[timbo]

Mo,

I don't think either the Battle or the Defiant have ever been guilty of being overrated. I mean just look at the Battle it just looks completly cr@p.

[jim]

Originally Posted by timbo

Mo,

I don't think either the Battle or the Defiant have ever been guilty of beaing overrated. I mean just look at the Battle it just looks completly cr(a)p.

Excellent example of how quickly planes became obsolete in those days. In the case of the Battle it was obsolete before the first one came off the production line.
Again its fair to say that at the time of drawing up the plans for the Defiant it reflected the thinking of the time, plus the bombers it was supposed to come up against were hangovers from WW1.

The blame for the lack of suitable aircraft at the start of the conflict can be laid squarely at the door of what is now the MOD.
Short sighted , tight fisted policies , and outmoded thinking in general.

In 1938 despite the obvious leap in technology the Spitfire represented only 250 were ordered at that time.

The speed of change in just a few short years was breathtaking.

[1250ships]

Originally Posted by jim

Excellent example of how quickly planes became obsolete in those days. In the case of the Battle it was obsolete before the first one came off the production line.

Which highlights how impressive the B-17 was in that category. It first flew a year before the Battle.

[Cardinal]

I think everyone should remember that the thread refers to the "Most Overrated Aircraft": not the best or the worst but the most overrated i.e. received more accolades than it perhaps should have while others possibly did more of the actual work (like some people ).

That's the reason why I mentioned the Spitfire earlier which is, BTW, one of my favourite aircraft . Nonetheless, as it was the 'showstopper' of its time, being both elegant and well engineered it has perhaps received more attention for its beauty than its (competent) prowess ...

[stalag8611]

Originally Posted by Cardinal

I think everyone should remember that the thread refers to the "Most Overrated Aircraft": not the best or the worst but the most overrated i.e. received more accolades than it perhaps should have while others possibly did more of the actual work (like some people ).

That's the reason why I mentioned the Spitfire earlier which is, BTW, one of my favourite aircraft . Nonetheless, as it was the 'showstopper' of its time, being both elegant and well engineered it has perhaps received more attention for its beauty than its (competent) prowess ...

Exactly Cardinal. The question was clear: MOST OVERRATED, not best or worst. I love the Spit; it was and is one of the most beautiful aircraft ever designed. However, it received more accolades than it probably deserved, but in a battle for survival every country needs a hero. The Spit filled that role and served Britian very well.

[Old Crow]

I think everyone should remember that the thread refers to the "Most Overrated Aircraft": not the best or the worst but the most overrated i.e. received more accolades than it perhaps should have while others possibly did more of the actual work (like some people ).

In reality, most overrated and best are not necessarily mutually exclusive. In many discussions about most overrated anything, it is common for a majority of observers to consider the best also the most overrated, presumably because that which is universally acclaimed the best attains mythic proportions, which lends itself to overrated status. For example, and in honor of the baseball thread running in the Pub, ESPN writer Jayson Stark has a new book in which he postulates that the great Sandy Koufax is one of the most overrated lefties of all time (because of struggles early in his career and his relatively short career)

As for me, I would call the iconic Mitsubishi Zero the most overrated fighter plane and the B-17 (one of my all-time favorites) the most overrated bomber.

[FormerViperDriver]

Originally Posted by Cardinal

I think everyone should remember that the thread refers to the "Most Overrated Aircraft": not the best or the worst but the most overrated i.e. received more accolades than it perhaps should have while others possibly did more of the actual work (like some people ).

Exactly. What we are trying to measure here is the differential between reputation ("rating") and actual performance. To measure something, ideally you need to quantitfy it. In this case, it is hard to exactly quantify reputation, although it may be somewhat easier to quantify performance (kill ratio, actual performance numbers, pilot's regard for the aircraft, relaibility, etc...). Nevertheless, it is possible to come up with very rough gauges on these things. Let's say we rate reputation on a 1 to 10 scale, and also performance on the same scale. A P-51D might rate something like a 9 or 10 on reputation (could argue for an 8, but no less), and 8 or 9 on actual performance. So the difference is 1 or 2, maning the palne might arguably be very slightly overrated, but really it's about even. Certainly nowhere close to MOST overated aircraft of WW II (sorry Sergey...).

Now on the other hand, the A6M Zero had a reputation of probably 8 or 9 (and here,I may interject that I would make a difference between reputation at the time of the conflict versus reputation in retrospect. Sometime they are not the same. I would say the Zero's reputation in the early years of WW II was closer to 10), while its actual performance can only be rated as something like a 5 or 6 at best (seen over the entire course of the war). Some could even argue for a lesser number. In any event, the differential would be around 3 or 4, maybe more. Clearly the Zero is more overated than the Mustang.

Now, this crude rating system won't eliminate the debate and magically come up with the right answer, but it should at least eliminate from contention a few of the planes already named in this thread. An aircraft's performance may have been dismal (rating 1 or 2), but if its reputation was also 1 or 2, than it's not the most overated plane, period. Conversely, if an aircraft's high reputation is matched by very good actual performance in combat, then it's not overrated either, or at least not much.

Hope this helps with future nominations.

Personally, I think the Zero is an excellent candidate for most overrated, but there may be others who'd give it a good run for its money...

FVD

[SKUNKY]

Originally Posted by Berkut76

The phrase above refers to P-51B/Cs and not P-51D.

I guess I didn't realize it was specifically the 'D' model you felt was overrated...Was the 'D' somehow inferior to the B/C?...and if not, why would it be considered overrated and not the B/Cs?

[jim]

Was the B17 overrated?

How can it be overrated, by what criteria ?

Lets us look at the facts, its fair to say that the B17 was the toughest bomber of the war, by that I mean of all the heavies it was the one that could take most battle damage.

Its bomb load was small when used on long distance raids but then again it had the best chance of making it through the mission.

Therefore it was (argueably) the best heavy of the war.

Its reputation may have been built up over the years since then but the fact remains that it did the job as good as and mostly better than any other.

Referring back to the Spitfire, The MK1 was a match and maybe slightly better than what was claimed at the time to be the best fighter in the world the BF109.
It took on the toughest role during the BoB and proved its ability.
The original design was so flexible that it lent itself well to continued development throughout the war. It always kept pace with and often surpassed the best efforts of the enemy to counter it.

It was used in all manner of tasks such as PR, fighter bombing, carrier fighter (not the most suitable for this task due to its narrow and for deck landings weak undercart).
It could have been used for fighter escorts all the way to Berlin if there had been no alternative such as the P47 ,Mustang, P38.

Its glamour was born at a time when we needed heroes. The pilot were indeed heroes and of course the Spit being such a beautiful and graceful aeroplane became part of the legend.

of course we all know that the Spit had its faults and no aeroplane could live up to the reputation it acquired so perhaps it was overated by those standards.

In my view neither the B17 or the Spit was overated, There was no aircraft at that time that was so far ahead of the opposition as to be able to live up to the sometimes mythic reputations ascribed to the Spit and B17 by subsequent generations.
However they were the best of their time.

In the final analysis they were part of the great war of attrition against the Nazi regime and they did their part magnificently.

[FormerViperDriver]

Originally Posted by SKUNKY

I guess I didn't realize it was specifically the 'D' model you felt was overrated...Was the 'D' somehow inferior to the B/C?...and if not, why would it be considered overrated and not the B/Cs?

Yeah, Sergey, my advice is to you is to stop digging yourself in a deeper hole with that line of reasoning. There is NO argument possible about any P-51 Mustang (Merlin powered) being the most overrated plane of WW II. If you want to argue it (the D model) was somewhat overrated, OK, make the argument (I'm still skeptical, but I'll listen), but MOST OVERRATED? You got to be kidding.

But maybe you just say things like that to stir up controversy, who knows...

FVD