Most Influential Aircraft of W W I I

IMHO I would have to say the german concept aircraft, even though they were never built(some were in prototype stage) once we got those plans our aircraft technology increased enormously.

Hard question that! I would say that the Mosquito is the most influential aircraft of the period as it defined the concept of multi role capability that seems required of the majority of todays military aircraft. However if you mean from a purely history point of view, the coin must be flicked between the Spitfire and the Hurricane!

I have to agree that German research projects have to be up there, but it was the engine in the Gloster Whittle that was to be the forerunner of the jet engines we now take for granted, and which made most propeller driven warplanes obsolete overnight

I would have to say the ME-262. Although other countries were working on their own jet aircraft, it was the first. As far as be influential everyone one I've spoken to that had the chance to encounter it during the war, pilots from both German and Allied sides and tank crewmen and ground troops all had pretty much the same reaction to it. "What the H*** was that !!" Just thinking in my life there hasn't been many things that I can think of that influenced that many people in the same way.

I must agree on the issue of the German aircraft programs being up there at the top or very near it. The V1 and V2 led to Ballistic missile submarines via the Loon and Regulus and cruise missiles as far as the V1. One of the things of the V2 program led to was putting a man on the moon and space stations. But then again, each aircraft led to a more superior aircraft whether it was Axis or Allies. Those with the best toys win. Great topic as it causes us all to think and especially remember our past.

Regards,
Richard

Here's another vote for the B-29. The Cold War really started when the Soviets announced their copy of the B-29. At that point, the U.S. and Soviet Union each had a plane that could drop atomic bombs (also owned by each country) on each other and/or nearly the rest of the world. Granted, the longest and scariest flights would have been one-way, but that hardly made people in New York (for instance) feel better. (Hey, they dropped an A-bomb on New York City, but couldn't fly home! Nya Nya )

This set the tone for the early days of the Cold War that, in many ways, still haunts us today.

Regards,

I have to agree with RSaddlemire about each aircraft, or development of a particular system influenced something else along the way. My interpretation of the question is this: A B-29 carried the bombs that in one way or another forced the total ending of the second world war, so unless the author had a particular thing in mind when he asked the question, end of discussion!
gbritnell

I would have to agree with the advances in Greman jet and rocket engines.
Thay made all the enginering plans and mistakes so that the allied powers got a huge leg up on the rest of the world in jets and space.

For my money, I'm in with you that feel that the germans led the way. The case for the B29 isn't really to do so much with the aircraft, rather than the wepon it delivered. The Me 262 for example really pushed the envelope of the state of the art in aircraft design and construction.

just my humble opinion, though

How about just about every aircraft that was flown just before during and just after the war. In 1935 every Air Force in the world was flying 200mph biplanes, along comes the Luftwaffe with the BF109 and the RAF with the Hurricane, now we are at 300 mph+. Now we are in 1942 F4U's Spitfires,P-47's,P-38's,109's 190's they are all flying at 400mph. Now its 1945 the Me262 and Meteor are flying, no props and 500+ mph. SO you tell me 10 years 350mph and still climbing. The war was the most terrible thing of the 20th century but at the same time technology of the time took a huge leap forward because of that war. JOHN

Now that we've heard from the kraut supporters, does anyone have any fresh perspective on this topic?

Excuse me, but I thought that you asked for people's opinions. And using a derogatory slur at the citizens of a particular nation is reprehensible. Had you wanted others to reaffirm your choice, perhaps the question could have been worded differently.

German technology in WW II was remarkable in its influence on the "state of the art." Jet aircraft, rocket-propelled aircraft, ballistic missiles, cruise missiles, "smart" weapons, SAMs, and a host of other modern technologies are rooted in the advances that Germany made during the war years. To admire their hard work & contributions to technology does not make one a "kraut supporter."

That said, in my opinion, the most influential aircraft of WW II is the Me 262.

Well, you might not believe me when I put the Vickers Wellington up for a vote, but I'm serious about it.

It was something of a pioneering bird, I think one of the first steps into the multi task warbird thinking. Most aircraft before her were fairly specialized while she was quite adaptable for her time.

The most influential thing about her though is that she was pivotal in buying Britain time to perfect such legendary beasts as the Spitfire and Lancaster. She was the only true bomber that Britain had at the outbreak of hostilities that could even remotely be considered modern at the time and America hadn't officially entered the European Theatre of the war when the Wellingtons had to make their first bombing runs over Germany.

She bought time, and influenced optimism in Britain that it was worth their while to put up a fight, that they actually had enough time on their side to develop better aircraft.

Underated as she might be, I'd hate to think what the opening year of the war would have been like without her. Would we even know what a Spitfire or Lancaster was without the time that the Wellington bought for them to be developed?

yf23 did ask for a "single aircraft", not a country's research program. Having said that, I would agree with a few others here that the Me-262 influenced a lot of future aircraft. Swept wings, twin engines, tricycle gear, multiple variations of a common airframe, etc. It was truly a plane ahead of its time. A second runner-up would be the unbuilt Ta-183. It was the basis (wing-wise, anyway) for the MiG-15, the F-86, and an Argentinian plane that I can't recall the name of right now. Kurt Tank immigrated (escaped, maybe?) to Argentina after the war, and helped them start a jet air force, based on his Ta-183 design.

Pixilater and upnorth I salute you both for you comments. I agree with you both and I hope that the comment made by yf23 was not worded correctly. A question submitted in the forum should not be a bone of contention but a request for others thoughts and ideas. Otherwise why ask the question to begin with? Each answer and idea is presented by the individual as either how they feel or information regarding the question. There have been some great responses to this question and I hope to be able to see some more.

Regards,
Richard

I would also go with the ME262.

As for the "kraut supporter." comment, I would like to mention that the boards has members from all over the globe including germans(methink) which I think might take offense at the use of words and language.

I would have to agree with the Me-262 as well... it was a definite sign of things to come. I would agree that the B-29 was influential but maybe not the a/c as much as the weapon that it carried (ie. nuclear payload). As for German engineering in WW2, the Bf 109 if I'm not mistaken was a fuel injected engine while the allied aircraft were all still carbureated... fuel injection makes it possible to fly upside down almost indefinately, a carbed engine's gravity fed fuel supply will soon run out turning it into an instant glider. The Benz's fuel injector had almost as many parts as the Merlin engines. The Luftwaffe birds also had a feature that made it possible to put the throttle at 100% to dog fight, all functions being taken care of automatically... the allied craft needed constant and precise control of the throttle during manuvers. I think this is a testament to the kind of craftsmanship the German engineers were capable of... and as for the unfortunate comment that was made... let's not forget that the Saturn V rocket that landed our US astronauts on the moon was created by the V-2 inventor... I am embarassed that his name escapes me now...

OK, I have been told that it was Wernher von Braun, and a big thanks goes out to Stinger for getting my back on that one and coming up with the name for me.

Gotta be the B-29 because it proved the whole concept of long-range STRATEGIC heavy bombers that Douhet and Mitchell had been talking about from the beginning of the rise of airpower. General LeMay built the entire strategic air command around the theories he so coldly employed in the firebombing of Japan. In fact, the whole theory of modern airpower (Warden et al) is based on a strategic approach to knock out an enemy's centers of gravity, which is what the B-29 was employed to do.

The German jets, while an impressive technical achievement were being paralleled on the allied side - they just didn't get fielded in time to actually be employed. The allies were going the right direction, and the ME-262 advances would have been developed eventually. No - I really think it has to be the B-29; no other aircraft changed the face of war in quite the same way.

The whole theory of the B-29 was high altitude precision bombing and this approach was pretty much abandoned by the mid to late 60's. With the advances in both SAM's and aircraft, a big, slow moving object was no longer a good idea. I am not saying that the B-29 wasn't a good airplane but it's what it carried that was the most influential. Every bomber built after it was rated on how well it could deliver a nuclear weapon first, then conventional bombing.

if we say the me 262, why not the he 178, the 1st jet powered plane WITH swept wings (albeit not very swept) looks striking like a modern day jet.

Far from being repudiated, high altitude precision bombing is exactly what is done now - from the F-117 through the B-2. And I think I may not have been quite clear that the thing that made the B-29 so influential was that it allowed, for the first time, true STRATEGIC bombing. The mission of the B-29, combined with the ability to travel long distances with a significant payload was what made it matter. (B-17s, despite their excellent record, couldn't do this)

Long-haul strike capability that can devastate key COGs is the center of AF doctrine now. The B-29 was the first practical means of achieving this, atomic bomb aside.

Correct me if I am wrong, but are you saying that strategic bombing did not happen until the B-29 came along? Strategic bombing is defined as using airpower as an instrument of military strategy, hence the strategic. Any aircraft that dropped bombs was doing strategic bombing before the B-29's came along.

Setting aside doctrine and mission requirements, wasn't the B-29 just the next step in a long progression going back to the Martin MB-1? As an example, in 1934 General "Hap" Arnold called the Martin B-10 "the airpower wonder of it's day". In 1936 the AAC ordered B-17's because they felt they would fill the long range bomber requirement at that time, B-10's were no longer the "airpower wonder" they used to be. So be it that B-24's took some of the lessons learned from the B-17 and improved on them, bigger payload, longer range, then the B-29 did same, then the B-36, then the B-47 and so on until we get to where we are today.

I am just saying that in my opinion, WWII jet technology (ME-262) had more of an inflence in the future of aircraft than anything else. Even strategic bombers have jet engines and swept wings nowadays.

Here is a website that has the official United States summary report of the bombing campaigns against both Germany and Japan. It's long, but very interesting.
http://www.anesi.com/ussbs01.htm#pagei

Eagle, it seems you forget that the first jet was the Gloster Whittle, while swept wing technology was first proven by the Me 163. As for the Me 262, it made history by being the first jet used in a combat environment. The Gloster Meteor was only slightly behind it into service but continued for many years after the war in military service proving that jet power wasn't just a fad.

I went back to my books to review the service of B29's during WW2. Significant to influence todays air power? Don't think so! Is the idea based on bigger is better? The B29 just had a bigger range and payload than other aircraft. Can't see how that influences todays air power at all. Gulf war1 and the latest invasion have shown that the Air services no longer view the carpet bombing of a target with complete obliteration to be the option of choice. Precision bombing of a target is now the preferred option.

I guess my major point is that the B-29 allowed strategic bombing to be carried out on a global scale for the first time. I don't disagree that strategic bombing existed in theory, but the Army Air Corps was relegated to primarily troop support and coastal defense by Army doctrine. The Air Corps Tactical School slowly moved the air arm towards strategic use and Douhet between WWI and WWII. The B-29 combined extreme (at the time) high altitude, a pressurized cockpit, large bombload, and very long range and made strategic bombing of the Japanese home islands possible. Recommend the following (long) read:

http://homepage.mac.com/umiami91/falk.doc

Discusses impact of B-29 on the Pacific war. Good read if nothing else. NOW - I am a propulsion guy and don't dismiss the impact of the jet engine. I guess we may be disagreeing on the meaning of influential. I am looking in the global-political context of the cold war. Dunno - interesting argument though!

md

Tim

I agree with you that the Gloster Whittle was the first jet and the Komet proved the swept wing as viable. The 262 used an axial flow compressor turbojet as opposed to the Whittle rotary compressor and although the Whittle design was used in many of the early jets, it is the axial flow that is used today. The 262 was just the first combat jet aircraft that brought all the things together. In fact, if I remember right the reason the 262 has swept wings is because they had to do it to get an acceptable center of gravity.

umiami91

That's what's great about these things. We can have differing opinions and carry out an intelligent conversation about them. I don't disagree with anything you've said about the B-29 or its mission and how it has impacted things. It was definately a very signifigant aircraft through WW II and Korea.

Just proves the saying, "opinions are like belly buttons, we all have our own".

Tim,

I don't disagree with you on the fact that carpetbombing is not current doctrine. I actually posit that it never was; the method was based on the technology available at the time. Now an exception is the firebombing campaigns which were - no bones about it - terror bombings designed to devastate the morale of the enemy and cause him to lose his will to fight. But long range, devastating attacks are where things are headed. The great majority of B-2 employments have been from Whiteman and back. (now some ARE from Diego Gracia, but I don't think many - but I could be wrong) Long range bombers, although declining somewhat in importance, were a defining factor in the cold war. The B-29 was really the first of the breed, IMHO, that is why I can't see another aircraft that is more influential coming out of WWII.

Mike Dahlstrom

yf23's original post did not restrict things to cold war influence only chaps. Had it done so I would have been a great deal more specific! I know I'm going to have to amend my details on this thing so you know a bit more about me when posting, but I'm sat in the West Midlands of England. Your assumptions seem to be that there wasn't a war going on over here, which I'm very puzzled about! In fact they seem dedicated soley to the Pacific war. I think you do the RAF, USAAF and Luftwaffe a dis service by not acknowledging the ground breaking work in bombing they performed.

To digress a moment here, is the B2 the only bomber you can cite? Today's 'bomber only' aircraft are indeed a dying breed. I wonder if the B2 would be deployed in a fighter defended territory with as much confidence? To date, as far as I am aware, it has only been deployed where high confidence of friendly air superiority was assured. By far the vast majority of todays 'precision' bombing missions are carried out by aircraft of multi role capability