Sponsor Message:
Military Aviation & Space Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Wwii Planes  
User currently offlineUSAFJR From United States of America, joined Apr 2002, 146 posts, RR: 0
Posted (12 years 1 month 3 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 4300 times:

I hope there arnt 1000 other topics like this... but what WWII plane was the best dogfight plane? It doesnt matter if its allied or axis.

22 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineSchreiner From Netherlands, joined Oct 2001, 960 posts, RR: 2
Reply 1, posted (12 years 1 month 3 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 4236 times:

Well... there are hundreds other topics about this one...

There were alot of good a/c:


Bad guys a/c: Me262/FW190/Me109/Zero

The allies could not done it without all these:

Good guys a/c: Hellcat/Bearcat/Spitfire/Mustang/Hurricane/Lightning/Yak-41

But all a/c had their advantage...
Example: Mustang: huge range - Lightning: very high speed and so on...

So there is not really a "best" plane...

Cheers,
Schreiner
Amsterdam




Soaring the internet...
User currently offlineBroke From United States of America, joined Apr 2002, 1322 posts, RR: 3
Reply 2, posted (12 years 1 month 3 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 4241 times:

The trick to success in dog fighting is to use your best attributes against the other guy's worse. For instance, at the beginning of the war the best Navy airplane was the F4F Wildcat and the best Army Air Force airplane was the P-40. Neither of these airplanes were near as manovuerable (sp??) as comparable airplanes of either the Germans or the Japanese. The Navy developed the "Thatch" weave where 2 pairs of F4F's supported each other and kept an attacker at bay. The "Flying Tigers" used the superior diving speed of the P-40 to make hit and run attacks against the Japanese. The A6M Zero was very manovuerable but because it was so light, it would torque roll when turning in the direction the prop rotated. Also, the Zero has little armor and no self sealing fuel tanks so the airplane couldn't take much damage. In Europe, the first American pilots used Spitfires and Hurricanes until the P-38 and P-47 arrived. Read about the development of the Bf-109 against the Spitfire where each development would give a slight edge over the other.
For instance, the early Spits were a little inferior to the Bf-109E. Then the Spitfire Mk 5 came out and the edge turned. Then the Bf-109F came out and the Mk 5 was at a disadvantge. So the Spitfire Mk 9 came out. The history of the Spitfire (Spitfire) by Jeffery Quill goes into this exchange quite a lot.


User currently offlineLY744 From Canada, joined Feb 2001, 5536 posts, RR: 10
Reply 3, posted (12 years 1 month 3 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 4223 times:

Yak-41? That's a modern VTOL fighterjet technology demonstrator (ask anyone in the F-35 program), a.k.a. Yak-141/Freestyle.

LY744.



Pacifism only works if EVERYBODY practices it
User currently offline2912n From United States of America, joined Oct 2001, 2013 posts, RR: 8
Reply 4, posted (12 years 1 month 3 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 4204 times:

There was also a quality issue with pilots during WWII. As the war went on Allied pilots continued to get better, training evolved as combat lessons were learned. Training could be conducted in safety, (many allied pilots were trained in the US or Canada with no worries of maruding fighters ruining their day.) After Midway, when a serious core of Japanese pilots were killed the quality of their pilots went into serious decline. Fuel shortages for both Japan and Germany restricted pilot training. (Plus the Japanese had a very different style of training pilots. I don't have the details, but it was a very long drawn out process which did not lend itself to replacing combat losses quickly or efficiently.)

User currently offlineIMissPiedmont From United States of America, joined May 2001, 6281 posts, RR: 34
Reply 5, posted (12 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 4205 times:

I do believe, correct me if I'm wrong, that the F6F shot down more enemy aircraft than any other fighter.


Quit calling an airport ramp "Tarmac" and a taxiway "runway".
User currently offlineSchreiner From Netherlands, joined Oct 2001, 960 posts, RR: 2
Reply 6, posted (12 years 1 month 2 weeks 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 4176 times:

LY744... u r right... same on me... I mean the Yak-9 (?)

IMissPiedmont; I thought the hurricane has more kills... but thats because the F6F entered service later in the war.

The P47 actualy was also a very good a/c. It took lots of bullet-holes...  Smile

Cheers,

Schreiner



Soaring the internet...
User currently offlineZionstrat From United States of America, joined Apr 2001, 226 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (12 years 1 month 2 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 4170 times:

Sorry Schreiner-
Hellcat has highest kill number and win/loss ratio (18:1)- I don’t have current Hurricane numbers, but if I remember correctly they were less than half of this- Here's some info:

http://www.concentric.net/~gspeter/Hellcat.htm

This is one of those debates that can never be resolved because of the variation mentioned before and because pilot experience was far more important than the platform (top German aces stuck with Me 109 long after it was surpassed by FW190).

However, on average, I would nominate the Corsair F4U. It was both fast, highly maneuverable, well armed and excelled in every role it was given. Sure the mustang was the best long range escort, the Zero or FW190, may have been most maneuverable, the ME262 was clearly fastest, but the Corsair could tangle with any of them in any environment and with pilot skill averaged out, they were in a position to win against any of them (short of a full speed strike from a ME262, but obviously this is apples and oranges).

The US intentionally spread the risk among many similar designs, so the differences are really narrow. But I honestly believed that if we could test all platforms in all major fighter roles, the Corsair would win by a nose.


User currently offlineUSAFJR From United States of America, joined Apr 2002, 146 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (12 years 1 month 2 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 4172 times:

P-51! yeah! there were more P-51b aces than in any other kind of plane, at least thats what I heard... you like what, 5 kills before your an ace?

User currently offlineGDB From United Kingdom, joined May 2001, 13170 posts, RR: 77
Reply 9, posted (12 years 1 month 2 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 4183 times:

What about the kill ratios of Soviet Yak-3's against the Luftwaffe, after the tide had turned against the Nazi's, (and when Luftwaffe pilot quality was in decline).


User currently offlineUSAFJR From United States of America, joined Apr 2002, 146 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (12 years 1 month 2 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 4165 times:

Well... I dont know much about russian WWII planes, I know about modern ones.

User currently offlineGDB From United Kingdom, joined May 2001, 13170 posts, RR: 77
Reply 11, posted (12 years 1 month 2 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 4169 times:

The biggest German aces of WW2 got most of their kills on the Eastern Front, when the German's were in the ascendency, and most Russian aircraft were obsolete.
I wondered if the tables were totally turned when Germany was in retreat, and the Soviets had better aircraft (and a lot of them!).
The Luftwaffe certainly lost air superiority then.


User currently offlineTEDSKI From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (12 years 1 month 2 weeks 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 4163 times:

The best USAAF fighter plane of WW2 was the Rolls Royce Merlin powered P-51D that helped provide effective escort for our B-17s & B-24s over Germany and our B-29s over Japan. Best US Navy fighter was the Grumman F6F Hellcat that was superior to the Mitsubishi Zero.

User currently offlineThumper From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 550 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (12 years 1 month 2 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 4144 times:

Although it didn't get there till the end I still think the F8F Bearcat was superior to the Hellcat or Mustang! Not talking about kills just ability!

User currently offlineUSAFJR From United States of America, joined Apr 2002, 146 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (12 years 1 month 2 weeks 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 4138 times:

I dont know about that one... the P-51b was pretty darn good.

User currently offlineTEDSKI From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (12 years 1 month 2 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 4104 times:

If the F8F Bearcat was superior it did not stay in service long enough to serve in the Korean War like the P-51 Mustang and F4U Corsair!

User currently offlineZionstrat From United States of America, joined Apr 2001, 226 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (12 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 4082 times:

The bearcat example shows how fast these conversations get out of hand because it is so easy to compare apples to oranges.

The Bearcat was a purpose designed interceptor based on the same power plant as the F6F, but with a much smaller and lighter airframe. In other words, it was fast and climbed like a banshee, and if it had made it into production earlier would have been an excellent kamikaze interceptor.

So yes it was fast, but was designed for a role that was almost obsolete from day 1 as jets had all the advantages for this scenario.


User currently offlineUSAFJR From United States of America, joined Apr 2002, 146 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (12 years 1 month 1 week 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 4029 times:

What would you say is the fastest WWII plane? Smile

User currently offlineL-188 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 29792 posts, RR: 58
Reply 18, posted (12 years 1 month 1 week 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 4034 times:

Operational one??

The Messeschmitt ME-163 Komet.

Rocket powered.

Not quite sure if it was actually operational or not.



OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
User currently offlineJwenting From Netherlands, joined Apr 2001, 10213 posts, RR: 18
Reply 19, posted (12 years 1 month 1 week 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 4027 times:

The 163 was operational in numbers. They weren't all that effective though. The design basically limited them to one pass at a single bomber per flight (or 2 passes when they got their rocketpacks mounted).
Their speed advantage was also a disadvantage, they were difficult to get into position for a good shot (almost had to be from directly behind, where the tailgunner could shoot at them).

Possibly the Me-262 was faster (less acelleration but higher topspeed). It has been claimed more than once that the Me-262 was capable of supersonic speed in a dive (causing serious structural damage, but the aircraft could be landed normally afterwards by a skilled pilot).

About the Bearcat, I don't think it entered operational service before the end of the war. It WAS used in Korea and quite successfull there until the appearance in strength of the MiG-15 (the only prop to be effective against that was the Sea Fury).



I wish I were flying
User currently offlineTEDSKI From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 20, posted (12 years 1 month 1 week 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 4029 times:

The F8F Bearcat DID NOT see action in the Korean War! It was it's jet powered brother the F9F Panther that was successfully used in that conflict. The F4U Corsair was used by the US Navy & Marine Corps for air to ground missions and did on one occasion manage to shoot down a MIG 15.

User currently offlineGDB From United Kingdom, joined May 2001, 13170 posts, RR: 77
Reply 21, posted (12 years 1 month 1 week 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 4010 times:

If you discount the rocket powered Me-163, I suspect it has to be the Me-262;

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Dean Alexander


Followed by the Gloster Meteor, I don't think the Meteor got to engage enemy aircraft in WW2, but it was used against V-1 Flying Bombs;

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Glenn Alderton



User currently offlineUSAFJR From United States of America, joined Apr 2002, 146 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (12 years 1 month 1 week 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 4027 times:

>>The Messeschmitt ME-163 Komet. Rocket powered.

well I meant prop planes.


Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic Wwii Planes
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Military aviation related posts only!
  • Not military related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
F1 Racing Wwii Planes, What Do U Think? posted Sat Jan 19 2002 21:14:19 by Schreiner
NZ Army Puts Spy Planes To The Test posted Thu Oct 19 2006 11:32:13 by 777ER
Favorit WWII Aircraft? posted Wed Oct 18 2006 18:21:47 by Skyman
Toilets On Military Planes? posted Mon Oct 16 2006 05:18:27 by LimaNiner
3 US Navy (?) Planes At SFO posted Sat Oct 7 2006 16:13:40 by Leamside
Fighter Planes Intercept Russian Bombers posted Sun Oct 1 2006 00:16:08 by Clickhappy
Looking For Some Military Planes Unit Price posted Wed Jul 19 2006 22:53:34 by Chrisdigo
Questions About 707 Awacs Planes posted Wed May 17 2006 02:05:46 by FlyingNanook
Is The B-52 Is One The Best USAF Planes Ever? posted Thu Apr 27 2006 19:30:27 by 747400sp
Large Amount Of Military Planes Overhead posted Thu Mar 9 2006 21:35:43 by Ryanair0pk

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format