Posted on 09/21/2016 8:36:24 AM PDT by C19fan
Over the last century of military aviation, several fighters have earned the nickname “flying coffin.” Military aviation inherently pushes up against the limits of technology and human endurance, particularly where fighter and pursuit aviation are concerned. Flying a fighter is remarkably dangerous, even when no one is trying to shoot you down. Engineering a capable fighter plane is also a struggle. Relatively small changes in engine, armament and airframe design can transform a clunker into an elite fighting machine. Many of the best fighters in history were initially viewed askance by their pilots.
(Excerpt) Read more at warisboring.com ...
The Soviet Lagg-3 was heavy and underpowered, but the Boulton Defiant was a fighter that had no front firing guns, just that rear turret.
The Brewster Buffalo is a candidate.
The BE-2 that the article refers to was an early observation plane, not a fighter, that was a favorite target for the 1st fighter, the Fokker Eindekker.
The Brewster Buffalo had an exemplary record with the Finns fighting against the Soviets.
The Bell P-39 Airacobra must come close to being one of these “worst fighters.”
Curse you, Red Baron!
http://acepilots.com/planes/soviet_p39_airacobra.html
The Soviets had many aces with the P-39, its major vice was that it couldn’t fight out of a paper bag above 12,000 feet and had short range.
Neither was a problem on the Eastern Front but were big problems in the Pacific and Western Europe.
Whoa there my FRiend:
It is amazing how the lesson never stays learned.
The P-38 had some success, particularly in the Pacific. It was the best long range bomber escort until the P-51s reached Europe.
Me-110 was excellent in the fighter-bomber role, especially when equipped against tanks.
But that isn’t what it was initially designed for. It was a “better than nothing” proposition for bomber escorts.
When allowed to “free-range’, they did quite well.
Early P-38's were considered meat on the table by Luftwaffe aces. It wasn't until the P-38J that they had hydraulic powered control surfaces and their maneuverability improved. The 'J' also finally gave their pilots decent heating, the early models were referred to as 'ice buckets' by their crews with sub-zero air blowing into the cockpit. Pilots would try to stuff newspaper or anything to try to plug the cracks.
Worse, the cold temperatures at high altitude in Europe would make the lubrication for their turbosuperchargers congeal and burn them out.
The Brewster was actually a very good machine for 1937-38. No less than Pappy Boyington said so when he wrote his book postwar. The original Navy ship was fast and maneuverable. But as WWII approached, they downrated it with the 3rd update and made it much heavier and slower.
Also, the guys who flew it were very poorly trained compared to the Japanese who had been in combat for years.
The Finns used it with much success.
Then there was the Bloch MB.150, the prototype couldn't even get off the ground, it was still a turkey by the time of the German invasion in May 1940
Yup, F-84 was a ground hog. They ended up putting RATO's on them to make takeoff shorter. Worked great for the first couple, but following aircraft had to follow through all that smoke on the runway. Quite the pucker factor.
Holy Crap! Let me guess...Davis-Monthan!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.