Which WWII aircraft would you choose?

GrauGeist · Aug 6, 2020

Admiral Beez said:
Choose for what role?

Air show circuit, private collection, one-upping your rich buddies, impressing that hot girl that's into vintage warplanes or pure notoriety of having the only example in the world (if you chose to have a non-existing type built).

wlewisiii · Aug 6, 2020

I'm torn between three rather different aircraft.

1) Boeing P-26 (since the P-12 is just too far pre-war to justify) because I think it would be enormous fun to fly from the nearest grass runway.

2) Curtis P-40Q - The ultimate development of the line. A bubble canopy on the P-40 alone is worth it.

3) F-15A Reporter - fast, highly maneuverable, cool looking, and shows what the P-61 could have been like with Turbocharging, a radar nose and the 4 20mm's in the belly from the very beginning.

In the end, I'd probably pick the P-26. It could probably run on Mo-Gas and the little local airport would be fine

herman1rg · Aug 6, 2020

It would have to be a Hawker Hurricane, with the DH Mosquito a very close second.

fastmongrel · Aug 6, 2020

A SARO Lerwick just so I could find out why it was such a bag of sh1t. It should have been a good seaplane in the class of the Catalina and Dornier 24 but it was an utter disaster 21 were built 11 lost due to accidents and zero contact with the enemy.

Escuadrilla Azul · Aug 6, 2020

Tough answer, but I would choose a CANT Z 1007 twin fin, nice lines and a rarity.

jetcal1 · Aug 6, 2020

Why a C-54 with an air conditioned VVIP interior for 12 of course. I can take my friends and camping isn't a problem at Oshkosh. Tricycle gear and parts still available.

If not? A puffed up On Mark Marksman B-26 would be ok.

Mad Dog · Aug 6, 2020

GrauGeist said:
Ok, so you have the finances and technical connections to have any single aircraft of WWII that actually existed during the war, built from the ground up, regardless of type or nationality - what would it be and why.....

That is a toughie! Probably one of these four, in this order:
Gloster Gladiator II - 'cos best of the biplanes!
Hawker Tempest V - sweet looking brute with speed and awesome climb, would be amazing as an airshow mount.
Westland Whirlwind - as with the Tempest, only with twin-engine safety.
Hawker Hurricane IIA - 'cos it's a Hurricane you can put drop-tanks on.

wuzak · Aug 6, 2020

SaparotRob said:
Didn't he successfully break a speed record? Close enough?

Yes, he broke a few records.

In the H-1 racer he set the land plane speed record 352mph. Many people who cite that face forget to mention the land plane category and that an Italian had gone nearly 100mph faster a year earlier).

He also broke the trans-continental record in the H-1 (with different wings and more fuel).

Other records he set were in aircraft built by other manufacturers.

SaparotRob · Aug 6, 2020

wuzak said:
Yes, he broke a few records.

In the H-1 racer he set the land plane speed record 352mph. Many people who cite that face forget to mention the land plane category and that an Italian had gone nearly 100mph faster a year earlier).

He also broke the trans-continental record in the H-1 (with different wings and more fuel).

Other records he set were in aircraft built by other manufacturers.

Those were the only aviation successes of his I could think of. Not actually coming up with a successful plane. Successful or not, his twin engines recon plane (XF-11?) was beautiful.

wuzak · Aug 6, 2020

SaparotRob said:
Those were the only aviation successes of his I could think of. Not actually coming up with a successful plane. Successful or not, his twin engines recon plane (XF-11?) was beautiful.

The problem for the XF-11 (and XF-12) was that the war was coming to an end during their development, and had finished by the time they flew. The role they were designed for - long range photo reconnaissance - was taken over by modified B-29s. The post war budget was slashed, many programs were cut, and using existing B-29 airframes for the reconnaissance role was cheaper than acquiring new designs.

And the jets were coming.

It would, therefore, be harsh to describe the XF-11 as a failure. Just had bad timing.

It would be fair to say that Hughes' other WW2 aircraft were failures, which possibly owed as much to his personality as any failing of the aircraft themselves.

Greyman · Aug 6, 2020

What would it take (in terms of modifications) to get the FAA on board with an Me 163?

RagTag · Aug 6, 2020

Go STOL...The Vought XF5U Flying Flapjack so we could see what modern powerplants, composite materials and automated flight controls could do to let the design reach its potential...definitely an air show stopper. I get to count this because the prototype rolled out on August 20, 1945, thirteen days before the end of the War!

NevadaK · Aug 7, 2020

RagTag said:
Go STOL...The Vought XF5U Flying Flapjack so we could see what modern powerplants, composite materials and automated flight controls could do to let the design reach its potential...definitely an air show stopper. I get to count this because the prototype rolled out on August 20, 1945, thirteen days before the end of the War!
View attachment 591192

Hell Yeah!

GrauGeist · Aug 7, 2020

RagTag said:
Go STOL...The Vought XF5U Flying Flapjack so we could see what modern powerplants, composite materials and automated flight controls could do to let the design reach its potential...definitely an air show stopper. I get to count this because the prototype rolled out on August 20, 1945, thirteen days before the end of the War!

The XF5U-1 certainly counts, though it first "flew" in 1943. And by saying "flew", they were short hops during ground/taxi tests.
It's predecessor, the V-173 actually flew (first flight a year earlier).

Acheron · Aug 7, 2020

Whatever was the winner of the ugliest aircraft thread. Then I would demand money from people not to fly it around for all to see.

GreenKnight121 · Aug 7, 2020

OK - I'd take two non-surviving versions of the P-38... and merge them!

Start with a P-38M night-fighter version (less the back-seat radar equipment):

And graft on the nose of a P-38L "Droop Snoot" pathfinder version (less the bomb-aimer equipment):

Instant 3-place P-38!

SaparotRob · Aug 7, 2020

Greyman said:
What would it take (in terms of modifications) to get the FAA on board with an Me 163?

It'd be really neat to see a catapult launch of one of those.

chipieal · Aug 7, 2020

I would have to say a P-47 later model. After all the idea of a combat plane is 1) to successfully fight 2) get the pilot back no matter the battle damage. i like the idea of the Chrysler built Hemi engine. Tests show over 500 mph. However I wonder about compressability and supersonic rate on propeller tips?

Mad Dog · Aug 7, 2020

SaparotRob said:
Those were the only aviation successes of his I could think of. Not actually coming up with a successful plane. Successful or not, his twin engines recon plane (XF-11?) was beautiful.

Hey, if we're going post-War, I want my Convair Pogo (with modern automatic landing computer).

GrauGeist · Aug 7, 2020

Greyman said:
What would it take (in terms of modifications) to get the FAA on board with an Me 163?

There is a replica of a 163 that's been around a while. It was built as a glider by a Luftwaffe pilot and it still appears at Airshows.
It's civil registry is D-1636 if you wish to read more about it.

Which WWII aircraft would you choose?

Generalfeldmarschall zur Luftschiff Abteilung

Staff Sergeant

Master Sergeant

1st Sergeant

Tech Sergeant

Staff Sergeant

Banned

Captain

Unter Gemeine Geschwader Murmeltier XIII

Captain

Tech Sergeant

Airman

Senior Airman

Generalfeldmarschall zur Luftschiff Abteilung

Airman 1st Class

Staff Sergeant

Unter Gemeine Geschwader Murmeltier XIII

Airman

Banned

Generalfeldmarschall zur Luftschiff Abteilung

Users who are viewing this thread

Similar threads