Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: Ugliest Bomber of WWII

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> RE: Ugliest Bomber of WWII Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Ugliest Bomber of WWII - 11/19/2007 6:50:08 PM   
crsutton


Posts: 9590
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Maryland
Status: offline
Tupalov ANT-6

http://www.aviastar.org/air/russia/ant-6.php

http://www.centennialofflight.gov/essay/Aerospace/Tupulov/Aero59G1.htm

_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to crsutton)
Post #: 61
RE: Ugliest Bomber of WWII - 11/19/2007 6:57:15 PM   
Terminus


Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline
Yes, that's been posted three or four times already...

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to crsutton)
Post #: 62
RE: Ugliest Bomber of WWII - 11/19/2007 7:07:10 PM   
crsutton


Posts: 9590
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Maryland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Terminus

Yes, that's been posted three or four times already...



Yes, but it would be my choice as we...........Hey, 1001 posts and another star!


I really need to get myself a girlfriend.

_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to Terminus)
Post #: 63
RE: Ugliest Bomber of WWII - 11/19/2007 7:10:02 PM   
BrucePowers


Posts: 12094
Joined: 7/3/2004
Status: offline
It is one ugly airplane.

(in reply to crsutton)
Post #: 64
RE: Ugliest Bomber of WWII - 11/19/2007 7:25:45 PM   
Reichenberg

 

Posts: 42
Joined: 2/7/2004
From: Frankfurt, Germany
Status: offline
If an ASW bomber counts too, my first choice is the Kyushu Q1W1 Tokai:

Talking of the Do17 being ugly....

Uwe

(in reply to Terminus)
Post #: 65
RE: Ugliest Bomber of WWII - 11/19/2007 8:44:56 PM   
niceguy2005


Posts: 12523
Joined: 7/4/2005
From: Super secret hidden base
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Terminus

If we're going to list the Hampden as an ugly plane, then the Ki-48 and the Baltimore/Maryland must go too. Here's another two:


I may have my wires crossed and no time to look it up, but isn't the Baltimore the same as the Martin? Which I think was listed toward the top of the thread.

_____________________________


Artwork graciously provided by Dixie

(in reply to Terminus)
Post #: 66
RE: Ugliest Bomber of WWII - 11/19/2007 10:00:13 PM   
Terminus


Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline
Not quite the same. This is the Baltimore:




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to niceguy2005)
Post #: 67
RE: Ugliest Bomber of WWII - 11/19/2007 10:00:44 PM   
Terminus


Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline
And this is the Maryland:






Attachment (1)

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to Terminus)
Post #: 68
RE: Ugliest Bomber of WWII - 11/19/2007 10:05:06 PM   
Terminus


Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Reichenberg

If an ASW bomber counts too, my first choice is the Kyushu Q1W1 Tokai:
Talking of the Do17 being ugly....

Uwe


That link's broken...

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to Reichenberg)
Post #: 69
RE: Ugliest Bomber of WWII - 11/19/2007 10:11:46 PM   
niceguy2005


Posts: 12523
Joined: 7/4/2005
From: Super secret hidden base
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Terminus

And this is the Maryland:






Actually I think the Maryland isn't THAT bad, though I think Martin might get the award for most ugly bombers produced.

Here's the one I was thinking of...B-10....that turret on the nose looks like a pimple.






Attachment (1)

_____________________________


Artwork graciously provided by Dixie

(in reply to Terminus)
Post #: 70
RE: Ugliest Bomber of WWII - 11/19/2007 10:21:32 PM   
rtrapasso


Posts: 22653
Joined: 9/3/2002
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: String

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cap Mandrake

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mac67

Tupolev TB-3. It must have been damn cold in those open cockpits.







Mary Mother of God that is ugly! I think the factory workers should have refused to build it.


It carried up to 4000kg+ of bombs though, and that was back in 1932.. when the B-17 wasn't even on the drawing boards.



Yep - here is a US contemporary of the TB-3/Ant-6: The Curtiss B-2. The TB-3 comes off looking good compared to this. To be fair, the cockpit of the TB-3 was enclosed by the time WW2 came around.

The Soviets had probably the most advanced planes in the world when the TB-3 was first built... but then Stalin went and shot most of his airplane designers, assuring that the Soviet Airforce was no longer in the lead by 1939.




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by rtrapasso -- 11/19/2007 10:22:35 PM >

(in reply to String)
Post #: 71
RE: Ugliest Bomber of WWII - 11/20/2007 12:10:13 AM   
Sonny II

 

Posts: 2878
Joined: 1/12/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: crsutton

Tupalov ANT-6

http://www.aviastar.org/air/russia/ant-6.php

http://www.centennialofflight.gov/essay/Aerospace/Tupulov/Aero59G1.htm


Looks like an apartment complex with wings.

(in reply to crsutton)
Post #: 72
RE: Ugliest Bomber of WWII - 11/20/2007 12:11:52 AM   
cantona2


Posts: 3749
Joined: 5/21/2007
From: Gibraltar
Status: offline
Is the Kyushu Q1W1 Tokai a copy of the Dornier?

_____________________________

1966 was a great year for English Football...Eric was born


(in reply to Sonny II)
Post #: 73
RE: Ugliest Bomber of WWII - 11/20/2007 1:01:36 AM   
Terminus


Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline
No.

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to cantona2)
Post #: 74
RE: Ugliest Bomber of WWII - 11/20/2007 1:11:17 AM   
m10bob


Posts: 8622
Joined: 11/3/2002
From: Dismal Seepage Indiana
Status: offline
Terminus...a master of overstatement.

_____________________________




(in reply to Terminus)
Post #: 75
RE: Ugliest Bomber of WWII - 11/20/2007 1:17:16 AM   
Terminus


Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline
I can't write big fat posts AND write a lot of them. You think 22986 posts just happen by themselves?

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to m10bob)
Post #: 76
RE: Ugliest Bomber of WWII - 11/20/2007 1:26:01 AM   
Mynok


Posts: 12108
Joined: 11/30/2002
Status: offline

No, they are outsourced to elves........

(in reply to Terminus)
Post #: 77
RE: Ugliest Bomber of WWII - 11/20/2007 2:56:00 AM   
rtrapasso


Posts: 22653
Joined: 9/3/2002
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sonny II


quote:

ORIGINAL: crsutton

Tupalov ANT-6

http://www.aviastar.org/air/russia/ant-6.php

http://www.centennialofflight.gov/essay/Aerospace/Tupulov/Aero59G1.htm


Looks like an apartment complex with wings.



Another design contemporary with the Ant-6/TB-3 - The mighty Keystone B-6!!




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Sonny II)
Post #: 78
RE: Ugliest Bomber of WWII - 11/20/2007 3:00:07 AM   
rtrapasso


Posts: 22653
Joined: 9/3/2002
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: rtrapasso


quote:

ORIGINAL: Sonny II


quote:

ORIGINAL: crsutton

Tupalov ANT-6

http://www.aviastar.org/air/russia/ant-6.php

http://www.centennialofflight.gov/essay/Aerospace/Tupulov/Aero59G1.htm


Looks like an apartment complex with wings.



Another design contemporary with the Ant-6/TB-3 - The mighty Keystone B-6!!





Or how about the Handley-Page Hinaidi? Of course, these weren't used as bombers in WW2, but it goes to show beauty is relative...




Attachment (1)

(in reply to rtrapasso)
Post #: 79
RE: Ugliest Bomber of WWII - 11/20/2007 3:49:13 AM   
Terminus


Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline
A VERY distant relative, in this case...

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to rtrapasso)
Post #: 80
RE: Ugliest Bomber of WWII - 11/20/2007 3:59:09 AM   
wdolson

 

Posts: 10398
Joined: 6/28/2006
From: Near Portland, OR
Status: offline
Many of the proposals were for obsolete bombers at the beginning of hostilities which was only used on a limited basis.  If the field were limited to aircraft that had any extensive use as a front line bomber, I believe the field would be down to:
B-17
B-24
B-25
SM.79
Martin Maryland
Do-17
Do-217

The Maryland saw little use outside of the Western Desert.

Personally, if this were the field, I could cast my vote for the SM.79, though Italian camo schemes did help to improve the aesthetics to some degree.  Italy was behind the curve in aircraft design for most of the war.  They continued to use open cockpits on their fighhters long past when other powers had gone to fully enclosed cockpits.  The SM.79 was a fabric covered, trimotor design, with external bracing when its contemporaries were mostly all metal (except the Wellington and Mosquito), 2 or 4 engines, and almost all had done away with all external bracing.

The Italians were handicapped with a poor engine industry.  They didn't have any engines with output approaching contemporary levels until they started building Damiler Benz engines under license.  The SM.79 would have been better off with a twin engine arrangement, but the Italians lacked any engines powerful enough to do the job.  They did produce an under powered twin engine version for export.  As far as I know, the only buyer was Iraq.

Most of the Allies badly neglected their militaries during the interwar period.  Civilian aviation in many of these countries was where the money was and both racing and airliner business fueled development.  When war came, these countries had a lot of out of date military equipment still on hand, and/or were stocked with stop gaps they had picked up from other countries.  Because the expertise was there in the civilian sector in the US and Britain, these countries were able to turn their aircraft industry around and build excellent aircraft within a short time of entering the war.  What was on hand at the beginning was a mix of state of the art and a lot of old junk.

The USSR had neglected their aviation industry for a different reason.  Stalin had locked up or shot most of the aircraft designers.  Though the survivors were let out of the gulag and designed some very good aircraft during the war.  Even still, the USSR did have small numbers of some excellent aircraft at the start of the war.  The MiG-3 was one of the best high altitude fighters around at the outbreak of the war.  Though most were lost trying to stem the tide at low altitude where their advantages were negated.  The Sturmovik and Pe-2 were also almost ready or available in small numbers when the war started.

Japan and Germany had a larger number of aesthetically pleasing aircraft at the beginning of the war because both had been building up their air arms with modern aircraft in the couple of years before they got into the conflict.  They had a larger number of newer aircraft on hand, which tended to be more streamlined and used more modern design elements.  Though there were plenty of old aircraft on hand too.  The Hs-123 was a biplane ground attack bomber that served on the Eastern Front until the last of them were grounded due to lack of spares.  Japan was flying the Claude and Nate in many units at the beginning of the war.

Italy went to war long before they were prepared.  Their industry was not up to the demands of a major war and they failed to build enough out of date equipment for their military.  They struggled to bring anything more modern ot the battlefield.

This thread is showing that aesthetics is, at least to some degree, in the eye of the beholder.  I would not consider some of the bombers proposed ugly.  To my eye, the Do-17 and B-25 have a certain grace to them.  The B-17 and B-24 both have their ugly sides, but I wouldn't call them ugly.  But then that's just my opinion.

Bill


_____________________________

WitP AE - Test team lead, programmer

(in reply to rtrapasso)
Post #: 81
RE: Ugliest Bomber of WWII - 11/20/2007 4:27:42 AM   
MineSweeper


Posts: 653
Joined: 9/19/2006
From: Nags Head, NC
Status: offline
Here is another winner (plain ugly)....they should have been shot down on sight (most likely they were)

French Brequet Bre 413






Attachment (1)

< Message edited by MineSweeper -- 11/20/2007 7:37:05 AM >


_____________________________





(in reply to wdolson)
Post #: 82
RE: Ugliest Bomber of WWII - 11/20/2007 5:23:19 AM   
BrucePowers


Posts: 12094
Joined: 7/3/2004
Status: offline
How a bout the B-18 Bolo. That thing was pretty ugly too.

(in reply to MineSweeper)
Post #: 83
RE: Ugliest Bomber of WWII - 11/20/2007 8:10:48 AM   
Reichenberg

 

Posts: 42
Joined: 2/7/2004
From: Frankfurt, Germany
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Terminus


quote:

ORIGINAL: Reichenberg

If an ASW bomber counts too, my first choice is the Kyushu Q1W1 Tokai:
Talking of the Do17 being ugly....

Uwe


That link's broken...

Sorry, hopefully this will do:

or


Uwe

(in reply to Terminus)
Post #: 84
RE: Ugliest Bomber of WWII - 11/20/2007 8:29:33 AM   
stevemk1a


Posts: 855
Joined: 3/30/2002
From: Penticton B.C.
Status: offline
From a purely aesthetic point of view I think this is a rather pretty aircraft.






Attachment (1)

< Message edited by willy -- 11/20/2007 8:30:49 AM >


_____________________________


(in reply to Reichenberg)
Post #: 85
RE: Ugliest Bomber of WWII - 11/20/2007 9:54:55 AM   
cantona2


Posts: 3749
Joined: 5/21/2007
From: Gibraltar
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Terminus

I can't write big fat posts AND write a lot of them. You think 22986 posts just happen by themselves?



_____________________________

1966 was a great year for English Football...Eric was born


(in reply to Terminus)
Post #: 86
RE: Ugliest Bomber of WWII - 11/20/2007 11:47:16 AM   
castor troy


Posts: 14330
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: MineSweeper

Here is another winner (plain ugly)....they should have been shot down on sight (most likely they were)

French Brequet Bre 413








is this thing able to fly???

_____________________________


(in reply to MineSweeper)
Post #: 87
RE: Ugliest Bomber of WWII - 11/20/2007 12:30:33 PM   
Apollo11


Posts: 24082
Joined: 6/7/2001
From: Zagreb, Croatia
Status: offline
Hi all,

quote:

ORIGINAL: MineSweeper

Here is another winner (plain ugly)....they should have been shot down on sight (most likely they were)

French Brequet Bre 413





This one is really plain ugly - YUCK!


Leo "Apollo11"

_____________________________



Prior Preparation & Planning Prevents Pathetically Poor Performance!

A & B: WitW, WitE, WbtS, GGWaW, GGWaW2-AWD, HttR, CotA, BftB, CF
P: UV, WitP, WitP-AE

(in reply to MineSweeper)
Post #: 88
RE: Ugliest Bomber of WWII - 11/20/2007 5:18:11 PM   
Mynok


Posts: 12108
Joined: 11/30/2002
Status: offline

It looks like a spatula with wings.

(in reply to Apollo11)
Post #: 89
RE: Ugliest Bomber of WWII - 11/20/2007 5:37:36 PM   
Ian R

 

Posts: 3420
Joined: 8/1/2000
From: Cammeraygal Country
Status: offline
Compared to that the Tokai is a lean speed machine

_____________________________

"I am Alfred"

(in reply to Mynok)
Post #: 90
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> RE: Ugliest Bomber of WWII Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

2.672