What is the most underrated WWII aircraft?

[DodgyGeezer]

We've all got our favourite plane spitfire/mustang/lightning/etc but what's the plane that doesn't seem to get enough love?

Can I nominate the Bristol Beaufighter?

[Eric Mc]

Quite a few -

Handley Page Halifax
Fairey Fulmar
Avro Anson
Martin B-26 Marauder
Messerschmitt Bf 110

[Desiderata]

I reckon the Mosquito was the "best", speed, flexibility, etc, but my favourite was one of the worst, the cheeky wee Lysander.

[Elroy Blue]

Westland Whirlwind. A bit more development and it could've been a real winner

[Eric Mc]

Elroy Blue said:

Westland Whirlwind. A bit more development and it could've been a real winner

Actually, rather fatally flawed for its original purpose (high altitude bomber interceptor) and was obsolescent in its best role (low level ground attack) as other types were coming along that could do the job better.

Also, the Air Ministry was reluctant to give a big order to Westland because they were a relatively small company and they didn't think they could handle serious volume production. They were struggling to keep up with rather modest Lysander orders. They also did not want Rolls Royce to waste time and effort on the Peregrine engine as it was felt they already had their hands full developing the Merlin and the Griffon.

[kurokawa]

J2M Raiden
very capable plane but not as much love as Ki-84 and N1K-J Shiden, let alone the poster boy A6M

and
Fiat G.55 seem always got out shine by other German 109 or Fw

[andyA700]

The Arado AR234 bomber, the last German aircraft to fly over the UK in WW2.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arado_Ar_234

[Eric Mc]

The Italians built some lovely fighter aircraft which were outstanding, especially when fitted with German engines. However, they tended to be undergunned a bit and the Italian manufacturers could not produce them in enough quantities.

[Eric Mc]

andyA700 said:

The Arado AR234 bomber, the last German aircraft to fly over the UK in WW2.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arado_Ar_234

Is it "underrated"?

I think those who came across them were fairly impressed, although they suffered the usual unreliability issues of German jets of the period.

[FourWheelDrift]

DodgyGeezer said:

We've all got our favourite plane spitfire/mustang/lightning/etc but what's the plane that doesn't seem to get enough love?

Can I nominate the Bristol Beaufighter?

The aircraft it came from, the Bristol Beaufort.

[magpie215]

C-47 probably because it's not a combat aircraft but it's contribution to the war effort was massive.

[Simpo Two]

Macchi fighters rarely get a mention, though I don't know how they fared operationally.

ETA Apparently the C205 was a match for the P-51 Mustang.

[Eric Mc]

magpie215 said:

C-47 probably because it's not a combat aircraft but it's contribution to the war effort was massive.

But it's never been underrated. When Eisenhower was asked after the war had ended, what pieces of kit had helped win the war, the one aircraft he mentioned was the Douglas C-47 Skytrain/Dakota.

[Yertis]

Eric Mc said:

Elroy Blue said:

Westland Whirlwind. A bit more development and it could've been a real winner

Actually, rather fatally flawed for its original purpose (high altitude bomber interceptor) and was obsolescent in its best role (low level ground attack) as other types were coming along that could do the job better.

Also, the Air Ministry was reluctant to give a big order to Westland because they were a relatively small company and they didn't think they could handle serious volume production. They were struggling to keep up with rather modest Lysander orders. They also did not want Rolls Royce to waste time and effort on the Peregrine engine as it was felt they already had their hands full developing the Merlin and the Griffon.

I'd argue that the Typhoon, that 'replaced' the Whirlwind, was also unsuccessful in its intended role as an interceptor. Given the development Elroy mentioned, the Whirlwind may well have equalled or bettered the Typhoon as a low-level attack aircraft. More concentrated firepower, excellent visibility, and twin engines are no bad thing in ground attack aircraft. Once it was established in service the Whirlwind was successful and much loved by its pilots.

The other policy is not the fault of the Whirlwind itself. It's not as if the Napier Sabre was a paragon of reliability.

[Eric Mc]

Simpo Two said:

Macchi fighters rarely get a mention, though I don't know how they fared operationally.

ETA Apparently the C205 was a match for the P-51 Mustang.

Exactly. Some of the Daimler Benz powered Italian fighters were excellent. There just weren't enough of them to be of any help to the Italians.

[magpie215]

Eric Mc said:

magpie215 said:

C-47 probably because it's not a combat aircraft but it's contribution to the war effort was massive.

But it's never been underrated. When Eisenhower was asked after the war had ended, what pieces of kit had helped win the war, the one aircraft he mentioned was the Douglas C-47 Skytrain/Dakota.

In the general population......not aircraft nerds like us ;-)

[Eric Mc]

Yertis said:

I'd argue that the Typhoon, that 'replaced' the Whirlwind, was also unsuccessful in its intended role as an interceptor. Given the development Elroy mentioned, the Whirlwind may well have equalled or bettered the Typhoon as a low-level attack aircraft. More concentrated firepower, excellent visibility, and twin engines are no bad thing in ground attack aircraft. Once it was established in service the Whirlwind was successful and much loved by its pilots.

The other policy is not the fault of the Whirlwind itself. It's not as if the Napier Sabre was a paragon of reliability.

Couldn't agree more. The Typhoon also had its issues but it was perservered with a for a few reasons -

i) it wasn't powered by a Rolls Royce engine . This meant it didn't hamper production of Merlins or Griffons. The Rolls Royce Vulture powered version of the Typhoon (the Tornado) was abandoned for those very reasons.

ii) it only had one engine, not two (like the Whirlwind) which meant it was more efficient to produce

My contention is that, if the requirement for the aircraft wasn't so strong, the Typhoon would have been abandoned too. It had many, many flaws.

[Eric Mc]

magpie215 said:

In the general population......not aircraft nerds like us ;-)

I'm not so sure. Once upon a time, the Dakota was probably better known to the general public than the Spitfire - for the simple fact that thousands of them were used as airliners right up until the 1980s and millions of ordinary people flew on them.

[Castrol for a knave]

Avoiding tge esoteric stuff, I would say the Hurricane

It has not entered popular culture like the Spitfire. I guess it was the 330d estate to the Spitfire's M3.

Its contribution is very much overlooked.

I would then maybe add the Auster and the B24 . The first for being a great little STOL bugsmasher and SoE conveyance of choice, but also creating an admin sky train after DDay, fetching and carrying.

The second for being able to close the air gap over the Atlantic, hunting for u boats and providing effective and disruptive cover.

[wisbech]

B-24 Liberator. 50% more built than the B-17 Flying Fortress, (18,000 vs 12,000) but the B17 gets all the praise. True, B17 was more survivable (higher altitude, more guns) but the B-24 was faster, longer ranged and carried more bombs. Also more flexible - the long range and payload means they were used for marine patrol, and for long range transport (basically for flying stuff much further than a C-47 Dakota could)