The Most Cost-Effective Plane of WW2

Discussion in 'Aviation' started by magnocain, Jun 11, 2008.

  1. magnocain

    magnocain Member

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2007
    Messages:
    394
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    What was the most cost-effective plane of WW2?
    On these criteria:
    1. low cost
    2. low maintenance
    3. climb
    4. maneuverability
    5. armament
    6. speed
    7. range
     
  2. kool kitty89

    kool kitty89 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2007
    Messages:
    3,069
    Likes Received:
    36
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    San Jose, CA
    Judging by the criteria, this is for fighters, correct?
     
  3. parsifal

    parsifal Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2008
    Messages:
    10,676
    Likes Received:
    676
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Urban Design/Strategic Studies Tutor
    Location:
    Orange NSW
    well, assuming Kk is right, of the big three US Fighters, (P-51, P-38 and P-47), the most cost effective is the P-51. Unit cost was $51000 as compared to $67k and $91K for the P-47 and P-38 respectively.

    The P-40 was cheaper, but not as effective IMO
     
  4. magnocain

    magnocain Member

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2007
    Messages:
    394
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Yes for fighters. But be my guest if want to put down bombers too. Think of what a small country would use.
     
  5. trackend

    trackend Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2003
    Messages:
    4,039
    Likes Received:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Occupation:
    Retired tech support railway engineer
    Location:
    Ipswich, Suffolk
    I go for the P51 for development cost alone 12 weeks drawing board to plane amazing
     
  6. Kurfürst

    Kurfürst Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2005
    Messages:
    1,076
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    legal field
    Location:
    Aquincum, Pannonia Prima
    Two canditates: Bf 109 and Yak 3.

    As far as cost-effectiveness ratio only, the Yak 3 is near impossible to beat though.
     
  7. kool kitty89

    kool kitty89 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2007
    Messages:
    3,069
    Likes Received:
    36
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    San Jose, CA
    He 162 is something to consider.
     
  8. red admiral

    red admiral Member

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2005
    Messages:
    479
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Apart from when it falls apart due to poor build quality.

    Does anyone have costs for German and Russian aircraft around? I've got some bits for USAAF, RAF and RA aircraft but don't have those to compare.
     
  9. merlin

    merlin Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2006
    Messages:
    465
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Occupation:
    Customer Service Manager
    Location:
    Cardiff
    Why is it a fighter!?

    I soon as I saw the thread, I thought it must be an aircraft that was built before the war started - but served throughout, simple to build and maintain, yet had some major battle honours.
    What could it be - simple - Fairey Swordfish!
     
  10. timshatz

    timshatz Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2006
    Messages:
    4,441
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Occupation:
    MGR
    Location:
    Phila, Pa
    Not sure if it qualifies as an airplane or as the world's first simple cruise missle, but the V1 had a cost of something like $500 each. Granted, it was very inaccurate and a ramp had to be built but for $500 per copy, it did a lot of damage.
     
  11. FLYBOYJ

    FLYBOYJ "THE GREAT GAZOO"
    Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2005
    Messages:
    23,198
    Likes Received:
    784
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Aircraft Maintenance Manager/ Flight Instructor
    Location:
    Colorado, USA
    For one that was non operational, this is a contender...

    [​IMG]
     
  12. claidemore

    claidemore Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2008
    Messages:
    682
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    British Columbia, Canada
    DeHavilland Mosquito.

    Yak would be cheaper (my initial choice), but the 'Wooden Wonder' is still relatively inexpensive with it's plywood construction. Mossie meets all the other criteria, plus if you add an eighth category, multi-role capability, it delivered a lot of bang for the buck (pun intended).:p
     
  13. Kruska

    Kruska Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2008
    Messages:
    606
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Since the majority of this forum (at least I feel so) agreed on the C-47 to be the best aircraft in WW2, and the reasons stated match more or less the majority of the above criterias, the answer could only reflect back on the C-47.

    Regards
    Kruska
     
  14. drgondog

    drgondog Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2006
    Messages:
    7,359
    Likes Received:
    561
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Executive, Consulting
    Location:
    Scurry, Texas
    Pretty darn good point - I was tossing P-40 early, Yak 3 late, and Mossie throughout but believe for just the reason you cited I would go with the C-47.

    and there are sure as hell a lot more still flying than all the warbirds combined - which makes them still pretty cost effective until we factor in today's fuel costs
     
  15. Kruska

    Kruska Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2008
    Messages:
    606
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Yes, I agree that just this last factor that you forwarded would already be enough to prove this a/c as the #1 in regards to cost-efficiency-effectivness.

    Regards
    Kruska
     
  16. magnocain

    magnocain Member

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2007
    Messages:
    394
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Thanks guys.
    Planes before the war are fine too.
     
  17. Kruska

    Kruska Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2008
    Messages:
    606
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    16

    :?: :?:

    Regards
    Kruska
     
  18. magnocain

    magnocain Member

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2007
    Messages:
    394
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Let me be more clear.
    Yes that is fine. What would a small country use during WW2? is a more appropriate question.
    Thank you to all of the people who have posted.
     
  19. kool kitty89

    kool kitty89 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2007
    Messages:
    3,069
    Likes Received:
    36
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    San Jose, CA
    Look at Finland.



    And good call on the C-47.


    I think the Hurricane should also be mentioned. (particularly for the early period)
     
Loading...

Share This Page