The World's Worst Aircraft: From Pioneering Failures to Multimillion Dollar Disasters

by Jim Winchester

From pioneering failures to multimillion dollar disasters. Features 150 of the worst aircraft ever to leave the drawing board, from the Seddon Mayfly, which didn't fly, to a flying tank which surprisingly did. Includes a brief history of each aircraft design, explaining why the idea didn't take off. Each type is illustrated with annotated photography and artwork, highlighting key faults and unusual design features.

Genres: Aviation, Nonfiction, History, Reference

320 pages, Hardcover

First published July 15, 2009

Reviews

[Kym Robinson · Rating 4 out of 5]

A concise and fun little book which you can devour some what quickly but most certainly invites a re read or two.

Filled with aircraft that were ambitious, terrible, tragic, funny, optimistic, mistimed, overly expensive and burdened with bad luck. Some even have all of the above.

72 %

[Robert Davis · Rating 2 out of 5]

A tank with wings. A flying car. A nuclear powered bomber plane. And, of course, The Spruce Goose.

[Mark Lisac · Rating 4 out of 5]

Thought this one would be fun. It was, but it was also surprisingly well done and informative. It's nicely packaged, with good graphics and succinct text following a consistent format. Some common themes emerge on reading about the 150 examples of badly designed aircraft. Most were either underpowered or overly complex. Many looked like unlikely fliers (some never did get into the air); even someone who had never looked at an aeronautical text should have been able to look at them and say, "What were you thinking?" The book thus serves as an argument for common sense and simplicity.

[Saskia (Smitie) · Rating 3 out of 5]

It's interesting to read little tidbits of planes that were unsuccesful for all sorts of reasons. You need a bit of knowledge of planes to understand it. I was often confused when it mentioned yaw, pitch and various technical names for airplane parts. Nevertheless, it was interesting to read and full of nice pictures and drawings of the planes. I also have more respect for the test flyers who had to fly these sometimes ridiculous contraptions.

[Andrew · Rating 3 out of 5]

Took me a while to come back to this, but I was able to start over and burn it out in a day. It was very interesting to see all the different failures and why they were failures, but it only discourages me when thinking of my own design projects. It seems like only a small percentage of aircraft projects undertaken hit the right technical, economic, and political jackpot to be successful.

[Eric B · Rating 3 out of 5]

Entertaining, but not very detailed.

[Aidan Garcia · Rating 4 out of 5]

It’s easy to want to judge some of these creations, but I’ve played SimplePlanes and Kerbal Space Program and birthed some abominations, so…yeah. I get it.

[Heikki · Rating 5 out of 5]

This review is from: The World's Worst Aircraft (From Pioneering Failures to Multimillion Dollar Disasters) (Hardcover)
Many people like aviation for the reason that they can globetrot more easily than with trains. Others like aviation for the aesthetics of airplanes. Yet others like it because the rise of aviation from zero to orbit in less than a hundred years encapsulates the human spirit of progress.

Jim Winchester's book tracks the little trodden paths that took entrepreneurs, engineers, and crackpots quite far from the principles of aviation, sometimes off the ground at least, but many times just for a fast taxi on the runway (if even that). His examples of the pioneering aircraft are endearingly silly, such as the Seddon Mayfly (1910) which looks like a Slinky toy with engines, and the Phillips Multiplanes, which give you the feeling you are trying to fly with a set of Venetian blinds for wings.

There's also some full-hardcore lunatic designs from reputable military plane builders, such as the 1959 Snecma Coleoptere, which sat on its tail and resembled mainly an empty barrel with a jet engine inside it. The US Navy's competitor to that, the Convair XFY-1 Pogo, while equipped with propellers, was equally hard for the pilot to enter, let alone to fly. I disagree with Wincherster's listing of the Brewster B-239 Buffalo as a failure, because the Finnish Air Force achieved a 25:1 kill ratio with it. But by far the majority of the planes he lists in this book are turkeys.

I also like his dry humor and style: he says of the Japanese Ohka kamikaze plane, "one of the few planes actually designed to kill its pilot, and judged against this requirement, it could be considered a success." Also his description of Caproni-Stipa of 1932 as a Sopwith Pup fallen in a well is not only apt, with the picture it's hilarious.

I would say this book is a must for any serious aircraft buff, for its variety, for its info boxes, and for its images which are rare (just check the Kalinin K-7 or the Antonov Flying Tank).

[Nick · Rating 3 out of 5]

At last, the stunning finale to the trilogy! You won't believe what happens to your favorite characters from The World's Worst Cars and The World's Worst Weapons!

No, I'm lying; It's just another book, which is about (checks title) bad airplanes. I don't know a lot about airplanes, so I was more interested in the parade of unbelievable disasters from the wild and wooly teens and twenties, where putting eight wings and sixteen motors on a houseboat looks comparatively sane. As for the rest of the book, well, it's an interesting bathroom book, and I wasn't expecting or asking for more than that.

[Georgene · Rating 4 out of 5]

I usually don't read about these sorts of things, but I did find this book fascinating. After reading this, I am surprised ANY test pilots survived anywhere. But then, this is about the WORST aircraft that have been built.

Each plane described has 2 pages devoted to it. There are at least 2 pictures of each plane and a set of specifications. While picture "heavy", I also found this book to be data "heavy", especially since I know very little about aircraft.

[Kristina · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is a good book for aviation enthusiasts who aren't much into detail and would like a book that you can read for 2 minutes at a time and not really lose the thread. For the rest of us? I'd both have liked it to be better formatted and have a bit more detail but otherwise, for an 'at work book for when I have a few minutes and data is running' it's decent.

[daniel dirnfeld · Rating 5 out of 5]

Interesting book

[Veeral · Rating 4 out of 5]

Funny at times and technical at some. This is the kind of book you would spend sometime with when you don't want to read anything serious.

[daniel dirnfeld · Rating 5 out of 5]

Interesting book

[John · Rating 4 out of 5]

A little on the thin side