What Was the Best Fighter of WWII?

[bronto]

nice, i did not know that.

["Sixhits"]

This is so up my alley.

First off, I picked the Spitfire. Specifically I'd go for the Spitfire MkI -- first of the few. History would have been different but for the MkI and Sir Hugh Dowding.

Now, I'm figuring Ghost doesn't mean the best fighter in terms of which fighter in the hands of a pro was the best. Hands down, of those offered, it's the F4U. If I had to pick best fighter of all fighters that actually saw combat, it's the Me-262.

Anyway: why no Russian fighters? The Yak 3 deserves to be up there.

RE: Yak 3: "Essentially a lightweight clipped wing variant of the Yak-9,  Pilots report that the aircraft flew similar to the Spitfire  but with better initial climb. Praised for being light,  fast, and rugged, the Yak-3 was rated as "superior"  to the FW 190 and the Bf 109G which it was meeting on a daily  basis."

Btw, Ghost: did you get this idea from Chuck Hawks' article?

[bronto]

i don't know much about corsair except i love the wing design!

[BTs_GhostSniper]

Btw, Ghost: did you get this idea from Chuck Hawks' article?

No, I just thought it up all on my own.  I am still working on a book on U.S. Military Aviation, and this just popped into my head.  It's interesting to see who thinks what fighter was the best.  I mainly do things like this, and my quizes, to make people more aware and knowledgable about subjects which interest me.

By the way, the problem with the Russian built fighters, like the Italian built fighters, is that no one fighter really stood out and was built in huge numbers and affected the outcome of the air war with a significantly high number of aerial victories.  That isn't to say that they didn't build a few good fighters.

By the way, the North American P-51 Mustang is generally considered the best all-around fighter of WWII.  Many P-51 pilots shot down Me 262 jets.  This isn't just my opinion, it is the opinion of both friend and foe alike during the war, and comes from first-hand accounts from pilots I have talked and exchanged letters with from all over the world (including Erich Hartmann, who went up against American pilots in P-51's during one short timespan during the war).  The P-51 gave the allies the escort plane with the range to follow the bombers all the way to Berlin, as well as the performance to go up against the best that the Luftwaffe could dish out.  My grandfather always told me he would have loved to fly the P-51, that it was by far the best fighter ever built (up to that time).  He flew P-38 Lightnings and faired well against the German Bf 109, including a dogfight in which he was awarded the Silver Star for protecting 3 badly damaged B-17 Flying Fortresses against several Bf 109's that came in to finish them off.  He was the lone plane left to protect the bombers, and he turned towards the Bf 109's and in a head on pass, shot down the lead plane.  Might be notable to tell you that he was flying on only 1 engine at the time (one engine was shot up in an earlier dogfight...he was limping home when he spotted the B-17's in trouble).[/size]

[bronto]

god knows i hate war but i'll be damned if it can't bring out the best in a man.

[*NADS Lo$eMoney]

By the way, the North American P-51 Mustang is generally considered the best all-around fighter of WWII.  Many P-51 pilots shot down Me 262 jets.  This isn't just my opinion, it is the opinion of both friend and foe alike during the war, and comes from first-hand accounts from pilots I have talked and exchanged letters with from all over the world (including Erich Hartmann, who went up against American pilots in P-51's during one short timespan during the war).[/size]

Yeah the P-51 was a great plane and had a tremendous impact in the european campaign. The only reason why I chose the Me109 over the p51 was the fact that the me 109 contributed the most to the airwar than any other plane (excluding bombers, I mean the allies were flying numerous 1000 bomber raids towards the end of the war).  An interesting thing about Hartmann and p51's is that when he flew the me262 he went up against p51s and didnt score a single kill against them. However in his bf109, over the course of his career, he shot down 5 p51s.

["Sixhits"]

.  My grandfather always told me he would have loved to fly the P-51, that it was by far the best fighter ever built (up to that time).  He flew P-38 Lightnings and faired well against the German Bf 109, including a dogfight in which he was awarded the Silver Star for protecting 3 badly damaged B-17 Flying Fortresses against several Bf 109's that came in to finish them off.  He was the lone plane left to protect the bombers, and he turned towards the Bf 109's and in a head on pass, shot down the lead plane.  Might be notable to tell you that he was flying on only 1 engine at the time (one engine was shot up in an earlier dogfight...he was limping home when he spotted the B-17's in trouble).[/size]

That's some balls.

I've read a lot about the P-51/Me-262 match up. Not lucky enought to chat with their pilots (I HAVE had the chance to chat up two B-17 gunners: one tail and one ball. I think they might like your g-pa) -- and my granddad was a RCAF mechanic in Burma. I'm pretty well torn between the two, but would have to give the Me-262 the edge on stats and armament. The P-51H was right up there but lacked the speed to control the fight, so I'm betting, and just betting, that of two roughly even pilots the Me-262 could win... just because he can dictate the terms of the fight.

well, UK was being bombed like none other and they still managed to hold their own in the air, so i'm not sure if that's such a great example. germans were just stretched too damn far i suppose.

Actually, the British trained their pilots out of the range of German bombers (not to mention you had American pilots flying in defense of Britain with the RAF from the very start).  Plus the German bombing effort wasn't nearly as intense as the Allied bombing effort.  The Germans did very well, all things considered.[/size]

What Ghost said is true, but might be misconstrued. A handful of Yanks served in the RAF. I mean, there were more POLES flying in the BoB than US ex-pats.

all due respect but German pilots were the best in the war.  They had the most kills (mostly due to the fact that  there was a lot of stuff to shoot down over Germany).  I can't remember the exact number, but the top 10 German fighter pilots all had over 200 kills.

Not that hard to rack up hundreds of kills -- relatively speaking -- when you're facing the ruskies.

[BTs_GhostSniper]

By the way, the North American P-51 Mustang is generally considered the best all-around fighter of WWII.  Many P-51 pilots shot down Me 262 jets.  This isn't just my opinion, it is the opinion of both friend and foe alike during the war, and comes from first-hand accounts from pilots I have talked and exchanged letters with from all over the world (including Erich Hartmann, who went up against American pilots in P-51's during one short timespan during the war).[/size]

An interesting thing about Hartmann and p51's is that when he flew the me262 he went up against p51s and didnt score a single kill against them. However in his bf109, over the course of his career, he shot down 5 p51s.

Actually, he never flew the Me 262 operationally, which is why he never scored kills against the P-51 in it.  He was transferred to an Me 262 squadron, and then quickly talked his superiors (notably Adolf Galland) into sending him back to his beloved unit on the Russian Front.  By the way, Erich Hartmann scored 16 kills against American flown P-51 Mustangs while stationed for a short time down around the Balkins (an area I served in 50 years later).

I've read a lot about the P-51/Me-262 match up. Not lucky enought to chat with their pilots (I HAVE had the chance to chat up two B-17 gunners: one tail and one ball. I think they might like your g-pa) -- and my granddad was a RCAF mechanic in Burma. I'm pretty well torn between the two, but would have to give the Me-262 the edge on stats and armament. The P-51H was right up there but lacked the speed to control the fight, so I'm betting, and just betting, that of two roughly even pilots the Me-262 could win... just because he can dictate the terms of the fight.

Actually, the Me 262 was only superior if it used its speed advantage to make a high speed pass, shooting down what it could and then leaving the area quick.  As soon as it got into a dogfight with a P-51, it bled off its speed too fast and was then in real trouble, cause it wasn't anywhere near as maneuverable as the very agile P-51.  This was a serious problem with the early jet engines, they had absolutely NO acceleration.  Once they started turning, their speed dropped dramatically and they were dead meat for an American pilot at that point.  Adolf Galland developed a tactic which enabled the Me 262 to attack bomber formations with much success.  They would zoom up to high altitude above the bombers, then dive on the bombers and lay into them with their four 30mm cannons.  Once they flew through the formation, they would leave the area at high speed, get back up to altitude, then come back and dive through the formation again.  It worked well for the Me 262, and it was more of what the plane was made for, shooting down bombers.  It was never meant to be a dogfighter.  The plane was an interceptor, pure and simple.

Not that hard to rack up hundreds of kills -- relatively speaking -- when you're facing the ruskies.

While this is true of many of the German pilots who served on the Eastern Front during the war, it is in fact NOT true of the Ace of Aces, Erich Hartmann.  Hartmann came to the war very late, and wasn't involved in the initial slaughter of the Soviet Air Force in 1941 and 1942, when so many Luftwaffe pilots racked up huge numbers of kills against untrained Russian pilots flying inferior aircraft.  By the time Hartmann came to the war, the Russians had much better pilots in the air, and were flying fighters that in many ways were equal to the Bf 109.  So it is a real accomplishment that Erich Hartmann shot down 352 enemy fighters under those conditions (including the 16 American flown P-51's).

[onwig]

not that i want to turn this into a flame war, but i would like to ask ghostsniper this, why you are referring to peoples death's as being a "score", war is not a computer game, some of my relatives lost their lives during WWII, I would hate to think of them as a "score" to some pilot/army person. Anybody who looses their life is not a score, its a tradegy (cept for a few cases) to that persons family and friends.

 

:edit:

btw, i picked spitfire 

[BTs_GhostSniper]

not that i want to turn this into a flame war, but i would like to ask ghostsniper this, why you are referring to peoples death's as being a "score", war is not a computer game, some of my relatives lost their lives during WWII, I would hate to think of them as a "score" to some pilot/army person. Anybody who looses their life is not a score, its a tradegy (cept for a few cases) to that persons family and friends.

Actually, I know for certain that my grandfather didn't actually kill the 3 pilots he shot down during the war (either he, or his wingman, saw chutes on all three Bf 109's he downed).

As for calling it a "score", well that is actually aviation talk.  A pilot "scores" a "kill" when he downs another enemy aircraft.  That has nothing to do with whether he actually killed the pilot, or any crewmen, in the other aircraft.  Scoring a kill can come in a few different variaties (some of these are more recent due to technology):  Kill with guns, kill with missles (either guided or unguided, heat-seaking or radar, etc), and kill with bombs (this is usually accidental), and kill through maneuvering the other plane into the ground (hey, it happens!).

[onwig]

ok, its 9pm for me, had a few drinks (about 6 cans)... and just read your post....I want to ask something else....

1, do you (in this day and age) think its ok to say the word "score" for a kill?, even if it is a word commonly used in so called aviation talk.

more to the point, and again not calling you a liar, but even if they did parchute down, how do you know they survived?

[BTs_GhostSniper]

ok, its 9pm for me, had a few drinks (about 6 cans)... and just read your post....I want to ask something else....

1, do you (in this day and age) think its ok to say the word "score" for a kill?, even if it is a word commonly used in so called aviation talk.

2. more to the point, and again not calling you a liar, but even if they did parchute down, how do you know they survived?

1.  It's not whether it's okay or not.  It's just the way it is.  You aren't going to change almost 100 years of military tradition (even tank gunners call it "scoring a kill" when they destroy an enemy tank).  Doesn't really bother me though.

2.  No, we don't know for sure if the 3 pilots survived.  It's unfortunate if they didn't.  But it was war, and people do get killed in war.  You either get killed yourself, or you do the killing (sometimes both).

Now go to bed Wiggy, it's getting to be your bedtime! 

[onwig]

OK,

GS, if someone in your family died recently,, and they were labelled a "score" would that not bother you... in other words... they would be a statistic..... I know for a fact, i would be so angry for someone close to me being called that... I dont want to change 100yrs of military tradition, whats the point, you are so set in your ways, we are not numbers/statistics, we are human beings. If one of my friends/or someone i know i knew died tomorrow, I would'nt think.... ahh well, thats another 1 person that died before they reach their 30th birthday... another "score" towards early death.

So it doesnt bother you that you might have lost people that you know, through military combat?, did you just shrug it off and say "well the enemy "scored" another kill"?

[BTs_GhostSniper]

GS, if someone in your family died recently,, and they were labelled a "score" would that not bother you... in other words... they would be a statistic..... I know for a fact, i would be so angry for someone close to me being called that... I dont want to change 100yrs of military tradition, whats the point, you are so set in your ways, we are not numbers/statistics, we are human beings. If one of my friends/or someone i know i knew died tomorrow, I would'nt think.... ahh well, thats another 1 person that died before they reach their 30th birthday... another "score" towards early death.

So it doesnt bother you that you might have lost people that you know, through military combat?, did you just shrug it off and say "well the enemy "scored" another kill"?

It's not so nice, but it is war.

How's this for a statistic:

50% of my Ranger School Class has died during the War on Terrorism.  I have personally attended most of their funerals and wept by their gravesides.

War is hell.

Come on, Wiggy, you know me.  I have one of the best hearts around (some may not agree with that based simply on my posts on this forum).  Life is one of the most precious gifts, and every life lost is a tragedy.  But those friends of mine died for a reason, they died for something they believed in.  In that, I am quite sure that their deaths did not go in vain, and that while the enemy may have "scored a kill" on them, they too scored countless enemy kills before they died.  And so is the way of the Ranger.

"Rangers Lead the Way!"

[onwig]

heh, just having a debate GS, no hard feelings from my side.... it's just like hitting a --->>>  sometimes when trying to get your points across on forums.

anyways, going to bed, might continue tomorrow....... 

[Brutha]

Don't know this, but perhaps the "score" thing came about to distance themselves from the lives they took? If they were so cold as to refer to ppl as score, why would they bother to look for a parachute, as GS grandfather did? Besides, you don't see the man, you see the machine....

["Sixhits"]

Onwig - Ghost's a brick wall but he's right. It's just how things are talked about. Frankly, this is a case of "deal with it". Even I, as bleeding heart as I am, see nothing wrong with that label.

And yes Brutha, it's a way of distancing one's self from the death. It's very common in jobs with high stress, be it in the emergency room (where they have other names for things), the board room, or the battlefield.

[onwig]

heh, i didnt mean talking to GS is like talking to a brick wall, i meant, i find it hard to get my points accross correctly on forums, but now that you said it, yeah your right 

sixhits, I can, just as well as others can, disagree with something. I was just merely expressing and asking why it/has been called a "score".

People who have lost their life, should not in my eyes be called a "score", this is my opinion but maybe i should get some counselling to "deal with it"  , as i said in a above post, i dont/cant/probably never will be able to change that in your systems/or any military organisations, or any other "labels" that you could think off.

and btw, I am happy to see the Spitfire in the lead

[BTs_GhostSniper]

Onwig - Ghost's a brick wall but he's right. It's just how things are talked about. Frankly, this is a case of "deal with it". Even I, as bleeding heart as I am, see nothing wrong with that label.

And yes Brutha, it's a way of distancing one's self from the death. It's very common in jobs with high stress, be it in the emergency room (where they have other names for things), the board room, or the battlefield.

Okay, it's getting scary how much Sixhits is agreeing with me lately.  I just hope I'm not moving more to the left...lol[/size]

and btw, I am happy to see the Spitfire in the lead

The Spitfire was a great fighter, true.[/size]

[c| Lone-Wolf]

I just hope I'm not moving more to the left...lol[/size]

Your text -is- blue, you know...