Topic: Worst Aircraft of of WWII

mmarsh · June 21st, 2007

I'm going to disagree.

Remember that the primary role of both the 262 and 163 was bomber interception. The short flight duration was made up by simply moving the airstrips close to the targets they were defending. They were never intended as long range aircraft. Although both were dangerous to operate for beginners they were deadly in the right hands. The 163 saw very limited combat so its hard to accurately gauge.

I also disagree with the Zero. It was superior to anything the allies had until 1943. Before that it could out-turn, out-run, out-climb, and out shoot anything the allies had. Its range was also superior. The only tactic a Allied pilot had against a Zero (on a 1 to 1 basis) on its 6 was to out-dive it.

Its lack of a self-sealed fuel tank was eliminated in the A6M5.

All bombers are vulnerable to fighters, even the super-heavy B-29 needed protection. The Stuka was probably the best pure Dive Bomber of the War, maybe tied with the Aiichi D3A1 "Val".

I'll agree with both the Blackburn Skua and Roc although both the Brewster Buffalo and P-39 were actually very effective in non-US hands.

The Brewster (known as the B-239 by the Finns) was very popular during the 1939-1940 Continuation War and the 37mm cannon of the P-39 made mincemeat of the Panzers during the Russian Front. While the Finns eventually replaced the B-239 with Me109Gs the Russians kept ordering the P-39 even when the IL-2 was in full production.

June 21st, 2007
mmarsh Tribunus Laticlavius Gear	I'm going to disagree. Remember that the primary role of both the 262 and 163 was bomber interception. The short flight duration was made up by simply moving the airstrips close to the targets they were defending. They were never intended as long range aircraft. Although both were dangerous to operate for beginners they were deadly in the right hands. The 163 saw very limited combat so its hard to accurately gauge. I also disagree with the Zero. It was superior to anything the allies had until 1943. Before that it could out-turn, out-run, out-climb, and out shoot anything the allies had. Its range was also superior. The only tactic a Allied pilot had against a Zero (on a 1 to 1 basis) on its 6 was to out-dive it. Its lack of a self-sealed fuel tank was eliminated in the A6M5. All bombers are vulnerable to fighters, even the super-heavy B-29 needed protection. The Stuka was probably the best pure Dive Bomber of the War, maybe tied with the Aiichi D3A1 "Val". I'll agree with both the Blackburn Skua and Roc although both the Brewster Buffalo and P-39 were actually very effective in non-US hands. The Brewster (known as the B-239 by the Finns) was very popular during the 1939-1940 Continuation War and the 37mm cannon of the P-39 made mincemeat of the Panzers during the Russian Front. While the Finns eventually replaced the B-239 with Me109Gs the Russians kept ordering the P-39 even when the IL-2 was in full production. __________________ "My center is giving way, my right is in retreat; situation excellent. I shall attack." -Foch I get this question a lot. I am from NYC. I fly a French flag because I work for the Paris Office of a International company. Last edited by mmarsh; June 22nd, 2007 at 12:09.