Greatest Fighter of WWII?

JodoForce · Post by **JodoForce** » 2003-05-27 05:06am

*Looks at numbers*

Why are the American 'aces' so poor?

And WHICH is the better dogfighter then, P-38 or P-51???

Boba Fett · Post by **Boba Fett** » 2003-05-27 05:07am

Vympel wrote:
Boba Fett wrote:
Atavarius wrote: Lots of Udel info.
His name was Rudel.

There was a fighter pilot called named Udet but I don't remember any Udel.
Do you play Il-2 Sturmovik, Boba?

Yes...but I haven't played it for months.

"Blitzkrieg" is out, you know...

Why did you ask it?

Post by **Vympel** » 2003-05-27 05:22am

Boba Fett wrote:
Yes...but I haven't played it for months.

"Blitzkrieg" is out, you know...

Why did you ask it?

Wanna pit your FW-190 against my La-7?

Blitzkrieg- isn't it like Sudden Strike, but not?

Why are the American 'aces' so poor?

I don't know if you could simply look at the numbers and decide that the Americans were the worst because they had the least kills.

The German kills were so high was because of the 'fly till you die' policy- the experten were never retired, they just kept on flying. A stupid idea, in my opinion. Instead of training new pilots, they picked up the slack while the rookie Luftwaffe pilots just died in droves against much more skilled US, British, and Russian fliers. The Germans also had an abundance of targets in both East and West, wheras on the Allied side there were a lot of planes flying with you and few opponents- so there were less opportunities to rack up the big kills. Oh, and there was also the kill reporting system and differences in doctrine.

Would Ivan Kozhedub lose in a matchup against Erich Hartmann? Whoose to say? Personally, I think Kozhedub would kick his ass.

Boba Fett · Post by **Boba Fett** » 2003-05-27 05:34am

Vympel wrote:
Boba Fett wrote:
Yes...but I haven't played it for months.

"Blitzkrieg" is out, you know...

Why did you ask it?
Wanna pit your FW-190 against my La-7?

Blitzkrieg- isn't it like Sudden Strike, but not?

I'll have to buy a new joystick first. My Logitech Wingman suffered an "accident" last time I was playing with X-wing Alliance...

On the other hand why not? We will discuss it in PM, OK?

I don't know if you could simply look at the numbers and decide that the Americans were the worst because they had the least kills.

The German kills were so high was because of the 'fly till you die' policy- the experten were never retired, they just kept on flying. A stupid idea, in my opinion. Instead of training new pilots, they picked up the slack while the rookie Luftwaffe pilots just died in droves against much more skilled US, British, and Russian fliers. The Germans also had an abundance of targets in both East and West, wheras on the Allied side there were a lot of planes flying with you and few opponents- so there were less opportunities to rack up the big kills. Oh, and there was also the kill reporting system and differences in doctrine.

Absolutely correct!!! A+ Mr. Vympel!

Would Ivan Kozhedub lose in a matchup against Erich Hartmann? Whoose to say? Personally, I think Kozhedub would kick his ass.

*no comment*

Ypoknons · Post by **Ypoknons** » 2003-05-27 05:52am

Vympel wrote: Blitzkrieg- isn't it like Sudden Strike, but not?

I haven't played SS, but the reviews I've read mention that it doesn't have the flaws of SS. It's a blast for me to play, anyways. Although they have some freedom with historical accuracy sometimes (A Maus at the Battle of the Buldge, for example).
I got to give this one to the P-51 or F-4U though. I suppose the F-4U wasn't as proven, and although being big, it was fast. The FW-190 has an excellent fighter earlier in the war, but I don't think even a TA-152 would be able to match a F-4U. It just got outranged by it. although it had it's advantages.
I'm not a big fan of Russian fighters. I think aces and "common" pilots have different abilities, and it seemed in the war more guns was better than manuveurbility for the majority of pilots. New pilots would really be able to take advantage of say, a Yak-3's abilities.

Thunderfire · Post by **Thunderfire** » 2003-05-27 05:59am

Vympel wrote:Would Ivan Kozhedub lose in a matchup against Erich Hartmann? Whoose to say? Personally, I think Kozhedub would kick his ass.

In a 1vs1 hmm Kozhedub should win most engagements because his plane is
the better dogfighter. Hartmann has only a chance if he is able to turn the
fight in to an energy fight. About american pilots they had the best training
in the late part of the war. Germany was short on manpower same goes
for japan - the training situation is even worse there. Britain also has
some manpower problem. Russians received only basic training the rest
was done in their combat unit. Skillwise the finnish pilots are probably the
best. They got insane K/D ratios with outdated fighters.

Post by **Vympel** » 2003-05-27 06:40am

Thunderfire wrote: In a 1vs1 hmm Kozhedub should win most engagements because his plane is the better dogfighter. Hartmann has only a chance if he is able to turn the fight in to an energy fight. About american pilots they had the best training in the late part of the war. Germany was short on manpower same goes for japan - the training situation is even worse there. Britain also has
some manpower problem. Russians received only basic training the rest
was done in their combat unit. Skillwise the finnish pilots are probably the
best. They got insane K/D ratios with outdated fighters.

Yup I agree. The only rational reason for my personal view is that the Bf-109G-6 which Hartmann flew was quite outdated by the time Kozhedub's steed, the Lavochin series (La-5FN and La-7) came into service. Perhaps he'd have a better chance in the Bf-190K4, I don't know. Kozhedub was an impressive pilot, no doubt. On a tragic note, a pair of USAAF P-51s attacked him because they must've thought his La-7 was a FW-190 or something- he shot them both down. He also got a kill on an Me-262, though it was going slowly and the pilot made the foolish mistake of turning. The P-51 kills aren't counted- so in truth his tally is 64.

Atavarius · Post by **Atavarius** » 2003-05-27 07:14am

Boba Fett wrote:
Atavarius wrote: Lots of Udel info.
His name was Rudel.

There was a fighter pilot called named Udet but I don't remember any Udel.

Oy, i seem to have had an illiterate moment last night. I assumed that was the pilot he meant though.

victorhadin · Post by **victorhadin** » 2003-05-27 07:50am

Thunderfire wrote:
Vympel wrote:Would Ivan Kozhedub lose in a matchup against Erich Hartmann? Whoose to say? Personally, I think Kozhedub would kick his ass.
In a 1vs1 hmm Kozhedub should win most engagements because his plane is
the better dogfighter. Hartmann has only a chance if he is able to turn the
fight in to an energy fight.

Which, assuming they start off from equal standpoints, is quite likely. The fighter with the greatest thrust/ weight ratio and climb rate generally decides the engagements in skilled hands by deciding how to start and retaining the option to bug-out and get away. Provided he used his energy advantage, there is no reason he shouldn't keep it. It only takes one well-aimed burst from an expert at close range, and he would have the opportunity to decide when and where to make the attempt at the kill.

victorhadin · Post by **victorhadin** » 2003-05-27 07:51am

As for best fighter, my nomination is the Ta-152. An advanced FW190 variant.

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2003-05-27 08:24am

JodoForce wrote:*Looks at numbers*

Why are the American 'aces' so poor?

Because they didn’t get a steady parade of vast swarms of bomber targets.

Thunderfire · Post by **Thunderfire** » 2003-05-27 08:43am

Sea Skimmer wrote:
JodoForce wrote:*Looks at numbers*

Why are the American 'aces' so poor?
Because they didn’t get a steady parade of vast swarms of bomber targets.

But they did get vast swarms of japanese and later german target drones.

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2003-05-27 09:26am

Vympel wrote: Yup I agree. The only rational reason for my personal view is that the Bf-109G-6 which Hartmann flew was quite outdated by the time Kozhedub's steed, the Lavochin series (La-5FN and La-7) came into service. Perhaps he'd have a better chance in the Bf-190K4, I don't know. Kozhedub was an impressive pilot, no doubt. On a tragic note, a pair of USAAF P-51s attacked him because they must've thought his La-7 was a FW-190 or something- he shot them both down. He also got a kill on an Me-262, though it was going slowly and the pilot made the foolish mistake of turning. The P-51 kills aren't counted- so in truth his tally is 64.

There where scores of incidents between American and Russian planes in 1945. Generally what would happen is they’d meet, circle around looking at the unfamiliar aircraft. Then a few German fighters might show up, bring down an Allied plane and then race off, sparking an engagement.

Post by **Vympel** » 2003-05-27 09:56am

Sea Skimmer wrote:
There where scores of incidents between American and Russian planes in 1945. Generally what would happen is they’d meet, circle around looking at the unfamiliar aircraft. Then a few German fighters might show up, bring down an Allied plane and then race off, sparking an engagement.

You'd figure the big red/ blue star on the planes and the fact that they werne't Me's or FW's would've told em something. Oh well, can't fault em for being jumpy.

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2003-05-27 10:10am

Vympel wrote:

You'd figure the big red/ blue star on the planes and the fact that they werne't Me's or FW's would've told em something. Oh well, can't fault em for being jumpy.

Neither side was that familiar with the others planes, and seeing the markings is not easy. Anyway in at east some of the engagements it seems both sides very well knew the other wasn’t German but thought they where just defending themselves from an attack, having never seen the German aircraft.

The skies over some cities got very busy later war, with 8th Air force getting in one last thousand bomber raid before the Russians invaded. IIRC it flew its last raid against Berlin the same day the Russians encircled the city.

Soulman · Post by **Soulman** » 2003-05-27 10:57am

Thunderfire wrote: Skillwise the finnish pilots are probably the
best. They got insane K/D ratios with outdated fighters.

I've seen some impressive stuff about Polish pilots, despite being outnumbered and flying outdated planes they managed a 1:1 ratio.

Iceberg · Post by **Iceberg** » 2003-05-27 11:30am

JodoForce wrote:*Looks at numbers*

Why are the American 'aces' so poor?

And WHICH is the better dogfighter then, P-38 or P-51???

It's not a matter of poor pilots but of War Department regulations. Ace pilots were frequently rotated home to train new pilot cadets (the Army Air Force reasoning that live instructors were better than dead heroes); pilots who were shot down were forbidden to return to combat (German pilots who were shot down were issued a new plane and sent back into combat) in order to protect the French resistance movements; and German fighter pilots generally hung back over Germany during the period before the development of drop tanks, preventing Allied fighter pilots from engaging them. Once the Allies could escort bombers all the way over Berlin and back, everything changed, and the Germans suddenly got very wary of engaging the P-51 Mustang and P-47 Thunderbolt.

It can be argued whether the Jug or the Mustang was the better fighter - the top USAAF ace in Europe flew a P-47 and had 28.0 kills, but the top Mustang ace wasn't far behind with 26.0 kills. It can't be argued which was more durable, though - the P-47 could take a Bf-109's entire ammo load and still fly, even with parts of the engine shot away.

Cpt_Frank · Post by **Cpt_Frank** » 2003-05-27 11:33am

Vympel wrote:
Sea Skimmer wrote:
There where scores of incidents between American and Russian planes in 1945. Generally what would happen is they’d meet, circle around looking at the unfamiliar aircraft. Then a few German fighters might show up, bring down an Allied plane and then race off, sparking an engagement.

You'd figure the big red/ blue star on the planes and the fact that they werne't Me's or FW's would've told em something. Oh well, can't fault em for being jumpy.

I guess it's difficult to identify the marks from several hundred meters distance (or even more) with the bare eye.

Atavarius · Post by **Atavarius** » 2003-05-27 12:30pm

There are twenty-one gaping holes and jagged tears in the metal from exploding 20mm cannon shells. I'm still standing in one place when my count of bullet holes reaches past a hundred; there's no use even trying to add them all. The Thunderbolt is literally a sieve, holes through the wings, fuselage and tail. Every square foot, it seems is covered with holes. There are five holes in the propeller. Three 20mm cannon shells burst against the armor plate, a scant inch away from my head. Five cannon shell holes in the right wing; four in the left wing. Two cannnon shells blasted away the lower half of my rudder. One shell exploded in the cockpit, next to my left hand; this is the blast that ripped away the flap handle. More holes appeared along the fuselage and in the tail. Behind the cockpit, the metal is twisted and curled; this had jammed the canopy, trapping me inside.
The airplane had done her best. Needless to say, she would never fly again.

-Robert S. Johnson, one of the top Aces in the ETO on the P-47 Tbolt.

P-47's often came back from combat shot full of holes, their wings and control surfaces in tatters. On one occasion a Thunderbolt pilot, Lieutenant Chetwood, hit a steel pole after strafing a train over Occupied France. The collision sliced four feet off one of his wings--yet he was able to fly back safely to his base in England.

Correct me if i am wrong, but thats also what made the Bolt so adept at ground attack. The Bolt could absorb the punishment from AA guns, while a lucky shot in the radiator of the Mustang would put her down.

Just thought i would add a bit to the mix, though i still prefer the Lightning.

phongn · Post by **phongn** » 2003-05-27 12:51pm

Ypoknons wrote:I got to give this one to the P-51 or F-4U though. I suppose the F-4U wasn't as proven, and although being big, it was fast.

::screams while running in circles::

It's F4U! Not "F-4U".

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2003-05-27 03:04pm

phongn wrote:
Ypoknons wrote:I got to give this one to the P-51 or F-4U though. I suppose the F-4U wasn't as proven, and although being big, it was fast.
::screams while running in circles::

It's F4U! Not "F-4U".

Easy now, calm down

*Injects Phongn with a liquefied version of the pre 1962 US military aircraft designation system*

phongn · Post by **phongn** » 2003-05-27 03:12pm

Sea Skimmer wrote:Easy now, calm down

*Injects Phongn with a liquefied version of the pre 1962 US military aircraft designation system*

USN or USAF?

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2003-05-27 03:13pm

phongn wrote:
USN or USAF?

Both blended with a pinch of Soviet industrial coding, what are you doing still awake?

Tribun · Post by **Tribun** » 2003-05-27 03:19pm

I wonder why the Me-262 is not listed.

It was the best fighter of WW II and one of the most famous too......

Glocksman · Post by **Glocksman** » 2003-05-27 03:23pm

The topic starter said to not consider jets.