Most influential aircraft of ww2

He should know, he's the Mentor where I am but his humble apprentice...

Certainly some pieces of the city were tactical targets (a bridge for example is a tactical target) but when an air force bombs a city, even when the aim is to destroy a factory, this is still considered strategic bombing as far as I know. Am I not right?

Thanks!

The same to you.

And Ricky popping in with a simultaneous message!

 

He should know, he's the Mentor where I am but his humble apprentice...
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ah! such modesty does not become you..
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Certainly some pieces of the city were tactical targets (a bridge for example is a tactical target) but when an air force bombs a city, even when the aim is to destroy a factory, this is still considered strategic bombing as far as I know. Am I not right?
scaramouche wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I never mentined the word startegic or tactical, simply that Guernica was a valid target-and in the meantime l managed to locate my copy of Robert H. Whealey's "Hitler and Spain: The Nazi Role in the Spanish Civil War (The University Press of Kentucky, 1989) and on pag. 104 the author states "On Aporil 26 1937 the Luftwaffe (sic) bombed the Basque village of Guernica. A few days later Francos's forces captured the town and tride to deny the fact of the bombing for the sake of international pubic opinion. this led to a series of charges and countercharges, so that the story of this relatively minor military event became a study in morality, international law and propaganda"- and that was the whole point of my story..the propaganda the "republicans" churned out...
Best Regards:

P.S. another aircraft that shoudl be added to the list of "infuentials: the Junkers Ju-52 3/m...
P
Best Regards gentlemen!
P.S. you too Roel

Thanks!



P.S.S> "And Ricky popping in with a simultaneous message!
Hey! that only shows Ricky has good taste

 

What about the good, old Stuka, not a revolutionary design, but still - indispensable as an organic part of blitzkrieg in Poland, France and USSR? Was it not immensely influential: a novelty in terms of close support (incl. its panic-effect)?
I know, ot´s a little off the main subject, but still important.

 

Actually the Stuka had little effect in Poland because the air-ground control system had not been worked out properly.
In France, however...

 

The funny thing is, that the Soviets helped Luftwaffe in Poland by means of a sender in Minsk.
They haven´t been so gallant towards their subsequent allies, concerning Poland: during the uprising in Warsaw they refused to allow western transport aircraft carrying supplies for Warsaw to refuel on Soviet side, although the RKKA stood on the other side of Vistula.
One can say, that Stalin was a Machiavelli of our times (he actually read Machiavelli during his reign). Just a little off our subject here, sorry.

 

Stalin was a bloody handed butcher, nothing or less. Cunning as the devil without a doubt, though.

 

As i reccal there were some reports by polish airman that they encountered Pe-3 night fighters trying to attack them over Warshaw on their supplies runs. I don't have confirmation about this but it was circulated among polish airmen at the time.

 

P-51 Mustang , Supermarine Spitfire , that jet the germans used at the end of the world war 2 (I can't remember it's designation).

 

canadiansuperpatriot:
probable the Me-262.....

Could also be the Me-163, He-163, Ar-234 and a few others

 

That wouldn´t surprise me. To the Germans, the Warsaw Uprising was very expensive in terms of manpower and equipment. Imagine, a city of 1,3 – 1,5 million in a state of general uprising, having their own weapons (often homemade), even a panzer-clad lorry. They have been waiting and preparing for the moment for almost 5 years. For Stalin, it was very dangerous politically to let the Uprising win, why I believe he might have ordered some fighters to shoot Allied bombers with supplies.

The man was one of the most convincing incarnations of Devil, I have heard of.

 

Sorry, I forgot the subject.
Without reading the preceding entries – I would say as Churchill: never have so many owe so much to so few weapons –


that would be Hurricane and Spitfire, in alphabetic order.

 

The Me 163 was a sidetrack which was probably only an influence in the sense that it proved that rocket engined interceptors was a sidetrack, and bloody dangerous to their pilots. The He 162 was just a piece of crap.

But the Ar 234 is an interesting aircraft. Far too few of them were made to name it amongst the most influental aircraft of WWII, but the few that Allied forces encountered certainly made an impression. It would be strange if it had no influence at all on any post-war design.

 

Sorry, I misunderstood the meaning of "influential). However, SKUA, as cheeky_m said:" NO JETS ALLOWED PLEASE ".
Sorry, Skua. We all make mistakes.

 

p-51 mustange was beter then what the german or japenese could put out good speed good view from inside the cock pit plus there gun's where good they could fly with B-17's on there way to bomb targets in Germany

 

the latest ta 152 was more than a match for the mustangs, they were better, but as you know: too late and too few!!!!

 

Although if they were introduced in large numbers earlier, the Americans would have brought the P-51H into service sooner as a counter to them.

 

The Mustang was good, no doubt about it, but "Most influential"? Probably not....

 

Hurricane?
It saved the UK in the BoB, which altered the war in our favour...

 

I'd definitly go for the Hurricane as the most under appreciated plane of the war. I've always had a soft spot for the Lancaster though.

 

Absolutely agreed, I have exactely the same feelings towards the Hurricane and the Lancaster.