People often talk about their favorite planes, but what are your WORST planes? Give me the absolute bottom of the barrel pieces of shit.
Pic related, the "flying coffin" that was the Buffalo.

It was bad, but the Finns were able to make reasonable use of them.

The Cutlass was famous for its shittiness.

>>63828487 (OP)
>buffalo slander post
>post the one example that managed to make good use of them
what did he mean by this

The Fairey Battle
>In the first of two sorties carried out by Battles on 10 May 1940, three out of eight aircraft were lost, while a further 10 out of 24 were shot down in the second sortie, giving a total of 13 lost in that day's attacks, with the remainder suffering damage
>On 12 May, a formation of five Battles of 12 Squadron attacked two road bridges over the Albert Canal; four of these aircraft were destroyed while the final aircraft crash-landing upon its return to its base.
>On 14 May 1940, in a desperate attempt to stop German forces crossing the Meuse, the Advanced Air Striking Force launched an "all-out" attack by all available bombers against the German bridgehead and pontoon bridges at Sedan. The light bombers were attacked by swarms of opposing fighters and were devastated. Out of a strike force of 63 Battles and eight Bristol Blenheims, 40 (including 35 Battles) were lost
>On 15 June 1940, the last remaining aircraft of the Advanced Air Striking Force returned to Britain. In six weeks almost 200 Battles had been lost, with 99 lost between 10 and 16 May.
If you flew it in combat you were almost gauranteed to die

>>63828487 (OP)
The Supermarine Scimitar is my favorite bad plane, for no particular reason other than its looks. It was a fucking deathtrap, with over half lost in accidents, a good percentage of those being fatal ones.
Also literally anything ever made by Blackburn, with some exception. One wonders how they ever found success from pumping out turd after turd while stacking the bodies of British pilots.

>>63830003
I don't know but I think the pilot is a little disgusted?

I didn't even know the Breda Ba.88 existed prior to playing WT and for good reason. It only made it 5 months in service because it could barely fly

>>63830106
>oh fugg i can't belieb i'm flyingg dis shidd :DDD

>le bad airplanes
>posts the airplane that won the Winter War in the air
shit thread made by a discord troon in bad faith to shit up the board
into every field, etc

>>63830026
It was an outdated pre-war bomber being pressed into emergency service. The Brits knew this but had no choice.

>>63830314
It was contemporary to the StuKa.

>>63828487 (OP)
>WORST planes?
Stukas are actually sitting ducks, it takes several business days to climb to any kind of altitude as well

>>63830060
The Buccaneer was pretty decent, wasn't it?
I know all their WW2 shit was garbage, though.

>>63829995

It's a shame because it had an advanced wing design and excellent aerodynamics. They made a few single seat prototypes with no turrent, 4 20mm cannons in the wings and a Merlin XX engine and it was slightly faster than the Spitfire MK1.

>>63830350
Stukas were great in uncontested airspace.
The UK was not that.
Buffalos worked for the Finns because they took a lot of things everyone else used off them. Also Finns.

>>63830841
Everything superfluous was stripped from them and new MGs pirated from FN installed

>>63828487 (OP)
At least post the British Buffalo variant where they somehow managed to make it both overweight and undergunned at the same time.

I hate this stupid piece of shit like you wouldn't believe.

>>63831196
Everyone does. It legit killed aircraft designs that were outright better than it in every way.

>>63831196
NEIN DU KRIEGST DEN SARGNAGEL, FRISCH VOM ONKEL AUS AMERIKA.

>Jahre Später
VTOL Sargnagel

>>63828487 (OP)
The greatest biplane fighter ever made.
Outdated from the day it entered service and the reason so many Krauts could rack up hundreds of air victories in 1941.
Mostly remembered for being an op pos in War Thunder due to its low rank.

>>63828487 (OP)
The Buffalo wasn't anywhere near as bad as the memes make it out to be. It was a bad plane for the Pacific but it did extremely well in Finland against the Soviets. It was Finland's best fighter and it absolutely raped.

>>63830316
the Ju87 had qualities that made it worthwhile keeping around though.

>>63831196
an aircraft so shit that even Bubi refused to attempt to make it work

>>63831371
>against the Soviets
That's not a high bar since even Italian clown planes like the G.50 and M.C. 200 performed okay in the East.

>>63831356
>Mostly remembered for being an op pos in War Thunder due to its low rank.
The absolute gayest thing about WT is how it inflates the performance of every single Russian aircraft

>>63831539
And also under ranks all of them. Soviets getting to fly 1940/41 planes while everyone else got 1936 planes was peak cringe.

>>63829173
>"We have 2000 Finnish combat aces, each having shot down FIVE-HUNDRED red communists"
yeah, I think they were padding their numbers a bit.

>>63828487 (OP)
The Buffalo the Finns got, the B239, was significantly better than the Buffalo in US service (F2A-3) that got a poor reputation. It still wasn't an amazing plane, basically an equivalent to the F4F or slightly worse, but it wasn't nearly as horrible as people say except for the later -3 models.

>>63831836
This. The -3 were overweight.

>>63831702
lmao nah nigger, slavs are just that shit at war, or have you STILL not seen any webms from ukraine
I was always on the fence about German kill tallies and victories, but after seeing the shit from the last couple of years it's gotten to the point they are believable even without solid proof

>>63831208
which ones?

>>63831836
>The Brewster Model B-339E, as modified and supplied to Great Britain was distinctly inferior in performance to the F2A-2 (Model B-339) from the original order. It had a less powerful (1,000 hp (745.7 kW)) engine compared to the F2A-2's 1,200 hp (890 kW) Cyclone, yet was substantially heavier due to all of the additional modifications by some 900 lb (410 kg). The semi-retractable tail wheel had been exchanged for a larger fixed model, which was also less aerodynamic. Top speed was reduced from 323 to 313 mph (520 to 504 km/h) at combat altitudes.
The UK somehow managed to make it even worse.

off-topic, but where could I find more images of the Zero fighter? The more high-quality the better.

>>63830026
Nearly every air force had similar aircraft, dolt. For example, the Northrop A-17 and Kawasaki Ki-32. The Fairey Battle was a typical interwar light bomber. It has a poor war record because at the time, the RAF was drastically outnumbered, the French were both hopelessly obsolete and also outnumbered, and they were unknowingly flinging pebbles at the Nazi horde.

>>63830316
The Luftwaffe skipped over the monoplane fast bomber in order to develop the Ju87, so it did beat all the other nations in this regard, yes. But the Stuka died just as easily as any other unrscorted light bomber, and in fact has less bomb payload than the Battle. Its main advantage is an optimised dive bombing profile, that's all.

>On 18 August, known as the Hardest Day because both sides suffered heavy losses, the Stuka was withdrawn after 16 were destroyed and many others damaged.[128] According to the Generalquartiermeister der Luftwaffe, 59 Stukas had been destroyed and 33 damaged to varying degrees in six weeks of operations. Over 20% of the total Stuka strength had been lost between 8 and 18 August

LaGGot.

>>63830886
>>63832273
>The UK
put in necessary modifications (armour) and then found they were given underpowered export variant engines. Had they been given proper engines they might not have been so bad.

>>63832783
Absolutely miserable. A Gloster Gladiator would have a fair shot against these.

>>63832783
>>63832793
>water cooled
>in Puccia
Well, when you hate your own people, every option is on the table.

>>63831539
>>63831592
>>63832793
I think it was Greg who made a rather convincing argument for why Russian WWII aircraft tend to overperform in simulators compared to reality: while many Russian engines had respectable on-paper performance, they also tended to utilize substandard materials, QC was terrible and the engines degraded in performance rapidly. Meaning of course that if you took 100 Russian aircraft that were theoretically equal to a given German aircraft, most would be inferior in practice. This of course is not included on most simulators, which assume all aircraft to be factory new.

>>63832273
US is getting Buffaloes in the next update as a spawnable token

>>63831356
What a shitbucket, a literal shit collecting vessel

One of the most dangerous aircraft every put into production. Over 40% of the 300+ airframes produced were in an accident that resulted in the loss of the aircraft.

>>63829173
Not hard since all the pilots in the red airforce that could tell up from down were purged by Stalin. Once the Russians got their act together (1944) they were less successful. Finnish pilots preferred German bf109s to the Brewsters once they started getting them.

>>63831525
Don't bully the G.50

>>63831196
A jet so shit it needed a propaganda movie to help paper over its awful safety record.

>>63830225
>Breda Br.88
it was good looking tho

>>63828487 (OP)
Not military, but I'll throw in the Belphegor aka the ugliest plane in the world, which I can only assume was some autist's malicious compliance with bullshit Soviet orders. It starts with being a jet crop duster and goes about as well as you might imagine.

>>63831196

The joke was that Kelly Johnson was up for a medal for the F-104, the Hero of the Soviet Union award, for his success in killing West German pilots.

UK can not into naval aviation

>>63833415
The F-104 was also known as the 'Erdnagel', or tent peg.

>>63830841
>great in uncontested airspace.
Doesn't that apply to planes in general?

As far as I'm aware the TBD is the only US ww2 plane so bad that no flown examples survived the war or the scrapheap.

>>63833451
>Bonglos invent carriers
>not one of their dedicated carrier fighters is outstanding
A bit strange, innit?

>>63833451
>>63834030
except the Fulmar was the highest scoring Fleet Air Arm WWII fighter

>>63829173
Didn't the Finns heavily overhaul and soup up the Buffalos they had to the point that it was barely even the same aircraft anymore and that's why they were able to use them so much more effectively?

>>63834344
No, but one thing they did discover was that, by flipping one specific engine part upsidedown, the cold weather performance increased drastically.

Has anybody posted the Ensign Eliminator yet?

It had such an ahead-of-its-time design. Shame it was absolutely awful to fly.

>>63834265
Bullshit.

>>63833774
was going to post the same thing. doesnt help that the torpedoes were utter dogshit though.

>>63828487 (OP)
Buffalo was equivalent to the wildcat

>>63831371
>It was a bad plane for the Pacific
It did fine it was more that Brewster could not produce them in meaningful numbers. Then they got de-navalized and sent to Finland because USN was using Vought Corsairs and Grumman Hellcats.

imagine being told by a drugged up Goring that this is your new fighter to fight against spitfires

>>63834612
Would've been fine as a dedicated jabo or bomber-killer.

>>63834612
On a related note, is War Thunder accurate in depicting the radar on all the WW2 German night fighters as being completely useless?

>>63828487 (OP)
The Buffalo was not that bad. It was terrible for Navy use (which it was designed for and mostly used as) but for other uses such as against similar ability russians, it was plenty capable.

>>63828487 (OP)
I don't think these qualify as "worst", considering what a cool formation they're flying in, but I wonder what the hell they are.

>>63830060
Honestly, as a Brit myself I always wonder wtf happened to our aerospace engineers post-war. We had some great stuff with the Harrier, Concorde, etc. but fuck me dead mate what the hell were they drinking when making our naval service aircraft?

>>63835999
Now imagine being German, you upside-down Satan.

>>63832260
I can only assume they were referring to the XB70 Valkyrie, the most beautiful plane to ever exist.

>>63834651
it was used as a bomber interceptor against American daylight bombing
against un-escorted bombers it did ok but it got mega raped if it ever encountered an escort fighter

I like the idea of the French aviation industry had with their ww2 stuff but their lackluster rearmament is what sank them. Also plywood planes

>>63832793
>>63832794
Good find
Oof higher losses than I-16

>>63836387
Lol unions stopped the government from using assembly lines...

>>63835930
He 51s most likely.

The sabre does not get enough hate
I know why, it looks cool
Brick with wings, has a high K/D because it was mostly in combat against the Mig 15 (lel)

Despite the chaos before the war and the hiatus during the war, the French aviation industry's postwar jet development was impressive.

>>63832783
>>63832793
>>63832794
God I hated that abysmal dogshit plane in IL-2 BoS.
Actually scratch that, I hated every single Soviet fighter until the La-5FN, a hellish combination of awful performance and lackluster armament.
The most fun I had in Soviet campaigns was with the Lend-Lease P-39 and Spitfire.

>>63828487 (OP)
I was depressed to learn the BF-109 fucking sucks. It appears that every country in WW2 had two fighters: one that is great, and one that is a death sentence but cheap to manufacture

>>63832260
Quite a number of them, mostly European though some North American designs got cucked as well.
Killed off the Saunders Roe which for all purposes, was superior in every way to the Lockheeb design based on what the European powers were asking for at the time.
F-107 was a contender that would have been far more capable.
It also killed off the revival of the Avro Arrow which is a crime onto itself.
Frankly the list goes on, the only reason the F-104 exists is because Lockheeb bribed everyone to buy it.

>>63834360
True of many piston engines, under specific cold temperature + humidity combinations and/or climate patterns you get condensate in the intakes which ices up and obstructs airflow. Inverting the breather tube allows it to drain before it can freeze; air dams insulation and electric heaters are also common solutions depending on space/cost/environmental compliance factors.

>Monsieur, le factorie de avions iz liberated! But there iz nothing here except le random parts!
>It's all we have! Just throw it together and get them in the air!

>>63838184
I doesn't suck, it was just 10 years old by the end of the war in a time where a new revolutionary design came out every 6 months.

>>63833239
A jet crop duster is probably the most soviet thing ever. Needlessly expensive, over complicated, and worse than tools that already exist for the job.

>>63838436
Many such cases.

>>63833239
>>63838454
Here, have a vid about this crowning acheivement of warsaw pact science, innovation, and wasted talent.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ZlyO9cJ8hiQ

>>63833774
It's not bad just outdated
This is a good example of how Americans just can't fathom the difference between 1939 and 1943 hardware

>>63834030
They pretty much voluntarily gave up carrier development via the Washington Naval Treaty in an attempt to get everyone to ease off on the arms race
There was a pause in British carrier development, but the treaty allowed the USN and IJN more modern carriers. This was seen as a sacrifice by the sponsor of the treaty, so to speak, to get buy-in
Didn't work, the world went ahead with the arms race and eventually the second war anyway
The lesson here is that treaties don't mean shit
Si vis pacem, para big fucking bellum

>>63836354
>against un-escorted bombers it did ok
Every fighter did okay against unescorted bombers
The fucking Boulton-Paul Defiant did okay against unescorted bombers
You got to be a real down syndrome of a fighter to not do okay against unescorted bombers

>>63838184
>death sentence
Gross exaggeration

>>63838454
It was actually a Polish construction made for the Soviets, hence my suspicion of design sabotage.

>>63838173
>lend lease P-39
Now you know why every single Soviet ace flew an Airacobra.
>>63838184
Bf 109 didn’t suck. It was great until the G-2 variant.

>>63839042
>Now you know why every single Soviet ace flew an Airacobra.

The tricycle landing gear is comfy, the visibility is great and the 37mm cracks He-111s open like coconuts.
The engine being located behind your back also eliminates the very real and very annoying risk of every intercept mission where you'd have to ditch the plane still behind enemy lines because you caught a stray 8x57 API or two from the turret gunners into the engine block / radiator and the whole thing died on you fifteen minutes later.

>>63839024
From Wikipedia
> According to aviation author Krzysztof Luto, the highly unusual decision to adopt jet engine propulsion for the prospective aircraft had been at the insistence of Soviet officials, who also actively participated in the design process.
Doing retarded shit like this is on brand for soviet brass.

>>63834556

https://hushkit.net/2020/03/24/fairey-fulmar-how-an-absurd-lumbering-thing-became-britains-top-scoring-naval-fighter/

>>63839042
>Bf 109
>It was great until
the F-4 variant. (including F-5 / F-6 recon)
after that it jumped the shark

All Bf 109 production should have totally halted by the end of 1942 (replaced entirely by Fw 190). But we know that due to logistics, production capacity/manufacturing line engineering, tooling, and the overall war strategic situation that wasn't an option for Germany

https://desuarchive.org/k/thread/63080249

>>63830314
>>63832745
What's your fucking point?

>>63840533
the fucking point, since I have to spell it out, is that saying the Fairey Battle is shit because it took high casualties in 1940 is like saying the TBD Devastator is shit because it took high casualties in 1942; it's actually not, and you are a moron

>>63829995
These actually scored a surprisingly large amount of kills during the war, they notched up 148 victories, which is pretty good for being such a shitter.

>>63830026
WW2 aircraft losses just be like that. That they ran out them is the worst sin the aircraft committed, and as others have said it was only because they stopped making them. Pretty much every aircraft in service through the war has sorties and operations where every single airframe committed was lost, that's what no BVR does to a motherfucker riding on some cable, canvas, and a dream.

>>63831356
>Chaika

>>63841264
in 1940 the Battle was a younger plane than the Bf109

>>63841702
so what?
why are you comparing a fighter and a bomber?
in 1937, the Japs were building the Ki-30; the Americans the Vultee Vengeance
all 3 aircraft are broadly comparable
what are you going to do next, bitch that the Bf109 would slaughter the Ju87?

>>63830026
The main problem with the Fairey Battle is that cause it was hamstrung by proposed disarmament treaties, even when said proposed treaties were falling apart they never built it to the capabilities it could have been. If they went with the twin engine design as they wanted to initially then the Battle would have arguably been quite a capable light bomber.

Despite being gimped though it scored a surprising number of aerial victories. It was just when it was used in the bomber role did it show just how outdated it was.

Surprised nobody has mentioned this pile of shit yet.
>On surface is a really great biplane and would have been a fantastic aircraft if it showed up in the mid 30's
>Except it shows up in mid 39 after most other nations have had the good sense to realise that biplane fighters are obsolete and are moving onto more advanced monoplane designs
>Despite this they keep producing this all the way up till 1943
>Most didn't even have radios
>From a nation that had designs like the Saetta already in service before this thing even flew

Seriously what were they thinking building this thing? The absolute balls of steel of the Itals that were forced to pilot this garbage yet managed to achieve some success.

>>63842220
>it was hamstrung by proposed disarmament treaties
oh really?
which clause of which treaty applied to the Fairey Battle?

>>63838184
>BF-109 fucking sucks.
It is a 1938 defense aircraft that was continually upgraded. It was a deathtrap due to the narrow landing gear, large p-factor, and high maneuverability meant that you could easily oversteer (bad for newbies on takeoff/landing) and could be put into a spin by pulling too hard in a turn (something you can do with basically every ww2 fighter). Also german flight training got more abbreviated as the war went badly and german aces tended to stay on the front until they died rather than rotate to train new pilots.

>>63828487 (OP)
Without doubt one of if not the ugliest plane accepted into service anywhere
>>63834344
They did that to their M.S.406s
>>63836354
>but it got mega raped if it ever encountered an escort fighter
Good thing bomber command did its level best to bar escort fighters from existing

>>63842740
it's Bf110s that ended up being megaraped
25% of German fighters shot down in the Battle of Britain were Bf110s

It looks really cool but you have to admit the MiG-23 was a big disappointment performance wise

>>63842671
Geneva disarmament conference.
Although said conference did break up it hamstrung designers as the possibility of it going away never really disappeared till 1937.
Basically the specifications proposed were what the Fairey Battle was. Think it was like a 6,300lb max weight, had to have a single engine, no more than 1 gun forward and 1 aft and around a 200mph max speed initially.

So yeah pretty much a design fucked by treaty.

>>63844814
nobody gave a damn about that proposal and every light bomber was heavier than that, except maybe the Breda 65 and the PZL 32 Karas, but that's just Italian things and the Poles were barely beginning to mechanise

review of the Fairey Battle is unfairly coloured by the overall performance of the Allies in 1940 and the propaganda around the "blitzkrieg". in reality was faster and longer-ranged than the contemporary Ju87, against which its main disadvantage was a shallower dive angle

>>63842220
>twin engine design
that's called a Blenheim, and would have cost twice as much. WW2 aircraft costs were mainly driven by the engines and airframe material

all bombers on all sides suffered from the problem of being chopped liver if it was unescorted, with perhaps the exception of the Mosquito, but that thing was just nuts
to properly assess the bomber, you have to take that out of the equation

>>63828487 (OP)
if America had gone to war in 1939, this would have been a typical US Navy carrier air wing

>>63844976
>nobody gave a damn about that proposal and every light bomber was heavier than that
Except the Bongs really did and were super autistic into deescalating things via arms treaties. They were naïve enough that if they thought they abided by it everyone else would follow their example just like they tried to pretend to naval arms treaties were still a thing.
>would have cost twice as much
Cost is not the issue here. Bongs more than could have afforded it. The twin merlin engine design they proposed without the restrictions would have been something very similar to a cross between a Beaufighter and Mosquito yet available in numbers by 1939. In theory it would have been extremely well armed, faster than anything the Germans had at the time and quite possibly well protected.

>>63832673
https://m.ww2db.com/photo.php?source=all&color=all&list=search&foreigntype=A&foreigntype_id=3

>>63845151
To be fair the Japanese were still flying the A5M at that point.
>>63842358
They couldn’t mass produce anything better. All their good planes relied on Alpha Romeo producing enough licensed DB 601 engines and that was a huge bottleneck. The CR. 42 meanwhile used an older native Italian engine so they just kept making them.

>>63845183
>the Bongs really did and were super autistic into deescalating things via arms treaties
except they didn't because unlike the cruisers and battleships to which you are trying to draw a comparison, the Fairey Battle didn't obey the treaty you keep bringing up
and unlike the naval treaties where the US Navy took a significant edge with superior powerplants and the Japs cheated big-time, the Fairey Battle is also at least on par with every other single-engine light bomber out there if not better, a fact which has repeatedly been stated here but which you refuse to even acknowledge
so yeah, this pear would indeed be like an apple, if it were red instead of green, tart instead of sweet, and round instead of pyriform in shape

as for twin-engine (medium) bombers, thanks to the British civil aeronautic industry which was world-leading at the time, the British had the Blenheim to work from, so they were not behind in tech in this area. this was also helped by the Nazis autistically gimping the Ju88 with an unneeded dive-bombing capability, and dumping the Bf110 in disgust which might have become a Nazi Mosquito. but they were still hampered by budget considerations, because:

>Cost is not the issue here
Cost was the entire issue which enabled WW2; America, Britain and France figured the world couldn't afford another war and settled down to enjoy the peace dividend; Germany pulled a MEFO-bill long con on its entire population and with it bought not just a huge overtake in training, technology and doctrine, but also a massive head start by the late 30s in sheer numbers

>>63845304
>the Fairey Battle didn't obey the treaty you keep bringing up
Anon, what are the specifications of the MK1 Battle and then what the specifications of the treaty? I'll think you find it actually did conform to those exact specifications.

>>63845239
they were still flying the A4N lol

>>63845151
and on the flipside, in 1939 this was the mighty Kaga's air wing
by end 1940 she'd have a full A5M fighter complement, ditching the A4Ns (which went to the other carriers) but the bomber squadrons were still this; she would not get the infamous Zero-Val-Kate combination until next year - in time for Pearl

>>63845151
>>63845355
Its legit impressive what less than a year did to aircraft designs.

>>63845349
if anything it is more likely that the Geneva treaty followed the spec of what was believed to be the best-performing light bomber prototype at the time, i.e. the Fairey Battle, which is not uncommon in treaty practice

but to say that the Battle followed the treaty is cart before the horse. worse still given that the treaty was not ratified, and especially given that the treaty also proposed banning aerial bombing entirely, because aerial bombing was regarded as the "nuclear option" of its time (direct quote from some bong, I think either Charles Portal or somebody from Bomber Command; but not Harris)

the disarmament talks collapsed in 1934. virtually all these light bombers date to 1935-37. unless you're going to suggest that they were all also gimped by the not-treaty?

>>63845391
The talks collapsed in 1934 but the proposed treaty wasn't fully kaput till 1937.
The Battle was being designed in 1934 with that treaty still in mind with the idea that maybe that everyone might suddenly become super civilized and go back to the treaty.

Yes the Bongs were thinking this retardedly.

>>63845406
if so then so was everyone else, since all their light bombers had similar or worse performance

>>63845427
It was more a case of yeah it had similar capabilities but they had an option to build something so much better and they knew it. It got so bad that the fags designing the Fairey Battle were pleading the government to stop buying them cause they legit figured out if anyone had the good sense to put something similar to the Merlin engine in a monoplane fighter these light bombers were going to be sitting ducks in a real war.

They legit had an opportunity to leapfrog ahead of everyone else in terms of aircraft capabilities and instead went "No that's not cricket!"

>>63845480

>>63845239
>They couldn’t mass produce anything better.
Absolutely could but they had to prop up their industry by letting everyone just build whatever

>>63828487 (OP)
Are we restricted to WW2? Because there are some Great War planes that are Genuinely bad.
Pic Related. The French SPAD S.A. It has a dedicated nose gunner mounted In Front of the propeller.

>>63845782
blimey
if you showed me that in a cartoon I wouldn't have believed it

>>63845782
>>63845884
Now that’s nightmarish.

>>63845782
I remember making this with two contra rotating props was peak prop performance in that banjo kazooie vehicle game for the 360 everyone hates. Also made for some hectic hovercrafts

>>63845884
>>63845903
>>63845907
And still somehow safer than the Christmas Bullet.

>>63831356
>War Thunder
Btw, how to play the planes there, not suck and understand what you are doing?
Because no matter what I do - I end up dead with no kills in 9 out of 10 matches.
I spawn, I climb - oops, someone is far above me for some reason, then I'm dead.
I spawn, I climb - oops, someone is approaching from the side in my direction, too late to try to run away, I turn towards him, I shoot - "hit, hit, hit"(or miss him entirely), he shoots me - I'm dead immediately.
I spawn, I climb, I notice someone down below, I dive towards him, then my plane speeds up and becomes effectively uncontrollable and I can't follow his trajectory at all despite him flying in a straight line/he turns on the spot and I can't follow his trajectory/I miss all my shots and end up directly in front of him for him to shoot/I smash into the ground.
I spawn, I climb, then I notice that my/enemy team is totally gone and there's nothing left to do but leave the match/wait a few seconds for game to end.
I spawn, I climb, I notice a bomber and spend the rest of the game chasing him (sometimes he kills me, sometimes I shoot him down, but usually I just follow him for the rest of the game).
After ~three-five games like that I want to pulverize my pc and throw it out the window, so i abandon attempts to figure out planes for a week, then it repeats.

>>63846091
welp, the main problem is your reflexes are too slow and your aim is dogshit, and there's nothing you can do about that but practice
positioning and situational awareness is also important but not really; if you're absolutely clueless just wingman a GOOD team-mate and watch your ass

>>63845782
>bro just bail out if you get hit

>>63845185
thank you sir!

>>63846091
Sounds like realistic battles. The gist is to suffer through getting killed for about 100h until you finally git gud. Though I have no idea what the current meta is or which planes are good for beginners. Haven't played since ~2019. At least back in the day I would recommend flying the Bf 109F-2, La-5FN or a Spitfire.
>I spawn, I climb, then I notice that my/enemy team is totally gone and there's nothing left to do but leave the match/wait a few seconds for game to end.
Ahhh the American experience. Extra pleasure when a P-38 is trying to turn-fight a zero.

>>63842358
no radios? huh. its just something ive never thought about but yeah, the entire history of aviation before (portable, in the plane) radios existing. holy shit, yeah, every single person who ever went up in a plane without a radio had balls the size of the moon. each ball, individually. i know ATC didnt spring into excistence the second radios and planes became best buddies, but i wouldnt go up without AT LEAST the ability to scream some final last words before i hit something

>>63845486
Are you honestly saying that 2000+ hp, eventually growing to 3000+ hp worth of engines on a light bomber frame in the 1930's wouldn't have been a great aircraft?

>>63846091
It's difficult to git gud at dogfighting without just taking a lengthy amount of time to learn the 'feel' of combat, just as difficult as it can be to explain how to do it without resorting to a buzzword salad.
>someone is approaching from the side in my direction, too late to try to run away, I turn towards him, I shoot - "hit, hit, hit", he shoots me - I'm dead immediately
Disregard head ons unless you have no other option. Instead you should be attempting to spoil an attack by forcing him to make energy wasting maneuvers to narrow the advantage. Of course, if you're already being pounced on by something that maneuvers better than diving away and screaming for the other retards on your team to save you might be the better option.

My personal playbook when flying the Zero or in a 1v1 against an opponent who already has an energy advantage:
>place opponent on your 2/10o'clock
>dive slightly, this forces your opponent to enter a steeper dive and reduces control authority - the same issue you identify as having
>when opponent is 0.7-0.5km away, roll and enter a high bank turn towards them trying to stay under their "chin"
>goals of this are severalfold:
>1) make them have to fire on a target with a constantly changing vector
2)most aircraft suck in pushing the nose down
3) staying below forces them to dive even steeper
>dumb opponents will then try and stay on you, at which point you've successfully closed the energy gap and now it's a level dogfight
>90-100iq opponents will push through and attempt to open the gap, you can try and get a shot off at them as they flee
>smart opponents won't take the bait at all and will simply set up another attack
Frankly, all of this relies heavily on an instinctive understanding of what each plane is capable of, and there will certainly be a lot of deaths involved. But hey, there's a reason rookie pilots died in droves during WWII

>>63847731
I'm saying that your hypothesized version of events doesn't match up
>bbbbut muh twin-engine Battle
inb4 bongs were idiots for building twin engine bombers when they should have built four-engined bombers
inb4 inb4 bongs were idiots for building four engine bombers when they should have built eight-engined bombers

ONCE AGAIN FOR THE NTH TIME, EVERYBODY was building similar single-engine light bombers at the same time as the Battle; try to parse that fact

>>63848141
>everyone was building similar single engine light bombers at the same time as the Battle
Cool but that doesn't detract from the fact they literally had designed what would eventually become the Fairey Battle as a twin engined aircraft first and then switched to a single engined aircraft later in development.

You're basically implying that cause nobody else did it then the Bongs couldn't when there's glaring evidence they could have but choose not to.

>>63848231
>they literally had designed what would eventually become the Fairey Battle as a twin engined aircraft first and then switched to a single engined aircraft later in development
because they could meet the required spec using only a single engine, dipshit
the Blenheim was already ordered so what pray tell would be the point of attempting to duplicate it?
talk about fucking gilding the goddamn lily

>>63848268
Because it literally could have given them essentially a Heavy Fighter/ Fighter-Bomber design that would have blown their competition out of the water you sperg?
Potentially could have also had the carrying capacity of the Blenheim while being much faster and this was also in development before the Blenheim was being considered.
That's the biggest crime of the Fairey Battle is that their initial concept could have been magnificent but what they produced in the end was obsolete by the time it entered service.

>>63848323
>could have
>Potentially could have
lol
>Heavy Fighter
lmao
>was obsolete
kek

okay son you've had your say, for what it's worth

I HATE the p-38 lightning. What a STUPID looking plane

>>63848344
Still waiting for you to provide a reason why sticking twin merlins on their original design doesn't scream promising.

>>63848374
t. IJN/IJA pilot

>>63848374
t.Yamato in his final moments

>>63848374
t.Person with shit taste

>my thread is still here
I had totally forgotten about it and assumed it had slid off. Very nice.

>>63830003
I only used that one because it was the best image. In a cursory search it was surprisingly hard to find even a mid sized resolution image of the Buffalo in profile.

>>63842220

The main issue with the Battle, and the cause of it's very high losses, was lack of armour and self sealing tanks.

>>63848390
>reason why sticking twin merlins on their original design doesn't scream promising
Blenheim

>>63848757
nonsense

armour didn't help any unescorted bomber from being slaughtered

>>63834344
The modifications you have to do to an F2A to make it a competitive 1942 fighter are:

1. Remove the wing machine guns. It needs less outboard weight in the wings, and 2 nose mounted M3s is enough for most purposes. The roll rate improvement is substantial.
2. Don't fill the tank all the way full. US requirements for range were probably excessive, and too many pilots will reach contact with too much fuel in the aircraft, which limits climb rate and top speed.
3. Remove the armored bulkhead. It doesn't really do that much to keep you from getting shot down, and while it does improve pilot survivability if you are, avoiding being shot down because you have better climbing rate, better acceleration, better top speed, and better turning radius improves pilot survivability more.

The Finns did 1 and 2, the Dutch did all 3, and in Dutch hands, fighting Zeros in the East Indies, it did well enough that the type had one of the highest ace to pilot ratios of any aircraft ever built, despite the fact that it was dragged down by poorly trained Americans in planes that benefitted from none of these modifications.

Light bombers should have been used to attack targets like road convoys, and concentrating a large number of them on important bridges was not a good idea.

>>63849063
Reliably finding ground convoys in that time period was a bitch and a half

>>63849063
attacking lines of communication was seen as more certain to cause enemy disruption for less potential risk because the enemy can't possibly have enough flak to cover all potential targets; both sides did it
attacking enemy units would not just run afoul of mobile flak, which was quite deadly, but also was only possible given aerial superiority over the battlefield, since fighters were regularly tasked to provide battlefield CAP against just this eventuality

that being said when both options were infeasible, then the correct decision should have been to reserve the Battles and not throw them away in pointless attacks
but the nature of the fog of war is that you don't know it's pointless until you try and die
c'est la guerre

>>63849005
>2 nose mounted M3s is enough
for an interwar fighter, yeah; but decidedly underarmed for WW2
also the Buffalo's nose guns tended to foul the windscreen, which is a problem not reflected in its tech specs
>Remove the armored bulkhead
Buffalo pilots quickly found that ADDING armour was critically necessary in order to not get slaughtered by A6Ms

>The Finns
were fighting retards and were some of the best-trained pilots of the war, even so their claimed kills are probably greatly inflated because unlike other battles which are very well documented, there's been no opportunity to compare claims against Soviet losses

>the Dutch
added pilot armour and armoured glass, and mainly killed bombers and Ki-27s which it outperformed, especially since the 339D had a 1200hp Cyclone engine

>>63846025
Christmas Bullet is without peer.
It's pic level of dogshit.

>>63849215
>cope cage plane

>>63849215
Dear Lord... an entire Cope Cage airforce!

>>63846569
Early WW1 pilots weren't issued parachutes since it was believed that pilots would bail out early if they had a chance. Then again, wartime law didn't cover aircraft left so the enemy could strafe you on the way down.

>>63848374
The P-38 is absolutely beautiful. Were you dropped on your head as a baby?

>>63849692
You're supposed to say
>t. Someone dropped as a baby

>>63832958
Shame. She looks cute.

>>63832273
>>63832853
is kards any good?

>>63828487 (OP)
No Breda Lince? It was a racing aircraft turned into a bomber and other to be underpowered to the point that it was withdrawn from flying service within a year of the start of the War. They were used for target practice and as decoys after their retirement. A 1943 revival of the type has even lower power engines, but better arrangement, but it was delivered one day before the Italian surrender.
>>>63831356
I am working on an RC one of these for streamer combat.

>>63850342
>Other
Found
Also, some honorable mentions for WWII are the Handley Page Hereford, FW-200, He-177, Me-210, Natter, Rammer, Bv-40, Ohka, Ta-Go, XP-79, Me-323, Bv-238, B-32, Douglas Devastator, XB-42, XP-55, XP-56, Fairey Albacore, Curtiss Seamew, Short Stirling, Brewster Buccaneer and the Bristol Buckingham/Buckmaster. I could go into all of them and now, but I will not, unless someone is interested. I have literature on most of the types above.

>>63849215
Cant tell if I actually dont know what im looking at or my brain is scrambling my interpretation of this to save me the horror.

>>63850342
I mentioned it less than 10 posts in but my post was sans picture, so

>>63831356
>Greatest bi plane ever made
>He doesnt know

>>63849209
>even so their claimed kills are probably greatly inflated
They're not greatly inflated per se, they just had a really autistic kill counting system with fractional kills that could add up to whole kills, so some aces probably have a handful of BS kills at best

>>63850662
>They're not greatly inflated
what proof do we have of that?
the British and Germans both had complicated kill verification systems as well, because of its vital importance to intelligence and battle damage assessment
the Germans had an added incentive of medals for achieving certain numbers of kills (the British didn't)
but for reasons of fog of war and the inherent difficulty of counting destroyed machines amidst a whirling cloud of dozens of fighters flying at 200mph trying to kill each other, the number of claims was anywhere from 3x to 5x of the actual figure

>>63850342
>It was a racing aircraft turned into a bomber
that describes a lot of aircraft from the interwar years
partly because setting airspeed records was good propaganda, partly because "racing" and "express mail delivery" was good cover for bomber development

>>63849215
I don't think photographs from Ukraine count?

>>63850713
I'm not overly familiar with the system but I think they've been cross checked later, Juutilainen himself claimed more kills than he has in official literature

>>63831356
>and the reason so many Krauts could rack up hundreds of air victories in 1941.
Stop pushing this retarded fuddlore.

>>63850832
>they've been cross checked later
German, British and US claims in the ETO are the most thoroughly verified because many German records survived, so we can cross-reference claims against losses on either side

Soviet censorship and the savage fighting in the East means anything involving them is quite unreliable

>>63850631
this was the fastest biplane ever made, they even made a racing one with ridiously high power to weight ratio

>>63842875
>*removes your pressure gauge*
>fuck you, fuel pressure is a maintenance concern, not a pilot's one. Now suck it up, princess, you're going to Iraq.

>>63846091
there's a steam guide called "Optimal Speed climb for props". If you are getting constantly outclimbed there's a high chande you don't know the optimal climb speed for your plane.

>>63831702
No, vatfricans are just that bad at war if they haven't got civilised nations feeding, clothing, fuelling and arming them.

>>63850948
>if they haven't got civilised nations feeding, clothing, fuelling and arming them
They were using Hurricanes and Kittyhawks against the Finns.

>>63832853
I don't know about that but I think people don't quite comprehend how incompetent the VVS was. I don't quite remember whether my source was Black Cross Red Star or The Air War by Glantz but tl;dr is that Soviet pilot training was kamikaze-tier with fighter pilots in particular having maybe 5 flight hours on an aircraft comparable to what they'll actually be flying. Add in terrible tactics getting forced onto pilots by high command and you've got a recipe for disaster no matter what planes they're given and even Kozhedub's squadron did poorly in the Kuban until they convinced higher level officers to let them try out new tactics instead of going in circles around bombers while getting picked off by Luftwaffe aces. The Red Army mostly got its shit together in the winter of 1942 and was broadly competent by Kursk, while at that point the Soviet air force was STILL throwing in swarms of Shturmoviks piloted by practically untrained peasants to get mulched in their hundreds. Normandie-Niemen did very well in Yaks and along with the Germans had nothing but praise for the Yak-3 in particular even though it was made by malnourished peasant women in Siberia like all their other aircraft.

>>63850631
Fuck yes. The Cr.42 was criminally underrated.

Gloster Gladiator
Heinkel 51
Fiat Cr 42
Kawasaki Ki-10
Nakajima A4N
Grumman F3F

who wins?

>>63838173
Early Yak's were decent, apart from their lackluster armament.

>>63851236
Gladiator

>>63832260
The big one is probably the Grumman F11-1F Super Tiger. It was to the original tiger what the super hornet is to the hornet. Powered by the same engine as the F-104 and also Mach 2 but a more conventional design. It was supposed to win the German contract but Lockheed bribed the Germans to win. They were later caught in a major bribing scandal, turns out they had been bribing everyone to buy to the F-104. The Super Tiger would have been a better all rounder which is what the Germans wanted. It's more conventional layout would have also made it far more forgiving to fly and it had a large nose that could have fitted a decent radar for sparrows.

>>63851241
the engine was dogshit and the Yak-1 was near obsolescence for 1941
Russian reviews of the thing are a desperate scramble to find anything good to say about it
>have to remove guns to gain performance
>um ackshually less guns is better
>get slaughtered a little less prolifically by Luftwaffe aces than other Soviet shitheaps
>um ackshually Soviet pilots loved the Yak

>>63848374
Der Gabelschwanz Teufel

>>63850342
>five months after their introduction they were serving only as airfield decoys
So bad the only purpose they had left was to be blown up. Damn.

The f-100 was bad, since it would get slaughtered if it came across the beastly mig-19. However both had shit range and huge accident rates due to the sabre dance problem on both designs. Although the mig may have fared better in terms of accidents due to the aggressive wing fencing

>>63838269
found the assmad canuck
It's always HURR HURR AVRO ARROW

Anyway, my entry is the HAL Marut. Poos wanted a supersonic fighter in the 60s, and hired one of the nazi aeronautic engineers to design one. They needed better engines than they had, but the poos refused to buy good engines from the brits over their retarded make in india initiatives. So they ended up with a subsonic fighter that sucked ass.

>>63831356
>Mostly remembered for being an op pos in War Thunder due to its low rank.
It's not even that overpowered, it just has decent guns in a BR range where most things don't and most players will turnfight the first plane they see.

>>63832745
> Nearly every air force had similar aircraft, dolt

omg you said the Fairey Battle was bad but ackshually other planes were bad too ahahahah you DOLT

(i am very smart)

>>63853098
Actually, this was a very competent design, just let down by weak engines.

>Inb4 poos and competent
The guy who designed the FW-190 designed this aircraft.

>>63854373
Anon do you not have the attention span to actually read the fucking post? He said all that

So bad they gave up and turned it into a drone program

>>63854373
Guy who designed excellent mid-war prop isn't necessarily competent at designing a supersonic jet
>>63854462
He never said it was any good even with the stronger

>>63854480
Why yes, Kurt Tank is competent, but poos are maximally incompetent.

It's more that poos wasted what would have actually been good, had it even gotten better engines. The jeets were upset he wouldn't politic instead of just designing the damn thing.

Basically, good ideas, extremely poor implementation - which is just India on any procurement situation.

>>63838184
>the 109 sucks
except it didn't
it sucked for a brief period of time from late 1943 to late 1944 at which point the Kurfürst started being available in decent numbers which was superior or equal to most allied fighters from a pure performance standpoint, the reason behind the luftwaffe eating shit wasn't bad planes, it was shit training and the reason behind that shit training (no pilot rotation, lack of fuel)

>>63834265
Winner of the special olympics is still a tard

>>63855064
>pilot rotation, lack of fuel
It was far, far worse than just that

>>63831356
>>63832783

WW2 Soviet airplanes is cheating

>>63831196
Why was this so hated? Isn't just a really fast cold war jet? What went wrong?

>>63855128
>Hurr Durr!
HIghest scoring Fleet Air Arm fighter aircraft of World War II isn't "special olympics"
Retard.

>>63855332

1) High accident rate. Via Wiki:

>The Germans lost 292 of 916 aircraft and 116 pilots from 1961 to 1989

That's why the joke about Kelly Johnson getting the Hero of the Soviet Union medal.

2) Corrupt bidding process. There was a massive bribery scandal around the selection of the plane.

3) The version that was sold was sold as a jack of all trades, when the plane wasn't really suitable for it, because the basic design was for a light fast interceptor/supersonic fighter.

Now, these aren't necessarily problems with the plane or how it's engineered. But if you're stuck with the "tent peg" through a corrupt process, 4 pilots a year are being killed in the thing, and it's not that great at its job, you're unlikely to be charitable and say "On the other hand, the wing design is very innovative, and there are a lot of technically impressive things about the plane."

>>63855580
What was causing the accidents?

>>63855752

From what I understand, part of it was the design, small wings, high stall speed, narrow landing gear, all made landings challenging. Plus being single engine there was no margin for safety. I've also read that part of it was that the Luftwaffe at the time did not have the most experienced ground crews. Which would exacerbate the issues with the single engine.

I feel sorry for the pilots who had to sit in the pre-modified downward ejection seats and enter the high-risk landing sequence.

>>63855752
Trying to land in a lawn dart that stalls at 320 km/h is not for the faint of heart.

>>63855873
You missed the bit that the they were rebuilding from an airforce of prop planes to jets and that Lockheed Bribed everyone that would take their money to abandon locally designed and built aircraft in favour off their pos.
Selling a daylight only, fair weather only interceptor as an all weather nuclear bomber was pretty much standard for that bunch of crooks.

>>63834482
It's like a chibified MiG-29

>>63834612
I've read two different German ww2 pilot memoirs where they flew this and they quite liked the plane.

If you care:
>Dual under the stars
>An Eagle's Odyssey

>>63851236
Probably the Gladiator

>>63856562
Sea Gladiator over Malta was the air superiotory fighter until Operation Spotter.
That was where the spankings began.

>>63855752
Lockheeb lying about their high speed interceptor being a multi-purpose plane

>>63856124

From what I understand a the other planes in the competition weren't local either. The English Electric Lightning was in the mix as was the Crusader. Plus there was the small matter of everyone in Germany who knew how to build a get engine being kidnapped by the Soviets or invited to come work for the Allies after WW2 setting their domestic aerospace industry back a skosh.

>>63838173
>The most fun I had in Soviet campaigns was with the Lend-Lease P-39
Airacobra cockpits in VR are like cheating. You can see everything so well.

P-38 and AirCo D.H.2 cockpit also have great forward visibility, although rear visibility in the D.H.2 is poor. Overall VR is just better because moving your head a few inches to the side lets you peek around the beams as well as peer downward from bubble cockpits. The floor windows on bombers are pretty funny, but they do work.

>>63846091
>Btw, how to play the planes there, not suck and understand what you are doing?
Play strong planes, avoid weak ones. AB is arcade. RB is about choosing favorable engagements and landing shots at +800m. Sim is about being the best.

I am very sad I never figured out good VR graphical settings, it was hard to convince the game to render aircraft outside of point blank ranges. Meanwhile flat-screen everyone gets an oversized black dot at 10km.

>>63851008
vvs was competent enough to have air superiority by 1943

>>63857870
>I am very sad I never figured out good VR graphical settings

I don't think it's doable, Gaijin seems to hard limit the graphics settings for VR for some reason.
It's a shame because it's the one warbird game that actually runs well on VR.

>>63846091
Play arcade until you learn how to aim. Then use manual engine controls in realistic for maximum performance. Don't dive on planes that are far below you. Don't accept a "head-on" unless your plane is already ruined.

>>63858261
>by 1943
Because the bongs had been bombing the aircraft factories and the cream of the Luftwaffe was transferred away from the Ost and promptly shot down trying to gain air superiority over Italy
Iirc something like 75% of the Luftwaffe losses that year happened in the West
Nothing to do with the VVS

>>63857749
>the other planes in the competition weren't local either
correct.
Other options were the Dassault Mirage III, Grummand F11F-1F Super Tiger and the SR.177 by Saunders-Roe.
Mirage suffered from an unwillingness by the french to allow the germans usage of nuclear weapons and rumors had it that the brits got sidelined by american pressure.
Didn't help that the germans were offering huge amounts of money, like 1.85 billion $ today, so everyone was doing their utmost to get the contract.

>>63830350
While I can't say whether the Stuka was a bad plane or not, my grandfather was part of a U.S. anti-aircraft artillery battalion and described them as sitting ducks. I think they had the biggest problems with fighter planes that would occasionally strafe them.

The Peashooter is such a retarded looking aircraft. I can't believe the Filipinos managed to get a positive k/d flying these things against Zeroes

>>63865138
When your foes are using the most flammable aircraft in history...

>>63864947
NTA but apparently dive bombers have to bomb into the wind, and if the wind was in the wrong direction it would take a few minutes for Stukas to circle the target and bomb. that's the price paid for the extreme (for its time) precision of dive bombers like the Stuka or Dauntless. in those few minutes over the target, fighters and AA could kill quite a few

also the Stuka was slower than the Battle, and I think slower than the Val also

>>63835999
Britain allowed buerocrats and the financial sector to take an outside role in their economy and pushed aside manufacturing. I make 2-3x as an American engineer than my equally qualified British colleagues. Fuck, my polish colleagues make about the same as the Brits

>>63865730
That's interesting, didn't know that. They had these half-tracks with quad 50s on them, and he just said they aimed straight up. Not a problem. I was a kid when he told me a few stories, and that they got strafed a few times and that was deadly. I was reminded of that later when watching Valkyrie and watching Tom Cruise get blown up:
https://youtu.be/wi07GlGfeMU

It's even worse when the pilot doesn't pull up. That happened to his battalion too.

>>63865820
>https://youtu.be/wi07GlGfeMU
>What would you have me do
>Ride out with me
>What
>What

>they got strafed a few times and that was deadly
by 43 and 44, yes it would be quite deadly
>It's even worse when the pilot doesn't pull up
unintentional kamikaze?

>>63865138
>Filipinos managed to get a positive k/d flying these things against Zeroes
boss, I'll take things that never happened for $20

>>63831196
didn't these get shot down like flies over Vietnam? I think this and the Thunderchief were top two most shot down AC in Vietnam.

>>63831356
>>63841688

>>63831196
>Mienen face when zee High speed high altitude Kämpfer interceptor ist Scheiße at being a high speed low altitude Grund Angriffsbomber because ich been eine retardieren and taken zee bribes from der lockheed Gesellschaft

>>63865847
>unintentional kamikaze?
Think so. Pilot got hit or just didn't pull up for whatever reason and went right into their position. Killed several people. That was one of the things that shook him up, and also nearly getting killed by strafing fire on another occasion.

>>63868540
>Kämpfer interceptor
Abfangjäger
>Angriffsbomber
Jagdbomber

>>63866537
https://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesús_A._Villamor
The flips went 6-3 in air to air combat before they destroyed their aircraft on the ground to prevent capture

>>63869125
fake stupid German aside it doesn't change the fact the Lufwaffe and RCAF were super mega retarded for using the plane with rearward firing ejector seats as a low altitude bomber then being shocked and appalled when pilots would eject and end up smeared across an entire grid square of Forrest

>>63869382
not sure where you learned to read