Comments on: Blog question: what World War II plane would you have wanted to fly?

By: Wayne Conrad

Wayne Conrad — Wed, 08 Apr 2009 21:51:46 +0000

The L-21 Piper Super Cub. A pilot’s airplane. Low and slow where the good scenery is, landing on unimproved strips, ferrying the Colonel around or trying to find the enemy.

By: david

david — Sun, 05 Apr 2009 16:19:36 +0000

Jim: The limited fuel supply in the Spit probably explained the Hurricanes were used for patrolling Luftwaffe airfields in France to intercept bombers taking off. One advantage of the Hurricane’s fabric on tube construction was that shells often passed right through without exploding, while bullet-damage was easily repaired with fabric patches, while the Spitfire needed to go to a metal shop if it had been shot up much.

By: Jim

Jim — Sun, 05 Apr 2009 15:36:01 +0000

Paul: When the “other guys” are up there trying to shoot my ass off, I’ll take effective over beauty any day.

Here in Ottawa, the Heritage Wings operation have both a Spit and a Hurricane. The pilots are also split over which ones they prefer to fly, or view as the more effective aircraft.

One of the restrictions that the Spit endured was fuel supply – about 85 gallons I think. The Hurricane had triple the fuel supply. The Spit was primarily a short-range home-defence aircraft – albeit a beautiful, very effective one.

By: david

david — Sat, 04 Apr 2009 17:09:25 +0000

I remember reading that the Hurricanes actually scored more kills than the Spitfires in the Battle of Britain. However, since the Spitfires often engaged the fighters to let the Hurricanes go after the bombers, it’s not quite fair to compare the two.

I’m not sure, but I think I also remember reading that it’s properly pronounced something like “Hurrigan”.

By: Paul Tomblin

Paul Tomblin — Sat, 04 Apr 2009 15:39:14 +0000

Hurricane? Really? A Hurricane was just a biplane with the top wing taken off. Fabric on frame, ugh. Yeah, sure, it was effective as all get-out, but it was almost as ugly as a Bf-109.

By: Jim

Jim — Sat, 04 Apr 2009 14:36:53 +0000

1. Hurricane
2. Lightning
3. Spitfire

By: david

david — Thu, 02 Apr 2009 15:21:43 +0000

I just put up a new posting with my choices. It turns out my first choice wasn’t that original after all:

de Havilland Mosquito
Douglas Dakota (U.S.: C-47)
L4 Grasshopper

By: bobk

bobk — Thu, 02 Apr 2009 15:06:49 +0000

1st choice: P-51D
2nd choice: P-38 Lightning
3rd choice: DeHavilland Mosquito

Of course, I have the benefit of being 24 hours late responding, but besides the two obvious choices (the Spitfire would also rank high in my list), I’ve always loved the Mosquito for too many reasons to list here.

bobk

By: Megginson Technologies: Land and Hold Short » Blog Archive » What WW II plane would I have wanted to fly?

Thu, 02 Apr 2009 14:08:42 +0000

[...] Land and Hold Short « Blog question: what World War II plane would you have wanted to fly? [...]

By: David V

David V — Thu, 02 Apr 2009 12:33:22 +0000

P-51D; Mustang always has been the one for me.

By: Paul Tomblin

Paul Tomblin — Thu, 02 Apr 2009 11:32:24 +0000

Spitfire first, Mosquito second. The two most beautiful planes ever.

By: Jim Howard

Jim Howard — Thu, 02 Apr 2009 02:23:05 +0000

De Haviland Mosquito

By: david

david — Thu, 02 Apr 2009 01:34:27 +0000

Great choices! The C-47 will also be my #2. The Catalina won’t be in my top 3, but it’s definitely in my top 10.

By: Dave Starr

Dave Starr — Wed, 01 Apr 2009 23:57:37 +0000

Nice concept. I’m looking forward to some interesting replies. My choice will probably not be the one most popular, but I am partial to it becuase it is a plane that fits my intened lifestyle so well..
1. PBY Catalina
2. C-47
3. Spitfire (no big surpise there .. (actually I’ll easily settle for anything with a Merlin engine)