# Coolest WW 2 plane (split from F-35 thread)



## Journeyman

Rifleman62 said:
			
		

> .......flying with the P-38 Lightning


World War Two produced only one aircraft more cool than the P-38....the Mosquito....with the A-10 loving grunt in me insisting that the Ju-87 (particularly the 87G) round out the top three

/tangent


----------



## Rifleman62

I meant the two aircraft flying together as a cool factor, not that the P-38 was a cool aircraft. 

If we want a tangent on the Second World War (the Commonwealth name for that war )/World War Two (US), then the Mosquito, P-51 top my list. It is the sound of those Merlin engines also.

There was a flying demo of a P-51C (Red Tails commemorative), and a static P-51D.

The F-86 is another favorite. Several flt demos. The distinctive F-86 "whistle" you hear when it flies by. See Korean was movies. 

Saw a Mosquito in the UK. If you love aircraft, go to Duxford: http://www.iwm.org.uk/visits/iwm-duxford

You will be thrilled.


----------



## Kirkhill

Journeyman said:
			
		

> World War Two produced only one aircraft more cool than the P-38....the Mosquito....with the A-10 loving grunt in me insisting that the Ju-87 (particularly the 87G) round out the top three
> 
> /tangent



Tangent continued....

2 for 3 JM.  The Mossie and the Fork Tailed Devil for sure.  But number 3 is either the Tiffie, or more eclectically, the Lysander.  I just love the way that thing was built to put down anywhere.


----------



## Edward Campbell

Oh, good, let's  :highjack:  the thread.

I agree that all of _Mosquito_, P-38 _Lightning_ and _Lysander_ were "cool," but the _Hurrican_, especially the Mk 1, was decisive ...







... and fairly "cool," too.

The Battle of Britain was a turning point, it as decisive, and the _Hurricane_, not the more glamorous _Spitfire_ was the workhorse of that battle.


----------



## Kirkhill

When you think about it - WW2 could possibly be seen as the apogee of piloted air warfare.  There were just so many effective and aesthetic aircraft out there.  Even ugly ducklings like the Shorts Stirling had their charm.

And I agree - The "hurriback" - with its distinctive "hunch" - did save Britain in the sense that you mean it.  It slaughtered German bombers. (Junkers, Heinkels and Dorniers).


----------



## mariomike

Lancaster.


----------



## OldSolduer

The Mosquito is my choice.


----------



## jeffb

None of these were bad choices but the A6M Zero (Reisen) has to be up there. The lines on that aircraft are beautiful. Here's an fighter that is pure offensive that relies on manoeuvre and pilot skill to stay alive rather then heavy armour. It was a fighter designed for fighter pilots. With a range of 3,100 km, it must be the longest ranged single-engine aircraft of the war. The Mustang is about 400km short of that according to Wikipedia. 

Just check out the performance specs: (taken from Wikipedia so they are probably ballpark) 

Performance

    Never exceed speed: 660 km/h (356 kn, 410 mph)
    Maximum speed: 533 km/h (287 kn, 331 mph) at 4,550 m (14,930 ft)
    Range: 3,105 km (1,675 nmi, 1,929 mi)
    Service ceiling: 10,000 m (33,000 ft)
    Rate of climb: 15.7 m/s (3,100 ft/min)
    Wing loading: 107.4 kg/m² (22.0 lb/ft²)
    Power/mass: 294 W/kg (0.18 hp/lb)


----------



## AirDet

I have 2 favourites. The Corsair F4U and the Lancaster BII. (basically a Lanc with Hercules engines.)


----------



## observor 69

For those of us who wonder how a C-130 Herc  engine got in a Lanc:   

The Bristol Hercules was a 14-cylinder two-row radial aircraft engine designed by Sir Roy Fedden and produced by the Bristol Engine Company starting in 1939. It was the first of their single sleeve valve (Burt-McCollum, or Argyll, type) designs to see widespread use, powering many aircraft in the mid-World War II time frame.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bristol_Hercules


----------



## Rifleman62

The Corsair F4U with it's distinctive gull wing was a great aircraft. The US Navy had teething problems landing on carriers so gave it to the Marines. Canadian VC in the F4U in 1945.

Served in Korean War as did the F-51 (1947 USAF designation - Fighter, vice USAAF designation - Pursuit). See also the F-82 Twin Mustang.  The P-51 was the first fighter to escort bombers round trip to Berlin from the UK.

The Brits replaced the A-36 (Attack)Allison engine with the Merlin, thus Mustang I / P-51. The Brits solved the F4U carrier ops problems. The Brits invented angled carrier decks. The Brits invented the steam catapult.

The Lancaster was an amazing aircraft. Special missions, 617 Sqn, Tallboys, Dam busters, Tirpiz, Pathfinders, etc.

The Mosquito later took on the Pathfinders role as well as dam busting the canal system of locks etc. Bomber version bomb load was  500 lbs more than the B-17, faster with a crew loss of two vice ten. Fighter Bomber, Night Fighter, Night Intruder, very versatile.


----------



## OldSolduer

To add to the Mosquito, much of it was made of plywood, thus giving it a low radar signature. 

The first "stealth aircraft".


----------



## AlexanderM

AirDet said:
			
		

> I have 2 favourites. The Corsair F4U and the Lancaster BII. (basically a Lanc with Hercules engines.)


I'm with you guys on the Corsair, it's my favorite.


----------



## The Bread Guy

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> Oh, good, let's  :highjack:  the thread.
> 
> I agree that all of _Mosquito_, P-38 _Lightning_ and _Lysander_ were "cool," but the _Hurrican_, especially the Mk 1, was decisive ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ... and fairly "cool," too.
> 
> The Battle of Britain was a turning point, it as decisive, and the _Hurricane_, not the more glamorous _Spitfire_ was the workhorse of that battle.


Also liking it because one in ten were built in my back yard.


----------



## Pat in Halifax

Agree with most hands down; the Corsair. Not sure why but most survivors are Goodyear-built FGs.
Since I was a kid, I have always liked the unclean yet functional lines of the 109 Emil. Though outclassed by 1940, arguably THE most revolutionary aircraft in the late 30s.


----------



## dimsum

Wait for it:  Fairey Swordfish.  Successful in Taranto and helped cripple the Bismarck.  As a friend says often, "if it's ugly and it works, it ain't ugly."






Other notable mentions that I haven't seen here yet:  PBY Catalina, DC-3 and B-25H gunship (AKA "How many guns can we fit onto an aircraft?")


----------



## vonGarvin

Said already earlier, but for the army, this is a pretty cool aircraft to see flying in support of you


----------



## daftandbarmy

If you want 'retro-cool', then you really need to be talking P47:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Se6rq8vean8

Kind of like the fighter plane version of Seth Rogan  ;D


----------



## larry Strong

Technoviking said:
			
		

> Said already earlier, but for the army, this is a pretty cool aircraft to see flying in support of you



It is a cool looking plane, however I much prefer the Ilyushin Il-2 Sturmovik, in combination with its successor, the Ilyushin Il-10, a total of 42,330 were built, making it the single most produced military aircraft design in all of aviation history!




Larry


----------



## vonGarvin

Larry Strong said:
			
		

> It is a cool looking plane, however I much prefer the Ilyushin Il-2 Sturmovik, in combination with its successor, the Ilyushin Il-10, a total of 42,330 were built, making it the single most produced military aircraft design in all of aviation history!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Larry



I almost posted the IL-2.  But in terms of just being "cool", I prefer the JU-87.  Just from appearance, its reputation, etc.  But the Sturmovik is epic!  Nice posting


----------



## Edward Campbell

milnews.ca said:
			
		

> Also liking it because one in ten were built in my back yard.



The story of Elsie MacGill and her husband, Bill Soulsby, is however, instructive on the subject of military procurement. That MacGill was an excellent manager is beyond question. The _Hurricane_ output of the CC&F plant at Fort William, now Thunder Bay, was nothing short of phenomenal, in both quality and quantity, and a lot of that was due to her organizational ability and engineering imagination. But her experience with Curtiss-Wright, with the Curtiss SB2C _Helldiver_ shows what goes wrong when the _Operational Requirement_ is not fixed before going to contract: the customer, the US Navy, never really knew what it wanted and so the aircraft was a failure, not even a brilliant engineering manager, which MacGill certainly was, could rescue it.. (MacGill and Soulsby worked together and were, reputedly, fired for having an (premarital?) affair (how quaint!) but it is just as likely that they were scapegoated for bad management in Washington.)


----------



## NavyShooter

My favorite would have to be the Lancaster.

Honourable mention to the Beaufighter that my Great Uncle flew in the war  with 404 Sqn.

Followup on the Taranto Raid with the Swordfish is that its likely to have had impact on the Japanese plans at Pearl Harbour, so it argueably had a HUGEimpact on the war  in terms of crippling the Italian fleet, while helping to bring in the US..


----------



## FAL

The Hawker Typhoon, in camo and invasion stripes. Other planes were capable in different areas, but for me, the closest thing in my mind and heart to a flying tank was the Typhoon. That big chin cowling, thick wings, and rockets for supporting the grunts by ventilating Tigers. Ach. It's like a powerlifter with wings.


----------



## a_majoor

Although it was a case of "too little, too late", I am a fan of the German jet aircraft of the very late war period. The Arado 234 "Blitz" bomber was especially clean lined and functional, and has that special beauty reserved for finely crafted tools:


----------



## Old Sweat

FAL said:
			
		

> The Hawker Typhoon, in camo and invasion stripes. Other planes were capable in different areas, but for me, the closest thing in my mind and heart to a flying tank was the Typhoon. That big chin cowling, thick wings, and rockets for supporting the grunts by ventilating Tigers. Ach. It's like a powerlifter with wings.



The Typhoon was indeed an imposing ground attack aircraft, especially against troops and vehicles. Its record against tanks, including Tigers, was despite the RAF claims, not very good at all. One figure I recall was 5% probability of achieving a kill on an individual Panzer. Its rockets were horribly inaccurate and perhaps more kills were made by its cannons. Try googling Tiger losses in Normandy and you will be able to examine several different sites that discuss the matter.


----------



## daftandbarmy

Old Sweat said:
			
		

> The Typhoon was indeed an imposing ground attack aircraft, especially against troops and vehicles. Its record against tanks, including Tigers, was despite the RAF claims, not very good at all. One figure I recall was 5% probability of achieving a kill on an individual Panzer. Its rockets were horribly inaccurate and perhaps more kills were made by its cannons. Try googling Tiger losses in Normandy and you will be able to examine several different sites that discuss the matter.



This is an excellent analysis of 2 TAF's effectiveness in the Normandy campaign i.e., not very, but not all their fault

Bloody Brylcreem jobs, slacking again….  ;D



2nd TAF and the Normandy Campaign:
Controversy and Under-developed Doctrine

A more recent body of scholarly literature has grown up, dedicated to "de-bunking" some of the more over-blown
claims for air power in Normandy." So where does the truth lie? What was the effect of Allied air power on the Germans in Normandy? 

http://www.collectionscanada.gc.ca/obj/s4/f2/dsk2/ftp03/MQ50093.pdf


----------



## Old Sweat

daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> This is an excellent analysis of 2 TAF's effectiveness in the Normandy campaign i.e., not very, but not all their fault
> 
> Bloody Brylcreem jobs, slacking again….  ;D
> 
> 
> 
> 2nd TAF and the Normandy Campaign:
> Controversy and Under-developed Doctrine
> 
> A more recent body of scholarly literature has grown up, dedicated to "de-bunking" some of the more over-blown
> claims for air power in Normandy." So where does the truth lie? What was the effect of Allied air power on the Germans in Normandy?
> 
> http://www.collectionscanada.gc.ca/obj/s4/f2/dsk2/ftp03/MQ50093.pdf



I know I emailed back and forth considerably with the author during the preparation of my book on Totalize and I think I also cited his thesis.

Much of the challenge is that unlike the Germans and the Soviets, the British did not develop a ground attack aircraft and treated it as something real pilots did not do for much of the war. The Comd 2 TAF also hated Montgomery after working with him in North Africa and tended to want to go his own way to assert the independence of the RAF.

Back to sexy airplanes.


----------



## larry Strong

Old Sweat said:
			
		

> The Typhoon was indeed an imposing ground attack aircraft, especially against troops and vehicles. Its record against tanks, including Tigers, was despite the RAF claims, not very good at all. One figure I recall was 5% probability of achieving a kill on an individual Panzer. Its rockets were horribly inaccurate and perhaps more kills were made by its cannons. Try googling Tiger losses in Normandy and you will be able to examine several different sites that discuss the matter.



Been reading the same about the Sturmovik as well.



Larry


----------



## jollyjacktar

I'll put this one forward,  the Dornier Do 335 Arrow or Aardvark as it was known to the Allies.  This the only surviving example, it's cool.


----------



## OldSolduer

If I were a pilot this is the one I'd love to fly.


----------



## old medic

No idea why, but one I like and not mentioned yet is the beaufighter.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=auHYZrNK9wk


----------



## jollyjacktar

My dad's cousin Ken flew Mossies and when Korea came up he and other  Mossies vets were brought back to fly the first jets as they were the only one's who were used to the high speeds.   The kids were scared initially.   Ken was an interesting guy to talk to.


----------



## TCBF

Larry Strong said:
			
		

> Been reading the same about the Sturmovik as well.
> 
> Larry



- To be fair, I don't think anyone back then seriously thought they would knock out a lot of tanks from the sky. All that was needed was to knock out the trucks, trains, and horse-drawn wagons that were used to sustain the enemy field force. Knock out re-supply, and the tanks aren't of much use offensively. You can tell your soldiers that you are knocking out lots of tanks to boost their morale - it doesn't need to be true to be effective.


----------



## quadrapiper

TCBF said:
			
		

> - To be fair, I don't think anyone back then seriously thought they would knock out a lot of tanks from the sky. All that was needed was to knock out the trucks, trains, and horse-drawn wagons that were used to sustain the enemy field force. Knock out re-supply, and the tanks aren't of much use offensively. You can tell your soldiers that you are knocking out lots of tanks to boost their morale - it doesn't need to be true to be effective.


Wonder how much of an effect the possibility of a tank-killing aircraft had on German tactics, both on the part of individual crews and further up the line?


----------



## a_majoor

While in overall terms tank busting by aircraft was quite difficult, the threat was effective enough to force the Germans to essentially hide in the woods during the day and only move at night. Looking at late war pictures, you often see fairly high levels of camouflage as well, including the rather odd looking "dapple" pattern paint jobs and lots of branches and foliage tied to the tanks.


----------



## FAL

quadrapiper said:
			
		

> Wonder how much of an effect the possibility of a tank-killing aircraft had on German tactics, both on the part of individual crews and further up the line?



If the ratio of successful attacks was as low as quoted above, maybe the best effect was the psychological effect.


----------



## OldSolduer

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> My dad's cousin Ken flew Mossies and when Korea came up he and other  Mossies vets were brought back to fly the first jets as they were the only one's who were used to the high speeds.   The kids were scared initially.   Ken was an interesting guy to talk to.


I have heard that the Pathfinder Mosquitoes would fly in complete darkness at low level and drop flares for the bomber stream. Incredible.


----------



## dimsum

Jim Seggie said:
			
		

> I have heard that the Pathfinder Mosquitoes would fly in complete darkness at low level and drop flares for the bomber stream. Incredible.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pathfinder_%28RAF%29#Tactics

"As the war wore on, the role of "Master Bomber" was introduced. This was an idea that had been used by Guy Gibson in the Dam Busters raid. Bennett wanted to lead raids but was denied operational flying as Harris was not prepared to risk losing him. The appointed Pathfinder (usually an experienced senior officer) circled the target, broadcasting radio instructions to both Pathfinders and Main Force aircraft, correcting aiming points and generally co-ordinating the attack."

So, the Master Bomber and his Pathfinder crew actually stuck around dodging flak until the entire bombing run was complete.  Geez.


----------



## OldSolduer

And to think they did all this without GPS and the gadgets they have today.


----------



## daftandbarmy

Thucydides said:
			
		

> While in overall terms tank busting by aircraft was quite difficult, the threat was effective enough to force the Germans to essentially hide in the woods during the day and only move at night. Looking at late war pictures, you often see fairly high levels of camouflage as well, including the rather odd looking "dapple" pattern paint jobs and lots of branches and foliage tied to the tanks.



Seemed pretty routine for this guy:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hans-Ulrich_Rudel

'Stuka Pilot' is an excellent book by the way.


----------



## FAL

Jim Seggie said:
			
		

> And to think they did all this without GPS and the gadgets they have today.



Indeed. How young pilots ever completed a strafing run without simultaneously texting?


----------



## OldSolduer

FAL said:
			
		

> Indeed. How young pilots ever completed a strafing run without simultaneously texting?



Not meant to derail but how about the Vikings etc who navigated without the benefit Of modern navigation equipment ?


----------



## RedFive

I'm seeing lots of love for the ground pounders, and so I submit for your viewing pleasure;

The Henschel Hs 129.


----------



## daftandbarmy

RedFive said:
			
		

> I'm seeing lots of love for the ground pounders, and so I submit for your viewing pleasure;
> 
> The Henschel Hs 129.



Must have had something to do with Goering 'compensating' for something...  ;D


----------



## Ex-Dragoon

I was always a fan of the Typhoon, the Lightning and the Corsair.


----------



## Pat in Halifax

Okay, just because no one else said it-Some say the first 'beautiful' warplane:


----------



## Edward Campbell

ff topic: Not WWII

There are (were) only a few _ugly_ aircraft (I think the modern F117 _stealth_ fighter is one of them.






Ugly F117


A couple of beauties were:





Sopwith Camel ~ maybe it is _beautiful_ because of its lethality, maybe for its _grace_ in the air





SR71 _Blackbird_ which is _beautiful_ in its own right


----------



## observor 69

You made me do it


----------



## Griffon

It was never made, it it was definitely way before its time...

The Horten Ho 229


----------



## OldSolduer

Griffon said:
			
		

> It was never made, it it was definitely way before its time...
> 
> The Horten Ho 229



But did it hear a Who?


----------



## Griffon

No...it was listening, but took too long.  Fortunately, the Allies swept through the land and shut it down before it heard a Who.


----------



## Nfld Sapper

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> ff topic: Not WWII
> 
> There are (were) only a few _ugly_ aircraft (I think the modern F117 _stealth_ fighter is one of them.



Here are some others:





AD Scout (1915), an anti-Zeppelin fighter





Curtiss-Goupil Duck (1917), an early experimental





Canadian Vickers Velos (1927), a photoreconnaissance plane





Handley Page H.P.50 Heyford (1930), an "express bomber"





Westland-Hill Pterodactyl Mark V (1932), a tailless flying wing





Kalinin K-7 (1933), a Soviet bomber





 Sud-Est SE 100 (1939), a French fighter





General Aircraft Fleet Shadower (1940), a scout plane





Delanne Duo-Mono (1941), a French fighter





McDonnell XF-85 Goblin (1948), a "parasite fighter"





Breguet 763 Deux-Ponts (1949), a French airliner





Bennett PL-11 Airtruck (1960), a crop-duster





Boeing X-32B (2001), a delta-wing fighter


----------



## YZT580

Hey, the goblin was a great idea.  Every long range bomber was supposed to carry one to fend off the opposition airborne threats.


----------



## Nfld Sapper

YZT580 said:
			
		

> Hey, the goblin was a great idea.  Every long range bomber was supposed to carry one to fend off the opposition airborne threats.



The McDonnell XF-85 Goblin was an American prototype fighter aircraft conceived during World War II by McDonnell Aircraft. It was intended to be deployed from the bomb bay of the giant Convair B-36 bomber as a parasite fighter. The XF-85's intended role was to defend bombers from hostile interceptors, a need demonstrated during World War II. Two prototypes were constructed before the program was terminated.


----------



## a_majoor

NFLD Sapper said:
			
		

> The McDonnell XF-85 Goblin was an American prototype fighter aircraft conceived during World War II by McDonnell Aircraft. It was intended to be deployed from the bomb bay of the giant Convair B-36 bomber as a parasite fighter. The XF-85's intended role was to defend bombers from hostile interceptors, a need demonstrated during World War II. Two prototypes were constructed before the program was terminated.



The US Navy pioneered the idea in the 1930's with aircraft deploying from the airships AKRON & MACON, but since airships fly relatively slowly, pilots could fly up to the airship and hook onto the "trapeze".

Perhaps fortunately for the pilots, the turbulence under the bombers (B-50's and B-36's) was too great for the parasite fighter to hook up, and the few times it was tried ended with the pilots ditching the "Goblins" onto the dry lake bed at Edwards AFB.


----------



## Rifleman62

Very rare cockpit view of a Mosquito.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nM2ZQj6YjiA

Published on Jul 27, 2013

Video taken from the worlds only flying Mosquito of the CWH Lancaster led formation at the 2013 Canadian Warplane Heritage Museum Airshow. Includes Spitfire, Hurricane and B25 Mitchell

Rare colour film of the Mosquito.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r-UUTo3wHds

Filmed by Mosquito navigator Mr. Brian Harris DFC in Aug 1944 at 627 Squadron.

The TV program" Battle Stations".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GLdVIKyx7RE


----------



## OldSolduer

Very cool Rifleman!

It's amazing it first flew in December 1940 and was in operational service less that one year later.


----------



## mtlee

For me, the coolest plane of WWII will always be the Spitfire Mk IX. I know it's cliché, but the Spitfire kindled my interest in aviation, and to this day I have a small Airfix model of one that sits on my desk at home. 

The other WWII aircraft I have a great admiration for is the Lancaster bomber. I had the opportunity to sit in one as a young buck, and I still get goosebumps every time I get to see one in person.


----------



## Colin Parkinson

For I have always had a love affair with Flying boats


----------



## vonGarvin

Colin P said:
			
		

> For I have always had a love affair with Flying boats



I like them too:


----------



## dapaterson

Technoviking said:
			
		

> I like them too:



There's a much better one:


----------



## mtlee

dapaterson said:
			
		

> There's a much better one:



But will it beat the 4:30 autogyro to the Prussian Consulate in Siam?


----------



## OldSolduer

Technoviking said:
			
		

> I like them too:



That was Billy Bobs boat......Bond, James Bond.

Live and Let Die I believe......


----------



## George Wallace

Jim Seggie said:
			
		

> That was Billy Bobs boat......Bond, James Bond.
> 
> Live and Let Die I believe......



....or was it THUNDERBALL?


----------



## dapaterson

Doesn't matter.  It's a Roger Moore Bond movie, and therefore it sucks.


----------



## AJFitzpatrick

At the risk of a further topic diversion (is the topic now the best portrayal of James Bond ?)

Always have found it interesting that the Jet amphibian/seaplane never reached any real level of development in the West (the Russians have the Beriev-200). I have a number of suppositions about this largely related to the fact that Jet developed was military driven whereas as Prop development was largely commercial/civilian and I can't see a military role for a jet amphibian that could not otherwise be met by carrier aircraft (The Soviet Navy never had a lot of fixed wing carriers) but there are certainly civilian roles...


----------



## cupper

PBS is running a series called Nazi Mega Weapons, about the engineering and development that went into some of the huge structures and weapons they produced during the war.

The most recent episode discusses the development and manufacture of the ME-262, and the steps they took to keep it hidden and protected from Allied bombing raids.

http://www.pbs.org/program/nazi-megaweapons/


----------



## YZT580

The attached is a photographic tribute to a great airplane.  Don't know whether this is the most appropriate place to put it but just Enjoy

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3598540/The-Photographer-captures-pin-sharp-images-final-55-airworthy-Spitfires-using-just-handheld-camera.html.


----------



## MarkOttawa

Not beautiful but lovely in its own way:



> http://www.classicfighters.org/content/chance-vought-f4u-4-corsair-history



As for beautiful:



> http://www.aviation-history.com/dehavilland/mosquito.html



As for the _Luftwaffe_:





http://www.aircraftaces.com/me-262.htm

Mark
Ottawa


----------



## MarkOttawa

And if one wants beautiful in another way (with RCAF):



> http://casmuseum.techno-science.ca/en/collection-research/artifact-consolidated-pby-5a-canso-a.php



Mark
Ottawa


----------



## Karel Doorman

Here one from the Dutchies  [ there were way to small a number of these availeble in WWII.

The Fokker G-1A (fightercruiser):revealed in 1936.This is a replica in Soesterberg,museum





Here's a better one,2 in flight(G-1B,models))





And offcourse one of the best bombers:the AVRO Lancaster:


----------



## Colin Parkinson

Colin P said:
			
		

> For I have always had a love affair with Flying boats



You beat me to it, the Sunderland flying boat and the Catalina/Canso were decisive aircraft as they played significant roles in keeping the sea lanes open. Another unsung aircraft


----------



## Chispa

The Black Sheep pose on the wings of Corsair #17740 in its revetment at Vella Lavella, Dec. 27th, 1943. The St. Louis Cardinals had issued them one team cap. http://www.donhollway.com/blacksheep/




















Marine Major Gregory “Pappy” Boyington, Commanding Officer of VMF-214 the “Black Sheep” boards his F4U-1 Corsair at the Barakoma airstrip on Vella LaVella ...https://www.reddit.com/r/wwiipics/comments/2qc4zq/marine_major_gregory_pappy_boyington_commanding/






http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2680649/posts


.


----------



## larry Strong

The "Whistling Death" is by far one of the more aesthetically pleasing planes to come out of WW2 in my mind....


Cheers
Larry


----------

