Most Overrated aircraft of WWII?

Exactly. The Il-2 was heavily armored. The Stuka was not. It was a totally different foe when compared to the Il-2.

 

Well the IL-2 was very well protected from ground fire with armor up to 12mm thick around the engine and two-man cockpit, which made it an extremely good ground attack aircraft, gaining the nickname "Black Death". However it was still extremely slow and was vulnerable to fighters. 14,200 were claimed downed in 1943 and 1944 alone.

 

Any good examples of aircraft that were so overrated before entering service and then failing miserably when used?

 

And yet when developed into the He-277 a four seperate engined heavy bomber and had the dive brakes removed it was a fantastic aircraft to fly and very reliable. Should have been developed as four seperate engined heavy from the outset.

v.R

 

Incorrect, when the Messerschmitt Bf-109 was early on in its development it used both the Daimler-Benz DB-600A and Rolls & Royce Kestrel engines both engines were carburettor fed and during the Spanish Civil war the Messerschmiott Bf-109 engines cut out during dogfights.

v.R

 

Reliable in that the engines no longer caught fire. The aircraft did not see service long enough to actually determine any other reliability as the engines were the major problem. Only 8 production models were completed. And by then they were no longer needed. Too late. It was halted due to the extreme need for more fighte aircraft. If produced earlier then it might have been useful. No combat trials were tried. There were not used in combat as far as I can tell.

 

Actually, by mid 1943 the Germans should most likely have scrapped the whole program and stopped production completely. Building an aircraft that is incapable of being used operationally due to lack of fuel is simply insane. A single He 177 guzzled between 7 and 10 metric tons of fuel per flight. A single gruppe would literally drain German aircraft fuel reserves in nothing flat.

 

Did you say 8 produced??? Tch, such a pretty and exciting airplane! Well, as bombers couldn't be towed by horses as the army's artillery pieces, then they had a problem

 

my bad. will putting a time context, battle of britain, make it up to you?

 

I read that the Swordfish had canvas for armor, and it could be destroyed easily. I would not want to fly one . I think if I remember right they were used in torpedo runs, I bet they were shot down easily. I feel bad for pilots who flew them.

 

Yea, the whole aircraft was canvased covered and the plane was very slow and maneuverability sucked for a biplane. It was a tough little plane that was a torpedo bomber. It was one of these planes that dropped the torpedo that struck the Bismark and disabled her rudder which eventually lead to her demise at the hands of the British fleet.

 

Perhaps you should read up a little more. It was for sure not an overrated aircraft as is the subject of the thread.

"By far the most succesful and famous biplane fighting aircraft of WWII. Its naval nickname was "Stringbag".
Little different from the biplanes of World War I and totally obsolete by World War II, the Fairey Swordfish remarkably remained operational until after 1945. Slow and almost defenceless, it was a successful torpedo bomber against light opposition. Swordfish crippled the italian fleet at Tarente and helped to sink the German Bismarck. Its main advantage was strength, ease of maintenance, and viceless flying qualities. Swordfish could be flown from aircraft carriers, even in rough seas. By the end of 1941, the wartime Swordfish was confined mainly to anti-submarine operations.
In Canada, Swordfish operated from the Naval Gunnery School in Yarmouth and the Royal Navy Station at Dartmouth, Nova Scotia. In 1946, Fleet Requirement Unit 743 (RCN) was equipped with Swordfish."

Fairey Swordfish - en


Fairey Swordfish aircraft profile. Aircraft Database of the Fleet Air Arm Archive 1939-1945
uboat.net - Fighting the U-boats - Aircraft - Fairey Swordfish

 

I read that the Swordfish was not a good biplane in wwII, I also looked it up on the internet they say the same thing. Do not get upset this is my opinion.

 

I doubt if the Italian Fleet and the crew of the Bismarck held quite the same opinion as 'the internet'....

 

Hey what do they know?




Cheers...

 

In at least two books in my collection "Complete book of World War II Combat Aircraft" ,Enzo Angelucci,Paulo Matricardi and Pieruigi Pinto,page 89 and "The Encyclopedia of Aircraft of WWII", pgs 158-63 there is no mention of it being "not a good biplane". In addition to the sites quoted and linked above.And so far the sites I have also gone to do not state as such.What are your written sources and which sites did you go to on the Internet? Most people try to back up thier opinions with info and facts rather then just saying "I read". And once again though, what does this have to do with the subject of the thread? The Swordfish was NOT overrated. BTW And this is my opinion and Im not upset LOL.

 

I can't think of a biplane that did more in WWII. In at least some senses of the word it was the best biplane of WWII.

Opinions not backed by at least some amount of reason and data are a waste of bandwidth.

 

It would seam to me that in order to be a candidate for the most overrated title the plane must have been rated quite highly for some length of time. My candidate is the B-17. Certainly a very good plane but it didn't live up to it's early rational of being effective vs naval targets and the B-24s and Lancasters could and I believe did deliver more bombs.

 

Please read about the the b17 it was a very good plane here are some reasons, good armor, plenty of protection with its guns, it did not need too be a good naval bomber it was meant for ground targets , such as factories, the main amount of bombing was ground targets, .The pacific was mostly about naval targets not the European theater.

 

Please read what I read and the title to this thread. It doesn't say anything about the plane being bad. As such your response has absolutely nothing to do with my proposition or the title of this thread for that matter. Indeed I don't think a bad plane could be "most overrated". Another I'd nominate would be the Me-262 for instance. Both were good planes but their reputation especially post war has grown out of proportion. If you have a junk plane there's little chance it will get overrated.