Hey, I had one of their blowdryers once. Looked a lot like that.

No wait mine was a Conair.

Is there a weird angle on this pic, or does that thing have one too many of... something?

This is what happens when the Air force and the Navy sit down together.

When it comes to experimental or otherwise prototype aircraft, not much can beat the Kalinin K-7...

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...nin_K-7_01.jpg

...or the Tarrant Tabor...

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...nt_Tabor_1.jpg

Fokker Fodder
Nuff said!
http://foto.arcor-online.net/palb/al...3965356638.jpg


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ro...War_Museum.jpghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_A..._Factory_B.E.2

The Kamikaze :DL

What? The Kamikaze was one of the most successful weapons ever. On one day they hit seven carriers as well as 40 other ships (five sunk, 23 heavily damaged, and 12 moderately damaged (according to wikipedia). They sank around 40 ships total incl. three aircraft carriers.

Yea its much better when the Navy just slaps the Air Force in the face and says: "This is what you are going to fly, now deal with it!"

How bout this brilliant idea?

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

I meant in the context of you stating "so bad that no corrective measures can fix it".

I don't believe any were ever 'fixed' :DL

There have been quite a few "composite" ( # Turning and # Burning) aircraft over the years. Like the AJ Savage, Avro Shackleton and B-36 Peacemaker. The Fireball wasn't necessarily a bad aircraft it was more a stopgap solution outpaced by by technology. Don't forget that when the Fireball was built it was assumed their would be a massive apocalyptic battle for Japan and any edge our pilots could have would save lives.

Well they did fix them... they welded cockpit shut some times. ;)

Three jeep carriers.

For combat aircraft, I think I'd require that they actually saw combat, then look at effectiveness. The G4M was pretty ineffective, and virtually all of them were shot down :)

And they were pretty "fairly" attacked, unlike some of the planes slaughtered during the initial japanese expansion, or even the german invasion of the CCCP. In both cases the attacking AFs had such overwhelming numbers at the sharp end that aircraft quality is a non-starter, any planes would have been wiped out at the right odds.

:hmmm: What can I nominate that hasn't already been said?

I always bring up the Flying Tent Peg, but it only really sucks if you treat it like a normal plane, and then you suck all the way down to the ground.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wgkYDDkAz7A

You had to get up, whack something and then go down, if you got into a turning dogfight, well then you're going to struggle.

The Defiant sucked because it was a World War One fighter in World War Two, however it excelled at the night role, so it's not that much of a sucker really...although those who used it after the 109s had twigged on the difference between it and a Hurricane would probably differ in opinion.

Hardly! 2,575 built for 15 countries hardly seems like a failure.

I nominate the Convair R3Y Tradewind

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convair_R3Y_Tradewind

http://img828.imageshack.us/img828/2...ytradewind.jpg
Nice looking, but horribly unreliable.

Fiat CR.42 Falco
 

http://imgur.com/iP3Il.jpg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiat_CR.42

I'm surprised no one has mentioned it thus far, so I will...I nominate the Brewster F2A Buffalo, another plane derided by its pilots as a flying coffin. The sad thing is that I grew up about a mile away from where they built these things back in WWII in Warminster, PA.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...A-3_g16055.jpg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brewster_F2A_Buffalo

I'm sorry, but this one just has to take the cake...it's one fugly airplane.