Greatest Fighter of WWII?

[Frank Hipper]

Choose and state your case!

The Me 262 isn't listed because it's a jet, and has so many superior qualities to disqualify it in piston driven company.

[Dalton]

P-38 Lightning, 'coz I think it's cool

[Sr.mal]

P-38 Lightning, 'coz I think it's cool

I would have to agree. Despite it being a twin-engined fighter, the thing hauls ass. Plus it is one of the only Allied fighters to have any cannon armament besides .50's. I'm not saying all of them only had .50's only a few DID NOT.

[Vympel]

It's pretty hard to choose a best fighter of WW2, for the following reasons:

- different roles for different countries

- different time periods: the best fighter of 1940 wouldn't remain the best fighter of 1944

That said, I think this thread should instead be what your favorite fighter actually is, rather than any arguments about 'best', which isn't very meaningful.

My favorite is the Lavochkin La-7. I like it's looks, I like it's armament (twin 20mm cannon in the nose is more than enough), I like it's pedigree (based on previous La-5), I like who it was flown by (the top Allied aces).

I would have to agree. Despite it being a twin-engined fighter, the thing hauls ass. Plus it is one of the only Allied fighters to have any cannon armament besides .50's. I'm not saying all of them only had .50's only a few DID NOT

The entire Yak series, the LaGG series, and the La series all had cannon armament, as did UK Hurricanes and Spitfires.

As an aside, the Bf-109 series was a piece of obsolete shit, maintained in service for far too long and being hideously inefficient in aerodynamic terms. That said, German aces did well on it because they were used to the machine.

I dislike the American planes- they were great, but their armament was weak and I don't like the wing-mounted guns- complicates aiming- the P-38 is luckily immune to that criticism.

[Frank Hipper]

The P-38 was a fantastic plane, and in several ways, the first modern fighter. Good choice, guys. Ever stand next to one? They're really huge. I can look into a Bf 109's cockpit when it's sitting on the ground, and it seems *very* small, but P-38s just seem to go on forever.

[Frank Hipper]

As an aside, the Bf-109 series was a piece of obsolete shit, maintained in service for far too long and being hideously inefficient in aerodynamic terms. That said, German aces did well on it because they were used to the machine.

You may have a point about the earlier model's aerodynamics, but the G and K models are a different story.

[Sr.mal]

I've sat in the back seat of the night fighter model. It looks big, but that back seat is cramped as hell.

[Vympel]

You may have a point about the earlier model's aerodynamics, but the G and K models are a different story.[/quote]

They didn't really change that much- it had the curved out wingtips from the F model onwards- the G-model added the improved machine gun armament that resulted in those two big bubbles on the engine cowling. The Bf-109 just got heavier and heavier with each iteration while it's wing loading remained the same.

Here's an article by USAF ace Col. "Kit' Carson- from Airpower, 1976 Vol. 6 No. 4

best of the breed

[Frank Hipper]

First off, I just want to state that I did NOT vote for the 109.

Part of that article's criticisms stem from the fact that it was designed to squeeze maximum engine in minimum airframe. The Gs and Ks were aerodynamically refined wonders compared to a C model. The "lumps and bumps" he mentioned came from enlarged engine accessories, as well as added armement housings. The fact that so much was added to the thing, and that it's weight practically doubled should be a case FOR the qualities of the original design, instead of agaisnt it.

But you can't argue it was an overweight turd by '44.

[MKSheppard]

You may have a point about the earlier model's aerodynamics, but the G and K models are a different story.

*slaps Hipper across the face with a shot filled glove*

You must be thinking of the Friedrich model compared to the Emil...

the Gustav and Karl models were too overloaded and sluggish.

[Darth Gojira]

I would have to vote Spitfires all the way, however, Hurricanes and the later Messerschmit models rock. And the Zero USED to be the best before the war kicked in.
P-38s are very cool, I must agree.

[Cpt_Frank]

I like the BF-109 and the IL-2.

[Vympel]

First off, I just want to state that I did NOT vote for the 109.

Part of that article's criticisms stem from the fact that it was designed to squeeze maximum engine in minimum airframe. The Gs and Ks were aerodynamically refined wonders compared to a C model. The "lumps and bumps" he mentioned came from enlarged engine accessories, as well as added armement housings. The fact that so much was added to the thing, and that it's weight practically doubled should be a case FOR the qualities of the original design, instead of agaisnt it.

But you can't argue it was an overweight turd by '44.

What Shep said- the most common production models of the Bf-109G had the enlarged, unaerdoynamic bubble armament housings and the Bf-109K was the most evolved model (without the enlarged armament housings), but then again, it's airframe life was incredibly crap due to shoddy German late war production quality.

The problem was that the weight increased while the wing loading remained the same. Not good for a fighter, which is independent of how much they beefed up the engine.

[RadiO]

Spitfire. Perhaps the best historical example of development and change in an fighter aircraft - the F Mk.22 of 1945 being radically different to the Mk.1 of 1939 in performance, firepower, aerodynamics and appearance. The Spitfire suffered less from the law of diminishing returns than the Bf-109 series. It was continually updated to carry ever more powerful armament, while its powerplant was repeatedly improved in service, then replaced by a new engine that was improved in turn.
Though its range was affected by its original - and best remembered - role as an air defence fighter, the later marks of Spitfire gave useful service as ground attack aircraft and there was an almost seperate dynasty of photo-reconaissance versions.

[Montcalm]

I voted for the P-51 but its not easy to chose between these fighters P-51,P-38,Messerchmit 109 and the Spitfire.
there all cool.

[Glocksman]

No votes for the F4U Corsair?

[Montcalm]

No votes for the F4U Corsair?

Like the P-38 it qualify as others.

[phongn]

Hmph. What about the F6F?

[TrailerParkJawa]

I would lean towards the P-51 or P-38 because of their range. In both theatres these aircraft allowed for long range escort of bombers. This meant reduced bomber loss, as well as being able to destroy more enemy fighters.

[Striderteen]

The Focke-Wulf 190 was small, fast, superbly maneuverable and armed to the teeth -- basic armament was two nose-mounted 13mm heavy machine guns and four wing-mounted rapid-fire 20mm cannons, plus three hardpoints (one belly and one under each wing) capable of mounting various combinations of weapons including ETC 501 bomb racks, WGr 21 anti-bomber rockets, RZ 65 anti-tank rockets, WB 151 twin 20mm cannon pods, MK 103 30mm cannon pod and MK 108 rapid-fire 30mm cannon pods. This made it the first truly effective multi-purpose fighter, proving itself lethally capable in the roles of air-superiority fighter, interceptor, ground-attack aircraft, tactical bomber and tank-buster.

The "Butcher Bird" was the choice of most German aces and gave British Spitfire and Hurricane pilots nightmares; it was a much more advanced fighter and had them completely outclassed in every possible way. The only allied fighter that could touch a 190 in a dogfight was the later P-51 Mustang -- but the 190s and 152s (the latest versions of the Fw-190 were renamed Tank Ta-152H in honor of the designer, Kurt Tank) could usually use their heavy 30mm guns and air-to-air rockets to attack Allied bomber formations from long range, then get away from the escort fighters with their superior speed and climb rate.

[Alyeska]

The P-38 lightning is easily my favorite fighter from the war. That thing symbolized the effort in the Pacific and was one hell of a plane. I know of several bomber pilots that would make deals with fighter pilots so that they could get a chance to fly the Lightning. That was a pilots aircraft. Sure the P-51 outclassed it for the most part, its just the P-38 had something that the P-51 lacked. It had class, elegance, and a look of deadliness all in one package.

[Sea Skimmer]

P-51 and F6F along with He 219. The P-51 flew into one of the densest air defence systems in history to take the war to the enemy's airfields. The F6F brought down something like 8,000 enemy planes flying off Pacific fleet carriers. The He 219 wasn't much of a dogfighter but wasp probably the best night fighter of the war.

[Utsanomiko]

I agree with Striderteen. The Fw-190 had such nice handling and speed. Plus I like its weapon configuration.

[Sea Skimmer]

I agree with Striderteen. The Fw-190 had such nice handling and speed. Plus I like its weapon configuration.

Which configuration? The thing easily had twenty variants.

[Utsanomiko]

I agree with Striderteen. The Fw-190 had such nice handling and speed. Plus I like its weapon configuration.

Which configuration? The thing easily had twenty variants.

I'm most familiar with the A4.