Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
It didn't actually suck either. It wasn't a good high altitude fighter due mainly to it's engine, but it excelled at medium to low altitudes. Reportedly, it had excellent manoeuvrability and was extremely stable and simple to fly, with excellent visibility. It was just the type of plane the Soviets were looking for. They couldn't get enough of the thing.102first_hussars said:The Nerd said:The aircobra sucked, and it was ugly.
It did suck but it was not ugly, in fact it was beautiful plane.
CurzonDax said:102first_hussars said:"Helldiver!" What a great name! But what a lousy airplane!
Tough to fly, poorly designed, and delivered too slowly, the Curtiss SB2C comes somewhere near the top of most lists of "Worst Aircraft of World War Two." Of course, that judgement is no reflection on the crews who had to fly "The Beast," who were as brave, skilled, and resourceful as any other pilots - perhaps more so!
The poor results of the SB2C program contributed to the decline of the once-great Curtiss aircraft manufacturing company. After WWII, the company never won any more significant military business, and eventually shrank into a specialty supplier to the industry.
In reading a few articles about
Actually I have talked to some Helldiver pilots and once all the kinks were worked out, many of them liked the Helldiver over the Dauntless. By Okinawa they were a good plane with a pretty good service record. I think the Helldiver suffered the same fate as the B-26, we only remember the bad aspects. Also the Greeks used them with great success in thier post WWII civil war.
But I am still a SBD fan!
:{)
Parmigiano said:Well, there should be a reason why the SB2C Helldiver was nicknamed 'Son of a Bitch 2nd Class'
However she was able to take off climb and land, so it was maybe 'amongst the worst' but not the absolute worst.
Nonskimmer said:It didn't actually suck either. It wasn't a good high altitude fighter due mainly to it's engine, but it excelled at medium to low altitudes. Reportedly, it had excellent manoeuvrability and was extremely stable and simple to fly, with excellent visibility. It was just the type of plane the Soviets were looking for. They couldn't get enough of the thing.102first_hussars said:The Nerd said:The aircobra sucked, and it was ugly.
It did suck but it was not ugly, in fact it was beautiful plane.
evangilder said:Agreed, Joe. I saw a program the other night on the military channel about Russian aviation during the great patriotic war and they said the P-39 worked well for the Russians because they typically flew it below 12,000 feet and the 37MM cannon was great fo ground attack.
evangilder said:Compared to the I-16, it probably was a dream to fly!
evangilder said:I have heard it said by pilots that have flown the I-16 that if you could fly it, you could fly anything.
evangilder said:Eric said that Varter has been flying it. I should have a chat with him about it. He knows how to tell a story too. He told a story about flying the Martlett around Toronto and how the tower guys wanted to see it, so they diverted all the traffic from Toronto Int'l Airport so that he could do some tower flybys for them. When he told that story at the airshow, my sides hurt from laughing.
evangilder said:I have heard it said by pilots that have flown the I-16 that if you could fly it, you could fly anything.