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

[fubar57]

Off to check my books but off the get-go, were they even in Europe?

 

[fubar57]

WOW!!! According to "TBM/TBF in action", ".....During the summer of 1944 at the height of the German V-1 "buzzbomb" attacks, Avengers of Number 854 and Number 855 Squadrons were credited with the destruction of two V-1s, both shot down by gunfire."

 

[ARTESH]

WOW!!! According to "TBM/TBF in action", ".....During the summer of 1944 at the height of the German V-1 "buzzbomb" attacks, Avengers of Number 854 and Number 855 Squadrons were credited with the destruction of two V-1s, both shot down by gunfire."

I witnessed during one of firefights on Kurdistan, our sniper destroyed an RPG rocket midair with one shot.

Also Iranian Navy claimed that they have destroyed several Caterpillar (Chinese built C-802 Anti-ship missile) with HMG fire, during Iran Iraq war.

Back into world war two, and have in mind that missile was something new and hadn't enough power, speed and accuracy, I think it was common to be countered with MG fire or heavier weapons.

 

[Escuadrilla Azul]

WOW!!! According to "TBM/TBF in action", ".....During the summer of 1944 at the height of the German V-1 "buzzbomb" attacks, Avengers of Number 854 and Number 855 Squadrons were credited with the destruction of two V-1s, both shot down by gunfire."

Amazing!

My guess was that the should be FAA an aircraft but two is more than just luck.

Thanks fubar57 !

BTW, which edition of in action? In the older #82 or the newer #10225?

 

[fubar57]

#82

 

[Escuadrilla Azul]

I witnessed during one of firefights on Kurdistan, our sniper destroyed an RPG rocket midair with one shot.

Also Iranian Navy claimed that they have destroyed several Caterpillar (Chinese built C-802 Anti-ship missile) with HMG fire, during Iran Iraq war.

Back into world war two, and have in mind that missile was something new and hadn't enough power, speed and accuracy, I think it was common to be countered with MG fire or heavier weapons.

Quite an achivement for the sniper!

 

[ARTESH]

Quite an achivement for the sniper!

And a life saver! TBH, if he missed, me and at least, other 4 soldiers, werent alive today.

 

[b0ned0me]

New production lines didn't just start from scratch - the manufacturer received orders for aircraft before the decision was made to build a the factory.

Without getting dragged into the details of which mark is best when, I don't think this is quite how the process worked during WW2. When the government decided it needed a certain firm to build a certain number of a certain type of aircraft, it also necessarily decided how many workers it was allowed, how much aluminium, the allocation of machine tools, factory expansion if necessary, etc etc. It wasn't a free market any more.

Because these companies were separate entities. Ask yourself why Curtiss didn't give up P-40 production and simply build P-51s?

Because the nice men from the government decided it would take them too long to make the switch, and they could still find some use for stacks of P-40s.
Otherwise the Curtiss management would have got a telegram telling them all p40 contracts, funding, GFE allocations and resource priorities were cancelled with immediate effect. Shortly followed by a letter offering them a choice of being useful either in making P-51s or in bayonet-charging the Japanese.

 

[tomo pauk]

Because these companies were separate entities. Ask yourself why Curtiss didn't give up P-40 production and simply build P-51s?

Each firm had their own management and specialisation and workforce. The Air Ministry offered contracts to firms, but nothing happened in a vacuum and existing orders didn't just begin or end as soon as war was declared. The Brits got the hang of satellite production, with firms like Gloster building Hurricanes ordered before the outbreak of war, English Electric and Shorts licence building other firms' types during the war, but each of these firms had orders to fulfil and chopping and changing production was not a quick or easy thing (hence the whole discussion surrounding the Spitfire Mk.III) - it couldn't be done overnight and took quite a bit of effort to begin with.

Without getting dragged into the details of which mark is best when, I don't think this is quite how the process worked during WW2. When the government decided it needed a certain firm to build a certain number of a certain type of aircraft, it also necessarily decided how many workers it was allowed, how much aluminium, the allocation of machine tools, factory expansion if necessary, etc etc. It wasn't a free market any more.

Because the nice men from the government decided it would take them too long to make the switch, and they could still find some use for stacks of P-40s.
Otherwise the Curtiss management would have got a telegram telling them all p40 contracts, funding, GFE allocations and resource priorities were cancelled with immediate effect. Shortly followed by a letter offering them a choice of being useful either in making P-51s or in bayonet-charging the Japanese.

Curtiss have had a contract to make P-47s (that they made a lousy job of). Asking them to do P-51s too in 1942 will not do anyone any good. Westland received contract for Spitfires and did a good job there.
So yes, governments were calling the shots of who makes what, not the companies. Governments sometimes were too late to force companies to make stuff under licence vs. companies' hardware.

 

[Geoffrey Sinclair]

Avenger V-1 kills, from Diver Diver Diver by Brian Cull.

9/10 July 1944,854 Squadron, Avenger JZ127, pilot S/Lt D.P. Davies, 0510, shot down by gunner L/Airman F Shirmer, V-1 at 2,000 feet, range 700 yards, 20 rounds used. Sunrise would have been at 5.54, moonset at 9.47, the full moon was on the 6th, so quite good shooting.

14/15 August 1944, 854 Squadron, Avenger FN854, Pilot Lt(A) A.F.Voak, 0210 off Dunkirk, Shot down by pilot, V-1 at 2,000 feet, 300 knots.

Lancaster gunners were also awarded 2 V-1 kills

 

[nuuumannn]

When the government decided it needed a certain firm to build a certain number of a certain type of aircraft, it also necessarily decided how many workers it was allowed, how much aluminium, the allocation of machine tools, factory expansion if necessary, etc etc. It wasn't a free market any more.

No, that's no how it worked. The government didn't do this. Employment of staff and provision of resources to build the aircraft was the firms' responsibility, not the government's. The Air Ministry allocated contracts and orders, the firms as independent businesses built the aircraft.

 

[b0ned0me]

No, that's no how it worked. The government didn't do this. Employment of staff and provision of resources to build the aircraft was the firms' responsibility, not the government's. The Air Ministry allocated contracts and orders, the firms as independent businesses built the aircraft.

But the Air Ministry did not just allocate contracts to build aircraft, it also provided the huge amounts of government authorizations required to obtain land, building materials, workers, machine tools, electricity, gas, petrol, oils, paint, aluminum, fabric, coal for heating, beans for the canteen and toilet paper for afterwards. All of these were subject to control from the Ministry of Supply, Ministry of Labour, etc. That's without even getting into the whole issue of all the things which the government purchased from other firms and supplied for fitment to the aircraft before it left the factory (engines, radios, guns, instruments).

As far as I am aware contracts were not placed or left in place unless sufficient resources could be allocated to fulfill them, not least to make sure the resources went to the most-needed types. And for obvious reasons critical resources were not allocated to firms which could not demonstrate a clear need for them (i.e. a contract requiring those quantities of that material).

 

[nuuumannn]

But the Air Ministry did not just allocate contracts to build aircraft, it also provided the huge amounts of government authorizations required to obtain land, building materials, workers, machine tools, electricity, gas, petrol, oils, paint, aluminum, fabric, coal for heating, beans for the canteen and toilet paper for afterwards. All of these were subject to control from the Ministry of Supply, Ministry of Labour, etc. That's without even getting into the whole issue of all the things which the government purchased from other firms and supplied for fitment to the aircraft before it left the factory (engines, radios, guns, instruments).

As far as I am aware contracts were not placed or left in place unless sufficient resources could be allocated to fulfill them, not least to make sure the resources went to the most-needed types. And for obvious reasons critical resources were not allocated to firms which could not demonstrate a clear need for them (i.e. a contract requiring those quantities of that material).

What you're describing and the manufacturing companies providing manpower and factories are two different things. The government issued contracts, the companies produced aircraft to these contracts from their own factories etc. The government didn't build factories and hire staff. The government provided funding to enable the firms to do so.

Allocation of contracts to build types was based on several things, including factory capability, previous experience, existing workload, merits of the tender submission etc, and varied depending on the situation and the piece of hardware, but the government expected companies to be able to fulfil the contracts depending on the expediency of the situation or the equipment. Getting a satellite firm to build another's aircraft for example, but it wasn't responsible for staffing and equipment within that firm to enable it to do that.

Companies ran on a thin line between staying in the black or red during the pre-war years and winning or losing a contract could mean either work for years ahead or staff layoffs and factory closures. When it came to the government contracts, often these firms had to put themselves in debt to build new factories and hire more staff because they knew the benefits of being awarded the contract would cover that debt.

I recently was reading about an early British manufacturing firm that was at a quandary - it needed government contracts to be able to pay for the expansion of the workshop floor space, but was told that the new contracts would only be awarded if the company had that floor space from the outset.

 

[PAT303]

Avenger V-1 kills, from Diver Diver Diver by Brian Cull.

9/10 July 1944,854 Squadron, Avenger JZ127, pilot S/Lt D.P. Davies, 0510, shot down by gunner L/Airman F Shirmer, V-1 at 2,000 feet, range 700 yards, 20 rounds used. Sunrise would have been at 5.54, moonset at 9.47, the full moon was on the 6th, so quite good shooting.

14/15 August 1944, 854 Squadron, Avenger FN854, Pilot Lt(A) A.F.Voak, 0210 off Dunkirk, Shot down by pilot, V-1 at 2,000 feet, 300 knots.

Lancaster gunners were also awarded 2 V-1 kills

I don't care what any one says, that's damn impressive shooting.

 

[GregP]

Maybe the V-1 hit the TBF from behind?

 

[VA5124]

Under TBF says that "the TBF managed to shoot down a V-1 'doodlebug' ". Never heard about that, anyone have any info about that?

I think the F8F deserves a metion here fast heavy armed but never made series production because we had better coming down the pipe like the F-80

 

[wuzak]

I think the F8F deserves a metion here fast heavy armed but never made series production because we had better coming down the pipe like the F-80

F8F certainly made series production, with over 1,200 built.

Also, the P-80/F-80 was not a naval aircraft and was not designed to do the same job as the F8F - to be able to climb fast.

 

[VA5124]

F8F certainly made series production, with over 1,200 built.

Also, the P-80/F-80 was not a naval aircraft and was not designed to do the same job as the F8F - to be able to climb fast.

I just giving my opinion

 

[yulzari]

The Hurricane actually dated back to 1935, but ok. Let's put that into context before we rest on the presumption that Britain is still building obsolete fighters in 1944. Following the Battle of Britain it was clear that the Hurricane did not have the chops to remain at the frontline against the Bf 109, certainly the new Friedrich model, so it was deemed second rate - the Air Ministry knew that. What it did do very well in trials was ground attack and the Hurricane II fitted with heaver gun armament, particular the IIc with four 20 mm Hisso cannon was a good fighter bomber and it proved itself in North Africa and the CBI theatre, where despite more advanced fighters being available, such as the Spitfire VIII and Thunderbolt, the Hurricane was effective as a strike aircraft. It's worth remembering that the Hurricane was a formidable low speed dog fighter.

Not specific to the Hurricane but, when folk play at aviation top trumps, few look at the sea level speeds and low level climb rates but go straight to what the maximum possible is. Thus the Spitfire V or Hurricane II value needs to be compared with performance low down of a FW190. Higher up you need a Spitfire IX but low down the Mk IX is not really better than a MkV. Thus they moved on later to the LF versions of Spitfires to get a better fighter bomber and the FAA always chose engine versions optimised for far lower levels than the RAF choices. The RAF well knew the Allison engined MkI Mustang was a better performer at sea level than the Merlin engined ones and kept them in use as long as possible for tactical recconaisance in NW Europe by preference even though the Merlin ones look so much better in a game of top trumps.

 

[nuuumannn]

Not specific to the Hurricane but, when folk play at aviation top trumps, few look at the sea level speeds and low level climb rates but go straight to what the maximum possible is. Thus the Spitfire V or Hurricane II value needs to be compared with performance low down of a FW190. Higher up you need a Spitfire IX but low down the Mk IX is not really better than a MkV. Thus they moved on later to the LF versions of Spitfires to get a better fighter bomber and the FAA always chose engine versions optimised for far lower levels than the RAF choices. The RAF well knew the Allison engined MkI Mustang was a better performer at sea level than the Merlin engined ones and kept them in use as long as possible for tactical recconaisance in NW Europe by preference even though the Merlin ones look so much better in a game of top trumps.

Which enhanecs what I've stated in my post. The Hurricane was still useful because of its good performance as a fighter bomber.