Best fighter of WW2

Personally I'd go with the P-51 or the Me 262, any thoughts?

 

If you are talking non-jets, then the P-51. Its had to compare them with jets, and though they were the way ahead, they had little actual influence on the war.

 

I would go with the Fw190-D9 or the Ta-152a.

Both these fighters had it all!
But it is difficult to pick the "best" fighter. Several fighters were equally matched. Like the Me109 against the Spitfire in the Battle of Britain. These two were an equal match, and victory was determined by the skill and tactics of the pilots rather than a superior aircraft.

I feel very strongly about this even to the end of the war. Just take this one example:
An American P51 ace (I can remeber his name, but he had over 30 kills) was flying over France in late 1944. He had shot down numerous Me109s and Fw190s. One day he and his group of 4 P51s was jumped by a lone Me109. The Me109 shot down this great ace, along with one other P51, and then was able to evade the other two, and get away!
The pilots were shocked at this! They thought there P51 was superior to any Me109! How could this happen?
Later they found out that the pilot of the Me109 was none other than Eric Hartmann!

This proves to me, that it is not really the aircraft, but the pilot that matters.
As a fighter pilot in WWII, you were either an ace or a target. There were no in-betweens!

Matt

 

IMHO it's the P-51.

No disrespect to the pilots, but it's easier to fly, has better all-round visibility, is more manouevrable and packs a mightier 'punch' than many other aircraft - this leaving the pilot freer to focus on 'the business'.

Totally agree with MP38 about great pilots in other aircraft ie skill wins out ! But in a P-51, a maybe-not-so-great pilot could do pretty well. So I think that this makes the P-51 a finer overall weapon of war.

( Even though, again, I personally 'prefer' the Spitfire, Bf109, Typhoon, etc etc ! ).

 

Can't answer your question, Otto - I must say that before I joined the Forums I'd never even heard of the Ta152 !

I've just been searching the net - you're probably right, as a 'souped up' Fw190 it was in performance terms the war's best. Fortunately (for the Allies) with only 150 built it's something of a 'what if..?'

 

Hallo!

I had not herad of the Ta-152 either until I came here. I could not imagine it was a super bloody Fw-190! Now, I know, by the comments of Erich, by example that it was probably the best piston-engine fighter of the war. But I still admit that the P-51D was better than the Me-109E, G and even K!!! And better than some Fw-190s. But again. It was not far, far better. It was a little better. So, a good pilot in a little worse aeroplane can shott you down easily.

By the way, did Erich Hartmann ever serve in France?

 

I think we have to look at the whole war in general and what came out when and battled against whom.....

The Me 109 was an excellent fighter but so was the Huricane and the Spitfire. And then came the Fw 190 which out performed the earlier Spits. Later Spits came to being and then the roles were reversed. Fw 190's were then added with heavier armor and kannon for defence against the Allied bomberformations were it excelled from mid 44 till the end of December through February of 45 with the Bf 109G-14/AS and G-10's flying as high cover trying their best to take on the marks of P-51 which roamed almost at will performing the air to air battles that we know as being famous. Don't forget the P-47 with the heavy robust engine and massive firepowere of it's 8 .50's, probably the top notch ground strafer of the war as a mixed jaob and fighter. The Fw 190Dora an upbeat version of the Fw 190A series, flying higer and trying to perform in the air cover support role, still being shot down in numbers by P-51's and later mark Spits. Enter the big surpirse for a short time, the Me 262 which could take anything on and flat out out run any piston driven a/c in a flat stretch. Terrible in the turns and an easy prey while landing and taking off. The last piston engine a/c of importance the Tank Ta 152, my favorite piston-job. flying high which it never id on ops, and the tremendous turning and speed advantage over every Allied a/c known, 1 3cm and 2 2cm weapons which could knock down and enemy plane. Too few and not deliverable to enough units during early to late 45.....only kills were Soviet a/c and a Tempest or two plus 1/2 P-47's. The losses were due to mechanical failure.

E

 

Erich is right. We have to look all the war. Then, in my opinion the Me-109 was the best fighter of WWII, because it performed excellently during all the war. It smashed all in the skies from 1939-1940. It was better than the Spitfires in normal conditions and there were not normal nor favourable conditions during the battle of Britain. It smashed all in the Eastern Front from 41 to 45 and it defended the Reich's skies very, very good 42-45. All its versions were very good aeroplanes, the light 109E, the heavy 109G or the awesome 109K... I will go for this aeroplane then.

 

I read an article recently about an American author who was given a chance to fly an original ME190G! His Father was p38 pilot during the war, and he loved the P38. His thought on the Me109 were this; He said that as soon as he was airborne, he wanted to go shoot something down! He said that just by flying this plane he felt extra aggressive! He stated that both the roll and pitch charateristics were excellent, and compared favorable to a P51. The only downfall that he stated was the yaw trim. No auto yaw trim available, and the yaw controls and movement were not as good as a P51. All P51 pilots that I have spoken with have a tremendous amount of respect for the Me109. They may have had a superior aircraft, but they knew that they had to be careful against a 109!

The same can be said for the A6m5 Zero! I served in Japan for 3 years. My Japanese gf at the time her grandfather was a zero pilot during the war. I met several other zero pilots! I even met a Kamikazi pilot (he must not have been very good! ). I even read a story about a Japanese Ace who shot down over 60 Corsairs!!! with a zero! In one dogfight he was jumped by no less than 16 Corsairs and Hellcats! He shot down 4 of them, and managed to evade the rest for over 1 hour, and eventually got away without a scratch on his Zero! Now that is flying my friends! I can't remember his name, but he was one of Japans top aces with over 80 kills! (all Americans!

Matt

 

If you want a plane that can absorb extensive amounts of damage you would have to choose the thunderbolt. The standing joke among Tbolt pilots was that you let the enemy get behind you and unload all of their ammo on you and then you turn around and shoot him down. It could take that much damage.

 

The P-47 was indeed durable...and the Me-109 was the faithful defender of the Reich...but I still think the P-51 wins due to combat performance. I considered the Japanese Zero, but its just too flimsy. And while the Me-262 was fast and agile, its revolutionary jets had problems. Add to that, not enough were made. It did have great post-war influence though.

My FAVORITE though, is the fork-tailed devil.

 

P-38 ? maybe in the Pacific. How come ?

As to the thunderbolt, possibly the best US jabo of WW 2. did not have the range of the P-51 for escort work or air-to air combat especially latter half of 44 through 45. No German a/c could outidve it, and as to the quote mentioned about pumping all the ammo into it and then turning around and shooting down the Luftwaffe a/c, this must be a statement by the pilots made in 43 through spring of 44, because once the 3cm minen round was developed and used by summer of 44, NO US or RAF fighter a/c would of made it back to base.......for this information, a deposit of 1 quarter will be gladly accepted......ha !
Seriously I do love the P-38 as a recon a/c, quick and agile. One of my best friends was with the 8th recon over Japan during late 44-45.

E

 

Slightly O/T but we are fortunate to have Europe's only flying P-47 not too far from here at Duxford.
It does make a gorgeous sight !

 

Why do I always bloody forget about the zero? I cannot imagine of another little thing like that. A real pain in the ass for the Americans...

I like also the mighty P-47, too American, big and strong... Although the P-38 had more style...

 

They sure were a pain in the ass...especially as kamikazes. But the P-47 would probably make a better kamikaze. Since it was so durable, it would be hard to destroy on its way to the unforunate target. Would probably make a more deadly weapon too.

 

I am new to the ranks, here.
Glad to see there is a forum for this sort of thing.
Anyway, IMHO: the broadness of the "Best Fighter" question begs for some direction. Biggest distinction (besides single- or multi-engined)would be between high- and low- altitude fighters (at 10K ft., the FW-190 would be all over the P-51.) Between radial v. in-line engine designs and the planes built 'round them, the radial designs win hands down (sorry, Mustang guys...) The later-war Bearcats, Corsairs, Tempests, etc. were faster, better-performing and better-operating over a wider range of altitudes. The Pratt and Whitney Wasp radial generated over 2,200 HP! And stuffed into a P-47, you've got one awesome plane (not as pretty as the 'stang, which is why it loses most popularity contests.) The only piston-engined attack plane to survive into Vietnam was the Sky Raider: radial.
Final factor is cost-per-unit. German theory of expensive, technically superior arms was a failure in the air as it was on the land; and so, consideration has to be given to the mass-produced, high peformance Russian fighters, like the later Yaks.
My personal favorite? Probably the Seafire or Ta-152.

 

Hello again, Knight Templar.
You're right to query the broadness of the theme - we've discovered this on the Forums time and again with regard to aircraft, guns, tanks etc etc eg it may be the best fighter ever made but if only two are built - it won't have much effect on the war !

But - this is one of the things that makes the discussions here so active and interesting. For me, I always like to read about 'personal favourites' - like the Seafire !

 

Hallo, Knights Templar and all you, guys!

That about the technologically superior and expensive machine does not apply on this case. By 1942 and 1943, when things were turning against us and the lack of aeroplanes was enormous because we had to supply with fighters three Luftflötten in the East, supply the Mediterranean and protect Germany's skies. What Luftwaffe leaders did was to delay the experimentation and development of new machines, because this consumed a lot of resources. So, what we did was to build many old, olready tested in combat aeroplanes. We needed quantity there. Example, the Me-109E, much technologically behind the P-47, by example was still being produced in 1943, when it could no longer face the most modern Spitfire versions or the P-47... In 1944 we came with the new and expensive aeroplanes, but it was too late.

 

Knight T :

First welocme to the forums....A Ta 152 lover, an excellent choice in my book as it is my favourite piston job.

The Fw 190 really was only kept in the Luftwaffe arsenal during mid 44 till the end of the war because it was the best wepaons platform the Luftwaffe had. The Bf 109 AS variants were the only thing that could keep up with the P-51 at 30,000 plus feet and even then the P-51 could fly higher. The Fw 190D-9 was suppose to be the short time replacement of the AS equipped Bf 190 with MW 50 injection, but the Dora even failed. Then came the ultimate....the Tank Ta 152 which by mid 44 if had been possible to deliver would of been quite intersting in the skies over the Recih against the "Stang" !

long live aviation !!

E