cheddar cheese
Major General
Although it was deadly effective when air superiority was achieved...
What Was the worst Aircraft of WWII?
- Thread starter plan_D
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
cheddar cheese
Major General
Me too, absolutely hopeless 
Hi Yeomanz:
I will argue your argument the Stuka was the worst plane.
I assume you know the Ju87 Stuka was designed for the specific role of highly accurate dive bombing.
It was not conceived to engage enemy aircraft.
You say it was as fast as a snail. Then you would have to use the same argument against the IL-2M "shturmovik", which had virtually the very same speed of the Stuka.
Since the Stuka was not designed to engage enemy fighters, it certainly provided a relatively comfortable target for allied fighters, still, shooting down aircraft is never easy.
In my guncamera footage collection I have a shot of rear gun camera action of a Stuka rear gunner setting a Spitfire ablaze with its 7.92 mm MG, the British pilot disengaging in a cloud of smoke dissapearing from the camera sight.
The Stuka is not only the "worst" plane. It happens to be quite the opposite. It is one of the most sucessful military machines ever made.
The Stuka´s dive attack destroyed far more enemy resources than the ground attack missions of the P-47s and Typhoons ever achieved over Normandy in preparation for the D-Day.
The Stuka gutted the ground positions and mechanized formations of the armies of Poland, France, Low Countries, USSR (until late 1943), the Balkans and sank a real hellish number of allied military and merchant shipping.
Read about "Operation Merkur" and see the treatment the Royal Navy received from Wolfram von Richtofen´s stukas off Crete.
From 1944 until the end of the war, in view of the numerical superiority of the allied air forces in the west, the Stuka virtually saw no action, except for some night harrasment missions.
If one should take many of the arguments used to affirm the Stuka was obsolete or the worst plane, then perhaps the B-17 Flying Fortress is obsolote as well.
The doctrine of the USAAF which saw the massive boxes of B-17´s penetrating deep into enemy territory, relying on the soundness of the construction of the big four engine B-17, packed with up to 12 defensive machine guns, accomplishing its bombing mission and being more than able to defend themselves from German interceptors and getting back for dinner, was proved a complete failure: it was a disaster. A disaster far superior to that of the Bf110 Zerstörer during the Battle of Britain.
Dozens of thousands of USAAF crews simply took off to never be seen again.
The large B-17, with its indeed sound construction, with its numerous defensive machine guns, without fighter escorts, lose to German fighters.
They could manage to shoot down some of the interceptors, yet the German fighters destroy more bombers than the bombers destroy fighters.
So, what do you think? Was the Stuka so bad? Was the B-17 obsolete?
I will argue your argument the Stuka was the worst plane.
I assume you know the Ju87 Stuka was designed for the specific role of highly accurate dive bombing.
It was not conceived to engage enemy aircraft.
You say it was as fast as a snail. Then you would have to use the same argument against the IL-2M "shturmovik", which had virtually the very same speed of the Stuka.
Since the Stuka was not designed to engage enemy fighters, it certainly provided a relatively comfortable target for allied fighters, still, shooting down aircraft is never easy.
In my guncamera footage collection I have a shot of rear gun camera action of a Stuka rear gunner setting a Spitfire ablaze with its 7.92 mm MG, the British pilot disengaging in a cloud of smoke dissapearing from the camera sight.
The Stuka is not only the "worst" plane. It happens to be quite the opposite. It is one of the most sucessful military machines ever made.
The Stuka´s dive attack destroyed far more enemy resources than the ground attack missions of the P-47s and Typhoons ever achieved over Normandy in preparation for the D-Day.
The Stuka gutted the ground positions and mechanized formations of the armies of Poland, France, Low Countries, USSR (until late 1943), the Balkans and sank a real hellish number of allied military and merchant shipping.
Read about "Operation Merkur" and see the treatment the Royal Navy received from Wolfram von Richtofen´s stukas off Crete.
From 1944 until the end of the war, in view of the numerical superiority of the allied air forces in the west, the Stuka virtually saw no action, except for some night harrasment missions.
If one should take many of the arguments used to affirm the Stuka was obsolete or the worst plane, then perhaps the B-17 Flying Fortress is obsolote as well.
The doctrine of the USAAF which saw the massive boxes of B-17´s penetrating deep into enemy territory, relying on the soundness of the construction of the big four engine B-17, packed with up to 12 defensive machine guns, accomplishing its bombing mission and being more than able to defend themselves from German interceptors and getting back for dinner, was proved a complete failure: it was a disaster. A disaster far superior to that of the Bf110 Zerstörer during the Battle of Britain.
Dozens of thousands of USAAF crews simply took off to never be seen again.
The large B-17, with its indeed sound construction, with its numerous defensive machine guns, without fighter escorts, lose to German fighters.
They could manage to shoot down some of the interceptors, yet the German fighters destroy more bombers than the bombers destroy fighters.
So, what do you think? Was the Stuka so bad? Was the B-17 obsolete?
cheddar cheese
Major General
You just contradicted yourself there mate. You say the Stuka cannot be the worst because it was not designed to engage other planes, well to be honest neither was the B-17.
Hey "mate", no contradiction whatsoever there, at all.
When or where did I affirm the B-17 was designed for the specific role of enganging enemy planes? I said the Stuka was specifically designed for highly accurate dive bombing.
Please look for sources, part of the USSAF doctrine on the heavy bomber boxes of B-17s and B-24s, was infact those heavy bombers could indeed take care of the German interceptors with their 10-12 defensive machine guns.
While not specifically desgined to engage fighters, it was implicit in the design of the USAAF heavy bombers: we are bombers but are able enough to destroy an enemy fighter interceptor force attempting to stop us; we do not need fighter escorts.
And in that doctrine, I insist, they failed.
When or where did I affirm the B-17 was designed for the specific role of enganging enemy planes? I said the Stuka was specifically designed for highly accurate dive bombing.
Please look for sources, part of the USSAF doctrine on the heavy bomber boxes of B-17s and B-24s, was infact those heavy bombers could indeed take care of the German interceptors with their 10-12 defensive machine guns.
While not specifically desgined to engage fighters, it was implicit in the design of the USAAF heavy bombers: we are bombers but are able enough to destroy an enemy fighter interceptor force attempting to stop us; we do not need fighter escorts.
And in that doctrine, I insist, they failed.
cheddar cheese
Major General
Well the Stuka had a machine gun on the rear, you could argue the same for that...
Hot Space
Tech Sergeant
Yeomanz said:Ju-87 was the worst plane , it was easily blown to smitheriens and was as fast as a snail , even though it could carry a hefty load
A snail can go pretty fast if you set light to it, you know
Hot Space
cheddar cheese
Major General
Or feed it GM crops
Hot Space
Tech Sergeant
Or set it alight when it's eating the GM Food
Hot Space
Hot Space
cheddar cheese
Major General
Ah, the best of both worlds!
cheddar cheese
Major General
You must have been really bored
Hot Space
Tech Sergeant
That's not fair having that as your sig - funny though, but not fair
Hot Space
Hot Space
cheddar cheese
Major General
I'll rid of it tomorrow mate 8)
Ill be bored then
Ill be bored then
Hot Space
Tech Sergeant
You're a hard man, you
Hot Space
Hot Space
Hot Space
Tech Sergeant
Again, you could use that one
Hot Space
Hot Space
cheddar cheese
Major General
Im starting to worry I know several good counsellors, they're friends of the family
I know several good counsellors, they're friends of the family 
