Best fighter in WW2???

[hawker]

Absolutely agree with you Big B.

I must add that both F-86 and MiG-15 was very similar planes. Both are derived from German blueprints[;)].

Even today everything is same. Who build the best fighter jets in a world?
Answer is simple,USA and Russia.
Pick any of their top notch fighters and in any case you will choose correctly.

Ups,i hijacked my own thread,back to topic. I think that we can conclude list of five.

1. Lavochkin La-7 (USSR) and North American P-51 "Mustang" (USA)

2. FW-190

3. Nakajima Ki-84 "Hayate"

4. Yakovlev Yak-3

[hawker]

ORIGINAL: Ian R

Didn't they test the Ki-100 with high octane avgas after the war in the US, and it performed well at high altitude as well as low?

Dont know about that,i think that Ki-100 top speed was around 400 MPH

[Big B]

Yep, the old joke on this side of the pond was "who's Germans were better - ours or theirs?"
In a chauvinistic light - I'll say ultimately, ours...we landed men on the moon first. [:D]

ORIGINAL: hawker

Absolutely agree with you Big B.

I must add that both F-86 and MiG-15 was very similar planes. Both are derived from German blueprints[;)].

Even today everything is same. Who build the best fighter jets in a world?
Answer is simple,USA and Russia.
Pick any of their top notch fighters and in any case you will choose correctly.

[Dixie]

I guess it depends on the defenition of best for the purpose of the thread.  The type with the longest sustained success?  The type with the biggest impact when it first saw action?  Success in a niche role?  Something else altogether?

My pick, for various reasons are:
Tempest (sleek, fast and a decent punch although there wasn't much of the LW to really test it by the time they entered service)
FW190  (made far more of an impact than the Bf109 did, and caused the RAF major problems until the arrival of the Spit IX)
Mustang  (really allowed the 8th AF to take the offensive)
A6M  (As it's the WitP this made it in, plus the Zero bonus [;)])

[RUPD3658]

ORIGINAL: Nikademus

Cylon Raider or Colonial Viper?

Viper...just make sure it is disconnected from the network.

[Big B]

ORIGINAL: Dixie
...
A6M (As it's the WitP this made it in, plus the Zero bonus [;)]

LOL! You know Dixie, I have read for years - I haven't ever been able to find a reference to the Zero Bonus in the history books?! [:D]

[niceguy2005]

ORIGINAL: Big B

I may not make any friends here - but I honestly don't think the last production Japanese fighters were up to the standards of their contemporary allied opponents.

I actually thought that this was largely accepted. It's not that the Japanese late war fighters hadn't progressed. At least most of them started to provide basic armor. Yet, the US and Russian fighter designs had progressed dramatically. The German designs had as well, but their industry faltered. Early war US fighters suffered as much as anything from a complete lack of desire to build a dominant fighter. If you look at early USN and USAAF specs they are very basic and don't ask for much in terms of better technology. This was true through the entire 1930s which is why the US found itself lacking when the war hit. In truth the P-47, Hellcat and Corsair were all extremely good AC, built off similar principals that maybe are best summed but by bigger, stronger, faster; each a bit different, but all very tough to defeat.

It seems to me that the P-51 was the most redesigned with the idea of producing speed with less weight, hence the increased range. I don't know that the P-51 was a durable as its other contemporaries though.

[Dixie]

ORIGINAL: Big B

ORIGINAL: Dixie
...
A6M (As it's the WitP this made it in, plus the Zero bonus [;)]

LOL! You know Dixie, I have read for years - I haven't ever been able to find a reference to the Zero Bonus in the history books?! [:D]

[:'(] You haven't been reading the right books then [;)]

[Big B]

Well, if I had to base it on "which fighter would you most likely be willing to stick your neck out in...with another guy shooting at you" I'd just rather be in a P-47 (late model hopefully) than anything else. At least I'd feel like I had the best chance to screw-up and come back alive...

ORIGINAL: niceguy2005

ORIGINAL: Big B

I may not make any friends here - but I honestly don't think the last production Japanese fighters were up to the standards of their contemporary allied opponents.

I actually thought that this was largely accepted. It's not that the Japanese late war fighters hadn't progressed. At least most of them started to provide basic armor. Yet, the US and Russian fighter designs had progressed dramatically. The German designs had as well, but their industry faltered. Early war US fighters suffered as much as anything from a complete lack of desire to build a dominant fighter. If you look at early USN and USAAF specs they are very basic and don't ask for much in terms of better technology. This was true through the entire 1930s which is why the US found itself lacking when the war hit. In truth the P-47, Hellcat and Corsair were all extremely good AC, built off similar principals that maybe are best summed but by bigger, stronger, faster; each a bit different, but all very tough to defeat.

It seems to me that the P-51 was the most redesigned with the idea of producing speed with less weight, hence the increased range. I don't know that the P-51 was a durable as its other contemporaries though.

Ya' got me there - I guess I need to expand my reading [:'(]

ORIGINAL: Dixie

ORIGINAL: Big B

ORIGINAL: Dixie
...
A6M (As it's the WitP this made it in, plus the Zero bonus [;)]

LOL! You know Dixie, I have read for years - I haven't ever been able to find a reference to the Zero Bonus in the history books?! [:D]

[:'(] You haven't been reading the right books then [;)]

[Mike Scholl]

ORIGINAL: niceguy2005
I am certainly no expert on AC performance and particularly not German AC, though I've picked up a bit here and there. However, my impression was always that the FW-190 was an outstanding all around fighter. There was almost no area of operation where it wasn't "very good" and a few where it was "exceptional". I don't tend to think of it as exceptionally maneuverable, like some Japanese AC, which was the comparison I was really going for.

I had forgotten, but I think you're right Big B. At altitude the P-47 became much more maneuverable. There really weren't an performance areas where it was a dog. However, as a pilot I think what I would appreciate most about the plane is the amount of battle damage it could take and still get you home. In that area it really was nearly unequaled for a fighter.

The real problem with evaluating the Fw-190 is that it's really two different aircraft. The Fw-190 A with the radial engine was an excellent low and medium altitude performer, and many were specialized as ground support aircraft. The Fw-190 D with it's inline engine was an exceptional performer at high altitude, but not as effective at medium and low levels. Too many people seem to combine the capabilities of both into one "super plane"..., which it wasn't. Like most of the "good" fighters of WW II it had it's strong points and it's weak points.

[niceguy2005]

Ya' got me there - I guess I need to expand my reading

Well, as I said I am certainly no expert and I am certain you have read up on this subject for more than I. That was just my amateur analysis. Though I would tend to stick to my opinion that early US fighters were poor due to a lack of effort to build a great all around fighter. Once the US engineers really got to work, it would have been very tough for Japan to keep pace.

[Tiornu]

Bearcat!
Hey, why not?

[Speedysteve]

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl

ORIGINAL: niceguy2005
I am certainly no expert on AC performance and particularly not German AC, though I've picked up a bit here and there. However, my impression was always that the FW-190 was an outstanding all around fighter. There was almost no area of operation where it wasn't "very good" and a few where it was "exceptional". I don't tend to think of it as exceptionally maneuverable, like some Japanese AC, which was the comparison I was really going for.

I had forgotten, but I think you're right Big B. At altitude the P-47 became much more maneuverable. There really weren't an performance areas where it was a dog. However, as a pilot I think what I would appreciate most about the plane is the amount of battle damage it could take and still get you home. In that area it really was nearly unequaled for a fighter.

The real problem with evaluating the Fw-190 is that it's really two different aircraft. The Fw-190 A with the radial engine was an excellent low and medium altitude performer, and many were specialized as ground support aircraft. The Fw-190 D with it's inline engine was an exceptional performer at high altitude, but not as effective at medium and low levels. Too many people seem to combine the capabilities of both into one "super plane"..., which it wasn't. Like most of the "good" fighters of WW II it had it's strong points and it's weak points.

You can break it down even further than that. Looking at the A series.............

The A-1 was fairly fast and manueverable (at Low/Medium altitude) and didn't have masses of armour.

The A-5 was probably the 'best' dogfighter of the A series. It was the fastest of the variants, the most maneuverable, it was more durable than the A-1 and had more guns.

From then on the other variants (from A-5 to A-8/R8) become progressively heavier, slower, poorer climbers, less maneuverable BUT packed a heavier punch to try and deal with the US 4E's.......

[Hard Sarge]

ORIGINAL: hawker

I know that this is probably chewed million times but this topic should be interesting.

Which is the best fighter in WW2?
Let jets stay aside in this.

For me:

1. Lavochkin La-7 (think the Yak Series was more importent, very good plane, but the model most people know from Flight sims, was a very small production run, and over all, I do not think shooting down a 262 should mean anything, all that is, is being in the right place, at the right time)
2. P-51 "Mustang" (outstanding plane, great range, great speed, could out run the bad guys, or with in reason, mix it up, once it was freed from the bombers, there was no place the LW could hide, there was a statement made about the engine, the A,I,II,A-36 and the tac Recon model, had the Allison, the B,C,D,K,H, III,IV had the Merlin, along with the recon model)
3. FW-190 (another outstanding plane, only trouble was the engine lost power as it got over 20K, if they would of been able to work out the metal troubles with the Turbo Charger on the C model, it would of been a monster (a 190 with the belly of a 51)
4. Ki-84 "Hayate" (more of a what could of been plane, if it had been built by the Allies, it may of been the best plane of the war, most JP pilots didn't know if they were going to be able to land, once they took off, major HT Trouble with the landing gear, after war testing, the test pilots were always worried about landing, plus it was the fuel that made the plane great, it was very good, one hassle with the statements about how good it was, is suppost to be a fight towards the end of the war, with one pliot taking on, take your pick, P-51s, F4Us or Hellcats (the story changes) also, the model does also, with the George and the Ki-100 being named, most of what is not told, is the same pilot (Muto most times, which if it was Muto, it wasn't a Frank or a 100 he was flying) was later killed by a 51 that he never seen, the Stang pilot even thought he had run into a rookie)
5. Me-109k (again, a great plane, getting pretty long in the tooth by mid 44, the K was more a lead slead, then a fighter, good climb, good speed, boom and zoom and it was great, just don't turn, the Spitfire may of "grown" better then the 109 did, but the Spit wasn't being made to do what the 109 had to, so not really fair to say it was better, the Spit didn't have to go again massed waves of B-17s, the F and very early G models were the best and even later, in the hands of a Experten, deadly, but airwar is not about single pilots, and just to nitpick, it should be the Bf 109)
6. Vickers supermarine Spitfire (another of the greats, only downfall was range, funny, it is always pointed out that it was a great turner, but since the LW didn't turn much, big deal, from WWI, the Germans felt that Roll Rate was more importent then Turn Rate was, really odd, it was a plane later on, that was set up for the roll it was to perform, so a Spit LF IX was not the same as the Spit HF IX, outstanding plane, but the Cane won the BoB, and the Stang won the Battle for the Reich)
7.P-38 "Lightning" (a odd one, outstanding plane, but depends on where it was, in the PTO, a monster, in the MED very good, in the ETO, poor, cold, fog and rain didn't agree with the plane, once all the changes were made, it was over shadowed by the Stang, when flown right, nothing could beat it, one yank, used to fly to GB AFs and put on a show, then land and start making bets with the Spit pilots saying he could out dogfight them in it, he never lost, but not many pilots could work the engines and controls like he could, in the PTO, it could control the fight, fight when it wanted to, disengage when it didn't, in the ETO, the speeds were closer)
8. F4U "Corsair" (a mother, one of my Favs, power, speed, could take lot of damage, and as long as the speed was kept up, could turn with Zero, and if in trouble could outdive anything the JP had (other then the Tony), little known fact, the F4u put the Hellcat out of production, and every CV had at least one Squadron of F4us on it by the time the war ended)
9. A6M2 "Zero" (don't need to say anything about this plane, for it's time, and for what it was designed for, it was outstanding, once the weaknesses were found, it was deadmeat, but, that shouldn't be held against it, as it wasn't suppost to be in front use for as long as it was, the replacements never worked out or were ready, a light weight plane, that was designed and flown, to hit and not be hit, it was outstanding, but once it was found out, it couldn't dive, or turn at high speed, so much for the edge it had)
Yak 3 (trouble is the Yak got to be looked at, as the series, more importent then the La, also, depends on which model, different planes, the 9 could be made into a ground attack, AS fighter, High (for them) Alt fighter, or a long range fighter (which made the 51 look like it had short legs, and it didn't use droptanks) the 3 was maybe the best pure dogfighter of the bunch, but was mid to low level, and the best model of the 3 may of only seen limited action, the 3 came off of the Yak 1 line, while the 9 came from the Yak 7 (which we hear very little about the 7, but a very importent model)
P-47 (again, another monster, great at high alt, and with later changes good at low level)

don't really think any of them can be said to really be better then the rest, all were good and all had areas that they were better then the others

we left off the Hellcat, another Outstanding plane, but it was replaced by the F4u because of the need for better climb and better top speed, the father away the JP planes were fought from the Fleet the better

from some statements that were made

got to remember, almost all of the US planes were pre war models (the Stang and Hellcat being 2nd Gen planes) the F4u, the P-47 and the P-38 were already being designed, worked on, when the war started

if the 47 had the range, the 51 wouldn't of been needed, but funny, as the war was ending, the 51 pilots were being crossed trained on the 47, because when they were sent to the PTO, they were going to be assigned the 47, the 51 didn't have the range needed (of course, almost a trick statement, as the P-47N was nothing like the C or D models)

That is the top nine,from best to worse[;)]

[Hard Sarge]

ORIGINAL: Speedy

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl

ORIGINAL: niceguy2005
I am certainly no expert on AC performance and particularly not German AC, though I've picked up a bit here and there. However, my impression was always that the FW-190 was an outstanding all around fighter. There was almost no area of operation where it wasn't "very good" and a few where it was "exceptional". I don't tend to think of it as exceptionally maneuverable, like some Japanese AC, which was the comparison I was really going for.

I had forgotten, but I think you're right Big B. At altitude the P-47 became much more maneuverable. There really weren't an performance areas where it was a dog. However, as a pilot I think what I would appreciate most about the plane is the amount of battle damage it could take and still get you home. In that area it really was nearly unequaled for a fighter.

The real problem with evaluating the Fw-190 is that it's really two different aircraft. The Fw-190 A with the radial engine was an excellent low and medium altitude performer, and many were specialized as ground support aircraft. The Fw-190 D with it's inline engine was an exceptional performer at high altitude, but not as effective at medium and low levels. Too many people seem to combine the capabilities of both into one "super plane"..., which it wasn't. Like most of the "good" fighters of WW II it had it's strong points and it's weak points.

You can break it down even further than that. Looking at the A series.............

The A-1 was fairly fast and manueverable (at Low/Medium altitude) and didn't have masses of armour.

The A-5 was probably the 'best' dogfighter of the A series. It was the fastest of the variants, the most maneuverable, it was more durable than the A-1 and had more guns.

From then on the other variants (from A-5 to A-8/R8) become progressively heavier, slower, poorer climbers, less maneuverable BUT packed a heavier punch to try and deal with the US 4E's.......

just remember, the A8 is not the plane most people think of when they think of late model 190s, the A8 could do most of the what the A-5,A-6 could, the A-8/R7,A-8/R8 are the heavy Armored, heavy gunned models that most people think of when the A-8 is mentioned, those were the slugs, but they could get in close and knock down bombers, as long as the fighters were kept away from them

the standard A-7/A-8/A-9 were very HARD to tell apart in combat

also, depends on what the plane was carrying, rocket tubes, underwing gun pods, drop tanks, all ruined how the plane flew

[decaro]

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl

The real problem with evaluating the Fw-190 is that it's really two different aircraft. The Fw-190 A with the radial engine was an excellent low and medium altitude performer, and many were specialized as ground support aircraft ...

That's why I put the Thunderbolt in the fighter-bomber category; its air-cooled radial engine could take a lot of punishment, i.e., flak, more so than the liquid-cooled Merlin-powered P-51; I consider pilot survivability a big factor in rating aircraft performance. After all, who wants to fly a high-performance "widow maker"?

For the record, the P-47 was produced in greater number (more than 15,000) than any other US fighter, but the Mustang got all the glory: recall the "tank busters" in "Saving Private Ryan" were Mustangs.

Re the Encyclopedia of Aircraft of WW II, the P-47 was a great dogfighter "clean," but bomb pylons impeded its maneuverability.

[niceguy2005]

ORIGINAL: Tiornu

Bearcat!
Hey, why not?

Really, why not. AN oft forgotten fighter.

[niceguy2005]

ORIGINAL: Joe D.
For the record, the P-47 was produced in greater number (more than 15,000) than any other US fighter...

I thought the P-40 was the most produced WWII fighter, if one includes are variants, but I could be wrong.

[Rainer]

Total production of Me 109 (ALL versions) was 30,000.

[decaro]

ORIGINAL: niceguy2005

ORIGINAL: Joe D.
For the record, the P-47 was produced in greater number (more than 15,000) than any other US fighter...

I thought the P-40 was the most produced WWII fighter, if one includes are variants, but I could be wrong.

Actually we may both be right.

Re the Encyclopedia of Aircraft of WWII, 15,683 Thunderbolts were produced.

At the time of the Pearl Harbor attack, the P-40 was the most numerous American fighter.
However, the Encyclopedia discounted RAF Tomahawks! Final count for all Curtis P-40s was 16,802 "including 4,787 built against British contracts."

The Messerschmitt 109 series may have been flown by more (mostly Axis) countries than any other WW II aircraft.