PDA

View Full Version : Most Underated aircraft of WWII, Allied and Axis



Buzzsaw-
04-05-2006, 09:58 AM
Salute

We've had the discussion on the most overrated, now let's talk about the most underrated.

I will put forward two aircraft, one from the Allies, one from the Axis.

Allies

Without a doubt, the P-47 is the most underated aircraft of the Allied side. (especially on these boards)

Combat Statistics:

746,000 missions of all types.

3,752 air to air kills, for a final ratio of 4.6:1 kill to loss in air to air combat.

Over 7,000 aircraft destroyed in total, when you factor in enemy aircraft destroyed on the ground.

Other ground targets claimed:

86,000 railway cars
9,000 locomotives
6,000 armored fighting vehicles
68,000 trucks

Thunderbolts dropped 132,482 tons of bombs, fired 59,567 rockets, and expended 135 million belts of machine gun ammunition.

A total of 5,222 were lost-1,723 in accidents not related to combat. Combat losses were predominantly to ground AAA. Thunderbolts were lost at the exceptionally low rate of 0.7 per cent per mission, the lowest of any USAAF Fighter aircraft.

Axis Aircraft

Ju-88

The Ju-88 was the most flexible and efficient aircraft the Germans built. It served as a level bomber, dive bomber, nightfighter, recon, maritime attack and ground attack aircraft. High and low altitude versions were built. It was very fast for a twin engined bomber, and the nightfighter variants reached speeds of 407 mph.
This aircraft served throughout the war, and dropped more tonnage of bombs than any other German aircraft. The nightfighter version shot down very large numbers of RAF bombers, as well as seeing service in the longrange dayfighter role in the Mediterranean and Atlantic.

I am sure the blue side can provide exact details of its combat statistics.

Buzzsaw-
04-05-2006, 09:58 AM
Salute

We've had the discussion on the most overrated, now let's talk about the most underrated.

I will put forward two aircraft, one from the Allies, one from the Axis.

Allies

Without a doubt, the P-47 is the most underated aircraft of the Allied side. (especially on these boards)

Combat Statistics:

746,000 missions of all types.

3,752 air to air kills, for a final ratio of 4.6:1 kill to loss in air to air combat.

Over 7,000 aircraft destroyed in total, when you factor in enemy aircraft destroyed on the ground.

Other ground targets claimed:

86,000 railway cars
9,000 locomotives
6,000 armored fighting vehicles
68,000 trucks

Thunderbolts dropped 132,482 tons of bombs, fired 59,567 rockets, and expended 135 million belts of machine gun ammunition.

A total of 5,222 were lost-1,723 in accidents not related to combat. Combat losses were predominantly to ground AAA. Thunderbolts were lost at the exceptionally low rate of 0.7 per cent per mission, the lowest of any USAAF Fighter aircraft.

Axis Aircraft

Ju-88

The Ju-88 was the most flexible and efficient aircraft the Germans built. It served as a level bomber, dive bomber, nightfighter, recon, maritime attack and ground attack aircraft. High and low altitude versions were built. It was very fast for a twin engined bomber, and the nightfighter variants reached speeds of 407 mph.
This aircraft served throughout the war, and dropped more tonnage of bombs than any other German aircraft. The nightfighter version shot down very large numbers of RAF bombers, as well as seeing service in the longrange dayfighter role in the Mediterranean and Atlantic.

I am sure the blue side can provide exact details of its combat statistics.

faustnik
04-05-2006, 10:08 AM
I disagree Buzzsaw! The P-47 was always a highly rated aircraft, both by those flying it and those flying agaisnt it. I just can't see where it is underrated.

I have to go with the P-38 as the underrated Allied a/c. It flew pivitol missions on both fronts and gave the Allies a fighter with long range and superior performance early in the war. The P-38 got a bad rap in the ETO because of some specific problems and this tended to overshadow its accomplishments.

For the Axis, hmmm, both the Bf109 and Fw190 are rated very high, so, I'll go along with your Ju88 idea. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

thefruitbat
04-05-2006, 10:12 AM
what about the hurrican. Maybee not so much on these boards where people know something about planes, but ask most people about the battle of britain and they will say spitfire won it... fair enough, not the most underated, but definatley underated none the less

JG4_Helofly
04-05-2006, 10:16 AM
Yes I think it's right.

P 47 was a very good plane at high alt and as fighter-bomber. The pilot loved it because of the protection against bullets and the eight MGs. A great plane

Capt. Eric Brown whrot in his book that the best planes on axis side was the ju 88 and fw 190. the ju 88 was a very efficient plane, a masterpiece of engineering. A plane for all tasks.

faustnik
04-05-2006, 10:19 AM
Oh, wait, I have one for the Axis, the Hs123. Perfect when the bomb had to be put absolutely on target. A biplane used by the LW until 1944.

djetz
04-05-2006, 10:28 AM
The most underrated allied fighter is the P-63.

I have never seen anyone here comment on it, but the Kingcobra is a beast.

It requires a little change of flying technique, but once you get the hang of it, that thing can out manuever anything else in the game. It's closest to the P-38 in flight model, which means it can do things that most other planes can't if you learn how to fly it properly. It's great for getting persistant fighters off your tail and into your sights.

A single well-aimed shot from the cannon will disintegrate most single-engined fighters. To me, it's the uber-US plane.

Boandlgramer
04-05-2006, 10:30 AM
i don´t want to open a new thread http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif, but,especially on this board, the BF 109 is the most despised axis airplane.
why ?

i am a FW 190 fanboy http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif.
to be honest, i havn´t a big sympathy for the 109, but it was respected from many allied pilots through the whole war.
NOT a first class fighter from 42 onwards but still a good allaround fighter ( according to captain eric brown).

JG53Frankyboy
04-05-2006, 10:31 AM
well, a underrated planes is for me a plane that few loved to fly with, had not the best reputation from its foes but nevertheless DID its job.

so, allied i would go for the P-40 series.

axis, hm, not easy............... Ju87 ?!?! or the Mc200 ?!

TheGozr
04-05-2006, 10:36 AM
Yak9U and Yak9UT .

JuHa-
04-05-2006, 10:40 AM
Most underrated allied plane could be the Brewster Buffalo, F2A-1 / B-239 ?

Brain32
04-05-2006, 10:46 AM
I agree with djetz P63 r0x big time, and looks extremely cool to me. Probably my favourite American plane(and they gave it to the Russians http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif). http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Treetop64
04-05-2006, 11:19 AM
Underrated allied planes?

> F4 Wildcat - Despite the odds against her, she admirally held the naval fort until the F6s arrived in force.

> P-38 Lightning - Shot down more aircraft over the Pacific than any other fighter. Took down Yamamato (symbolic, but important nonetheless).

> P-40 Hawk/Tomahawk/Warhawk series - the old workhorse of airforces around the world. Never gets the credit she desreves.

> Hurricane - We all know better, but for those less informed, she is still generally referred to only as a sidenote whenever discussions of the Battle of Britain come up.

Rammjaeger
04-05-2006, 11:56 AM
F4F Wildcat (basically the only decent USN carrier-borne fighter available until the F6F arrived)

P-40 (people believe it always got owned by the Zero)

P-39 (performace on Eastern Front is often overlooked)

B-24 (B-17 gets most of the attention)

Yermolayev Er-2 Soviet light bomber

Fiat Cr.25 excellent recon plane

Brewster Buffalo (Finnish performance in Winter War and Continuation War)

Texan T-6 (excellent trainer)

telsono
04-05-2006, 02:48 PM
For the British: Westland Whirlwind

For the Americans: Lochkeed P-38 lightning

For many services: Curtiss H-75 (P-36) series

Irish_Rogues
04-05-2006, 03:25 PM
Allied:
PBY Catalina - Not Glamorious, but a real workhorse that played a big roll in the war

Axis:
JU 87 - Played a big roll in the early German success and lived on past it's prime

PBNA-Boosher
04-05-2006, 03:25 PM
P-47, yes, don't forget the P-40, B-24, P-38, and Hawker Hurricane. (the real savior of Britain) And that's just the allies!

vladward3050
04-05-2006, 04:17 PM
How about the Arado Ar-234 for the Axis. The Me-262 gets all the attention, but from what I've heard from pilot accounts, the Ar-234 was a delight to fly with great visibility and bomb carrying ability. I think even a few were used in the night fighter role. A truly great aircraft.

Megile_
04-05-2006, 04:27 PM
Spitfire XIV

MLudner
04-05-2006, 05:51 PM
I vote F2A or P-39 Allied. Both were better than they were given credit for.

Nimits
04-05-2006, 07:41 PM
The P-40: She could hold her own many ways superior to the A6M2, Ki-21, and Ki-43.

VW-IceFire
04-05-2006, 08:45 PM
The most underrated Allied fighter of the war was the P-40. Although books commonly tend to play on the P-40s negative sides (dangerous spin, poor altitude performance, etc.) they often overshadow that the P-40 was available in huge numbers filling the gap while no better plane was available. And when better planes were available the P-40 was still being used to good effect alongside its superior contemporaries. If the P-40 was flown right...it was just as good as the aircraft it was against.

The most underrated Axis fighter I would have to say is the Ki-61. Its not generally well regarded in the literature but it was a sophisticated and modern design that literally flew in the face of Japanese aircraft design.

JG5_UnKle
04-05-2006, 10:38 PM
Hurricane for us brits - it won the BoB and worked hard through the war, mult-role I might add http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif but the Spit gets all the credit.

For the U.S I would have to say the P-38 because it gets slammed for being **** when it wasn't, well mostly http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Siwarrior
04-05-2006, 10:54 PM
Hurricane was the real workhorse of BoB, spittyfire got all the attention..............

I think that teh kittyhawk is very much underrated, it can hold its own in the hands of a good pilot to any aircraft up to 1943. too many people try to fly it like a spitfire or a zero and thats where it gets its bad rep.......

Daiichidoku
04-05-2006, 10:56 PM
allied:

fighter: hurricane..always a bride's maid....used until late war even, in the least regarded theaters

bomber: baltimore/marylands...most ppl never ever heard of these martin bombers, every bit as good as any other twin...widely used by RAF

other: cant decide this category..TOOO MANY to choose from, really

axis:

fighter: tie between ki61 and IAR 80

bomber: Do17...well-known for BoB, but ovrshadowed later by Ju88 and He111...used throughout war in MANY roles

other: H6K "mavis" seaplane

MrBlueSky1960
04-06-2006, 03:01 AM
FIGHTER: WESTLAND WHIRLWIND

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v187/Secudus/WB01.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v187/Secudus/WhirlyOS04.jpg

BOMBER: HALIFAX

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v187/Secudus/Friday13th.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v187/Secudus/HalibagCloseUp.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v187/Secudus/Halifax09.jpg

HotelBushranger
04-06-2006, 04:10 AM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/heart.gif I looooooove Halifaxes!!! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/inlove.gif

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">P-40 (people believe it always got owned by the Zero) </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Pearl Harbour quote: "Their Zeros are more faster, but our P-40's are more manouverable!" http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif Shame, Affleck, Shame.

I'd say P-40. Like many have reiterated, it did its job well, but in every theatre was in the shadow of the Spitfire. Also Blenheims, well they're definitely weren't the best, but they kept powering on well past their obsoleteness life.

Axis, hmm I won't say Ki-61. Ask any IJA flyer, and they would say the Ki-61 is the best. It's just that noone else flies em. Maybe Ki-100? I took that up for a spin the other night for the first time and racked up 4 kills in one flight http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

TgD Thunderbolt56
04-06-2006, 07:10 AM
The most underrated US plane IMO would have to have been the B-26. It had all types of negative paradigms unfairly associated with it and was actually one of the MOST capable medium bombers for many tasks. It was fast, extremely strong and resiliant and could climb like no other bomber. Once the wings were extended a bit and some of the teething problems remedied, it was proven to be an excellent performer.

Greatly underrated.


TB

HotelBushranger
04-06-2006, 07:45 AM
IIRC, it (or the A-26) had the lowest sortie to loss rate in the USAAF. Not bad http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

panther3485
04-06-2006, 08:44 AM
My number one choice for Allied would be the P-40. For the Axis, Ju 88.

Off the top of my head, others worthy of mention (for varied reasons):

Allied:
Lysander, Walrus, Hurricane, Typhoon, Beaufighter, Sunderland, Wellington and Halifax
AT-6 Texan/Harvard, Kingfisher, F4F Wildcat, P-38, P-39, Dauntless, PBY Catalina, Hudson, A-20 Boston/Havoc and B-24 Liberator
LaGG-3, Petlyakov Pe-2, Polikarpov U-2/Po-2

Axis:
Storch, Arado Ar 196, Ju 52 'Tante Ju', Fw 189, He 115, Henschel Hs 123 and Dornier Do 217
Macchi MC200 Saetta, Fiat R.S.14 and S.M.79 Sparviero
Aichi E13A 'Jake', Mitsubishi Ki-46, Nakajima B5N and Kawanishi H8K


Best regards to all,
panther3485

JG52Karaya-X
04-06-2006, 08:52 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by djetz:
The most underrated allied fighter is the P-63.

I have never seen anyone here comment on it, but the Kingcobra is a beast. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

That's because it saw hardly or even no combat action. It wasnt used on the Western front and it's service record with the Russians is not clear, some say it fought in the last few months, some say it didn't fight at all

Rammjaeger
04-18-2006, 02:15 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JG52Karaya-X:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by djetz:
The most underrated allied fighter is the P-63.

I have never seen anyone here comment on it, but the Kingcobra is a beast. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

That's because it saw hardly or even no combat action. It wasnt used on the Western front and it's service record with the Russians is not clear, some say it fought in the last few months, some say it didn't fight at all </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Theoretically it should only have been sent into combat during the last months because the Americans leased it to the USSR to fight the Japanese in Manchuria and NOT the Germans. Most sources that I know assert that it was used widely on the Eastern Front. VVS units that were using it were officially armed with P-39s so as not to draw American suspicion.

Low_Flyer_MkVb
04-18-2006, 04:14 PM
Hmmmm....let me think...

ElAurens
04-18-2006, 04:40 PM
Allied: Curtiss P 40, for all the reasons stated so far.

Axis: Kawanishi H8K "Emily". There simply was no better flying boat operated by anyone in the WW2 time period, and I would argue for some time thereafter. It was one of the few Japanese aircraft specifically prohibited from flying "special attack" (suicide) missions.

Rammjaeger
04-19-2006, 02:17 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">
Axis: Kawanishi H8K "Emily". There simply was no better flying boat operated by anyone in the WW2 time period, and I would argue for some time thereafter. It was one of the few Japanese aircraft specifically prohibited from flying "special attack" (suicide) missions. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

That's just common sense, I guess. Sending a huge flying boat on a kamikaze mission would have been way beyond idiotic by anyone's standards.

nicolas10
04-19-2006, 03:43 AM
I would have to say the P51A is quite the underrated aircraft. All people talk about are the P51B and onwards, but the P51A was a great plane already. I think that one is definately underrated. And besides it looks way better than any other Mustang.

Also I would have to say that here in the west, most russian planes are quite underrated. Who will think of a La 7 or Yak 3 when trying to pick the best WWII fighters (at least before playing IL2 http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif)?

Now when it comes to the axis I don't know.

Nic

MrMoonlight
04-19-2006, 04:21 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by nicolas10:
I would have to say the P51A is quite the underrated aircraft. All people talk about are the P51B and onwards, but the P51A was a great plane already. I think that one is definately underrated. And besides it looks way better than any other Mustang. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Couldn't agree more. Pilots who flew both the Allison and Merlin powered Mustangs say the P-51A handled much better than the B at low to medium altitudes and was an absolute joy to fly in all flight regimes. Its performance dropped sharply, though, above 18,000 feet or so, and there is where the Merlin-powered ponies really shined.

I also vote for the Whirlwind as being underrated. If RR hadn't given up on the Peregrine, they could have ironed out the issues with it and most likely would have been able to squeeze some more power out of it eventually. A refined Whirlwind with uprated engines would easily have topped 400 mph.

On the Axis side, I would have to say the Heinkel He-100 is probably the most underrated aircraft. Superior to the Bf-109 in practically every aspect, the fighter contract was awarded to the already obsolete Messerschmitt design simply because ol' Willy had his head so far up Hitler's @ss, it wasn't even funny. All logic pointed to the He-100 as the fighter to go into production. Luckily for the Allies, cronyism led to the lesser capable Bf-109 being produced instead.

mynameisroland
04-19-2006, 05:09 AM
Yes lucky for us that the inferior Bf 109 ( which was actually as good as the Spitfire for the majority of the war ) was placed in to production instead of the magical evaporative cooled He 100.

Bf 109 F series VS Spitfire II and Vb anyone ?

ElAurens
04-19-2006, 05:20 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Rammjaeger:

That's just common sense, I guess. Sending a huge flying boat on a kamikaze mission would have been way beyond idiotic by anyone's standards. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

But that was not the reason...

Combined Fleet saved the Emily from suicide missions because of it's usefullness in the recce and transport roles. The Japanese Empire was a very far flung thing, and the Emily was the only aircraft they had that could more or less cover it all. Most of the crews wanted to fly Kamikazi missions, but were denied that "honor".

JG52Karaya-X
04-19-2006, 05:27 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by MrMoonlight:
On the Axis side, I would have to say the Heinkel He-100 is probably the most underrated aircraft. Superior to the Bf-109 in practically every aspect, the fighter contract was awarded to the already obsolete Messerschmitt design simply because ol' Willy had his head so far up Hitler's @ss, it wasn't even funny. All logic pointed to the He-100 as the fighter to go into production. Luckily for the Allies, cronyism led to the lesser capable Bf-109 being produced instead. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

As roland already pointed out the He100 was not quite what its designers promised it to be. It had lots of growing problems, especially with its engine which used a very unusual evaporative cooling system which proved to be 1) very sensitive to combat damage even more so than the normal inline liquid cooled systems 2) was anything but reliable. While the He100 showed outstanding performance on the paper it was far away from that in real life. Furthermore the Messerschmitt Bf109 was without a doubt the most modern fighter plane when it went into production and stayed a formidable plane right up to the end of the war.

MrMoonlight
04-19-2006, 05:41 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by mynameisroland:
Yes lucky for us that the inferior Bf 109 ( which was actually as good as the Spitfire for the majority of the war ) was placed in to production instead of the magical evaporative cooled He 100. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Thanks for emphasizing my point. I said the Bf-109 was inferior to the He-100...not the Spitfire. And there was nothing "magical" about surface evaporation cooling. It functioned fine on the He-100 after initial problems were overcome (as with any new technology).

Do a bit of research and look at the numbers. The He-100D-1 was a better performing aircraft in every respect than its contemporary at the time, the Bf-109E. Fact.
Truth is (simply put) Messerschmitt was Hitler's "golden boy" and Hitler had some sort of personal grudge against Ernst Heinkel (for whatever reason). Had common sense prevailed at the RLM, it could have ended up a looking a lot worse for Spitfire and Hurricane pilots.

domenlovrec
04-19-2006, 07:41 AM
For the P47, it's not sooooo underated. Dive performance are bad. In RL they were way better, however, the bigest P47 problem imho is, that japanese fighters are overmodeled at high altitude.

danjama
04-19-2006, 08:25 AM
All Russian fighters are underrated in real life, as we all should know now.

For the US i would go with the P38. Its successes in the PTO are not well documented, and therefore it doesnt get the recognition it deserves. It is only known mostly as a failure in the bomber escort role, ETO.

For RAF, the Blenheim possibly, of course the unsung hero of BoB, Hurricane. The swordfish was also very important but underrated, in its naval roles early on.

I am not sure about axis. I didnt even know what a Ki84 was until i got this game so i guess that answers that one, even if it wasnt produced in the thousands.

DIRTY-MAC
04-19-2006, 08:36 AM
OK her we go. not in any particular order

P-40

P-39

Mig 3

P-43 Lancer

CW-21B Interseptor

Westland Whirlwind

Bf 109 (most the later ones)

heywooood
04-19-2006, 08:54 AM
since the question asked refers to 'the most underated aircraft' and not 'fighter aircraft' the answer is simple...C-47

it carried more men and equipment and supplied every theater of war with more materials to wage war than any other - it was vital to allied success, be sure.

Slickun
04-19-2006, 08:58 AM
F4F Wildcat.

Fought the Zero to a standstill. The kill-loss records are just about even, and it was going against the cream of the Japanese Navy's crop.

Yet all we hear about, mostly, is how it was owned by the Zero.

BTW, the P-38 did not shoot down the most Japanese planes. The F6-F Hellcat did (5000 or so). The P-38 shot down the most of any U.S. Army planes in the PTO.

Honorable mention is the P-39. Reviled by the US, it was a success with the VVS.

heywooood
04-19-2006, 09:37 AM
I often wonder if the russians feel the same way about the I-16 that we do about the P-40, (and the Wildcat) or the brits about the Hurricane....

These were early planes and pilots that all hope rested on at the outbreak of the War and really were so critical to holding the line until more and better equipment could be brought to bear...

WOLFMondo
04-19-2006, 09:45 AM
I don't think any Brit feels the Hurricane is underated. Its been so shoved down our necks that the Hurricane was the real winner of the Battle of Britain that the Hurricane has its rightful place in history.

Its really the planes like the Halifax (equally as good as the Lancaster, loved by its crews) and Beaufighter (doing all that the mossie could do years before hand and all over the world) which are underated

heywooood
04-19-2006, 10:11 AM
yeah - well I wasn't saying the Hurri was underated - I guess I was slightly off topic there and was musing about the relative importance of those specific planes to their nations of origin and any sentimental value that might be assigned to them....as far as underated aircraft goes - my vote went to the C-47 as indicated above...because the original question does not mention fighters at all.

And since the C47 or a variant of it was produced and used by EVERY participating major nation in WWII - and since it was soo significant and yet almost never remembered as such - to the extent that people only ever talk about the fighter planes and to lesser extent the bombers of WWII (see this thread for example)- I guess it must be underated in every sense of the word.

Low_Flyer_MkVb
04-19-2006, 10:20 AM
No, No...no clues, it's on the tip of my tongue....