Worst aircraft of WW2?

[blue swede]

I have to agree with an earlier posting, that the worst aircraft would be the Me163 Komet. Maybe it belongs in a new aircraft grouping, "Desperation Aircraft". The Japanese would have some aircraft to contribute.

 

[cheddar cheese]

I vote for the L.W.S. Zubr. It was designed with underpowered engines, and then proper engines were installed, all without beefing up the airframe. As a result, the Zubr had an operational life of ONE mission! After that, teh Polish Air Force used it as an airfield decoy!

Just think, maybe it could have been flown somewhere by unknowing crewsadn then was found to unairworthy, stranding the crews wherever they happend to be at the time! Maybe that's why the Polish air force was overrun so easily!

I think with this suggestion we have a viable compititor to the Ba-88...more stats and info?

 

[MikeNZ]

I've just come to this board have read this entire thread - fascinating!!

Can I suggest some rules?

1/ The a/c must have seen active service, not been immediately relegated to training/target/transport duties
2/ the a/c must not have had a development that went on to be successful (eg Manchester -> Lancaster, Me-210 (surprised no-one mentioned it) -->Me-410)
3/ Obsolescence is not sufficient reason (so Battle TBD are out)

Seems the top contender is the Breda 88 hands down.

I'd like to suggest another contender - I don't think it is in the same class as the Breda, but the Short Stirling was not a sparkling success!

the 1st of the British 4-engined heavies it was designed with a short wingspan to fit into existing hangers, and carried all the shortcomings of that decision with it for its like. It had limited ceiling, limited load carrying capacity, and although manouvreable for a 4-engined bomber this wasn't enough to help it much!

Other marginal WW2 designs include the P43 Lancer - predecessor of the P-47 it served in small numbers in China to no great note, as did the P-66 Vanguard - rejected by the RAF although apparently liked by USAAF pilots who flew the type while it was defending the West Coast of the USA in 1941-1942!

 

[the lancaster kicks ass]

i think everyone's trying to go for aircraft that saw active service, but i believe obsolesance is a reason fer it being bad, just because it's out of date that doesn't stop it being an appauling aircraft! and the stirling wasn't nearly as bad as some of the other aircraft suggested, interestingly though in the same way they restricted her wingspan to less than 100ft in order to get her into the hangars, she was also known as the packing crate bomber because some her her fusilage sections had to be able to fit into a standard RAF aircraft packing crate........

 

[cheddar cheese]

I agree with Mike, Obsolescence alone is not a good enough reason...the CR.2 was obsolete, but had WW2 been 4 or 5 years earlier it would have been one of the very best fighters...(Even though it was designed in 1938...forget I said that )

There is bad by the standards of the day and then there is just bad. The Fairey Battle was outdated, and very poor for use in World War 2...The Ba-88 was just a horrifically poor aircraft, and is bad at any time.

 

[the lancaster kicks ass]

but the battle, when used in WWII, was a bad aircraft, it'd be amazing in WWI, but against it's contemparies it sucked, how good something is is judged by other planes of the day.....

 

[cheddar cheese]

The Ba.88 would be bad even in WW1. A plane that struggles to even take off is a bad airplane.

 

[loomaluftwaffe]

the Bloch MB150 (or is it 151) sucked so much it wouldnt take off

 

[plan_D]

That was the prototype that failed to take off. It produced the MB.152 which was very heavily armed for 1940 !

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

For someone on this thread here:

The He-177 was the worst aircraft of WW2.

 

[loomaluftwaffe]

but it had great potential

 

[kiwimac]

Nope, still the Brewster Buffalo for me. Not only a lousy fighter but ugly to boot.

Kiwimac

 

[Gnomey]

but it had great potential

Maybe but it was still crap.

 

[loomaluftwaffe]

blame Goering or some RLM guy

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Yes it had potential but they went about building it the wrong way, and it never should have been attempted for dive bombing or tank busting duties.

 

[loomaluftwaffe]

at least better than putting a 50mm cannon in the worlds 1st operational jet fighter

 

[plan_D]

Brewster Buffalo ? Are we talking about the same plane that had the highest kill ratio of the war here, Kiwimac ?

 

[kiwimac]

The Buffalo?

THOSE facts I'd like to see. The Buffalo was obsolete by the start of WW2.

Kiwimac

 

[cheddar cheese]

In the hands of the Finns, the Buffalo (B-239) had the highest kill ratio of the war...496 planes shot down for 19 losses - a 26:1 kill ratio...

 

[FLYBOYJ]

In the hands of the Finns, the Buffalo (B-239) had the highest kill ratio of the war...496 planes shot down for 19 lossed - a 26:1 kill ratio...

Yep, the ones flown by the US Marines were the heaviest of the bunch and had the worse climb performance, but basically it was the same aircraft operated by the Finns...