Best fighter of WW2

I will formulate my opinions from multiple sources. I would imagine the Air Force might know a bit about their airplanes...and have access to a few veterans

And on the veteran accounts... such accounts are often helpful, but still need to be looked at critically...
Like the accounts from American soldiers that, when combined, point to there being over 1500 Tiger tanks in Normandy in 44...
Or the accounts of german veterans that talk about fighting JSII tanks during the battle of Kursk...
Speaking of veteran accounts, why did all the allied air forces install gun cameras on their planes? Did it have something to do with exagerrated claims?

I'm an editor by trade... I have seen firsthand that there is no such thing as a perfectly objective and reliable source. I'd rather explore options before jumping to conclusions...

 

' ARMAMENT .
The P-47 bristles with eight .50-cal. machine-guns, four in the leading edges of each wing. The ammunition is carried outboard of the guns. The design load is 300 rounds per gun, though a maximum load of 425 rounds per gun may be carried ',

Source : P-47 : Pilot Training Manual For The Thunderbolt ( AAF Manual No 50-5 ).

I'll have that lie down, now......

 

MY POINT ALL ALONG !

Crazy why would the German vets at Kursk be involved in this thread as a comparison when we are obviously arguing about US fighter pilots accounts of their P-47's and what the pilots said they had for armaments.
You are talking the truth about over inflated claims during 1943 especially at Schweinfurt, Emden, Bremn and Schweinfurt/Regensberg during 1943.............the claims were far from reality. That I will buy, but again it doesn't come into play here at this particular posting. The fact is whether the P-47 had 8 or 6 .50's.

I'm leaving.............

 

Please stop!!! I checked. I already said I checked. Way back in the middle of page 4. Back then it was only about whether or not the P-47 could carry 6 or 8 .50 caliber machine guns. Now I'm hearing accounts about P-47's and P-51's carrying only 4. I'll believe all of it. I'll belive that the P-47 would drop to 6 or even machine guns for maneuverability. Although I don't see how maneuverable a P-47 could get. I'll believe that the P-47 would carry 8 .50 machine guns for ground strafing raids. Now I believe that all of them are true.

We have gotten why off topic. Who cares about how manueverable a plane was, or much firepower it had? Kills are what really matters here. Kills to loss. How well did a plane do? Do it do what it was intended for. Did it do what it was made to do? Right here, right now, we're trying to figure out what the best fighter plane in world war two was. There is no right answer. Only opinions.

Now can we please get back on the subject?

The Mustang still kicks butt!!!!!

 

Erich, my point was simply not to believe any source without question. But you've made it very clear that your sources are 100% accurate, so I guess no one can argue with that...

And my point on the veteran accounts you clearly missed- veterans often get information incorrect when they remember their war experiences, regardless of the specific topic.
Gun cameras were installed because all pilots were tending to exagerrate their kill claims, not just in 43...

[ 02 October 2002, 12:15 PM: Message edited by: CrazyD88 ]

 

Mustang- break this one down for me... When one considers the numbers available and the situation of germany later in the war, it seems obvious that none of the german planes would wind up having the most kills or the best numbers. But putting that aside- on a plane-by-plane basis, would you consider the Mustang to be superior to the Me262?
Again, I'm no expert on the air war, but it would seem to me the the 262 was pretty impressive... The only drawback I would find would be the relatively short ammo capacity (again, I'm disregarding fuel shortages, pilot shortages, etc.).

 

That's a toughie Crazy. Pitting my favorite plane against a twin jet plane. You know that I'd have to go with the P-51. If you are talking about one against one then the 262 might, just might, if he got lucky come out on top. Realistically though you'd have to consider the engine problems the 262 frequently had. If you are talking about how big of an impact each plane had on the war then the P-51 wins hands down. Not just as a fighter, but also as an escort to bombers. The reason the 262 didn't have such a big impact on the war was that it didn't come until late in the war and that Hitler originally had ordered it to be a highspeed bomber. At least I'm pretty sure about that last part. If you are talking about how big of an impact each plane had in future wars then the 262 wins hands down. Most jet engine planes after the war were modeled after the 262.

 

You're both correct in my opinion.....the 262 flat out could not be touched, but on the other hand it's turning radius was just plain awful and that was key to success to destroying the jet in the air. Get inside it..... ! plus as you mention endurance was terrible, faulty engines, just a couple of .50 hits in the turbines and the thing would smoke terribly and knock....ooooooops time to bail out ! Also the sitting duck routine, although the German airfields were bristling with 20mm pieces only Jv 44 toward the last two months of the war was smart enough to put up a high defence cover with single engine a/c. Other than the poor Nowotny Kmdo which didn't seem to save his skin or others of his little unit, there was nothing to protect the jets on take-off or landing....just my 2 cents in the bucket.....

E

 

Good points Erich. I had forgotten to mention the 262's turning radius. I was just going easy on it any ways. Didn't want to hurt the 262's feelings or make it look inferior to the P-51. I would never do that. Never.

 

Yeah right ! Ther are a couple of factors to look at besides the ones listed, and maybe through 5 pages it has been discussed already. Look at the purpose of the P-51. It was supposed to fly as a high escort fighter, to protect the US bomber formations and then to take on any German fighter that may approach or form up for an attack on the bomber formation. did not matter whether the attack formed from the sides, the back or front of the formation. The P-51 groups were to break it up at all costs if possible. If a melee of fighter activity was taking place in the air above the bomber formations then the protective groups would engage the high flying targets. General rule of thumb was that there were already P-51 formations lingering at over 30,000 feet anyway looking for a German Gefechtsverband....an attacking formation of fighters starting to form.....
in any case once the bombers were in postion over a target area, the P-51's were not to leave the bombers alone to during and away from the target area if they were tasked for escort duties. The 357th f.g. mixed it up regularly in 44 and 45 as they usually were called onto flying the higher escort protection so they could easily spot and disrupt a German formation. with the superior turning, diving and speed characteristics of the P-51 we can easily see who would come out on top. It would have to be an excellent German pilot who would be able to get the jump on a expereinced US airman flying the Mustang. It did happen though......
The P-51 was designed for fighter versus fighter work.
The 262 on the other hand after being relieved of the notierity of a bomber.....for the time being, made its show as an anti-recon a/c in the summer and fall of 1944. After Kommando Nowotny proved that the a/c was most useful as a bomber destroyer, and after his demise the unit was formulated into JG 7 which flew the a/c with much success against the combined US bomber and fighter formations. The attacks were carried off in a matter of seconds flying about a 1000 feet higher than the bombers and then diving onto them and then slightly behind and upward firing the 4 Mk 108 cannons, and then blasting through the bomber formation.....the hope then was to outrun the Allied fighter escorts and make it back to base safely. Many times it didn't happen of course.
for a Me 262 pilot(s) to take down a P-51, it was one of secrecy, and quickness. Trying to fly higher than the p-51's which was hard enough, the Me 262's had to attack with engines running full bore. A slight diving attack and then again through the fighter formation and then sweep back and low towards their airfields.

E

 

Looks like somebody did his homework. Thank you Erich. That was a very, very, very, very, very, very, very nice post.

 

No kidding on the homework... I get the idea that Erich knows just a tad about the air war!

So it seems on a single plane vs. plane comparison, the biggest issues would be the turning radius and durability of the 262. Looks like neither of you really came up with any drawbacks for the Mustang... so apparently the 262 was a better theoretical aircraft, but in reality it wasn't able to really achieve too much.
What about the Mustang's engine- wasn't the liquid-cooled engine it carried vulnerable? (Mustang, be honest! )

 

Jet engines require more sophisticated steel alloys than do piston engines; and the Germans were not able to incorporate these metals into the Jumo engine. This played a great part in the engine's famed delicacy. Other factors are cost of production, ease of production, ease of repair. In these fields, the Russians were the unequalled masters.

 

Yeah Crazy, the Mustang did have a liquid cooled engine. You'd have to get pretty lucky to hit it just right though. Besides the Rolls-Royce Merlin engine allowed the Mustang to keep it's high level of performance throughout the altitude ranges and allowed a higher service ceiling. So it really depends on which you like better, durability, or a certain level of performance.

 

The drawback from the pilots point of view on the P-51 was the cooler/oil, air duct system under the fuselage. If hit you were going to go down.
For the Me 262 yes the engines and strange fuel mixes were the problem, flaming out was quite normal. The Me 262 in my view was a success probably more than what people figure. From march 45 the only thing really up in the air were the Me 262 fighter units and almost the same can be said for bomber units as well. JG 7 scored or I should say claimed more than 450 victories. Trying to prove all of them is almost an impossible task. Another thing is the current events in late 45 on the Ost front when JG 7 was moved just outside of Prague and took on all types of Soviet a/c and strafed many Soviet transport. These figures have never really been documented......

E

 

That's a good point, Erich. It seems like there are far better statistics available for the allied air forces than the germans, especially late in the war. And I take it the 262s never had gun cameras installed? In fact- did any of the german planes have gun cameras?
Andreas's point also seems a good one. The resources required to make one of these engines would have been a stretch.
Erich, I do have a question- I've read in a couple places that one of the suprising advantages of the 262 was that it used standard diesel fuel, not the high octane fuel required by most planes (Of course now I can't find the webpages where I read that!). "Strange fuel mixes"? Ya got me confused now... what did the 262 use?

 

C :

I'll try and answer your post backwards since it's one of those type of days for me....fuels, arg ! now that is something I am a comlete 0 on. High or low octane ? I'll have to do some digging. Will tell you though that during attacks by the Fw 190's through the bomber formations when the pitch controls were changed by the German pilot, this during the bank and split S and down out of sight/ the Fw 190 engine would smoke heavily for a short time. The American gunners thinking they had scored a victory !
Yes the Me 262's had gun camera's as did all the German fighter a/c. I have cine films of 109's and especially of Fw 190A-8's and even Bf 110G-2's which is really gross. The last one show the 37mm of the Bf 110G-2 taking down a B-24 from the rear !

E

 

Hmmmm... for some reason I had thought that the germans didn't use gun cameras...

Well then, if they had the cameras, what about numbers? Like you mentioned, it seems hard to find numbers for the performance of the Luftwaffe later in the war...
But of course it's likely that I just haven't found any yet!

I'll see if I can find that stuff I saw on the 262's fuel. I think I remember reading that it used diesel, but it did use a LOT of it...
And almost every source I have read talks about the unreliability of the 262's engine, but I've generally gotten the idea that said unreliability was more due to design/construction issues.
Hmmmm...

 

You asked about numbers......what numbers ? Number of kills or losses in 1945 ? TRhere are complete losses listings at Freiburg BA/MA archiv's. Victories are another matter altogether, as several trucks with records during the retreat of 45 were lost while being transferred from Berlin. could be in someone's private files......who knows ? ! I wish I knew.

The 262 unrealibility may stem from faulty materials but also the way the engine was made as a whole. fuel lines and hoses running everywhere on the outside of the engine housings only protected by scant thin aluminum frame plates.

E