Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Fighters, Bombers and Recon Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: Best All-Around Fighter of World War II
sentinel28a    10/13/2009 3:38:03 PM
Let's try a non-controversial topic, shall we? (Heh heh.) I'll submit the P-51 for consideration. BW and FS, if you come on here and say that the Rafale was the best fighter of WWII, I am going to fly over to France and personally beat you senseless with Obama's ego. (However, feel free to talk about the D.520.)
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
gf0012-aust       5/24/2010 3:46:21 AM
I believe the Japanese gave the name of "Whispering Death" to the F4U

nope, the "whispering death" was the japanese name given for the Mk21 version of the Bristol Beaufighter 
 
Quote    Reply

gf0012-aust       5/24/2010 3:47:47 AM


I believe the Japanese gave the name of "Whispering Death" to the F4U

nope, the "whispering death" was the japanese name given for the Mk21 version of the Bristol Beaufighter 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bristol_Beaufighter
 
Quote    Reply

JFKY    The F4U   5/24/2010 10:03:57 AM
Is a great plane.  I'd put it in the "Naval category" is all.  Still might vote for the F6 Hellcat...did the F4U get cleared for many of the ordnance that the F6 did?  The 11" Tiny Tim is a rocket-propelled 500 pound bomb.  I believe the F6 was cleared for its use.  Making the F6 a threat to bunkers AND naval vessels, and because of the accuracy of the Tiny Tim, it was a greater danger than dive bombers.  Just on the basis of its outstanding strike capacity I might go with the Hellcat over the Corsair...but experts, and I'm not one, certainly can disagree.
 
Quote    Reply

RockyMTNClimber    Not to pick a nit with you JFKY....   5/24/2010 12:15:49 PM

JFKY, you then are placing more importance upon the ground attack role in WWII than the air superiority role.

 

No, I'm talking overall....the P-47 could perform a2a and a2g, well.  The question was the best OVERALL fighter, and that's why I vote for the P-47.  IT COULD do many things well.  So yes I choose the P-47, just think, NOT THAT I AM ADVOCATING THIS, but if only the P-47 existed the USAAF could have fought in Europe and prospered.  Better than if they only had the F-51.  I don't dispute the beauty and capacity of the F-51, this isn't the "Rafale is a replacement for the F-15E, the F-16, the F-35, and the F-22."  Only that on a host of axises that it performed well.  And that makes the best OVERALL, IMO.


The reason I jumped back into this conversation was your earlier comment that the Mustang was not a strike fighter. Clearly there are many people here who aren't as well read on this topic as you are and I wanted to just make the historical point that in fact the Mustang probably flew more ground attack missions during than pure A2A. By 1944 most escort missions were evolved into hunter killer missions if the Luftwaffe didn't come up to play. The USAAF didn't want our pilots to bring home extra fuel and ammo it could use to crush the German war machine! I couldn't let that comment ride without correction. Secondly, it was an error to state that the best radial the Japanese had was a 600 hp. Again, clearly not the case so it required a correction to keep others properly informed.
Aside from that I am happy to agree with you that the P-47 was unquestionably superior to any Rafael every built during the war, or even since. We'll just have to agree to disagree on the P51v.P47 issue but be assured I respect the P47 & its pilots immensely.
 
Re: the Corsair, we covered that fairly thoroughly a couple of months ago on this thread and I for one conceded that it was certainly a contender in this debate. I felt then, and now, that it's cost of about $120,000 per copy kicked it out of the running at least for me (you can build 2.5 mustangs for that price!). A review of the Corsair's combat record would find most of it's combat was not from carriers but from ground bases all over the Pacific. It's hey day was when it turned the air war against the Japanese at the battle of attrition over Guadalcanal. The Marines/Navy went from an exchange rate of about 1.1/1 with the Wildcat to about 5:1 by the time the Corsair was broadly operational. In addition to that, it's range allowed it to chase the Japanese right back up to their bases in Rabaul & Bougainville, something the Dept. of Navy just couldn't do before it arrived. IMV the F4U is definately a contender for best all around fighter of WWII.
 
Check Six
 
Rocky
 
Quote    Reply

LB    Corsair   5/24/2010 1:57:08 PM
Actually if you look at 10/14/2009 you'll note I commented that there was no comparison to the Corsair in terms of best all around fighter.  The Corsair was far better air to ground than the P-51 and the P-51 did not operate from carriers.  So even one wants to argue the P-51 is marginally better air to air that alone does not make it better all around.  We'll also leave aside that radial engines are significantly more survivable.
 

Many of the comments and points pertain to A/C such as the P-51, P-47 and a variety of other axis fighters,  but not much has been posted on the Vought Chance Corsair.  While it was primarily used in the PTO and many nations used it long after the war, some as long as the 60's.  The US Marines deployed several wings; but,  I believe the majority of the F4U were flown from carriers.  How many P-51's or P-47s were flown of carriers?  It's performance was considered excellent in both the ground attack role and in the air superiority role.  I believe the Japanese gave the name of "Whispering Death" to the F4U.  Definitely, this A/C because of it's longevity, versatility, performance  strength and capabilities should be considered for the top spot and the "Best all-round fighter of WWII.



Performance:

Max speed: 425 mph

Range: 1,015 mi (882 nmi 

Service ceiling: 36,900 ft 

Rate of climb: 3,180 ft/min 

Armament:


Guns: 4 × 0.50 in (12.7 mm) M2 Browning 50 Cal, 400 rpg and 2 × 0.50 in Browning M2 machine guns, 375rpg Rockets: 4 × 5 in (12.7 cm) High Velocity aircraft rockets and/or

Bombs: 2,000 pounds (910 kg)


 
Quote    Reply

earlm       5/24/2010 7:03:35 PM
The Corsair used a supercharger, not a turbocharger and wasn't good above 20,000 feet.  The ducting for a turbocharger is why the P-47 was so big.  The Corsair was great in the Pacific but best overall?
 
Quote    Reply

mabie       5/24/2010 9:02:41 PM
It was only recently that I learned of the contribution that Charles Lindbergh made to drastically improve the range and overall effectiveness of the P-38. It was expensive to build but it was very versatile and the fact that the top US aces were P-38 pilots has to count for something.
 
Quote    Reply

earlm    P-38   5/24/2010 11:20:40 PM
Interesting case.  The top US aces were P-38 pilots because they flew at a time when there were lots of targets and fewer US planes to fight over them.  It was an interceptor and expensive with non ergonomic switchology.  That meant it was great if it could bounce but if the enemy could climb above it and bounce it there was trouble.  No issues with harmonization and it could carry a good load.  A version with two R2800 engines was proposed, about 4400-5600HP depending on which version was used.
 
Quote    Reply

gf0012-aust       5/25/2010 12:05:11 AM

It was only recently that I learned of the contribution that Charles Lindbergh made to drastically improve the range and overall effectiveness of the P-38.

just a damn shame that Lindberghs moral compass was bent.  He was a great fan of Hitler and his ideology
 
Quote    Reply

VelocityVector    Consider the Contemporary Magnetic Declination Then   5/25/2010 1:33:10 AM



It was only recently that I learned of the contribution that Charles Lindbergh

just a damn shame that Lindberghs moral compass was bent.  He was a great fan of Hitler and his ideology


Lindbergh wasn't anti-Jewish; he was most definitely anti-collectivist.  Some Jews at the time had banded together into industry or interest-focused collectives, for example Communism, and Lindbergh criticized these groups with racist language and through racist affiliations aimed at disrupting the collectivism, not at the supposed attributes of Judaism or Jews. 

The "passive" eugenics Lindbergh advocated are still being practiced every day in Israel, Russia, London, New York and Hollywood, at the financing of Jews and Jewish Groups, some of which I belong to and give money to as a gentile.  The local PlannedParenthood fundraiser is Judy G., a Jew who advocates eugenics interestingly in private conversation given this context.

v^2
Gentile Member, JUF

 
Quote    Reply



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics