Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Blackburn Firebrand; Blackburn Firebrand. Aircraft Database of the Fleet Air Arm Archive 1939-1945 Designed as a carrier fighter, redesigned as a torpedo fighter, ineffective at both. Dangerous flight characteristics even with a huge tailfin and rudder.
The last Firebrands couldn't have been that bad. They served in an active squadron until 1953. Granted the peacetime budgets were pretty small but keeping aircraft that were difficult to control or fly for 7 years after the war? Including the MK V version they served in 7 squadrons post war. A great plane??? NO, but a true clunker?
The F2A Buffalo. The Zeppelin. The TBD Devastator. The Boulton-Paul Defiant. The Bf-110. (in it's original intent) The F3H Demon. The Me-163. (killed more pilots than "kills" it achieved) The Yak-15. (Burned off its own tail) The F2Y Sea Dart. The Convair Pogo.
I stand by my offering the TBD as a clunker, it entered service in 1937, one year after the Fairey Swordfish, the same year as the Bf-109, and two years before the SBD.
The Finnish used every aircraft they had to good effect, everything from the M.S. 406, Polikarpov I-153, Fiat G-50, Blenhiem, and over a dozen other rogue aircraft.
I think that says something about the Finns, more so than the aircraft.
And... when was the TBD used in combat, prior to 1941? Adequate like a Chihuahua is a dog. Having owned several of the cute little buggers, I can tell you that, while the Chihuahua might have the will to fight, it is no match for a pit bull. (That being said, I have a 3 pound female that has tore up the neighbours 10+pound male terrier. He gives our place a wide berth now.)The TBD was an adequate torpedo bomber up to 1941 when its deficiencies became readily apparent.
The Finnish used every aircraft they had to good effect, everything from the M.S. 406, Polikarpov I-153, Fiat G-50, Blenhiem, and over a dozen other rogue aircraft.
I think that says something about the Finns, more so than the aircraft.
The Finnish used every aircraft they had to good effect, everything from the M.S. 406, Polikarpov I-153, Fiat G-50, Blenhiem, and over a dozen other rogue aircraft.
I think that says something about the Finns, more so than the aircraft.
The chief test pilot of the early Me210 said it had all of the most undesirable handling qualities.
The reputation of the aircraft was so damaged by those early models, that even when Messerschmitt corrected all the problems, and renamed it the Me410, few pilots trusted it.
Was the 410 also the part of 'sorry tale'?
I stand by my offering the TBD as a clunker, it entered service in 1937, one year after the Fairey Swordfish, the same year as the Bf-109, and two years before the SBD.
I rely on Greg Boyington's opinion of the Buffalo, he flew it.
The Finnish AF used the Buffalo to good effect. The TBD was an adequate torpedo bomber up to 1941 when its deficiencies became readily apparent.
The Finnish used every aircraft they had to good effect, everything from the M.S. 406, Polikarpov I-153, Fiat G-50, Blenhiem, and over a dozen other rogue aircraft.
I think that says something about the Finns, more so than the aircraft.
Not to mention the quality of the opposition.
The Albacore was not replaced by the Swordfish. It was replaced on the production line by the Barracuda. Swordfish continued to be produced at non-Fairey factories, for use on escort carriers, not as front-line carrier strike aircraft, in which role the Albacore did, in fact, replace the Swordfish. Doubtless the Swordfish was much cheaper to produce and that fact, plus the fact that the Swordfish was being built in non-Fairey plants (mainly Blackburn, IIRC), kept it in production but in almost every aspect of performance, including TO distance (critical on a CVE), the Albacore was superior to the Swordfish, and would have been better suited, even to CVE operations.