Before the USA entered WW2 after Pearl Harbor, how many American military brass, aeronautic engineers, etc., knew that 1st generation American fighters like the P-40, P-39, and F4F were outclassed by 1st line Axis fighters like the German Me-109 and FW-190 and the Japanese A6M Zero?

Different philosophies developed different aircraft. The F4F gave as good as it got early in the war, the Warhawks were feared greatly by the Japanese who faced them when flown by AVG pilots prior to Pearl Harbor. The Me109 faced limited action against green UK pilots flying Tomahawks so that was not a real test of US technology.

Tactics made up for some of the shortfalls the US aircraft were percieved to possess. No aircraft in the war could turn with a Zero, Australian pilots tried but could not stay in a turning engagement while flying Spitfires! The Zero had armament and armour problems that made it a death trap when hit even by a rifle caliber round.

 

The FW-190 completed development after the Battle of Brittain so shouldn't be counted in this group. The P-39 was a favorite of the Russians. They used its armour and big gun up front to great advantage down low on the deck on the Eastern Front.

 

We did okay with what we had. The results speak for themselves.

 

Check Six

 

Rocky

 

 

 

 

probably a lot of em.  a lot of the aircraft that finished the war or were available shortly after for the US were designed between 38-41, and the sheer number of them should indicate a sense of urgency felt by the military to get better aircraft out fast.

 

A-26 invader, maiden flight in 42'

B-36 design competition started april 41'

B-29 maiden flight in 42'

early P-51 prototype flying by 40' (though very different from the eventual D, K and H models

P-47 maiden flight 41'

P-38 maiden flight 39'

F6F prototype contract signed june 41'

F4U design work started in 38

i do agree with rocky that the P-40, P-39, and F4F did pretty good work themselves

It was a steep learning curve, but once US and Allied pilots learned how to take advange of their aircraft's positive attributes and never turn with a Zero. They got along pretty well. The AVG did remarkable work with few aircraft against an increasingly frustrated enemy prior to US entry to the war.

Tactics. Tactics. Tactics.

 

Check Six

 

Rocky

No argument there, Rocky.  The Zero's 20mm cannons also suffered from poor fusing. 

 

Another reason was that no one believed Chennault's or the Chinese reports that the Zero could outmanuever anything in the Allied inventory. After all, it was just a bunch of silly Chinese and a washed-up American.  The British actually believed that the Brewster Buffalo was superior to the Zero, because those nearsighted, buck-toothed Japanese could never produce something superior to a white guy's design.  Simple racism, and a lot of Brits (and Americans) paid for it with their lives.

 

What made the F4F and the P-40 so good was they were tougher than nails.  A Zero could pound away for hours at either one and possibly never shoot it down.  The P-40 was also much better in the vertical (where the AVG fought) and the Wildcat pilots developed pack tactics (Zero pilots, like samurai, tended to fight as individuals). 

 

I don't really count the Germans into the deal--the Americans knew plenty about the Bf-109 and the Fw-190 by the time we got into the war.  The 109 was approaching obsolescence and the 190 rarely got into fights, because the Luftwaffe tended to pull their fighters back out of the short range of the Spitfire and early P-47--no reason to play tangle with other fighters when your job is to kill bombers.  Until the later marks of the Spit came out, the advice the Brits gave to Americans when dogfighting 190s was not to do it.  The P-47 was better in the vertical than either the 109 or the 190, and again, even if it got caught, the German better have an hour on his hands to shoot a Jug down. 

 

Of course, when the P-51B/D series came out, it was pretty much over...

 

Oh yeah, about the P-39...the Russians liked it because it was free.  Like Geoffrey Perret said, the Russians didn't care too much about losing a free plane and a half-trained pilot if it meant that the pilot managed to blow up a few trucks and a Panther or two before being gunned down by Barkhorn or Hartmann.  The Russians could replace their losses easily enough; the Germans, not so much.

 

The fact that Alexsandr Pokryshkin did so well with the P-39 says more about him as a pilot than it does about the poor old Airacobra.

 

On the German side, the Luftwaffe gave visiting Charles Lindbergh a nice tour of the capabilities of the 109...he came back a convinced isolationist. He was tapped for intelligence when he returned, and the Germans probably pulled the stunt to make us think twice about jumping in.

 

During the late 30's, the money floodgates began to trickle open, leading to new fighter designs to compete with the new generation. We also were able to afford to consider an absolutely ridiculous variety of designs to fulfill the same roles.

 

On the Japanese side, most reports(from China) were ignored, but we learned pretty quickly what was up.

 

The P-40s mainly dealt with Japanese Army fighters though, who supposedly were not on the same level as the IJN pilots in their Zeros, so that encounter was still a shock. The P-40s and Wildcats assigned to the early campaign all struggled, and the Buffalos were considered to be practically deathtraps.

 

Of course, being massively outnumbered makes things tricky. Reminds me of the German accounts from WW2 from those who survived...particularly those who fought in Italy/North Africa.

I noted that the Lockheed P-38 Lighting was left off the list.  Why is that?  Perhaps because as the top USAAF fighter it dominated all the way through to the end of the war.  Ira Bong was our top ace and he flew the Lighting.  The Japanese and Germans feared the 38 - aka the "Forked Tail Devil" to the Germans and "RTT" or Round-Trip-Ticket in the Pacific because of its twin engine design.

 

My personal favorite and one of Kelly Johnson's finest.

I did not include the P-38 in my comments because it did not arrive in large numbers until a bit later in the war. It was there at Guadalcanal though along with the F4F, P-40, & P-39. It's brute power gave it an advantage down low and its superchargers allowed it to run fast up high. Chuck Yeager said in "Right Stuff" that it was not the best ship for high altitude dog fighting so that is why they sent it to the Pacific in large numbers.

13,000+ P-40's were built during the war and that compares to 14,000+  P-51's. I would say that just about speaks for itself as far as this "outclassed" silliness is concerned!

 

Check Six

 

Rocky

Thanks!

You will find a large number of P-38s served in the Euro theatre, including bomber escort since they had the range.  The P-38 also served well in the recon role due to its high altitude performance and its silence at low levels (the balanced twin engines made it very quiet).  The P-38 also served in North Africa.

The selection for them in the Pacific was mainly due to the long range capability over other single engine fighters. 

Tactics made up for some of the shortfalls the US aircraft were percieved to possess. No aircraft in the war could turn with a Zero, Australian pilots tried but could not stay in a turning engagement while flying Spitfires!