I'm confused. The title is "The quest for the worst combat aircraft in history..." and several of the bad ideas posted here are of experimentals. By nature they are not 'combat' aircraft, and it must be expected that some will be failures.
Quote:
Originally Posted by frau kaleun
Is there a weird angle on this pic, or does that thing have one too many of... something?
|
It was an attempt at vertical takeoff and landing.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Schroeder
Fokker Fodder
Nuff said!
|
Not really. The Fe-2 was developed before the Fokker, so its purpose was a valid one. It's like saying the Corsair was a bad idea because in Korea they were easy prey for MiGs.
I also agree with TLAM Strike: The CR.42 was not a bad aircraft when it came out. In the Med they did quite well against Gloster Gladiators.
My candidate:
http://www.aviastar.org/air/usa/lewis_barling.php
Note that this source lists the maximum speed as 89 mph. Other sources say 95 mph. I've seen one book which claims that despite the 61 mph listed for cruise speed, that was actually the minimum flying speed, which gives a very small margin between staying up and falling down!
