Aircraft that succeeded on their second try?

[taildragger]

DC-4E to DC-4 comes to mind. The DC-4E was clearly a failure, being overly large and complex for the intended role. The DC-4 took a step backwards (downsizing, eliminating pressurization) and was well-matched to airline needs (after initial employment by the War Dept.). These were fundamentally different aircraft, but were designed in rapid succession to fill the same requirement by the same organization, so seem to qualify for the thread.
Lockheed Electra to P-3 Orion Lockheed corrected the airframe's structural weakness but not before the airplane acquired a reputation that made it unsalable. Shortened and fitted with a weapons bay as the Orion, it served for decades around the world in huge numbers. It's reputation was so bad that decades later, when Lockheed explored resurrecting the Electra for sale to China as the PRC-105, it was described as a stretched, airliner derivative of the P-3.
B-17A to B-17E OK, this didn't occur in one step. The early-model B-17s were fairly ineffective in combat and the B-17E marked the airframe's most significant redesign and a major improvement in effectiveness.
C-74 Globemaster to C-124 Globemaster II The original aircraft probably can't be fairly called a failure, but the fuselage redesign dramatically increased it's usefulness. The small fleet of C-74s was retired fairly quickly once the C-124 became available.
HP Herald to Dart Herald HP got powerplant selection all wrong initially and produced a non-competitive 4-engined airplane. The redesign with 2 turboprops was a big improvement but was still dramatically outsold by the Fokker F-27.

 

[Justo Miranda]

Wow!
For once, Hanlon's Razor was wrong!
"When forced to blame a mistake on malice or stupidity, opt for stupidity first."
Those dastardly French communists sabotaged their own country!

It was hard to believe that French industrialists were that stupid.

No no no. Deltafan is correct.

The real story, the truth, is even more weird.

Basically

1939-40 French aircraft were crippled by innumerable issues. Silly things like, no propellers, no bomb sights, no radios, and defective engines.

Why that ? Because airframe builders were paid for the number of airframes they churned out of their plants, every month.

What went wrong ? well, the airframe manufacteurs, and the air ministry above them, were unable to shake propellers, radios, bombsights and engine manufacturers a) for their products to work properly and b) crucially, for their production and deliveries to match airframe builders.

This meant that airframes got out of the factory "naked" - bombsights ? propellers ? radios ? NOT MY PROBLEM ANYMORE. I DID MY JOB, AIRFRAME IS DELIVERED.

Typical criminally dumb mistake: the propeller industry was so bad, aircraft were ferried from industry to combat units with wooden, two blade propellers, SPAD 1918 style.

But hey, the airframe manufacturer did not cared as long as the freakkin' airframe cleared his plant and he could told the Air Ministry "I delivered the goods." Dang.

As for the engines, the issue was different: Gnome&Rhone (the 14 A / B / M / N / R series) bosses were greedy pigs, really, who only cared about money and not about delivering functional engines.

Hispano Suiza (12Y) was hardly better.

Now you guess, French pilots were COMPLETELY enraged by fighting and dying with such crippled aircraft.

When they got complete D-520s (with sights, radios and the correct propeller, a damn miracle that usually took two weeks, even in May 1940), it was the 12Y that did not functioned properly.

But those enraged pilots simply couldn't imagine that the industry was THAT CRIMINALLY DUMB. See above.

So instead a couple of myths sprung to explain all those issues - remember, conspiracy theories ? "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity "

Conspiracionists are explaining STUPIDITY by MALICE.

For example, the 9-11-2001.

Just think about it: The Mighty United States, with the most powerful armies in the world, prepared against every single possible threat in the entire universe and history - were successfully attacked and got 3000 people killed by 19 bearded, illiterate SOBs without even a firearm: just knifes and cutters.

That sounds so impossible, so unreal (even 20 years later) conspiracionists simply can't accept THAT truth. And instead they prefers the "conspiracy explanation" because it more reassuring to them. "those 19 SOBs defeated us, somewhat, but it was an inside job, otherwise, they couldn't do it alone."

Well, France 1940 collapse is our 9-11: to people at the time, it was an unexplainable collapse. Don't laugh, with perfect hindsight, it seems laughable but by spring 1940 they just didn't understood what the frack was happening. See Gamelin Huntziger, Reynaud, so many others.

So just like the "9-11 truthers" they took the "reassuring conspiracy option" and claimed "it was an inside job ! Some traitors sabotaged us, stabbed us in the back."

Remarquably, in this case there were two opposite "culprits"

Culprit 1
The german 5th column : Abwher agents had infiltrated french aviation plants to sabotage.

Culprit 2
Communist traitors - as explained by Deltafan.

But make no mistake: BOTH EXPLANATIONS ARE MYTHS. The reality was that French aviation industry and ministry were arseholes (sorry for the crude word, but frack, they really were. Criminal ones).

So https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanlon's_razor - as you said, except don't blame NON existing communists or abwher agents.

Fundamentally, the french aircraft industry short herself ALONE in the foot.

"Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity"

And that's the crux of the matter: late 30's France had colossal amount of stupidity. If you don't believe believe me, try browsing Maurice Gamelin.
I can tell you, with Gamelins everywhere, there is no need for a conspiracy to sink 1940 France. Sheer stupidity did the job.

Here is a startling example of that complacency...

General Charles Huntziger, in command of the French 2nd Army, guarding the Ardennes ( to be soon anihilated by 7 German panzer divisions, right there)
May 7, 1940 - what did he declared ? "It just beyond me, that somebody can even remotely think the German armies could attack in the Ardennes sector."

Such an inspired luminary !

Enough said...

Some biblio here
- Books



Comas, M., Le Morane-Saulnier 406, Lela presse 1998.

Cuny, J., Le Dewoitine D.520, Docavia Nº4, Ed. Larivière 1980.

Facon, P., L’Armée de l’Air dans la Tourmente, Economica 2005.

Green, W., Warplanes of the Second World War, FIGHTERS, Macdonald 1962.

Joanne, S., Le Bloch M.B.152, Lela Presse 1998.

Ketley, B., French Aces of World War II, Osprey Publishing 2000.

Klein, B., Airplane Five Views, B.C.F.K. Publications 1974.

Marchand, P., Les Moteurs à Piston Français, D’Along 2003.

Marchand, P., Morane-Saulnier M.S. 406 C1, Les Ailes de Gloire Nº7, D’Along 2002.

Shores, C., Armée de l’Air, Squadron/Signal Publications 1976.



Publications



Belcarz, B., “L’Armée de l’Air durant la Campagne de 1940”, Ciel de Guerre Nº8, 2010.

Belcarz, B., “Le G.C. I/145”, Air Mag, Hors Série Nº6, 2009.

Breffort, D., “L’Armée de l’Air en 1939-1942”,Wing Masters, Hors Série Nº1, 1991.

Correspondence with Paul Deweer, Jean Cuny and Bernhard Klein.

Coste, A., “Le Spad 510 s’en va-t-en guerre”, AVIONS Nº128, 2003.

Cuny, J., “Bloch M.B.150 à 157”, Le Fana de l’Aviation Nº8 to 11.

Cuny, J., “Les Chasseurs Arsenal VG 30 à VG 70”, Le Fana de l’Aviation Nº197 to 200.

Ehrengardt, C., “Arsenal VG 33 et dérivés”, Aéro-Éditions, Aéro Files Nº1.

Facon, P., “L’Armée de l’Air en 1939-1940”, Le Fana de l’Aviation, Hors Série Nº7, 1997.

Facon, P., “Le Sacrifice des Bombardiers Français”, Le Fana de l’Aviation Nº558, 2016.

Leyvastre, P., “Bloch’s Fighters”, Air International/April 1978.

Michelet, G., “Des idées originales”, l’Aérophile octobre 1938.

Michulec, E., “Jagdwaffe en France”, Ciel de Guerre Nº8, 2011.

Mihaly, E., “Il a failli être le T6 français en 1940”, Le Fana de l’Aviation Nº78 & 423.

Mihaly, E., “Les Chasseurs Légers Caudron-Renault”, Le Fana de l’Aviation Nº 33 to 36.

Moulin, J., “C.A.P.R.A. R.30 ou R.300”, l’Aérophile 2010.

Moulin, J., “Loire 43, 45 & 46”, Document’air Nº3, Avia Editions, 1998.

Nĕmeček, V., “Potez 230”, Letectvi + Kosmonautika 22/85.

Nĕmeček, V., “Roussel 30”, Letectvi + Kosmonautika 5/86.

Nicole, F., “Payen: un rêve de vitesse”, Le Fana de l’Aviation Nº266.

Pelletier, A., “Paper Darts to Deltas”, Air Enthusiast Nº68, April 1997.

Ricco, P., “Le Bloch M.B. 700 dernier des Spads”, Le Fana de l’Aviation Nº341.

Roux, R., “Bugatti 100P& 110P”, Le Fana de l’Aviation Nº7 & 328.

Roux, R., “Les Avions Payen”, Le Fana de l’Aviation Nº5, 6 and 7.

Roux, R., “M.Bloch 700”, Le Fana de l’Aviation Nº8.

Watteeuw, P., “Les Pertes de la Chasse de Jour Allemande en France 1939-45”, AVIONS, Hors Série Nº10 and 15, 2005.