-1 was scrapped at Paxutent in 1944, too.

 

[pbehn]

I must say, there is a shocking lack of French designs there.

 

[Thumpalumpacus]

Yeah, skipping the He-280 seems odd to me.

 

[PAT303]

Spitfire MkIII? I always felt the Spitfire could have been developed further.

My opinion the MkIII was the only one on the list that was able to be put in service and make a difference, it was better than anything flying in 1940-41.

 

[Clayton Magnet]

Surely the Bell XFL Airabonita should be on the top ten list of WW2 aircraft that never saw production

The Airabonita only belongs on a "Worst names of WWII" list, certainly not a top 10 "best" list like this one.

 

[Thumpalumpacus]

The Airabonita only belongs on a "Worst names of WWII" list, certainly not a top 10 "best" list like this one.

On the bright side, making it a taildragger took advantage of CoG issues.

 

[nuuumannn]

Just browsed through this; I'll let you guys go nuts

Hush-kit again, good read, too.

Just a bit about the Miles M.20, it was first suggested as a naval fighter in 1940, which led to Eric Brown writing a report about its unsuitability as a carrier aeroplane after testing it on behalf of the Admiralty in 1941. Nevertheless, an intriguing inclusion, but in reality it had limited growth potential and performance beyond 1941. Perhaps if it were exported to smaller countries that wouldn't be faced by the most modern fighters that were emerging in that 1941, 1942 time period?

The Fiat G.56 is a shoe-in for this, but as recorded in another thread, Milch made the decision not to initiate production of the Italian fighters for German needs in October 1943 following the impending fall of the Fascist Italian government. As I mentioned in the other thread, a weird situation arose where the Allied controlled government ordered G.55 production continued, even though the factory was still under the control of the Axis powers!

Aaah, the Fw 187, what to say about this that hasn't been said already. Would'a could'a should'a...

The He 280 remains a spectacular missed opportunity for an interim jet fighter.

Martin Baker produced some real whizz-bang fighters, but the firm was small; a workshop located on an airfield with little logistical ability to commence production of an entirely new fighter from scratch. Infrastructure would have had to be built, a factory big enough to support mass production, as well as manpower acquired and trained - it was all a bit beyond the capabilities of a wee cottage factory putting out specialist one-off aeroplanes made by hand. Things on the frontline were changing so fast that by the time production of the MB.3 was undertaken and they were rolling off the production line, an aircraft with the capability of the MB.5 would have been needed and by the time that came out, jet fighters were already in service. Not to mention the problems with the Sabre that affected the Typhoon, on top of its other vices, so the MB.3 would not have offered much more beyond the Tiffy at any rate because of delays getting it into service.

The He 100, a rather mercurial machine that would have needed a new cooling system before it went into service; it certainly would have been an excellent fighter, but in reality had it entered service and been available alongside the Bf 109, the Luftwaffe would still have lost the Battle of Britain - it wasn't a long-range fighter the Luftwaffe needed but better strategy and management from the top who listened to those at the frontline, instead of resting on their laurels accepting rubbish intelligence that contradicted what was actually happening. Nonetheless, it would have been a formidable foe for the RAF, which, of course would have had to adapt to the situation by up-engining Spitfires sooner, if it were possible.

A nice segue to the Spitfire III, I'm cautious about agreeing with suggestions that Smith should have allowed this to run its course instead of going the interim Mk.V route. Having established the Spit III would have meant a clearing of the existing production lines, which were stacked with Mk.IIs, which were easily converted to Vs, then with Vs on the production lines, putting 60 series Merlins in them to make Mk.IXs. We forget just how fluid this decision making process was and how swiftly Supermarine adopted the production lines to improve the type's performance. This was expeditious and that's what was needed. Had there not been a war on it might have been the route to take, but with the war on, quick decision making was needed and Smith had the right ideas to meet Air Ministry expectation, in my opinion, and based on how long it took before the war for the British aviation industry to do anything quickly, the route the Spitfire's development took was able to adequately meet the rapid changes in tactical situations on the aerial battlefield in the war as it was from 1940 onwards.

 

[PAT303]

From what I have read about MB, Martin was a ditherer who wanted everything perfect instead of good enough which resulted in the company making a very good 1943 aircraft, the MB5 in 1946, what's ironic is Hawker, who also had a reputation, was still making 1939 aircraft, the Hurricane in 1944. What killed the MkIII Spit was a war had to be fought but it lived on in the MkVII, VIII and XIV.

 

[pbehn]

From what I have read about MB, Martin was a ditherer who wanted everything perfect instead of good enough which resulted in the company making a very good 1943 aircraft, the MB5 in 1946, what's ironic is Hawker, who also had a reputation, was still making 1939 aircraft, the Hurricane in 1944. What killed the MkIII Spit was a war had to be fought but it lived on in the MkVII, VIII and XIV.

If it wasnt for the pesky war, the Spitfire could have been much better.

 

[tomo pauk]

A nice segue to the Spitfire III, I'm cautious about agreeing with suggestions that Smith should have allowed this to run its course instead of going the interim Mk.V route. Having established the Spit III would have meant a clearing of the existing production lines, which were stacked with Mk.IIs, which were easily converted to Vs, then with Vs on the production lines, putting 60 series Merlins in them to make Mk.IXs.

Why would the existing production lines need to be celared from Spitfire IIs in order to make the III?
The production line for Spitfires at Westland is yet to be made. There is cetainly no glut of Spitfire IIs to clear from the Castle Bromwich production lines in Summer of 1940.

 

[PAT303]

If it wasnt for the pesky war, the Spitfire could have been much better.

How inappropriate to have ww2 start when the Spit was being developed, bloody Germans.

 

[Clayton Magnet]

How inappropriate to have ww2 start when the Spit was being developed, bloody Germans.

If it wasn't for the bloody Germans, and their penchant for starting world wars, the RAF probably would have been flying fixed pitch prop Mk.I's into the 1950's!

The Mk.III is my personal favorite "What if?" question from WWII. Spitfire development after 1940 always seemed to lag behind a succession of "interim" types, all for the sake of not disrupting current production rates.