Any ww2 planes that is viable to the modern day?

[Leavee]

Now if you remember me,i made a thread about ww2 tanks being viable today and i got some good answers on them being now just used as infantry support and all SHT's just better off not being a good choice.

But after that whole thing i just thought if ww2 planes like the BF109,p51 mustang,spitfires and the russian YAK-9t would still do well in the art of modern war.Or bombers like the flying and super fortress (B-17 and B-29).

Now normally an F22 would just come in and take a dive to a whole bunch of em and just shred them to pieces but i would like to see what they would fair now being used other than just being in a museum collecting dust rather than flying high up in the skies like they used to.

[Leavee]

This thread went from ww2 planes to the a10

[Rumpelcrutchskin]

Modern fighter will shoot you down from 150 km away with radar-guided missile, you wont even see this coming in WW2 plane.

[shoopy]

引用自 NewGBreaker：

LOL, six A-10s were shot down in Desert Storm/Shield, fighting enemies forces with weak outdated soviet tanks without mobile SAMs distributed with their armor.

If you throw A-10s against tanks with 2K22M/2S6M escorts losses will be staggering, unless the A10 fights exclusively with missiles at standoff ranges. A10s that try to come close enough to fire their cannons are inside the 2K22 gun range, plus they also have their SAMs. China has similar systems.

31 July – An AH-64 Apache goes down after coming under fire in eastern Baghdad. The two crew members are safely extracted.

2 July – OH-58D Kiowa 91-0560 from 3–17 Cavalry Regiment is shot down by small arms fire along a canal south of Baghdad, in Babil province. Both pilots are rescued by strapping themselves onto the stub wings of an AH-64 Apache. The helicopter is later destroyed.

29 May – OH-58D(R) Kiowa 93-0978 from B Troop, 2–6 Cavalry Regiment is shot down between Baquba and Muqdadiyah with small arms, killing the chopper's two pilots.

5 April – A UH-60 Black Hawk carrying nine is shot down in Latifiya using anti-aircraft heavy machine guns, 4 were wounded.

21 February – A UH-60 Black Hawk is hit by RPG and small arms fire north of Baghdad and makes a hard landing; all nine military personnel on board are rescued.

7 February – A CH-46E Sea Knight from HMM-364 is shot down by a shoulder-fired missile in al-Karma, outside Fallujah, killing all seven on board.

2 February – AH-64D Apache 02-5337 from A Company, 1st Battalion, 227th Aviation Regiment, 1st Air Cavalry Brigade, 1st Cavalry Division shot down by a combination of gunfire and a shoulder-fired missile, near Taji, killing the two pilots.

28 January – An AH-64D Apache from 4th Battalion, 227th Aviation Regiment, 1st Air Cavalry Brigade, 1st Cavalry Division, is shot down by hostile fire during the Battle of Najaf, killing the two pilots.

25 January – A UH-60 Black Hawk is shot down by gunfire near Hit. All aboard survive the incident.

20 January – A UH-60 Black Hawk from C Company, 1–131 Aviation Regiment is shot down by a combination of several heavy machine guns and a shoulder-fired missile north-east of Baghdad. All 12 crew and passengers on board are killed in the incident.

If getting shot down means it's bad then we better get rid of all the helicopters.

[highfivingbears]

引用自 ㅇㅅㅇ：

what modern planes would survive an emp pulse

Those only exist as the aftereffect of a high altitude nuclear blast. S nuclear blast situated a mile above New York could wipe out most of he Eastern Seaboard, I'd say.

[WhiteKnight77]

引用自 Squid：

Just responding to some random stuff in this thread I read people say in general:

And those prop-driven aircraft they continue to use or will use... are turboprops. Anything that is not is just used for training/hack aircraft like little Cessnas and such. Turboprop engines work similarly to jet engines and use the same type of fuel ect., like most helicopters with the exception of some little Robinson choppers and such.

What seems interesting is all of the still airworthy (original) World War II era warbirds still around. Sure, most of the original ones by now they may not fly that much if they are especially valuable. But even still, there is a single (authentic) flying Mitsubishi Zero still I think (right?), among the most rare and priceless. Also, there are only 1-2 airworthy (original) Fw-190s around and Bf-109s, also priceless. Well not really I guess, but a huge amount of money. Same with the B-29s, can't imagine how much those are worth.

I was going to reply to more but maybe later. I ranted on long enough below.

引用自 Miller the Fiddler：

Any of the German Jets

Someone already said this by now perhaps but if not... all the better. No. Not those either, and I would wager, the best piston aircraft of the war were more feasible in some ways for the time for purposes aside from pure performance (in some ways, seeing how the best piston aircraft were not far behind in performance in some aspects!). And lots of other countries were getting into jets, just none were quite as desperate to want to field them right away as Germany late in the war. Even still, England used Gloster Meteor jets to do ground attack missions. There was an interesting article in a recent flight magazine that detailed all of the various jet aircraft there were being flown and tested at the time. It's likely that, if the war had been extended another year, the US would have started flying P-80s.

Another reason why, no, is this: The Me262 engine could only last 12 hours between when it needed a major overhaul. By comparison, I think an L-39 Albatros engine can last around 1000 hours. The L-39 Albatros being a much more modern jet introduced in the late '60s-early '70s with a turbofan engine, when most jets were still just turbojets. But you get the idea.

And also, the throttle response on those very earliest jets was pretty bad, with their early jet quirks. It will be interesting to see how it flies when the Me262 comes out for DCS World. Although I can't say I am excited for that really and will be flying the F-86 Sabre instead, the most underappreciated aircraft module in that game! And much more advanced than the jets of the World War 2 era like the Me-262 and earliest P-80s, ect, although they were already beginning design work on the Sabre around that time also, before the war even ended I know they started work on the Sabre which later was used to fame in the Korean War, attaining 10-1 victory-losses over the MiGs.

Turboprops are jet engines, just with a drive shaft sticking out the front of it with a propeller stuck on it just like turboshaft engines are jet engines, just with drive shafts coming out the back or the front of the engin. The turbojet and turbofan engines are the ones who produce thrust by just pushing really hot air out the back of the engines. Turboprop and turboshaft engines have a power turbine that uses the hot gasses to turn the shafts used to transfer energy to the transmissions to the props or rotorheads.

Source, me, former jet engine/helicopter mechanic/crew chief.

[WhiteKnight77]

引用自 highfivingbears：

They're not viable. Planes from the 50's onwards have a slight chance, but in a warfare situation, any WWII era prop or early jet isn't going to be useful. I'll tell you why.

Some people still favor the F-22, because it has such a high maneuverability in midair and it's great in a dogfight, but here's the thing: we don't dogfight anymore. What we do is acquire a target lock from miles out using advanced sensors, fire a missile, wait for it to hit, and you've got yourself a confirmed kill. Modern aeronautical combat has moved past dogfighting.

Long gone are those days, where planes would circle around each other in a deadly duke-it-out duel suspended thousands of feet above the ground, just waiting for the other pilot to make the slightest mistake in near-impossible twists and turns for the average man, all the while a constant awareness on their own instruments telling them how close they are to death.

Frankly, it's barbaric.

While the result is still the same in the end, with that being a dead enemy, modern aeronautical combat is much more sophisticated nowadays. Those early jets like the Meteor or that tiny little German deathtrap piece of plane engineering would be demolished instantly against any modern air force of the world.

Vietnam taught the US Air Force and the US Navy that dogfighting still happens. The F-4s used then did not have any cannon and once all the missiles were gone, the fights devolved into airborne swirls of 3 dimensional fights. This is why there is a Top Gun school and Red Flag as well as all fighters since 'Nam have had cannons (save for the F-117 as that is not a fighter, but a bomber).

[highfivingbears]

引用自 WhiteKnight77：

引用自 highfivingbears：

They're not viable. Planes from the 50's onwards have a slight chance, but in a warfare situation, any WWII era prop or early jet isn't going to be useful. I'll tell you why.

Some people still favor the F-22, because it has such a high maneuverability in midair and it's great in a dogfight, but here's the thing: we don't dogfight anymore. What we do is acquire a target lock from miles out using advanced sensors, fire a missile, wait for it to hit, and you've got yourself a confirmed kill. Modern aeronautical combat has moved past dogfighting.

Long gone are those days, where planes would circle around each other in a deadly duke-it-out duel suspended thousands of feet above the ground, just waiting for the other pilot to make the slightest mistake in near-impossible twists and turns for the average man, all the while a constant awareness on their own instruments telling them how close they are to death.

Frankly, it's barbaric.

While the result is still the same in the end, with that being a dead enemy, modern aeronautical combat is much more sophisticated nowadays. Those early jets like the Meteor or that tiny little German deathtrap piece of plane engineering would be demolished instantly against any modern air force of the world.

Vietnam taught the US Air Force and the US Navy that dogfighting still happens. The F-4s used then did not have any cannon and once all the missiles were gone, the fights devolved into airborne swirls of 3 dimensional fights. This is why there is a Top Gun school and Red Flag as well as all fighters since 'Nam have had cannons (save for the F-117 as that is not a fighter, but a bomber).

Sure, if you're fighting against an enemy who uses Soviet Era planes that still were dogfighters, and in long engagements as well.

I'm not saying that dogfighting is completely dead, but any air war between any major country will likely not be made up of mostly dogfights.

[Arya]

引用自 highfivingbears：

Sure, if you're fighting against an enemy who uses Soviet Era planes that still were dogfighters, and in long engagements as well.

I'm not saying that dogfighting is completely dead, but any air war between any major country will likely not be made up of mostly dogfights.

Fighters themselves may be obsolete. The USAF's Penetrating Counter-Air project(the replacement for the F22 Raptor) has stated it's "exploring all options, not just fighters"

[WhiteKnight77]

引用自 highfivingbears：

引用自 WhiteKnight77：

Vietnam taught the US Air Force and the US Navy that dogfighting still happens. The F-4s used then did not have any cannon and once all the missiles were gone, the fights devolved into airborne swirls of 3 dimensional fights. This is why there is a Top Gun school and Red Flag as well as all fighters since 'Nam have had cannons (save for the F-117 as that is not a fighter, but a bomber).

Sure, if you're fighting against an enemy who uses Soviet Era planes that still were dogfighters, and in long engagements as well.

I'm not saying that dogfighting is completely dead, but any air war between any major country will likely not be made up of mostly dogfights.

Again, Vietnam taught hard lessons to the Air Force and the Navy. You may think that everything will be BVR, but they though that back then as well and ended up in dogfights without the needed weaponry. They had to make a special weapons pod for the F-4 so it could dogfight. Missiles are not the be all end all. Back when the F-22 was canceled, I told people then that they do not know what kind of adversary or enemy they would meet 20 or so years down the road.

A year later the Russians and Indians unveiled a stealth type fighter and not long after that, the Chinese introduced a fighter that looks like a cross between an F-22 and F-35 and with the Chinese building fortified islands in the Spratleys, that is a big issue and only 187 air superiority fighters are not enough. Fighters will always end up in dogfights as the number of missles that fighters carry is finite.

Many here should read more history to see how much things stay the same.

[Arya]

引用自 WhiteKnight77：

Again, Vietnam taught hard lessons to the Air Force and the Navy. You may think that everything will be BVR, but they though that back then as well and ended up in dogfights without the needed weaponry. They had to make a special weapons pod for the F-4 so it could dogfight. Missiles are not the be all end all. Back when the F-22 was canceled, I told people then that they do not know what kind of adversary or enemy they would meet 20 or so years down the road.

A year later the Russians and Indians unveiled a stealth type fighter and not long after that, the Chinese introduced a fighter that looks like a cross between an F-22 and F-35 and with the Chinese building fortified islands in the Spratleys, that is a big issue and only 187 air superiority fighters are not enough. Fighters will always end up in dogfights as the number of missles that fighters carry is finite.

Many here should read more history to see how much things stay the same.

Forgive me for asking, but how many Gun Kills have been made since the days of Robin Olds' heroics over Vietnam? I don't know of any, or rather have never found a confirmed account.

[WhiteKnight77]

引用自 Wolfey：

引用自 WhiteKnight77：

Again, Vietnam taught hard lessons to the Air Force and the Navy. You may think that everything will be BVR, but they though that back then as well and ended up in dogfights without the needed weaponry. They had to make a special weapons pod for the F-4 so it could dogfight. Missiles are not the be all end all. Back when the F-22 was canceled, I told people then that they do not know what kind of adversary or enemy they would meet 20 or so years down the road.

A year later the Russians and Indians unveiled a stealth type fighter and not long after that, the Chinese introduced a fighter that looks like a cross between an F-22 and F-35 and with the Chinese building fortified islands in the Spratleys, that is a big issue and only 187 air superiority fighters are not enough. Fighters will always end up in dogfights as the number of missles that fighters carry is finite.

Many here should read more history to see how much things stay the same.

Forgive me for asking, but how many Gun Kills have been made since the days of Robin Olds' heroics over Vietnam? I don't know of any, or rather have never found a confirmed account.

The Isrealis love gun kills. You should study up on them. It's more personal.

[Arya]

引用自 WhiteKnight77：

The Isrealis love gun kills. You should study up on them. It's more personal.

Although let's be fair; nine days out of ten the Israelis are dealing with Floggers, Frogfoots and other obsolete Soviet trash.

[shoopy]

Don't forget that eventually drones might end up being like the old torpedo boats of the sea. A small $4 million craft firing a $300.000 missile to shoot down your $100 million flying battleship.

[Arya]

引用自 slandy：

Don't forget that eventually drones might end up being like the old torpedo boats of the sea. A small $4 million craft firing a $300.000 missile to shoot down your $100 million flying battleship.

I agree completely, although drones themselves have a torpedo boat. Microwave projects are amazingly effective against the littler ones, Raytheon recently claimed their system can wipe out a squadron of quadrocopter drones for 2 US cents of electricity. Knowing Raytheon that's probably a massive exaggeration, but still. It's known to work. Really well.

So well that it's believed the UK's Tempest fighter will have a heavyweight Microwave projector as a main gun. For frying swarms of drones.

[Leavee]

It went from ww2 planes to the A10 warthog to vietnam all the way to drones.