Worst Piston engined Bomber of World War Two

Discussion in 'Aviation' started by nuuumannn, Jul 10, 2012.

  1. nuuumannn

    nuuumannn Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2011
    Messages:
    3,743
    Likes Received:
    439
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Aircraft Engineer
    Location:
    Nelson
    Taking Greg's idea into a new thread entirely.

    LWS Zubr, Blackburn Botha, He 177...

    Anyone else?
     
  2. Tankworks

    Tankworks Member

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2012
    Messages:
    88
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    6
    Location:
    British Columbia
    (if we are talking multi engine?)Blenhiem, it peaked just pre-war.
     
  3. Trilisser

    Trilisser Member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2011
    Messages:
    147
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    18
    No way Blenheim! IMHO the worst bomber should be one having really terrible performance, even more terrible handling and so on.
     
  4. Shortround6

    Shortround6 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2009
    Messages:
    9,770
    Likes Received:
    801
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    retired Firefighter
    Location:
    Central Florida Highlands
    Avro Manchester, AW Albemarle, Handley Page H.P.53 Hereford, Nakajima Ki-49?, Kawasaki Ki-48, Amiot 143?,

    That is for starters ;)
     
  5. Shortround6

    Shortround6 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2009
    Messages:
    9,770
    Likes Received:
    801
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    retired Firefighter
    Location:
    Central Florida Highlands
    The Blenheim did at least perform combat missions for several years, in part because expected replacements didn't work. Had they worked the Blenheim would have been phased out much sooner and perhaps with more of it's reputation intact?
     
  6. buffnut453

    buffnut453 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2007
    Messages:
    2,176
    Likes Received:
    227
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Virginia, US of A
    Amiot 143
    Potez 540
    Farman F222

    Can anyone detect a pattern here...??? :D
     
  7. nuuumannn

    nuuumannn Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2011
    Messages:
    3,743
    Likes Received:
    439
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Aircraft Engineer
    Location:
    Nelson
    #7 nuuumannn, Jul 10, 2012
    Last edited: Jul 10, 2012
    Ahh, Hereford, most certainly; forgot that one. Manchester I'm gonna debate, but not right now...

    I'd also add the Handley Page Halifax Mk.I to the list.
     
  8. parsifal

    parsifal Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2008
    Messages:
    10,678
    Likes Received:
    676
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Urban Design/Strategic Studies Tutor
    Location:
    Orange NSW
    AM 143 were actually a pretty good design, when first designed in 1931. The Potez 540 was built to meet a 1932 specification. The farman was the spring chicken of the crowd, being designed 1933-4, and produced from 1935.

    For their time, there was nothing wronmg with these aircraft, in fact they were quite advanced. the problem was the industry that produced them
     
  9. buffnut453

    buffnut453 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2007
    Messages:
    2,176
    Likes Received:
    227
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Virginia, US of A
    Hi Parsifal,

    My tongue was somewhat in my cheek. I think the main problem is they were still in service in 1940. That, to me, is pretty criminal.

    Cheers,
    B-N
     
  10. baclightning

    baclightning New Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2011
    Messages:
    17
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    1
    #10 baclightning, Jul 11, 2012
    Last edited: Jul 11, 2012
    I know it didn't see combat, but considering that 771 were built, the Brewster Buccaneer/Bermuda deserves consideration...
     
  11. parsifal

    parsifal Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2008
    Messages:
    10,678
    Likes Received:
    676
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Urban Design/Strategic Studies Tutor
    Location:
    Orange NSW
    Exactly. French approached aircraft production until 1939 like they were works of art, handcrafted slow laborious expensive processes that damned the FAF to being a second rate force when called upon to defend their country. In terms of their bombers, if you exclude army co-operation biplane types, they possessed less than 300 bombers in May 1940. Now thats criminal.......
     
  12. Vincenzo

    Vincenzo Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2007
    Messages:
    2,281
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    none
    Location:
    Lazio
  13. Shortround6

    Shortround6 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2009
    Messages:
    9,770
    Likes Received:
    801
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    retired Firefighter
    Location:
    Central Florida Highlands
    The Amiot 143 may have been an OK airplane but adoption and continued use leave a lot of blame for some officials to shoulder. Look at the time line for the Martin B-10 bomber. 10 YB-10s under took a trip to Alaska over 6 months before the first production AM 143 flew. The AM 143 was obsolete before the first one was delivered. At least the Potez 540 was on secondary duties by WW II.

    The Brewster Buccaneer/Bermuda certainly deserves consideration in the single engine category.
     
  14. R Pope

    R Pope Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2004
    Messages:
    318
    Likes Received:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    18
    How about the Breda 88? On a hot day it could only attack targets that were in the direction they were pointing at liftoff, because they couldn't get enough altitude to dare trying to bank!
     
  15. parsifal

    parsifal Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2008
    Messages:
    10,678
    Likes Received:
    676
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Urban Design/Strategic Studies Tutor
    Location:
    Orange NSW
    #15 parsifal, Jul 11, 2012
    Last edited: Jul 11, 2012
    I would nominate the following by nationality

    Germany
    Until its problems were eventually sorted out with the mark 5 sub category,He177

    Britain
    Avro Manchester

    France
    Bloch 131


    US
    Cleveland, Buccaneer or Vindicator


    Soviet
    Probably the old Ant-20 Maxim gorky

    japan
    Probably the Ki49
     
  16. GregP

    GregP Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2003
    Messages:
    5,906
    Likes Received:
    853
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Electrical Engineer, Aircraft Restoration
    Location:
    Rancho Cucamonga, California, U.S.A.
    That's the spirit RPope!

    It would have helped if the crew had weighed anchor before attempting takeoff. Since they didn't they actually plowed many a field, albeit in a single row. The average pilot was unable to use the aircraft for its intended use!

    The LWS-6 Zubr is also a very strong candidate if it weren't for the fact that they discovered their error before they made more than 17 Zubrs. It was ugly enough that even the first person who looked upon its completed form became ill and swooned out of the hangar. That SHOULD have been warning eough, but it went unheeded until they completed 17 airframes. Nobody halted the work order so work continued ...
     
  17. FLYBOYJ

    FLYBOYJ "THE GREAT GAZOO"
    Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2005
    Messages:
    23,203
    Likes Received:
    786
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Aircraft Maintenance Manager/ Flight Instructor
    Location:
    Colorado, USA
    The Breda 88 was considered a fighter bomber and was mentioned on the worse fighter thread. It would probably qualify here as well.
     
  18. davebender

    davebender Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2009
    Messages:
    6,418
    Likes Received:
    64
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Michigan, USA
    Heinkel He 177 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    130 x He-177A1.
    15 x He-177A3 powered by DB606 engines.
    .....145 total He-177 production aircraft with faulty engines.
    .....949 total He-177 production aircraft (He-177A3 and He-177A5) powered by reliable engines.

    How many B-29s and Manchester/Lancaster bombers were produced before engine problems were sorted out? If rated by the same standard as the He-177 then B-29s and Lancasters should also be on the worst bomber list.
     
  19. nuuumannn

    nuuumannn Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2011
    Messages:
    3,743
    Likes Received:
    439
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Aircraft Engineer
    Location:
    Nelson
    I have to say that it's no surprise that the Manchester is here, since, aside from its well known issues with the Vulture engines, it also suffered problems with its electrics and hydraulics. Despite these faults, by the time the later models of the Mk.I and the Mk.III appeared these issues had been resolved, according to a book on RR engines I have.

    Because of its poor serviceability record, by late 1940 the Air Ministry had already confined the type to the scrap heap and progress on the Manchester Mk.III continued; it was this aeroplane that changed the course of the type's troubled history. The Mk.III being renamed to detract from the stigma of the Manchester. Chadwick had always intended that a version of the Manchester be built with four engines, so the Mk.III wasn't just as a result of the failure of the Mk.I. In effect, the Lancaster's airframe was (almost) identical to the Manchester; the only difference being the centre section. Tooling up to build the Lanc was comparatively easy and was carried out rather rapidly as a result.

    I guess you guys are right for including the Manchester, but part of me thinks it shouldn't be here because of the Lancaster. It was a very advanced aeroplane on roll out for the first time and was put into production and service before its issues were sorted, it also spawned the Lancaster, (which didn't have engine issues, Dave) which was essentially a Manchester with a bigger wing and four engines.

    As for the Halifax Mk.I; underpowered, dangerously poor handling, too slow, faulty undercarriage... the list goes on.
     
  20. nuuumannn

    nuuumannn Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2011
    Messages:
    3,743
    Likes Received:
    439
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Aircraft Engineer
    Location:
    Nelson
    #20 nuuumannn, Jul 11, 2012
    Last edited: Jul 11, 2012
    I have to sympathise with you a bit here, Dave, since the big problems of the He 177 were eventually ironed out, but I guess because of its protracted and difficult development and limited use it differs from the Lancaster and the B-29, although the B-29 had a pretty long and troubled gestation, but the end result was a striking aircraft with excellent performance; not to forget its use during the war. You could say that with the B-29 the end justifies the means, but you couldn't with the He 177.

    It shares with the Manchester/Lancaster a troubled gestation too, but the Lanc/Manchester Mk.III was free of the issues that plagued the Mk.I and it had an enviable combat record, something that the He 177 could never have had as a heavy bomber in the Luftwaffe.

    The biggest problem with the He 177 was that it was German.
     
Loading...

Share This Page