WW2 fighter aircraft....let the argument begin!?

Question

1.what was the best prop fighter.
2.If your son went to war, what plane would your want him to fly?[that should spice it up],same one?[dont say not for theaxis]
give a few reasons or examples to back it up.

Answer 1

(1) Hurricane

Answer 2

1. P-38. All the top aces flew them. Their performance is unmatched, and the arrangment and type of guns is really the best (exceeds the wing mounted 6 x .50 cal that is typical, and is better than the 20mm & .303 cal that the british loved [20mm had too slow a rate of fire, and .303 cal was too weak to do much damage]). The guns in the nose makes them easier to aim, and the .50's can do some real damage, but when the slower 20mm kicks in, it can do even more.



2. P-47. Now you'd think I'd say P-38, but it had a serious design flaw that could get you into a dive that you could not pull out of. P-47 was very rugged and survived battle damage very well. It was well armed, with 8 .50 cal machineguns. Speed and performance were decent.



P-51 or Spitfire would be a good second choice. Corsair wouldn't be a bad option either (same engine as the P-47).



There is a pocket of dead air at the back of the wing - the faster you go, the larger this pocket gets. On the P-38, this pocket could completely envolope the flaps if you went fast enough. The only way to go this fast was to get into a dive. You're in a dive, and now your flaps are in this pocket of dead air, so you can't pull out. Eventually this was rectified by bolting on dive breaks from Dauntless dive bombers - if you got into a dive you could not pull out of, pull the dive break until you slow down enough to regain control. Still, this is a major reason why so few survived.

Answer 3

Well, for overall performance in WWII, I'd have to go with the P-51D.



Range, speed, and the ability to duke it out with anything the Luftwaffe or the Japanese had.



The Spit XIV would have been better if it had the range.



Nothing could turn inside Japanese aircraft, but you had to have the range, and speed to go get them. A Hellcat pilot once told me the only aircraft in the entire pacific that could turn inside a Zero, were a couple of old SPAD's the French had in Tahiti.



The P-38 was far to unreliable in the skies over western Europe.



The P-47 just didn't have the maneuverability or enough range. Not even the "N" model.



The Tempest wasn't a dogfighter. Great ground attack AC though.



The F8F Bearcat, F7F Tigercat, and AD (A1) wasn't in service yet, by the end of the war. To include them would be like including the P-80. It existed by the end of the war, and shouldn't be included in this discussion as they were not operational.

Answer 4

Supermarine Spitfire.



Elliptical wing design meant not only a distinctive shape in the sky but also a faster aircraft than, say, the Hurricane.



Adolf Galland rated the Spitfire so highly he told Goering 'Give me a squadron of Spitfires'. - Here's a quote from his book The First And The Last:



"The theme of fighter protection was chewed over again and again. Goering clearly represented the point of view of the bombers and demanded close and rigid protection. The bomber, he said, was more important than record bag figures. I tried to point out that the Me109 was superior in the attack and not so suitable for purely defensive purposes as the Spitfire, which, although a little slower, was much more manoeuvrable. He rejected my objection. We received many more harsh words. Finally, as his time ran short, he grew more amiable and asked what were the requirements for our squadrons. Moelders asked for a series of Me109's with more powerful engines. The request was granted. 'And you ?' Goering turned to me. I did not hesitate long. 'I should like an outfit of Spitfires for my group.' After blurting this out, I had rather a shock, for it was not really meant that way. Of course, fundamentally I preferred our Me109 to the Spitfire, but I was unbelievably vexed at the lack of understanding and the stubbornness with which the command gave us orders we could not execute - or only incompletely - as a result of many shortcomings for which we were not to blame. Such brazen-faced impudence made even Goering speechless. He stamped off, growling as he went."





Some others worthy of note:



P-51D Mustang - great escort fighter from the US.

Bf-109 - Primary German fighter of WW2

Fw-190 - Replaced the Bf-109 around 1941/1942.

Hawker Hurricane - massively outdated even when it entered service.





@ole man & firefox . . . There is no denying that the Mustang was a great fighter and I have said as much above. In MY opinion, the Spit was marginally better. Go to any air show and see the number of people who turn their heads at the roar of the Spit - you just don't see the same reaction to a Mustang - at least, not on the same scale! If the Spitfire were to lose the "best fighter" argument, then it must win the "best known" and "most revered!"



I guess we are going to differ in opinion and, as patriots, stick with the aircraft from our country! Hey - isn't that what this debate is all about? ;-) Great question!



@Firefox . . . Some more info - the conclusion says it all, really!! I found the following declassifed Secret Tactical Trials report from RAF Wittering in Jun 1944. You can view it at http://www.spitfireperformance.com/spit14afdu.html (where the Spit is also measured against other airframe types!). . .



TACTICAL COMPARISON WITH MUSTANG III



Radius of Action: Without a long range tank, the Spitfire XIV has no endurance. With a 90 gallon long-range tank it has about half the range of the Mustang III fitted with 2 x 62 1/2 gallon long range tanks.



Maximum Speed: The maximum speed are practically identical.



Maximum Climb: The Spitfire XIV is very much better.



Dive: As for the Spitfire IX. The Mustang pulls away, but less markedly.



Turning Circle: The Spitfire XIV is better.



Rate of Roll: The advantage tends to be with the Spitfire XIV.



Conclusion: With the exception of endurance no conclusions can be drawn, as these two aircraft should never be enemies. The choice is a matter of taste.



Enjoying this debate, thanks!!

Answer 5

Give me a Chance Vought F4U Corsair any day.



The Mustangs and Lightenings were brilliant aircraft, with mesmerizing performance, but I'm not taking anything with more plumbing than my body has into battle.



The air cooled P&W R-2800 could absorb a shocking amount of damage and still operate, bringing the pilot safely home. Jugs shot off, oil coolers compromised. It remains an all around bad @ss plane.



The P-51 and P-38 were thoroughbreds, compared to the Corsair. Liquid cooled engines, however, don't prove themselves in battle the way that air cooled engines have.



The Corsair is a plane so ugly that only a mother could love it. Fast, nimble, and so grossly overpowered that you have to wonder why a left rudder pedal was installed. (Carrier take offs involved full right rudder before power the engine up because you couldn't deflect the rudder after the 1800 horsepower was blasting air around the fuselage at full power.)



It took a special pilot to fly those things. I know I don't have the nads to. Any time I get told to "not take off with full power setting until used to the airframe," I get a little worried.



And if my kid was going up, and into war, I'd probably want him, (or her,) to fly one of the variants of the A-6. It's slower than mollases at Christmas time, in comparison to other jets, but it's an incredibly nimble and resilliant aircraft. Like the old B-17's, it can absorb a surprising amount of damage and still bring the crew home.



JT

Answer 6

I was always mesmerized by the P-51(D) Mustang.

Fast climb rate, excellent turning ability.

It also was the first fighter with enough range to escort the American bombers inside enemy territory and return.



If my son had to go to war in any airplane, of the WW II era, I would want it to be in a P-47 Thunderbolt. This plane was rugged. The Thunderbolt could take a beating and still keep flying. It also could dish out plenty of punishment as well.

The P-47 isn't as pretty as the P-51 but it's not a beauty contest when somebody is trying to shoot you down.

Answer 7

Same answer to both, ... well, sorta.



The single most advanced fighter in WWII was the Grumman F-8 Bearcat. Time-to-climb, flat out top speed, heavy armament, manueverability; in addition to benefitting from 5 years of wartime trial and error in aircraft design.



Two planes that MIGHT have been better, had they had a chance to reach combat in time were the F7F Tigercat (which is actually my favorite WWII aircraft) and the A-1 Skyraider, which with it's 20mm cannons and high end top speed probably would have made it an a55 kicker of the first degree. (To those who would object- read your history, the A-1 IS a WWII aircraft).



Choosing a fighter for a family member or friend to fly in combat, I'd still choose the F8 - except that the F7 had two engines (higher survivability) and the A-1 was proven to be as tough as a P-47 (or even tougher) during service in 'Nam.

I might choose one of them if there were more combat data available (although I believe the A-1 was credited with two air-to-air gunfight kills (mig-15's) in Vietnam - so who knows?

Answer 8

The P-51, the finest refinement of propeller fighters. Built for speed, power, range, maneuverability and survivability. The first air superiority fighter, need I say more?



I've a daughter and if she is fighting, I'd rather see her strapped to a Mustang.

-------------- ---------------- ------------------ ------------------ --------------

Edit: Pongopilot, and what did Goering say about the Mustangs over Berlin??? "The was was over!"



There is no denying the Spit's legend, but she still was a defensive fighter. The Mustang went into the lion's den. The Mustang won in Europe and kicked the 109s and 190s backside while doing so!

------------- ------------- -------------- ------------ ------------ ---------------

Edit 2: Pongopilot, I can assure neutrality if it comes to nationality, I am an Indian. I am more impressed by the offensive nature of the Mustang, the Spit was a point defense interceptor and so IMO, lacks the completeness of the Mustang.



BTW, the clipped wing Spitfire had better roll rates than the traditional elliptical one.

-------------- ------------- -------------- --------------- ------------- -----------

Final Edit: On a lighter side, why are some folks keen on sending their kids on the more *survivable* aircraft rather than the best?

Answer 9

By most accounts the P51D was the top of propeller(fighter) aircraft evolution.

If my son were flying a fighter I would want it to be a Grumman

Hellcat..

All the great fighter attributes as well as extremely rugged.

I am partial to aircraft w/ round engines & would definitely include the P47 thunderbolt.

Maybe not as nimble as lighter planes , but could dish it out as well as take a beating.

The "axis" had some great fighters , but nothing nearly as tough as American iron

The Brits had some of the greatest , but again not as tough.

They also had some of the most beautiful, but that's another arguement.

Best regards

Answer 10

The only WW2 fighter aircraft that I've had the privilege of flying (riding along) were the T-6 and P-51. The P-51 is my choice because of the sexy looks and the sound of that Rolls Royce is unmatched. No examples of being the best fighter, just my two cents.

Answer 11

1. Hawker Sea Fury - Had the war continued, it would have been one of the few to be suited against ME-262's and other German Jets. In fact, even in Korea it took down Mig 15's.



2. A-26 Invader, purely because it could outrun almost everything the Japanese had (and almost anything at that time)

Answer 12

Easy! The P51D Mustang.

Awsome speed, manouverability, a deadly weapon platform. They really nailed it with the P51D, which was I think, just about the last piston engined fighter out of the USA



If my son went to war, I'd prefer he was flying something not used as a front line aircraft, as he'd have a better chance of survival, so maybe a transport plane like a Dakota if we're still talking piston engines.

Answer 13

P-51 was to me the best fighter



However in terms of what I would want my kid to fly, I'd say the P-47 Thunderbolt, since this one is much tougher and survivable than a mustan.

Answer 14

Prop fighter - Grumman Bearcat. It's just nice to fly!

If my son went to ww2, then I'd like him to fly the Lysander. This means he would be flying officers around in the UK, nowhere near the bullets.

If he went to war now, against the taliban, I'd hope he was dropping nukes.

Answer 15

De Havilland Mosquito

Answer 16

1. Tempest

2. spitfire late versions XIV and later



reason is that i would not like my daughter to be performing strafing attacks against German AA traps, and the Tempests were extensively used that way.



Spitfires would give her much better aerobatics, range and armament.

Answer 17

de Havilland Hornet

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

http://www.vicflintham.co.uk/post-war-military-aircraft/hornet/hornet.html

http://users.skynet.be/BAMRS/dh103/dh103.htm

http://www.vectorsite.net/avmoss_3.html

Answer 18

the F-14 tomcat. They kicked *** in 'The Final Countdown' movie.