So, you call a B-17 a two-engined bomber? After all it's got two engines on one wing. What do you call single-engined bombers? That must put you in a tight spot ... I mean ...do you say 0.5-engined bomber? You can't say no-engined bomber, that's just being silly 'cos ...you'd be screwed if a glide bomb was there ...no engine ...what's half of none?
I think P40 that wasn'tused to its potencial because it didn't get the credit that maybe it deserved? Why didn't they give it a Merlin 61? Why did they stop at the merlin 25
I feel the same about the P40, it was a good plane that could have lasted the whole war if the upgrades were instituted. Instead, Curtiss shunned the upgrades because they could save money by just producing minorly improved models to sell to the military. Here is a model picture of what the P40 could have been developed into.
P.S. regarding a previous post, the P40's final model would have had 4 20mm guns or 6 50 cals, not the 4 50 cals stated by someone else.
They were used throughout the war. The last of the P-40s were retired from USAAF service in 1948. An order was placed for 1,000 P-40Ns in June of 1944, although it was later reduced to 220. The last one off the production line was in November of 1944. So they were in use throughout and still ordered into late 1944.
i would say most of the madcap german designs, mainly the fw226 flitzer.
the me262, if it had been introduced when planned.
can i add the dh108? i know it was not ww11 but.
Going to the other end of the war I would have liked the Fokker G1 to ahve had a better chance. Its battle lasted days and most of them were just off the production line. If it had been in numbers then who knows.