[Gort]

Some WWII warbirds were lousy to mediocre. Some were good. Some were excellent. And some, for whatever reasons, were/are way overrated. We’re talkin’ good ol’ hype. Undeserved glory.

I’ve listed 42 WWII planes below (feel free to add more). Choose the bird you think is overrated and tell us why (choose several if you like).

Things to consider: Did this warbird perform as advertised; did it match the hype? Or is was it the sad victim of a rabid PR campaign?

A-20
B-17
B-24
B-25
B-26
B5N2 Kate
Beaufighter
C.202
C.205
C-47
F4F
F4U
F6F
Fiat G.50
Fw-190
G4M Betty
He-111
Hurricane
Il-2
Ju-88
Ki-61
Ki-84
La-5
Lancaster
Me-109
Me-109
Me-110
Me-163
Me-210
Me-262
Mig 3
Mosquito
P-38
P-47
P-51
Pe-2
S.M.79
Spitfire
Stirling
TBF
Tempest
Yak 3/9

[Migmauler]

Hey this looks like fun. I'll play.

JU-87 Stuka- obsolete by the time the "real" war started and one of the ugliest planes ever built.

Japanese Zero- again, outclassed by both the Hellcat and Corsair after the US introduced fighters to replace outdated P-40s and Wildcats.
Even later variants were no match for the US navy fighters.

ME-110- Even as early as the Battle of Britain, a veritable "sitting Duck" to British fighters.

[david cotton]

The Avro Lancaster.
Better than the Halifax and Stirling, but still not a good aircraft.

It could haul large bomb loads and reasonable height, but it was still a sitting duck once a fighter found it.


It would have been a great aircraft if it could fly faster and higher. When bombing Germany, the best chance for a bomber is to get in and out a quick as possible. The less time in the combat zone , the greater the chance of survival.


The Lancaster should have been stripped down to fly faster and higher and maybe with a slightly smaller bomb load.


The Lancaster was also a death trap for its crew. When one was shot down, the average number of crew to survive was less than 2.

[Dan Flynn]

The P-38 Lightning. Very famous due to Bong, McGuire etc but not as good as the P-51, P-47 and F6F. Some of the old pilots told me it was uncomfortable due to no heater - some other reasons can't remember.

[Louie]

Blackburn Skua. Just plain ugly.

[mikeb1958]

Originally Posted by Louie

Blackburn Skua. Just plain ugly.

I agree..it makes the Stuka look like Pamela Anderson.

[wmosner]

US...P-61

German...Dornier Do 335

[jim]

Originally Posted by mikeb1958

I agree..it makes the Stuka look like Pamela Anderson.

Pamela Anderson!!!!!!!! I would rather sleep with a Skua, well at least its real.

BTW the Skua was never rated by anyone either over or under, it did what it could.

[Epapazian]

I know that this is an unpopular choice but in my book one of the most overrated combat planes of WW II was our famous B-17. Sure, its crews loved it and the plane could take lots of punishment and still return to base. But the B-17 was designed primarily as a coastal patrol bomber and had a bomb bay of very modest proportions compared to Great Britain's Lancaster. On paper the B-17 carried 8-9 tons of bombs and had a range of 2000 miles, while the Lancaster's bombload was 11 tons and it had a range of 1600-1700 miles. However the B-17 could never haul more than 4000 pounds of bombs to Berlin and hope to get there while a Lancaster could deliver more than twice this tonnage on long distance missions. Its good points aside, the B-17 was lauded by Hollywood's propaganda machine and the Army Air Force as a virtually invincible bombing platform which never missed any target and routinely shot down hordes of attacking Axis fighters on every mission. The reality was, of course, very different.

[johnnyboy]

The B17 with a crew of 10 and a small bomb load. The job could have been done much better with a Mosquito carrying the same bomb load with the same range with only a crew of two, Able to fly much faster and so able to outrun most German types so putting fewer lives a risk and just think how many the industrial might of the USA could have built