Best fighter of WWII? (oldtimers poll)

[mikeus_maximus]

I know there are "seasoned" ex-military types on this board. I'd like your and anyone else's opinion on this topic. Every year of WWII saw improvements in aircraft development and performance-- so much so that what was state of the art at the beginning of the war, such as the Me 109 and Supermarine Spitfire, would have been death traps by the end, 6 years later.

For years I'd heard the P-51 Mustang was the ultimate WWII fighter. Then I read a quote from a former FockWulfe 190 pilot who said Mustangs were frail-- one bullet in the aluminum cowling and they went down. No one can deny their service record, though.

Other sources say the FW 190D was the best plane to come out of WWII. It was built on the same concept as the P-51-- take a good fighter, shoehorn in a huge bomber engine, and now you've got a great fighter. Except in this case it was a radial engine, which could lose one or two cyl. and keep on ticking (as opposed to the Mustang's inline engine).

Some say the Japanese "Frank" fighter produced near the end of the war was tops. Other have said the Russian YAK3 was.

Recently I heard that the F8F Bearcat was undoubtedly the best plane. Grumman took apart a captured FW 190 and made it better. The Bearcat was a plane deisgned from scratch around a huge radial engine, rather than vice versa. It was smaller, faster and more agile than any of the above. It had a production speed of 455 mph, a rate of climb twice that of a Mustang, and a ceiling almost as high. Is was delviered to the Navy in the Pacific theatre, but the war ended before it saw action, or it would have made its own legend. A few years later a modifed version set the airspeed record for piston planes at 528+ mph.

It gets my vote. Anyone else have an opinion?

[tacticalogic]

P-38 lightning !

It seems to have been the "warthog" of it's day.

[GonzoGOP]

If you are counting experimental/limited production they the P-80/F-80 comes into play. They actually got some of them to Europe, but they never mixed it up with the enemy. The thought of P-80s vs ME-262s in the sky over Germany is just too cool to imagine. Heck throw in the Horten flying wings and just imagine the fun.

[Loud Mime]

Wow....imformative!!!!

Thank you very much.

[GonzoGOP]

P-38 lightning ! It seems to have been the "warthog" of it's day.

P-47 was the original hog. Hence the warthogs official name (you know the one nobody has ever called it) Thunderbolt II.

[truemiester]

The war had to won on the ground - P-47.

Could give a whoopin’ and take a lickin’.

[Phlyer]

The key to answering this is the criteria. Since the F8F never got a single kill in combat, can it be best?

Well, maybe, if you're talking about performance. But if you're really talking performance (and because your ground rules don't explicitly limit it to piston-powered aircraft), then it's hard to beat an Me-262. On the other hand, since the Me-262 engines lasted an average of 4 hours between overhauls, does that level of unreliability matter? Or cost? In the end, there were more Me-262s shot down by Mustangs than the other way around, mostly because the Mustangs could hang around the Me-262 operating bases and take them out then they were vulnerable.

There is an excellent article that was put out by EAA some time ago (like, 20 years), called "Ending the Argument." In it, the authors did an engineering flight test of the P-51, P-47, F6F, and F4U with the aim of determining which was the 'best' fighter. Obviously, if your candidates include the P-38 or FW-190, then that article cannot possible 'end the argument' but they did a good job on the aircraft they considered.

In it, they evaluated both 'hard' numbers, like top speed, turn rate, rate of climb and stick-force per g, plus pilot assessment factors like stall warning, trim forces, and general cockpit ergonomics.

The result was . . . no clear result. The Corsair had the best handling qualities (obviously they had a later one) including the quantifiable handling qualities like stick force per g (on which the Mustang was terrible). In addition, the early laminar-flow wing on the Mustang provided a very sharp and unpredictable stall, resulting in man reported instances of a pilot spinning out of control just as he was getting ready to take a shot. Obviously that's not a 'good' thing.

The ergonomics on the Corsair were terrible, reflecting the design change that raised the seat for better field of view. The pilot practically stood up in the cockpit, which was bad for g tolerance and also meant that he had to bend over and look next to his knee to see various switches. The Mustang was much better ergonimically, to the point that the authors felt it would make an important difference in the pilot's ability to fight after a several hour mission escorting bombers.

[philman_36]

Anyone else have an opinion?
While the P-51 Mustang was nice my vote goes to this fine aircraft...

Lockheed P-38 Lightning

Type: Long range fighter and fighter bomber
Powerplant: Two Allison V-1710-27/29
Max speed: 414 mph (666 km/hr)
Ceiling: 44,000 ft (13 400 m)
Range: 475 miles (765 km) on internal fuel
Weight (empty): 12,600 lbs (5806 kg)
Max. T/O:21,600 lbs (9798 kg)
Wingspan: 52' 0" (15.85m)
Length: 37' 10" (11.53 m)
Height: 9' 10" (3 m) Armament: One 20mm cannon, four .50 machine guns, 2,000 lb of bombs, rockets

Damned fine fighter/bomber!

[TheThirdRuffian]

Probably so; I didn’t realize the krauts had more than one operational jet.

[Loud Mime]

So, "best" discussions are never going to arrive at an actual best aircraft. There were several bests.

Yes, discussions like these are like judging College Football teams. But they are so much fun!!

[OpeEdMunkey]

Let’s see a pic of the model!

[Tallguy]

Thats very true, and its something that continues to this day, sell a US product but not the SAME product we use.

Well in fairness it needs to be remembered that the Brits were buying just about everything that had wings in 1940 without very much regard for performance. The P-38's superchargers were very tempermental, and remained a problem almost to the end of the War. It's entirely likely that there weren't enough superchargers available to equip the British order. Same goes for the Allison engines that rotated in the opposite direction. (Of course that might have been a decision made by the RAF loggy-types to streamline the spares in the pipeline).

[EGPWS]

There were several bests.

Yep, however the most profound in ending the war was the Mustang. Even Gehring stated such.

[philman_36]

Me too. See #47.

[tacticalogic]

I love those things. About once a week a pair of them will fly directly over my house at what looks to be about 1,000 feet.

[philman_36]

Me too. See #47.

[75thOVI]

NO
don't give me a P-38
the props, they counter-rotate
they're scattered & sittin’
from Burma to Britain
don't give me a P-38
NO

give me operations
way out on some lonely atoll
for I am too young to die
I just wanna grow old

& don't give me a P-39
the engine is mounted behind
she'll tumble & spin
& she'll auger you in
don't give me a P-39
NO

don't give me a Peter 40
it's a hell of an airplane, I know
she's a ground looping bastard
& you're sure to get plastered
don't give me a Peter 40

One of the advantages to driving a cab, which I did for about 10 years was the people I met. One gentleman I picked up to take to the airport had vanity plates that said “P-38J”. We talked during an all too short ride, and he told me that he did love the Lightning. However, he trained on P-39s. For those of you that aren't familiar with that little beast, it had an engine mounted behind the pilot with the crankshaft running between his legs. It also had an automobile type door. This gentleman told me that they had a rash of P-39s come back from training hops with the door missing. They couldn't get a straight answer from the pilots as to what was happening. Finally it came out. With the center of gravity in the middle, a P-39 could be easily put into a flat spin, much like a Frisbee. The pilot would try every trick in the book to recover, usually with no success. Left with the only option of bailing out, the pilot would take his hands off the stick to hit the emergency door release. With both hands off the stick, it would center up on it's own, and the Airacobra would return to it's normally rather docile flight characteristics. I also used to carry around a very nice old German lady, who was a Luftwaffe veteran. But, that's another story.

[EGPWS]

Ceiling: 44,000 ft (13 400 m)

Rarely and without dependability for it was cutting edge with it's "turbo chargers" instead of super chargers and that limited them to lower altitudes.

Although it was used in Europe, it performed much better in the Pacific against the Zero at lower altitudes.

[GonzoGOP]

Actually the ME 163 was a rocket. My late uncle who flew B-17s in the ETO described them as 0 - Oh Wow in three seconds when you hit the ignition, Oh Wow to Oh S#!t in 60 seconds when you ran out of fuel and a P-51 flamed you as you glided back. And even if you got back the landing (the wheels were ejected to save weight) killed more pilots than did our fighters. Oh and if the fuel leaked it dissolved the pilot.

[PzLdr]

The the winner is the Me 262

[TheThirdRuffian]

What made the P51 a game changer was not so much it was a great fighter (it was), was the fact that with a drop fuel tank it could escort the bombers to target and back.

Gas mileage, in other words.