I will agree with you on that. Most of the "best" aircraft were adaptable to a good many roles and most of the aircraft that you posted in your list there I would agree with on. Its been a while since you were posting on here hasn't it?
WW2 top ten planes
- Thread starter schwarzpanzer
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
kleinnak
Airman
quite a while as a matter of fact...to be totally honest...these are my first...:-S, i've been a member for a while, but i wasn't big into forums at the time and actually forgot i was a member until i came across this site by accident again. so...these are my first posts
kleinnak
Airman
*side note* i agree with you too on the Bf designation thing, that bugs me quite a bit to read :-S especially when i see it in books and tv and other sources that are supposed to be "scholarly"
The whole Bf thing really does not bother me, I just like to note it incase people may not know the truth behind it. I as a matter of fact sometimes make the mistake and write Me-109 instead of Bf-109. I know the difference and which one is write I just sometimes make the mistake, I just dont know if he knows that or not.
kleinnak
Airman
ahhh, gotcha, it does for me but i'm just a stickler for accuracy that way 
. and a lover of the 109 at heart, so again...bias i s'pose. i guess it does bug me a lot more when i see it in a book or something like that, because those are the places that are supposed to get those things right.
. and a lover of the 109 at heart, so again...bias i s'pose. i guess it does bug me a lot more when i see it in a book or something like that, because those are the places that are supposed to get those things right.
The old Bf-109 is my favorite aircraft from WW2. The G-6 to be exact. It was not the fastest or the most maneuverable. I just love the way she looks and what she meant to the Luftwaffe.
DerAdlerIstGelandet said:
Here here. I think that best, historically, and best, as in my fav, are two different things. I love the Corsair. Its faults were many and it may have not been the best carrier borne craft in the war, but its still my fav nonetheless.
:{)
trackend
Chief Master Sergeant
The best, I still like the later Spitfire's the Jug the Corsair
mmmmm I wonder what my favorite plane of WW2 is
Nothing to do with kills, perfomance ect I just love the shear bottle of the guys who flew them and tales of David and Goliath that endears the Stringbags to me. Even the blokes who used them took the piss but loved the character and reliability of these out moded but effective old biplanes.
mmmmm I wonder what my favorite plane of WW2 is
Nothing to do with kills, perfomance ect I just love the shear bottle of the guys who flew them and tales of David and Goliath that endears the Stringbags to me. Even the blokes who used them took the piss but loved the character and reliability of these out moded but effective old biplanes.
kleinnak
Airman
Amen to that, Trackend! it takes a special kind of plane to be able to outlast all its wartime successors in service, lol.
the lancaster kicks ass
Major General
- 19,937
- Dec 20, 2003
there are stories of spitfires and other more advanced planes letting stringbags land ahead of them out of respect, they truely are remarkable planes........
the lancaster kicks ass
Major General
- 19,937
- Dec 20, 2003
fair point............
pD!
LOL that is funny!
P38 Pilot
Tech Sergeant
Good one PD! Im not much of a German Aircraft person but the Bf-109 was a very good aircraft. I like the design and look of the Fw-190 the best though.
the lancaster kicks ass
Major General
- 19,937
- Dec 20, 2003
you do of course mean the -190A??
No he means the Dora, Lanc stop tryign to corrupt him.
Still my question to y'all is this, and this is as good as any thread to post this since the Stringbag is my 2nd fav torp bomber with the Avenger being no.1. (A previous post with pics of Swordfishes reminded me of this question) I was watching "Sink the Bismark" which I love. But I was watching the scenes where the RN sent in the Swordfish to attack the ship and came to these two observations/questions:
1. I have never got a satisfactory why the RN carriers had such a small air group on them. I know the RN carriers were smaller than USN ones but they were not that small.
2. With the awesome power of even a 1940 carrier, I am of the opinion, even with Devastators, a USN carrier, lets say the Enterprise, could have sent the Bismark, as unescorted as it was, to the bottom in record time.
When I say these two observation/questions let me say that my readings have always centered on the USN or the IJN's carrier power not the RN so I am a little ignorant on this particular subject. I mean even in 1940 the USN had a full complement Wildcats, Dauntlesses, and Devastators. I know that the RN has navalized versons of the Hurri and Spit on thier carriers but why did they not develop a good naval divebomber or a modern torp bomber. Was it just a different form of thinking or philosophy that drove the RN? I hope I am making sense.
:{)
1. I have never got a satisfactory why the RN carriers had such a small air group on them. I know the RN carriers were smaller than USN ones but they were not that small.
2. With the awesome power of even a 1940 carrier, I am of the opinion, even with Devastators, a USN carrier, lets say the Enterprise, could have sent the Bismark, as unescorted as it was, to the bottom in record time.
When I say these two observation/questions let me say that my readings have always centered on the USN or the IJN's carrier power not the RN so I am a little ignorant on this particular subject. I mean even in 1940 the USN had a full complement Wildcats, Dauntlesses, and Devastators. I know that the RN has navalized versons of the Hurri and Spit on thier carriers but why did they not develop a good naval divebomber or a modern torp bomber. Was it just a different form of thinking or philosophy that drove the RN? I hope I am making sense.
:{)
the lancaster kicks ass
Major General
- 19,937
- Dec 20, 2003
well pre-war the FAA had kinda been left behind, they weren't given much attention, most of the military aircraft industry was focused on the RAF, hence them not having their own purpose built carrier fighter (the B-24 and -25 don't count )...........
and the carrier compliment depends on the size of the carrier, escort carriers can't take many of any aircraft but even with wings back the swordfish isn't small...........
and we'll never know if a US carrier could've done it quicker, but it was only about a week after the hood was suck that the bismark suffered the same fate, most of that time waqs spent finding her, once she was spotted it was all over in a day............
obviously i'm just trying to sound intelligent and not really know what i'm saying on most counts though trakkie and some of the other guys will be able to tell you more........
)...........and the carrier compliment depends on the size of the carrier, escort carriers can't take many of any aircraft but even with wings back the swordfish isn't small...........
and we'll never know if a US carrier could've done it quicker, but it was only about a week after the hood was suck that the bismark suffered the same fate, most of that time waqs spent finding her, once she was spotted it was all over in a day............
obviously i'm just trying to sound intelligent and not really know what i'm saying on most counts though
trakkie and some of the other guys will be able to tell you more........Swordfishes were big but they could not have been any bigger than a Avenger for example and they fit fine in old carriers such as the Enterprise and the Saratoga. I know that the air group depends on the size of the carrier but the Ark Royal or Illustrious we not any smaller than the smallest USN fleet carrier Wasp. My point is this, US and IJN carriers, even the Graf Zepplin, had more air power than a RN carrier. I know that on the Zepplin it was on paper but there were already Stukas and 109s with folding wings developed for it. All I am saying is, Hood or no Hood, if the RN carriers had the same air power as lets say the Enterprise, Yorktown, or Zuikkaku the Bismark would have not lasted too much longer after the 1st airstrike.
What my question was is that the RN had the equipment, just wondering why not put them on carriers. I guess the Battleship mafia was still very much in power in England in 1940.
:{)
What my question was is that the RN had the equipment, just wondering why not put them on carriers. I guess the Battleship mafia was still very much in power in England in 1940.
:{)
