- Thread starter
-
- #41
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
The ) after the 8. 8)Why can't I post an "8" without a smiley?
Hi Greg, that comment about P-39 et al wasn't aimed at you specifically, but they always seem to end up in these 'Worst of WW2' categories.
You might be right, John. Although the Falklands war was won without direct US military intervention, the Brits sure made use of American generosity (I love how a thread about the worst aircraft of WW2 can reference the Mongol Hoardes!).
Here's one that defines the difference in policing in different countries.
Australia; police officer draws a pistol and fires. Bang! Bang! "I think he's dead!"
United States; police officer draws a pistol and fires. Bang! Bang! Bang! Bang! Bang! Bang! Bang! Bang! Bang! click click click Pause, reload, Bang! Bang! Bang! Bang! Bang! Bang! Bang! Bang! Bang! "Yep, he's dead."
Britain; Police officer stops and ponders, "What ethnic minority does he represent? Is this gender or sexual discrimination? What if he/she's a homosexual, will this result in a law suit..."
I read somewhere when it was discovered the prop was too long after the landing gear mods, that someone ran into the hangar, got a hacksaw, and cut the prop blades so they wouldn't touch the ground. Handling wasn't helped by this 'fix.'The Silvansky IS should be on that list, Designed in 1938 as a frontal aviation fighter. There was a mistake on the landing gear lenght, too long to retract into the space for it in the wing, so it was shortened. That left the propeller too large for ground clearance, so the propeller was cropped.
It may seem funny now, but this was 1938 Russia. Only the fact that the design staff was led by some one with kin high in the party saved them from the gulag or worse.
When it finally flew, the test pilot felt lucky to be able to land, and pronounced it unfit to fly.
The design team was broke up.
Tarrant Tabor (No. 2099 The Tarrant Tabor)
The Bell Airacuda YFM-1. A lesson on how not to design a combat aircraft.
The Barling Bomber (Engineering Division NBL-1 Barling Bomber. [photograph])
The B-26 was pretty much the same issue as the GeeBee, nothing wrong with the actual plane but you have to fly them a certain way as it was designed to be flown.I'd imagine that any airplane labeled "widowmaker" is prolly not a good one to start-on. I think the B-26 had this reputation. As did the 104.
The B-26 was pretty much the same issue as the GeeBee, nothing wrong with the actual plane but you have to fly them a certain way as it was designed to be flown.
The S 6B and others were racing machines, The B-26 was a service bomber but apart from issues with a new aircraft most seemed to be about landing, with higher wing loading the landing speed was higher along with the stall speed.Prolly not a good thing, for thousands of green, freshly recruited pilots. Lot of those 1930s era racers were dangerous. I remember a story about the Supermarine S.6B being a complete handful, during take-offs and landings.
The same can be said for any high-performance machine.Prolly not a good thing, for thousands of green, freshly recruited pilots. Lot of those 1930s era racers were dangerous. I remember a story about the Supermarine S.6B being a complete handful, during take-offs and landings.
I suggest you do some research and you'll discover that label was probably not justified for either aircraft once all facts are known.I'd imagine that any airplane labeled "widowmaker" is prolly not a good one to start-on. I think the B-26 had this reputation. As did the 104.
There was a poster here adamant that the Mosquito was the same.I suggest you do some research and you'll discover that label was probably not justified for either aircraft once all facts are known.
To wit, here is a synopsis of the first and only flight of the Heston.The same can be said for any high-performance machine.
You're not going to take a person fresh from driving school and put them behind the wheel of a 7,000 horsepower Alcohol-burning Funny Car and expect anything but disaster.
The Hereford hardly warrants mention, it was in very limited use.8) Handley Page Hereford: Even routine maintenance was complicated. Hopeless in combat along with the [sic] Hampdon. Seriously needed to be scrapped much sooner than it was.