WORST Fighter of WWII
12-04-2010, 02:22 AM
#27
Senior Member
My Feedback: (3)
RE: WORST Fighter of WWII
I think you're going to have to look hard to find any WWII aircraft with a worse performance and combat record than the French Potez 63.11. All the drawbacks of the Me-110, with none of its saving graces. Thanks; Ernie P.
The Potez 630's engines proved so troublesome that most units had re-equipped with the Potez 631 before World War two began. The latter was an ineffectual interceptor, slower than some German bombers and 130 km/h slower than the Bf 109E, although it continued in service until the armistice.
The Potez 633 saw only brief operational service with the Armée de l'Air in Europe when aircraft from two units undertook a sortie near Arras on May 20, 1940; two days later the aircraft was withdrawn from front-line service.
More than 700 Potez 63.11 were delivered by June 1940, of which more than 220 were destroyed or abandoned, despite the addition of extra machine gun armament; the heaviest losses of any French type.
The Potez 630's engines proved so troublesome that most units had re-equipped with the Potez 631 before World War two began. The latter was an ineffectual interceptor, slower than some German bombers and 130 km/h slower than the Bf 109E, although it continued in service until the armistice.
The Potez 633 saw only brief operational service with the Armée de l'Air in Europe when aircraft from two units undertook a sortie near Arras on May 20, 1940; two days later the aircraft was withdrawn from front-line service.
More than 700 Potez 63.11 were delivered by June 1940, of which more than 220 were destroyed or abandoned, despite the addition of extra machine gun armament; the heaviest losses of any French type.
12-09-2010, 05:33 PM
#28
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: , CT
Posts: 366
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: WORST Fighter of WWII
I think the P36 did very well against the Luftwaffe in the battle of france.
ORIGINAL: Johnnie Red
P-36 obsolete from the first day of combat!
P-36 obsolete from the first day of combat!
12-10-2010, 12:14 PM
#30
RE: WORST Fighter of WWII
The P-51 was an excellent escort fighter.
What lots of people misunderstand is that air combat is not always about destroying your adversary. It's about objectives, and the objective of the strategic bombing campaign was not to destroy Germnan fighters, but to get the bombers in and out. So chasing them away was just as good as blowing them apart (well... almost
). And the P-51 was much better at this than the P-47 was. Of course, when the time came, the P-51 proved quite adept at shooting down German aircraft, even the occasional Me-262 in a dogfight (not just on landing approach). Not a ground-pounder like the P-47, but that's really not a true fighter's role anyway..
Cimara, thanks for this insightful comment! Your post really got me thinking, however in the end I decided to respectfully disagree with you. During WW2 innovation was everything. At the time that the Meteor project was started, the outcome of the war was much less certain than when it entered service. So the decision to fund the project was right, and then the decision to hold these aircraft in reserve was again right! While the resources that were used to build this aircraft did not reap a measureable combat reward, they still amounted to a strategic reward. More of a defensive accomplishment, than an offensive one. If Germany's jet program had taken off, then the RAF was poised to meet it head on. That is worth something.
I think, however, that your lesson could better be applied to the Luftwaffe's jet and rocket aircraft. At the time that Germany really could have used alot more FW-190Ds and Ta-152s, they were sure spending alot of effort developing new fighter types that really had no impact on the war. Sure, the RAF didn't make much use of the Meteor either, but then again, they didn't lose the war!
What lots of people misunderstand is that air combat is not always about destroying your adversary. It's about objectives, and the objective of the strategic bombing campaign was not to destroy Germnan fighters, but to get the bombers in and out. So chasing them away was just as good as blowing them apart (well... almost
). And the P-51 was much better at this than the P-47 was. Of course, when the time came, the P-51 proved quite adept at shooting down German aircraft, even the occasional Me-262 in a dogfight (not just on landing approach). Not a ground-pounder like the P-47, but that's really not a true fighter's role anyway..
ORIGINAL: cimara
Gloster Meteor
Dont care how good an aircraft is if your afraid to put it in combat for fear of one being shot down and salvaged by the Germans.
That makes it a wast of war resources witch could have been used to produce aircraft your not afraid to lose. Might as well bombed your own factory same result.
Gloster Meteor
Dont care how good an aircraft is if your afraid to put it in combat for fear of one being shot down and salvaged by the Germans.
That makes it a wast of war resources witch could have been used to produce aircraft your not afraid to lose. Might as well bombed your own factory same result.
I think, however, that your lesson could better be applied to the Luftwaffe's jet and rocket aircraft. At the time that Germany really could have used alot more FW-190Ds and Ta-152s, they were sure spending alot of effort developing new fighter types that really had no impact on the war. Sure, the RAF didn't make much use of the Meteor either, but then again, they didn't lose the war!
