Best fighter of ww2?

Ok here it comes:

What was he best fighter aircraft of WW2? Give me reasons people, REASONS!

 

I wish it was that simple.......

You'd have to look at how a fighter performed in a given area, (i.e. the P-39 Airacobra was a horrible fighter but proved to be an effective ground attack plane).

Are we talking about sheer performance numbers such as ceiling altitude, top speed, etc.???

If so, The ME-262 is up there, but was a jet of course. If we're talking strictly prop-driven fighter planes, then yes, the TA-152 was supposed to be an outstanding plane. It was basically an FW-190D with longer wings and an improved turbocharger which made for great high-altitude performance. Unfortunately (or should we say fortunately?) the TA-152 never really got a chance to exercise its full potential.

I'd like to go out and say the P-51 Mustang comes to mind, as well as the P-47D and even the later models of the Spitfire for sheer speed.

Be sure to spare a thought for the last BF-109 "K" model. Yet another deft fighter that came too late in the war.

But if we were going to bet on this, I'd have to go with the P-51D Mustang. Why? Well, it was in the hands of some well-trained veteran pilots, had speed that was downright hazardous, and kept its performance thoughout the altitude range. It had low-end manueverability yet could be a high altitude interceptor/escort. It also made a great fighter-bomber.

Watch the film Empire of the Sun. Great scenes of this shown.

 

What I say now will undoubtly counter many of the the readers biblical worship of the P-51 Mustanjg. The P-51 was one of the best. But if I were to label a the "best" the prize would have to go to the F4U-4 Corsair. I also have the utmost respect for the FW-190 and the Me 262. But ya gotta go with the Corsair.
The Corsair, contrary to many beliefs, was faster than the Mustang. The Corsair's 2,450 HP Pratt and Whitney dwarfed the Mustangs 1,695 HP Packard Merlin V. The maximum speed of the Corsair's top speed was 446 mph vs the Mustang's 437. This number is really not important because different powerplants could provide different results. Both aircraft were very fast.
The Corsair weighed in at 9,205 pounds vs the Mustangs 7,125 pounds. The Corsair, being designed for carrier use, was built to be more survivable. The Corsair packed more armor than the Mustang nad was better able to handle enemy fire.
The firepower of the two was very similar. Both had 6 .50 cal machine guns. In the external load capacity though the Corsair had a slight edge being able to carry 8 8 inch rockets vs the Mustangs 6. Both had similar bomb loads.
Both aircraft were extremely agile. I have never seen the two aircraft in a turning contest but I think that the Mustang would have an edge, though not a big one.
A big advantage of the Mustang was the ability of the Mustang to carry 2 external gas tanks for a range of 2,080 miles vs the 1 tank for the Corsairs 1,560 miles. Aircraft carriers though took out much of the advantage the Mustang had in that area.
Some many good fighters surfaced at this time that one could say that they were only seperated by the pilots who flew them. But if wanted a better chance at winning I'd recommend the Corsair. Do not forget that the Corsair served throughout the Korean War as a fighter and a close support aircraft. The corsair is also othe only prop driven aircraft the shoot down a modern jet fighter (in Korea 2 Mig-15's were shot down by Corsairs).


------------------
Carthage must be destroyed!

 

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Snefru:
But if I were to label a the "best" the prize would have to go to the F4U-4 Corsair. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

At first i was considering the P-38 lightning however after some consideration...I think I agree with Snefru. The Corsair was the best all round fighter. Both the P-51 and F4U were comprable fighters...however as pointed out the Coursair held slight advantages. However an advantage i would stress on is durability. The navy followed the tradition of only using air cooled engines for they were more reliable and could handle damage better.
One unlucky shot on a P-51 cutting the coolint lines could proove fatal...however the F4U being aircooled had no coolant.
And again as pointed out it is obviose that the F4U was ahead of it's time being the only design to make it all the way to Korea to shoot down jets in dogfights. It took a wierd two engined version of the P51 to make it that far.
The F4U Corsair was a good balance of speed, manuverability,mileage, armament, and durability. The F4U didn't lack in any field of a perfect fighter!

<FONT COLOR="#ff0000" SIZE="1" FACE="Verdana, Arial">This message has been edited by Ron on 30 November 2000 at 07:33 PM</font>

 

Definately the P-51 Mustang. Its fast, manoverable, and sleek.

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

 

Nope, no p-51 and no F4U is going to make it into best list.

Yes, the p-51 was sleek, but one bullet could bring her down, too dainty for me tastes.

The F4U was too bulky and was not really tested against Japanese aircraft, at the time the Corsair entered the war, most good Japanese pilots were dead.

The best was the bf109 bar none, you can't argue with the planes' track record for most kills of any single aircraft model.

As for best overall plane, I say the me262. It was WAY too fast to be intercepted, unless it was on the runway. Which in my opinion is a bullshit kill anyways. And firepower? Were talking several 20mm or 30mm canons. Freaking deadly!

------------------
Who's peppy? I am!!

 

Wow. It looks like somebody has been doing some serious research before they posted their response. I agree that the Corsair was an outstanding plane that had better "numbers" than the P-51D. However, There is something to be said about what pilots called "flyability". No, this is not how easy or hard it is to learn how to fly a given plane. Rather, it is the performance of a plane throughout the entire altitude range. Again, the P-51D had fluidity whether it be strafing tanks, or intercepting high-altitude planes.
The Corsair may have had this as well. But if so, it certainly was not documented well or noted from pilots. Famous Corsair aces such as Pappy Boeington and the Black Sheep swore by the slant-winged plane, and it was even manufactured thru 1954. But the F4U went thru MANY improvements over its years. If its 1944-45, I'd still have to go with the Mustang based on flyability. Sorry if that is stereotypical.

Also - the Corsair was not the only prop-driven plane to down jets, whether it was Korea OR Vietnam. Their is a recorded downing of a MiG-15 by a Hawker Sea Fury. In Vietnam, an A1 shot down a MiG-17 in 1965. Incorrect? Look it up - I'm sure that you can find it

 

There are many documentations about the "flyability" of the Corsair. The Corsair was dubbed the "Ensign Killer". This name came from the many accidents that new pilots had landing the Corsair on the deck of a carrier. The set-up of the aircraft gave the Corsair limited visability of the carrier and could cause some new and inexperienced pilots to crash.
I mistated that point about the Corsair being the only prop aircraft to shoot down a modern jet. I should have stated that it was the first to do so. I did not hear of other aircraft doing it after but I am sure the search will be fulfilling enough.
Again I make the point that at the end of the war i believe that the pilot was the main factor in these planes success or failure.. I

------------------
Carthage must be destroyed!

 

If you guys are talking about pilot skill over aircraft performance, then you gotta go woth the bf109, Hartmann, Gallnd, Baer etc, etc, etc

 

I admit, I am no aircraft expert but, I think the P-51 record stands for itself. True, it might not be the best bird, but its my favorite none the less.

 

Yes Peppy if we want to talk about pilot skill vs. aircraft performance, that should be another string altogether. The ME-109 was an outstanding plane in its heyday but there were MANY variables that contributed to that, (i.e. so many confirmed kills for ME-109 aces).

 

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Peppy:
As for best overall plane, I say the me262. It was WAY too fast to be intercepted, unless it was on the runway. Which in my opinion is a bullshit kill anyways. And firepower? Were talking several 20mm or 30mm canons. Freaking deadly!
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well the 262 was fast and very advanced...however the engines were not reliable and prone to burn outs and problems.

The F4U was a good blend of something every fighter should have. Another interesting point is that yes the P-51 and F4U were similar and GREAT aircraft...but how well did the P-51 tke off from carriers...not so well...whlie the F4U was universal...land based and carrier based.

 

My choice is the FW-190, as the best fighter in WW2.

 

I have to agree with my friends up above. The F4U Corsair, be it flown by Marines from VMF-214 (the Black Sheep) or Navy pilots from VF-17 (the Jolly Rogers) was the best all around fighter, bar none. Great speed, adequate armament (6 each .50 MGs). Yes it was a difficult plane to land on carriers due to its long nose, but from aground strip it couldn't be beat.

Ed Bohne

 

A vet once told me that the F4Us could out-dive the Zero fighter, but that the zero was better at manouvers. I know they were tough fighters though.

 

My two cents worth would have to go with the FW190 because it was a sturdy aircraft with very little "teething" problems such as those plaguing the ME262. If you consider the evaluations of American and British pilots, this one plane gets high marks across the board. The landing gear were sturdier than those of the BF109. The radial engine was simple and easy to maintain. Both the Corsair and the BF109 had the forward sight problems. I must add, aircraft is not my specialty so this is only an opinion.

------------------
Tschuss

 

I would give all my teeth, for either a Messerschmitt, or a BF-109.

 

Alright. We have gotten some interesting responses on this thread. Many planes have shown up on this list. Which one will prevail? What are the characteristics of a good fighter? Lets look at them:

1. firepower- gotta cause some damage
2. speed- to catch'em or run from'em
3. agility- get out from in front and get behind
4. survivability- gotta take some damage
5. maintainability- gotta fly
6. range- gotta get to the fight

This list will look at the contenders for best fighter:

1. F6F Wildcat
2. bf-109
3. FW-190
4. Me 262
5. A6M Zero
6. P-51 Mustang
7. P-47 Thunderbolt
8. P-38 Lightning
9. F4U Corsair

FIREPOWER:
The standard US armament was the package of 6 .50 cal machine guns. Other countries had mixes of 20mm cannons and 13mm machine guns (equal to the US .50). The US .50 was the most relaible air to air guns in the war. Lets rank the firepower:

1st Me262 with 4 30mm cannons... ouch
2nd bf109 with 3 20mm and 2 13mm, P-47 with 8 .50, and P-38 with 1 20mm and 4 .50 cal
3rd After this all of the aircraft had similar air to air firepower

SPEED:
Obviously the fastest aircraft will have turbojet engines. It is suprising though who the other fast guys are.

1st me262 (540 MPH) with 2 Junkers Jumo 004BY turbojets each with 1,984 pounds of thrust.
2nd P-47 (467 MPH) with a Pratt and Whitney R-2800 9-153 Double Wasp with 2000 HP
3rd F4U (446 MPH) with a Pratt and Whitney 2800-18 Wasp with 2450 HP
4th P-51 (437 MPH) with a Packard Merlin V-1650-7 with 1695 HP
5th FW-190 (426 MPH) with a Junkers Juno 213A-1 with 1776 HP
6th P-38 (414) with 2 Allison V-1710-89 each with 1425 HP
7th bf-109 (386) with a Daimler-Benz DB 605AM with 1800 HP
8th F6F (380) with a Pratt and Whitney 2800 9-153 Double Wasp with 2000 HP
9th A6M (346) with a Nakajima Sakae 31 with 1130 HP

AGILITY:
I have never seen a plane by plane comparison or the actual turning radius of the aircraft. These are some opinion and some fact. I am sure though that you will agree as I have done much research.

1st A6M
2nd P-51, FW-190
3rd P-38, bf-109, F4U
4th F6F
5th P-47
6th ME262

SURVIVABILITY:
This is ranked based on three things: the planes armor, self-sealing tanks, and the planes mass. All American planes had armor to some extent and self-sealing tanks. Later German and Japanese also had self sealing tanks. American aircraft that operated off of aircraft carriers are considered to be very sturdy because of the reenforcements necessary to make the aircraft sound. Weight empty in ()

1st P-47 (11,000) Friggan flying tank
2nd F4U (9205), F6F (9153), P-38 (12780), ME262 (8378 [speed is also a factor here])
3rd P-51 (7125), FW-190 (7694)
4th bf-109 (5893)
5th A6M (4178)

MAINTAINABILITY:
For a plane to be effective it must be in the air. Most of the aircraft had an excellent maintance record. American aircraft that operated off of carriers have an exceptional maintance record because of the high standards of carrier operations. Wanna know about the German maintance on planes? Look at their cars today.

1. F4U, F6F, bf-109, FW-190, P-51
2. P-47 , P-38 (both operated off of very rough runways and the P-38 had 2 engines)
3. A6M (design and engine were good but the plane was fragile and any damage could cause hours of repair)
4. ME262 (new technology always has high maintance)

RANGE:
Planes had to get to and from the combat zone. Most aircraft could increase their range with drop tanks. These numbers represent the maximum range for the aircraft.

1st P-51 at 2080 miles
2nd F4U at 1560 miles
3rd F6F at 1530 miles
4th A6M at 1118 miles
5th P-47 at 800 miles
6th ME262 at 652 miles
7th FW-190 at 519 miles
8th P-38 at 475 miles
9th bf-109 at 447 miles

WHO IS THE BEST?

I assigned each place a point as follows:

1st=10
2nd=9
3rd=8
4th=7
5th=6
6th=5
7th=4
8th=3
9th=2

Here again is how the aircraft rated:

FP SP AG SV MT RG
F6F 3 8 4 2 1 3
FW190 3 5 2 3 1 7
BF109 2 7 3 4 1 9
me262 1 1 6 2 4 6
A6M 3 9 1 5 3 4
P51 3 4 2 3 1 1
P47 2 2 5 1 2 5
P38 2 6 3 2 2 8
F4U 3 3 3 2 2 1

These are the conclusions:

52 Points- F4U and P51
49 Points- P47
46 Points- Me262
45 Points- F6F and FW190
43 Points- P38
41 Points- A6M
40 Points- Me109

I would love any input or information that I have looked over.


------------------
Carthage must be destroyed!

 

I am willing to accept a tie between the Corsair and the Mustang, provided we admit that Naval (includes Marines) Aviators are genetically superior to Air Force pilots!