Worst aircraft of WW2?

[FLYBOYJ]

I was watching the history channel when it listed the loss rete of them. The next time its on I will record and post it on.

Evidently the sources used for the history channel were wrong, and it won't be the first time. I bet if one was to pull the Unit history of the squadrons operating the Me 163 I think it will be clear their total attrition rate was a lot lower than 80%.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Their was only 46 of the komet and their is 7 that survived

Wow!

Were did you get those numbers? They are wrong.

Aprox. 400 Me 163s were built with a little less than 300 actually seeing combat.

Your number of 7 surviving is wrong as well. Aprox 30 were shipped out of Germany in 1945 to various countries for testing.

There are 10 examples in Musueums around the world today (which is more than your claim of 7 surviving):

Preserved Axis Aircraft

I think you might want to actually research the Me 163 a bit.

Facts:

Aprox. 400 were built.

About 300 saw combat.

95% did not get shot down or destroyed in the war.

10 examples, not 7 have survived in museums today.

Just because 10 survive today, does not mean that only 10 were not shot down in the war.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Evidently the sources used for the history channel were wrong, and it won't be the first time. I bet if one was to pull the Unit history of the squadrons operating the Me 163 I think it will be clear their total attrition rate was a lot lower than 80%.

As I already have shown. JG 400 had 91 aircraft and 14 were lost.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

As I already have shown. JG 400 had 91 aircraft and 14 were lost.

So I figure just over 15%? That's not that bad considering.....

 

[Marcel]

How many sorties did they make?

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

How many sorties did they make?

That I do not know.

I know that they were not very succesful for varying reasons. JG 400 lost 9 aircraft (out of 91) and claimed 14 bomber kills.

And an edit to my post above: 279 Me 163s saw combat out of aprox 400 that were built.

 

[Elvis]

I haven't read about this specifically mentioned on the P-39, but the US 20 mm was genuinely unreliable, the M1 version would have been the one used on the P-400/P-39D-1 (and optionally on the D-2 irc). Some sourses say the M2 version was worse, others that it was better but still much less reliable than the British Hispano Mk.II. So, with the ejection chute fixed, the M4 37 mm cannon would be more reliable.

On the issue of the power of the 37 mm shell, it should be noted that the German 30 mm mine shell carried ~60-85% more HE filler than the 37 mm did. (73 or 84 g opposed to the 37 mm's ~45 g)

KK,

Would you happen to know how the M4 37mm cannon featured on the P-39's the P-63's compared to the 30mm cannon that was featured on the Sturmovik?


Elvis

 

[kool kitty89]

I don't know of any 30 mm used on the Il-2, I believe the standard cannon was the 23 mm VYa cannon (early versions using the lighter 20 mm ShVak).

And in tank buster versions, a pair of 37 mm NS-37's replaced the 23 mm weapons.

If you meant the NS-37, it was considerably heavier than the M4 (170 kg to 96 kg) but fired moderately heavier projectile at a high velocity (890 m/s opposed to ~600 m/s) at 250 rpm to the M4's 140.

The WWII Fighter Gun Debate: Gun Tables ( a decent quick refrence, but not completely accurate you could also check Tony William's site: WORLD WAR 2 FIGHTER GUN EFFECTIVENESS )

 

[D.H firemoth]

Wow!

Were did you get those numbers? They are wrong.

Aprox. 400 Me 163s were built with a little less than 300 actually seeing combat.

Your number of 7 surviving is wrong as well. Aprox 30 were shipped out of Germany in 1945 to various countries for testing.

There are 10 examples in Musueums around the world today (which is more than your claim of 7 surviving):

Preserved Axis Aircraft

I think you might want to actually research the Me 163 a bit.

Facts:

Aprox. 400 were built.

About 300 saw combat.

95% did not get shot down or destroyed in the war.

10 examples, not 7 have survived in museums today.

Just because 10 survive today, does not mean that only 10 were not shot down in the war.

Soz I ment of the one's that have shot down bombers so dont get me wrong its not a bad aircraft

 

[r2800doublewasp]

The TBD was very advanced when it came out back in 1937.

 

[r2800doublewasp]

The Breda Ba. 88! It was so bad the Italians stripped them and used them as decoys almost immediately after they left the production line. Also some were just scrapped. Brand New!

 

[moomoo2]

I'm not saying that its a bad aircraft as such, but the JU52 at one point in the war around 1942 they were losing more of them than they could replace. Something like 500 lost in a couple of months as opposed to 400 being built. It was a bit of a deathtrap i think. Does anyone have any more info on this?

 

[FLYBOYJ]

I'm not saying that its a bad aircraft as such, but the JU52 at one point in the war around 1942 they were losing more of them than they could replace. Something like 500 lost in a couple of months as opposed to 400 being built. It was a bit of a deathtrap i think. Does anyone have any more info on this?

Despite losses, the Ju 52 performed well and met or exceeded its design expectancy. The Breda BA.88 didn't come close to doing that.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

I'm not saying that its a bad aircraft as such, but the JU52 at one point in the war around 1942 they were losing more of them than they could replace. Something like 500 lost in a couple of months as opposed to 400 being built. It was a bit of a deathtrap i think. Does anyone have any more info on this?

I would not call it a bad aircraft because of that. It performed very well. Any transport is going to b a sitting duck unless is properly escorted or you have complete aerial superiority.

 

[wingnuts]

I'm not saying that its a bad aircraft as such, but the JU52 at one point in the war around 1942 they were losing more of them than they could replace. Something like 500 lost in a couple of months as opposed to 400 being built. It was a bit of a deathtrap i think. Does anyone have any more info on this?

The JU5/3m "Tante Ju" was used used by BEA in the UK after the war and in many places around the world up to the 1960s... Swissair used them up to the 1980s....as well as those in the Spanish and other airforces.

Many were lost during the invasion of Crete and on the Eastern Front when being used for tasks they were never designed for.

Rather than the worst I think it could be classed as one of the best aircraft of the period. Many still airworthy today.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Spain as a matter of fact continued to build them until 1952. It was a very rugged and sound aircraft. Not spectacular in performance but a very well built and sound aircraft.

 

[parsifal]

The Ju 52 was certainly a valuable aircraft, and far from the "worst a/c type of the war.

However, it had its limitations.

Durng the Stalingrad airlift ther were many Ju52 casualties, some were due to the activities of the VVS and some to flak, however, according to Hayward ("Stopped At Stalingrad - The Luftwaffe and Hitlers defeat in the East 1942-3") more than half the casualties were due to engine failures with many engine failures due to icing. The casualty rate to non-combat reasons amongst the He111 units also used in the airlift was much lower (although the payload of the He 111 was also much lower when used as a transport). The He 111 also enjoyed a much longer range, such that after the capture of the main supply airbases at Morozovskaya, Tatinskaya and Salsk, the Ju52, with their shorter range than the Heinkels, could no longer airlift to Stalingrad

The heavy losses suffered over Tunisia highlighted the extreme vulnerability of the type, but also the fact that the german were often forced by the military circumstances they faced to take big risks. As the war progressed these big risks showed as heavy casualties.

The Germans suffered heavy casualties to their transport fleets in both the airborne ops they undertook, many of which, at Crete at least were destroyed as the Ju 52s landed , under fire, to discharge the Gebirgjagers sent in to rescue the paratroopers pinned at Maleme.

The losses in the transports had other bad effects on the Germans. The Ju52s were actually flown by elite pilots, working in the Bomber training schools using the Ju52s for that purpose. There were so many casualties suffered over Stalingrad in these crews, that the Germans were forced to curtail all their blind flying training for bombers, and cut back on bomber production generally, simply because for many months they could not train the crews needed to put the bombers into the air. Later the decision was taken to abandon bomber production in favour of fighters, but in early 1943 this decision had not yet been taken. It was forced on the germans as a result of the near total paralysis of the bomber training schools, brought about, in turn, by the losses to the transports over Stalingrad....

 

[Burmese Bandit]

Have to agree. The 52 was good - well, let's say more than adequate, the tactical usage horrendous.

 

[Boss Calamari]

The Ju-252 was supposed to replace the ju-52, but there wasn't time to change production orders because of the war condition.

 

[r2800doublewasp]

I gotta to go with (like I said before) the Breda BA 88. The Ba. 65 was also horrendous, but you got to factor in its age.