WHAT "DUD" WOULD YOU FLY?

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

FLYBOYJ

"THE GREAT GAZOO"
28,097
8,748
Apr 9, 2005
Colorado, USA
We always talk about how good a fighter or bomber is, but what if you're stuck flying a "Dud?" For example, if I was a relatively new pilot I wouldn't be too happy flying the following in WW2....

P-40
P-39
Fairey Battle
Brewster Buffalo
Curtiss CW-21B
Douglas Devestator
Breda Ba.65
MiG-1

If you had to fly a "dud" which would you choose? :rolleyes:
 
I think the CW-21B would of been fun to fly, but taking it into combat would of been another story. I call the CW-21B the "American Zero."
 
Fairey Barracuda.
From what I have read it was disliked intensly by both the Pilots and the ground crews as it flew like a pig and maintenance was a nightmare.
 
For me its a the Battle. Easy to fly, reasionable payload so I could take plenty of beer and food. Room in the back for jolly flights and a decent range, so if I had to go into battle I could fly as far as possible in the other direction.
 
I'd pick the P-40, but it ain't a dud :p

I wouldn't mind flying the Cr-42 and Gladiator, Stringbag, the bipe's in Pisis' sig, Stuka, P-36 (Finns used em well), MS 410/Morane, Po2
 
The Brewster Buffalo or the P-40 would be my choice, they are easy to fly and rugged. The Mig-1 probably has the best performance (men, one of the prototypes made 651 Kp/h or 404 mp/h!) but is a tricky plane, bad for newcomers anyway...
 
Really, the Re-2000 could turn inside a Fiat Cr 42? That's amazing.
 
If evan felt the need to mention the P-36 as a possible dud, I'm taking that because it was better than the Spitfire Mk.I in everything but speed.
 
Hmmm..I mentioned the P-36 because it was the predecessor to the P-40. I don't know much about the P-36 though. I am assuming that the P-40 should have been better than the P-36 as it was after, but I could be wrong.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back