NationStates Jolt Archive

Which is the best fighter plane of the Second World War?
If other please state name, the list above is just those that I could remember the names of :)
Also, if people could add why they think those are the best it would be nice!

Sopwith Camel! Hang on, wrong war ...

I voted P-51 because, well, I guess it was the best. But if you want to go by effectiveness, kills, and domination the bf-109 in the late 30's would be my pick.

Hawker Hurricane, definately. Why? Well, we beat the squareheads in the BoB with them, didn't we? And quite soundly, I might add.

But that's the best propellor-powered plane. A Meteor would kick anythings arse in WWII.

Hawker Hurricane, definately. Why? Well, we beat the squareheads in the BoB with them, didn't we? And quite soundly, I might add.

But that's the best propellor-powered plane. A Meteor would kick anythings arse in WWII.

Even a 262?

Focke-Wulf 190.

No meteor ever was in dogfight with a German plaine, so no victories for the meteor. It was much slower then the Me 262 but was a good platform to build the after the war Glosters.

I would say, the Fw 190 and the Mustang. But a A. Galland or a Walter Nowotny in their Me 262 outclassed of course every allied pilot and plaine.

Well, an ME262 would be a challenge, certainly. But if you take into account the fact that the Allies had complete air superiority for their entire land campaign...Then surely it must've been better, otherwise the Germans would've been lording it in the skies...

Well, an ME262 would be a challenge, certainly. But if you take into account the fact that the Allies had complete air superiority for their entire land campaign...Then surely it must've been better, otherwise the Germans would've been lording it in the skies...
Sadly (for the Germans at least) they were being pushed back all the time so there weren't many airfields to fly the 262's from, also they had a problem with fuel. But I do take your point!

the Me262 obviously by far the fastest, a needed trait in fighter plane. However it was tempramental and had such a short range (innefeciant early jet engine) thatit could only be used as a defensive interceptor against bombers. It could only stay in the air for 10 mins, fight for ten and fly back to refuel. The Zero was manuverable but rendered obsolete by the mustang/hellcat/corsair platoon employed by the US by the end of the war. The supermarine spitfire performed outstandingly against the luftwafe but its performance record was greatley inflated by the use of radar. The P51 Mustang was the only fighter with the range to escort bombers into enemy territory, the only ones fast and manuverable enough to dominate their opposition and was the best "pure fighter" of world war two.

the Me262 obviously by far the fastest, a needed trait in fighter plane. The Zero was manuverable but rendered obsolete by the mustang/hellcat/corsair platoon employed by the US by the end of the war. The supermarine spitfire performed outstandingly against the luftwafe but its performance record was greatley inflated by the use of radar. The P51 Mustang was the only fighter with the range to escort bombers into enemy territory, the only ones fast and manuverable enough to dominate their opposition and was the best "pure fighter" of world war two.

After being fitted with a Packard-built Merlin V-1650 engine

i thought it was a rolls-royce engine. It was origionally a failed design because it was underpowereed and didnt have that fuel tank bulge under it. it was then brought back as a long range bomber escort, used sparingly in europe and lead on to beat the living crap out of the japansese mitsubishi zeroes.

Im an idiot, I said Mustang, but the F4U Corsair was the best fighter in the world at the end of the war (at least in the hands of a capable pilot). It was tricky to fly and the giant engine made for poor visibility in take off and landing, but its kill ratios were phenomenal. It was the fastest plane in the American forces when introduced, and maintained an amazing level of maneuverability.

about the Me262: There is no question that it was the fastes. However it was tempramental and had such a short range (innefeciant early jet engine) thatit could only be used as a defensive interceptor against bombers. It could only stay in the air for 10 mins, fight for ten and fly back to refuel. Wasnt the most manuverable thing either, its body construction couldnt handle half the high-G turns and manivers that twin jets made it capable of.

Well, an ME262 would be a challenge, certainly. But if you take into account the fact that the Allies had complete air superiority for their entire land campaign...Then surely it must've been better, otherwise the Germans would've been lording it in the skies...

I don't think the numbers have such a great deal to do with it as far as things go, since the Me 262 proved to be utterly lethal for any allied aircraft, which got in its way... however once the allies worked out how to stop the 262 (i.e. attack it while it was landing/taking off), they could defeat it. Given more airfields and better state of the Reich at that point anyway, the Me 262 would have lorded it over the skies. Even against the British Jet Fighters, after the war the RAF did an analysis, which showed the Me 262 had many superior aspects to it over it's British rival and in theory at least would have won.

However, I would choose the Spitfire or the Hurricane. Why? Because of their durability and the fact they lasted the whole war as active service planes, both of them diversified into many roles and performed superbly.

But if you take into account the fact that the Allies had complete air superiority for their entire land campaign...Then surely it must've been better, otherwise the Germans would've been lording it in the skies...

So that is your reasoning for calling a simple Meteor, (wich never fought)better then a Me 262 that had a prooven record of shooting down over 100 B17 and Lancasters and lots of fighters to. :rolleyes:

There were only a few Meteors in the air while Germany had complete squadrons of Me 262 from wich a few 100 saw action. So saying that the meteor is better then a 262 because of the allied air superiority does not make sense since the meteor was not involved in gaining this air superiority :)

about the Me262: There is no question that it was the fastes. However it was tempramental and had such a short range (innefeciant early jet engine) thatit could only be used as a defensive interceptor against bombers. .

You're correct that the Me 262 needed a very skilled pilot but you make the same mistake often made about the so called short range of the fighter. I would not call a range well over 1000 km short, and all that without extra fual tanks.

For technical details:
http://www.warbirdsresourcegroup.org/LRG/me262.html

P-38 Lightning.

Defidentally one of the best fighters in the war, the americans used them to great success, and even other nations who got them did too, anything which is lacked in pure fighting power it made up in versatility, being able to torpedo(experimental, but worked), bomb, dogfight, escort, and others. For a cost/payload ratio, P-38's could carry more bombs than B-29's.

haha the lightning was a great plane. Everyone knew it was comnig bc nothing else in the sky looked remotley close to it. FAST AS HELL

Me262 all the way! Though the Mustang would probably be my second favorite.

haha the lightning was a great plane. Everyone knew it was comnig bc nothing else in the sky looked remotley close to it. FAST AS HELL

Though some paint schemes made it nearly impossible to see at all.

i thought it was a rolls-royce engine. It was origionally a failed design because it was underpowereed and didnt have that fuel tank bulge under it. it was then brought back as a long range bomber escort, used sparingly in europe and lead on to beat the living crap out of the japansese mitsubishi zeroes.

It was a Rolls-Royce, but due to production limitations they were produced by Packard to be fitted into the aircraft without the need for shipping constraints.

P-38 Lightning.

Defidentally one of the best fighters in the war, the americans used them to great success, and even other nations who got them did too, anything which is lacked in pure fighting power it made up in versatility, being able to torpedo(experimental, but worked), bomb, dogfight, escort, and others. For a cost/payload ratio, P-38's could carry more bombs than B-29's.

So could the Hawker Hurricane...

Bah! Someone got the P-38 before me. :D

So could the Hawker Hurricane...

Any numbers to back that up?

got to give credit to some of the Gruman planes too. Bearcat, WildCat, and the infamous Hellcat of the marianas turkey shoot. they got the job done and were very very durable, well built planes.

I also like this one, wow:

http://www.luft46.com/mess/mep1112.html
http://meltingpot.fortunecity.com/seymour/32/mep1112d.html

and for beemer lovers (BMW):
http://www.luft46.com/bmw/bmw3.html

I also like this one, wow:

http://www.luft46.com/mess/mep1112.html

Tis a nice one ain't it! Have you seen some of the other designs the Germans came up with? I like this one!
http://www.luft46.com/horten/hox.html

Tis a nice one ain't it! Have you seen some of the other designs the Germans came up with? I like this one!
http://www.luft46.com/horten/hox.html


In fact, I've been in contacy with Dan Johnson (website owner) before, he sended me a box with collectors cards for free because I defended his site in a debate about the most modern Luftwaffe fighters on a WWII site.

Of course your Horten is great!

I like this one to:

http://www.luft46.com/jhart/jh180-3.jpg

It is the Heinkel P.1080, a ramjet-powered day fighter with a speed of (621mph)1000km/h and armed with 2Mk 108 30mm cannons.

Hmmm difficult, difficult. I want to vote for the Spitfire for reasons most Brits I think know. (It's basically the one that I know the most about). However I know the Hurricane was a damned good plane; and I want to vote for the Yak just because it doesn't have any votes. :p Ah, how to choose?

Hmmm difficult, difficult. I want to vote for the Spitfire for reasons most Brits I think know. (It's basically the one that I know the most about). However I know the Hurricane was a damned good plane; and I want to vote for the Yak just because it doesn't have any votes. :p Ah, how to choose?
You voted for the Yak didn't you :D

Any numbers to back that up?

I wasn't talking about the ratio's sorry should have made that clear... but the question is it does it really matter with ratios? I'm sure you could say similar of a lot of fighter aircraft having better bomb ratios than their bomber counterparts e.g. the Bf 109G (Me 109) would have had much the same ratio advantage over a He 111 etc...

I was more talking about the diversity of tasking, i.e. the Hurricane served in many roles with it being used as a Tank Buster/Interceptor/Escort/Torpedo Bomber (experimentally and maybe used once or twice)/Ground Support Aircraft etc...

Sopwith Camel! Hang on, wrong war ...

The Sopwith Snipe fucks on the Camel. They only had it for a few weeks before the war ended though.

P-38 Lightning.

Defidentally one of the best fighters in the war, the americans used them to great success, and even other nations who got them did too, anything which is lacked in pure fighting power it made up in versatility, being able to torpedo(experimental, but worked), bomb, dogfight, escort, and others. For a cost/payload ratio, P-38's could carry more bombs than B-29's.
Mozzy out classes this in every field.

Me-262, for pure technological advantage.

Fighter bomber has to be the Mosquito, lowest loss ratio of any bomber of the war.

Dog fight, has to be the Yak, out classed both the 109 and 190.

Jets, the meteor was used to take ouot loads of flying bombs, the reason it was not in combat was that it's engine was so much better than the one the germans had the british did not want it falling into enemy hands should one be shot down, as it developed it was shown to be vastly better than the 262 could ever have become.

The vampire although a little too late was also a good aircraft.

The Mustang was good at what it did as was the hurricane and the tepest etc so to say one was better than the other is hard.

As an escort fighter the mustang.
But in airial combat the Spit was better, as was the Yak.
In the single seat figheter bomber role the Typhoon etc were good but so was the 190 and also the Ill 2.

So we can argue about favorites but best.... well I don't know how you can tell.

Me-262, for pure technological advantage.
Yes but it's engines were crap compared to the English ones, which the Russians and Americans were given for free... Wonder why lend lease never kicked in here?

I'd say the Hurricane was the best, in the context that it appeared. It was simple and cheap to build, very maneouverable, and very easy to fly; if the RAF needed a new squadron, they could just round up a bunch of yokels, stick them in the Hurricane, and have them shooting down 109s by teatime.

the Me262 obviously by far the fastest, a needed trait in fighter plane. However it was tempramental and had such a short range (innefeciant early jet engine) thatit could only be used as a defensive interceptor against bombers. It could only stay in the air for 10 mins, fight for ten and fly back to refuel. The Zero was manuverable but rendered obsolete by the mustang/hellcat/corsair platoon employed by the US by the end of the war. The supermarine spitfire performed outstandingly against the luftwafe but its performance record was greatley inflated by the use of radar. The P51 Mustang was the only fighter with the range to escort bombers into enemy territory, the only ones fast and manuverable enough to dominate their opposition and was the best "pure fighter" of world war two.

I agree, The P-51 especially the ability to escort bombers into enemy territory, if the Germans had such a fighter at the Battle Of Britain, then there may have been a different outcome.

I don't see where kill ratios really tells you anything about how good a fighter is. I'd say that is more indicative of the quality of the planes/pilots a particular plane went up against. For example, who can argue that the reason the US Navy planes racked up impressive kill ratios was 1) design philosophy of Japanese mfgs. 2) improved tactics to counter Japanese aircraft strengths and 3) declining pilot quality.

By the same token, the incredible kill ratios racked up by Luftwaffe pilots can be attributed to going up against inferior aircraft early on in the war, and against bomber types later on.

Anyway, I voted for the Mustang, specifically the "D" model. It's all around performance, multi-role (albeit limited) capability, cost and durability make it, IMHO the better all-around fighter.

Now, if you want to break it down to specific areas, like fastest, best ground-attack, etc. etc.,....then you're opening up a whole new debate.

I'd say the Hurricane was the best, in the context that it appeared. It was simple and cheap to build, very maneouverable, and very easy to fly; if the RAF needed a new squadron, they could just round up a bunch of yokels, stick them in the Hurricane, and have them shooting down 109s by teatime.

Something else to be said for the Hurricane's - they were very easy to fix after taking damage. The fact that they had an internal girder construction held together with wire and then wooden fabric-covered pieces made both cosmetic and structural repairs simple. I don't have figures for the turn-around times for fixing them, but they were something ludicrously short at one point.

I'd say the Hurricane was the best, in the context that it appeared. It was simple and cheap to build, very maneouverable, and very easy to fly; if the RAF needed a new squadron, they could just round up a bunch of yokels, stick them in the Hurricane, and have them shooting down 109s by teatime.
I agree wholeheartedly! A weapon system cannot be analysed separately from its production cost and maintenance requirements (as Bodies without Organs also commented on); as the saying goes, amateurs talk about tactics, professionals talk about logistics. In the same way, the Sherman was, tank for tank, seriously inferior to the Panzer III, let alone the Panzer IV or the Tiger, but the ease of production in converted automobile factories poured out so many Shermans that weight of numbers prevailed.

I agree, The P-51 especially the ability to escort bombers into enemy territory, if the Germans had such a fighter at the Battle Of Britain, then there may have been a different outcome.

It wouldn't have made a great difference.

What really hampered the German escorts over Southern England was Goering ordering them to closely accompany the bombers, thus loosing any speed and altitude advantages they would have otherwise had.

The Emil (Bf-109E) was no slouch compared to Mk 1 Spits and Hurricanes and was able to hold it's own; the real reason the Germans lost the Battle of Britain was down to tactical blunders and not the aircraft available to them.

It wouldn't have made a great difference.

What really hampered the German escorts over Southern England was Goering ordering them to closely accompany the bombers, thus loosing any speed and altitude advantages they would have otherwise had.

The Emil (Bf-109E) was no slouch compared to Mk 1 Spits and Hurricanes and was able to hold it's own; the real reason the Germans lost the Battle of Britain was down to tactical blunders and not the aircraft available to them.

Actually, I'd say it was Radar that won the Battle of Britain. It gave the RAF an absolutely huge advantage.

Chance-Vought F4U-4 Corsair

I happened to come along this looking for a representable pic. :)

http://home.att.net/~historyzone/F4U-4.html

Of those available?

The Jug.

Actually, I'd say it was Radar that won the Battle of Britain. It gave the RAF an absolutely huge advantage.

Agreed, radar allowed us to get our aircraft to altitude, in the right airspace, to greet the bomber streams coming over.

Having said all of that, I don't seriously think the Germans would have made a succesful invasion... The Channel can be a rough enough crossing in a large ship, let alone in barges designed for river use... let alone that the Royal Navy would have raped the invasion force, air cover or not, but that's for a different thread.

Fighter bomber has to be the Mosquito, lowest loss ratio of any bomber of the war.


So, NianNorth, we agree at last ;)

I can't believe it took this many posts before the great DeHavilland Mosquito is mentioned.

I know it is a fighter bomber and night fighter not a pure fighter, but it owns. Twin engines, fly perfectly well on one, incredibly fast, resilient wooden construction, looks like kate moss with a bicep job. I'd rather have been in it than anything else.

My favourite is the Boulton Paul Defiant. It was crap, but really cute and had an amazing kill record for about the first week or so of service.

P-38 lightning

Mustang. Would kick the crap outta anything that challenged it, and could take what others dished out. That's all you want out of a fighter.

I voted for the Spitfire for several reasons.
1) like ths BF109 it was one of the few fighters that was around at the start of WW2 and the finish.
2) It proved itself on all fronts and was still being produced as late as 1948

As to the P51 Mustang, it was not untill the British put in the Rolls Royce Merlin engine that the P51 reached its true potential. Prior to that it was too heavy for the original engine and had lower manueverability than both most German and English fighters.

Also the Mosquito was a light Bomber and not actually a fighter, however that does not in anyway diminish the Mosquitos prowess as a warplane.

Each aircraft has it's own good points, I don't think there is a "best " for anything.

IMHO,

Supermarine Spitfire: Fast, agile, good weapons mix, but slightly less durable than Hurricane
Hawker Hurricane: Average speed, average weapons load, average everything
Messerchmitt Bf-109: Fast, agile, heavy firepower
Messerchmitt Bf-110: Fast, heavy firepower
Hawker Typhoon/Tempest: I don't know much about this aircraft in terms of performance, but I guess it has great firepower.
P-47 Thunderbolt: Not too shabby for a fighter.
P-38 Lightning: Hmm...fast, nice guns, but a little big?
A6M5 Zero: Fast, better-than-average firepower, but poor protection
P-51 Mustang: Long range for later variants.
Arado Ar 234: World's first operational jet bomber.
Messerchmitt Me 262: Fast, but not agile, vulnerable during landing
Boeing B-17 Flying Fortress: Workhorse of European Bomber Groups, I presume?
B-24 Liberator: Another nice, big, 4 engined bomber.
B-25 Mitchell/A-20 Havoc: great light bomber?
Focke-Wulf Fw-190: Superb fighter, heavy firepower
Avro Lancaster: Great load-carrying capabilities, but poor defence IMHO
Bristol Beaufighter Great anti-ship/submarine fighter.
Mosquito: Great speed, loved the firepower of the greater variants. :)

In general, I think each side has aircraft that are good on one sidfes or more, but has deficits somewhere else. I know ther are other models I have not named, I can't think of them at the moment, plus I guess quite a few of them have been named earlier already. Anyway, do tell if I made any mistakes in my post.

Definately the Chance-Vought Corsair. :p

Also the Mosquito was a light Bomber and not actually a fighter, however that does not in anyway diminish the Mosquitos prowess as a warplane.

It was a fighter-bomber and used as a night fighter very effectively.

Mozzy out classes this in every field.

Except for fighting, which the P-38 kicks its ass.

The P-38 was easily the most versatile fighter aircraft of the war.

You voted for the Yak didn't you :D

Who? Me? :p :D

I'll have to go with the Me-262, allthough production started too late and german resources were too scarce to change the course of the war.
I just finished reading a 600 page book about D-day, allow me to quote:

The Germans produced more than a thousand Me-262's, but it wasn't untill the last six weeks of the war that they were able to deploy hundred or more at the same time. A secret report from 1960 to president Eisenhower explained:'In that period the Germans literally circled around our fighters and they could our formations of bombers to pieces without punishment. In the attack of March, 18 1945 on Berlin for example, 1250 B-17's were escorted by about the same amount of fighters. They were under attack from a single group of Me-262's that shot 25 bombers and 5 fighters, allthough they were fighting against more than 100 to 1. The Germans lost no planes.'

The Dewoitine 520 was apparently quite a good fighter, but it wasn't produced fast enough before the Fall of France (the cursed MS 406 was becuase of political lobbying). I have a personal affection for the Hawker Typhoon, though it wasn't truly a fighter, but it sure as hell could dish out firepower. Same for the Hurricane, which is vastly underrated for it's part in the BoB (Damn Spitfires).

The Dewoitine 520 was apparently quite a good fighter, but it wasn't produced fast enough before the Fall of France (the cursed MS 406 was becuase of political lobbying).

I quite like the look of the D.520. It's a shame it wasn't more prolific, hey?

IL2 Sturmovik

PIGEONS!!! Those crafty little birds helped more than any man-made-aircraft.

I quite like the look of the D.520. It's a shame it wasn't more prolific, hey?

It does look quite good, except from vertical angles on the ground, when it looks oddly squat. If only the Armee d'le Air had more of them, it's kill ratio was 1 lost to every 2 (3 if you count probable kills) enemy, compared to the 406's, which was somewhere around 4 to 1.

The P-51 was a wonderful fighter, though my vote goes to the Me262. If Hitler and the Nazis could have gotten the 262 into production sooner and been able to make more of them, well, NationStates might have been a German site.

I voted for the thunderbolt, just because I think they are cool, and because I didn't figure on many other people voting for them. :D

This is a beauty to, no chance neither for a Mustang or the great Thunderbolt. :)

http://www.luft46.com/mrart/mr132-1.jpg

Bah, The best was the P-38J Lightning!


http://www.topgunillustrations.com/wpe7.gif
http://www.altavista.com/image/results?q=p-38&mik=photo&mik=graphic&mip=all&mis=all&miwxh=large
http://otterpop.sbay.org/pics/p-38_2.jpg

http://otterpop.sbay.org/pics/p-38_2.jpg

The 1000$ question, you know wich action this represents? It really hapened.
















---> The shooting down of admiral Yamamoto that was in the Bomber. Intelligence had the decoding system of Japan's army codes, so they knew he was on his way. A squadron took care of the protection fighters while other attacked the bomber.

That was the end of the great Yamamoto (planner of Pearl Harbor)

I did not know what that picture was (I used Altavista) but I did know of that. I sort of think it was sad, I wish we woulc have captured him insted. He would have been one of those guys who think straight, I think it is better if they would have gotten Hitler like that.

Now as stated earlier the Me262 would have made a far more strategicly important role provided they were produced earlier in the war however the invention of the jet engine in England was first in 1936 followed by the Germans in 1937 and so if the RAF or the Luftwaffe had thought jet engines a more viable option earlier we would have had a far more technologicaly advanced aviation sector today and due to industry size the Germans would have won the war as it had a higher production capability.

I did not know what that picture was (I used Altavista) but I did know of that.

I don't use anything but from my WWII knowledge, I absolutely sure that it represents that.

I don't use anything but from my WWII knowledge, I absolutely sure that it represents that.

Indeed he is correct, a glance at the P-38 pictured will show it is the "Miss Virginia", the aircraft generally attributed to have shot down Yamamoto (Though there is still debate over whether or not Barber or Lamphier shot him down).

Which is the best fighter plane of the Second World War?
If other please state name, the list above is just those that I could remember the names of :)
Also, if people could add why they think those are the best it would be nice!

ME262a.
Until SOMEONE thought the fastest plane ever at the time would make a perttier bomber although it was too small.

Still, it's not all about the plane.
By the time the ME262 was in service a lot of the best German pilots were colourful marks on French and German grass.

Poor Yamamoto...

Oh well, w00t!!! America!!!!

Indeed he is correct, a glance at the P-38 pictured will show it is the "Miss Virginia", the aircraft generally attributed to have shot down Yamamoto (Though there is still debate over whether or not Barber or Lamphier shot him down).

I'm sorry, you're both wrong
It was me.
I also shot JFK, JR and Archduke Ferdinand.
And I am a compulsive liar.

I'm sorry, you're both wrong
It was me.
I also shot JFK, JR and Archduke Ferdinand.
And I am a compulsive liar.

It'll be okay, I'm sure they have medication for that.

Bah, The best was the P-38J Lightning!

Since, I like historical details, I'll tell you guys the next real story.

I have some albums of the famous Hugo Pratt that wrote and draw Corto Maltese. For the ones that don't know this art style comics (better say " bande dessinée" because "Comic" downgrades the famous artist Pratt was), you will remember the billboard (affiche) on the streets from a Channel parfume with a Italian sailor on it,his clothes in the 1930's style.

Well this Hugo Pratt made an album about the death of the famous writer Antoine de St Exupéry (Le Petit Prince aso). He died as a fighter pilot above the Meditaranian in 1944 in his P-38 Lightning. Most probably shot down by a FW-190 from the base of Orange.

2 Years ago, fishermen found parts of a Lightning in their nets, between Marseille and Corsica. A few month's later, they found a jewel on the same spot that belonged to de St Exupéry. So we can say that his grave is found.

The P-51 Mustang and the Zero come to mind for me, but i would have to say the F4U Corsair was the best preforming aircraft. Although the ME262 might be able to match it......

p-49 lightning it wasnt the best in any one field but it was the best all around fighter because of its versatility

the Me262 obviously by far the fastest, a needed trait in fighter plane. However it was tempramental and had such a short range (innefeciant early jet engine) thatit could only be used as a defensive interceptor against bombers. It could only stay in the air for 10 mins, fight for ten and fly back to refuel. The Zero was manuverable but rendered obsolete by the mustang/hellcat/corsair platoon employed by the US by the end of the war. The supermarine spitfire performed outstandingly against the luftwafe but its performance record was greatley inflated by the use of radar. The P51 Mustang was the only fighter with the range to escort bombers into enemy territory, the only ones fast and manuverable enough to dominate their opposition and was the best "pure fighter" of world war two.

The Spitfire was far more versatile than the Mustang. The Mustang had essentially 4 versions in its life, the Spitfire had 24 and there were also 3 versions of the Seafire carrier version.

I'll concede the range, but remember the Mustang only existed because of a British requirement, and only became the fighter it should have been when they added the British designed Merlin engine. The original Allison-engined versions were pants.

As for the record of the Spitfire being inflated by radar? That was just the Battle of Britain.

If the Spitfire wasn't such an essentially fine design, it would have been superceded by another design, just as the ME109 was replaced by the Fw190 and the Wildcat by the Hellcat in the Pacific theatre.

Instead, it was modified and modified, and coped with an incredible growth in engine power from the first Merlin to the final Griffon.

There was no other fighter that was produced in so many variants, had an airframe capable of so much development, and which was so well regarded by all its pilots.

The Mustang did one thing well, but the Spitfire did a whole host of things wonderfully.

So, NianNorth, we agree at last ;)

I can't believe it took this many posts before the great DeHavilland Mosquito is mentioned.

I know it is a fighter bomber and night fighter not a pure fighter, but it owns. Twin engines, fly perfectly well on one, incredibly fast, resilient wooden construction, looks like kate moss with a bicep job. I'd rather have been in it than anything else.

My favourite is the Boulton Paul Defiant. It was crap, but really cute and had an amazing kill record for about the first week or so of service.

Yes, if only Boulton Paul had given it a couple of wing guns instead of putting them all in the turret.

Unfortunately as soon as the Germans learnt to tell it apart from a Hurricane and attacked it from the front and below, it was pretty well doomed as a design.

Of course having to take the weight of that power turret and gunner played havoc with its performance, so it probably wouldn't have done all that well even with wing guns.

Corsair

Come on people, it entered in its first version in 1942(pretty much start of the war for the US) and remained in service for the marines through the early 60's.


http://home.att.net/~historyzone/F4U-4.html


COME ON. This was one of the best aircraft of the war if not the best.

I agree, The P-51 especially the ability to escort bombers into enemy territory, if the Germans had such a fighter at the Battle Of Britain, then there may have been a different outcome.

But they did!

The Germans had air bases in Northern France so they were close enough to the UK for the Me109 to have ample range for bomber escorting. So the bombers had plenty of fighter escorts.

That's why the Hurricane / Spitfire mix worked well, the Hurricanes went for the bombers and the Spitfires tangled with their escorts.

The situation in the opposite direction was different as to hit targets in Germany from the UK was twice the distance.

No there were two main reasons for the winning of the Battle of Britain - radar and Hitler!

Yes, Hitler. In one of his many stupid personal decisions he switched the targets of the attacking forces from RAF airfields to English cities, especially London.

If they had carried on attacking the airfields they might have won the battle by simple attrition, but letting the RAF repair the airfields and bring in replacement aircraft and pilots turned the attrition the other way.

Finally Hitler turned his attention East, and Operation Sealion was cancelled.

But they did!

The Germans had air bases in Northern France so they were close enough to the UK for the Me109 to have ample range for bomber escorting. So the bombers had plenty of fighter escorts.
.

Or you are ignorant of this fits your agenda.

Go and read something or visit a WWII site, one of the main problems with the loss of bombers above England was due to the limited reach of the Bf-109. During the most important part of the battle of England, these fighters could protect their bombers at a point about one third of the distance Dover-London.The bombers were unprotected above most of their objectives.

Later on, they could protect them further but that is when the battle was allready lost.

Corsair

Come on people, it entered in its first version in 1942(pretty much start of the war for the US) and remained in service for the marines through the early 60's.


http://home.att.net/~historyzone/F4U-4.html


COME ON. This was one of the best aircraft of the war if not the best.

Of course the US Navy decided it wasn't suitable for carrier operations so didn't use it for such until 1944, after the British had shown them how to land Corsairs on carriers...

It wouldn't have made a great difference.

What really hampered the German escorts over Southern England was Goering ordering them to closely accompany the bombers, thus loosing any speed and altitude advantages they would have otherwise had.

The Emil (Bf-109E) was no slouch compared to Mk 1 Spits and Hurricanes and was able to hold it's own; the real reason the Germans lost the Battle of Britain was down to tactical blunders and not the aircraft available to them.


Welll....

The Tuskegee guys did the same thing. They stayed close to the bombers and would engage when needed. Once the fighter was chased off to a safe distance they immediatly returned to the bombers.

Result: No bombers lost to fighters for their 2 years of escort duty.

But as to the battle of britain. Rader helped a great deal. Then switching to civilian targets didn't help either.....

Or you are ignorant of this fits your agenda.

Go and read something or visit a WWII site, one of the main problems with the loss of bombers above England was due to the limited reach of the Bf-109. During the most important part of the battle of England, these fighters could protect their bombers at a point about one third of the distance Dover-London.The bombers were unprotected above most of their objectives.

Later on, they could protect them further but that is when the battle was allready lost.

Incorrect I'm afraid. The Bf109 was at the limit of its range over London, not 1/3rd of the way.

This was ample range for the attacks on the airfields in Kent and Sussex, so the bombers were escorted there.

It was only at a severe range disadvantage once the London raids began, and obviously any raids north of London like the later coventry raids would have to be unescorted.

However those later raids were at night, so neither side could use their day fighters effectively.

If the Germans had really tried to run unescorted bombers in daylight they would have been slaughtered.

Best? The reason that the Spitfire and Hurricanes were so effective during the Battle of Britain was that they complemented each other - the Spitfires kept the German fighters busy while the Hurricanes ripped through the German bombers.
It does seem unfair to compare fighters built before the war to the later designs!

Has anyone mentioned the Me 163 Komet? Certainly one of the more interesting aeroplanes of the war.

Has anyone mentioned the Me 163 Komet? Certainly one of the more interesting aeroplanes of the war.

Interesting but no match in the "Best of" competition. But we debated about the Me-262 ("Schwalbe") as candidate.

If the Germans had really tried to run unescorted bombers in daylight they would have been slaughtered.

Back to the books, they did.

Nothing matched the Me-262, I don't know how anyone could think otherwise.

Has anyone mentioned the Me 163 Komet? Certainly one of the more interesting aeroplanes of the war.

Well as a fighter it was remarkable.

No endurance and more likely to blow itself and its pilot up on landing than be shot down.

The combat record of one Me163 group was 9 kills and 14 self-inflicted losses!

Hydrogen peroxide is not a fuel to mess with...

A few more aircraft come to mind:

The French aircraft, Dewoitine D.520, Morane-Saulnier M.S. 406 (as referred to earlier) and the Potez (think it was a great fighter-bomber). And yes, the Ilyushin Il-2/-10 Sturmovik. What do you people think of the Henschel Hs 123, the Blohm und Voss BV 138, the Lysander, and...lets see...maybe the Fw 200? Lets debate and hear some opinions about the lesser-known aircraft of the war. :)

I voted for the Spitfire for several reasons.
1) like ths BF109 it was one of the few fighters that was around at the start of WW2 and the finish.
2) It proved itself on all fronts and was still being produced as late as 1948

As to the P51 Mustang, it was not untill the British put in the Rolls Royce Merlin engine that the P51 reached its true potential. Prior to that it was too heavy for the original engine and had lower manueverability than both most German and English fighters.

Also the Mosquito was a light Bomber and not actually a fighter, however that does not in anyway diminish the Mosquitos prowess as a warplane.
No there were bomber, fighter bomber ond fighter version of the mosquito.
The Spit was one of the most agile and fastest fighters at the start of the war and at the end. Pretty good record.

Except for fighting, which the P-38 kicks its ass.

The P-38 was easily the most versatile fighter aircraft of the war.
No the mosquito fighter bomber was more heavily armed, four 20mm cannon and four .303 s all with plenty of amo. Appart from the first variant and the low blown models they were all faster than the P38.
It was an effective night fighter and could carry 4000lbs of bombs and over 400mph, that's versatile.

Any wya I like the Westland Whirlwind, heaviest fire power for it's time. Just crap at altituted.

There's also the germany Arrow, Dornier335 which was interesting.

But as has been mentioned the Spit was designed pre war, many other fighter (especially the US ones) were designed after some years of war so were more advanced and had the benefit of combat feedback etc. So comparing them is a little unfair.
But as the Spit was great at the start of the war and in the Spitefull good at the end, had inteceptions higher than any other fighter, had ground attack and phot recon variants, worked in deserts, jungles off carriers and from every enviroment it has to get my vote. It's not my fave but have to say across the board it's the best. Others may match it in one field or another or better it but none cover the same ground.

Think of the unsung heroes of the war, guys, the C-47s! The Avro Ansons! The Ju 52/3m s, the transports! :D

Any wya I like the Westland Whirlwind, heaviest fire power for it's time. Just crap at altituted.

There's also the germany Arrow, Dornier335 which was interesting.

But as has been mentioned the Spit was designed pre war, many other fighter (especially the US ones) were designed after some years of war so were more advanced and had the benefit of combat feedback etc. So comparing them is a little unfair.
But as the Spit was great at the start of the war and in the Spitefull good at the end, had inteceptions higher than any other fighter, had ground attack and phot recon variants, worked in deserts, jungles off carriers and from every enviroment it has to get my vote. It's not my fave but have to say across the board it's the best. Others may match it in one field or another or better it but none cover the same ground.


Except the Chance-Vought F-4U

Carrier, Land, Jungle, Desert, Photo Recon, Interceptor, Fighter, Bomber. Carried a heavier payload, could take more damage and fly faster

P-51D Mustang

I'm surprised by all the Me 262 votes. It was a techonological marvel of the time, but seriously flawed.

They were very vulnerable at low altitudes and during landing and takeoff. P-51s would wait for that moment and kill them and rack up good numbers too.

the p38 lightining...one of the most manuverable planes of the era,also very well armed....

Im an idiot, I said Mustang, but the F4U Corsair was the best fighter in the world at the end of the war (at least in the hands of a capable pilot). It was tricky to fly and the giant engine made for poor visibility in take off and landing, but its kill ratios were phenomenal. It was the fastest plane in the American forces when introduced, and maintained an amazing level of maneuverability.

Yes. (the Corsair, not that you're an idiot). Tha Chance-Vought Corsair was an amazing aircraft and though it's extremely difficult to define what "best" means given the strategic circumstances of the war (the Germans playing defense after 1942 for example), the Corsair as with the Mustang survived to fight in the 1950's arsenal during the Korean Conflict. In terms of handling, firepower, kills, speed, and sheer air superiority you can fairly argue that the Mustang and Corsair were evenly matched. The edge goes to the Corsair because of it's versatility (land and sea-based, thanks Great Britain for showing us how to land it on a carrier) and the fact that it was air-cooled. This means that a hit to the engine was not as fatal as that incurred by the water-cooled Mustang (and Spitfire). Longer life, better engine protection meant survivability - the Corsair edges out the win.

Except the Chance-Vought F-4U

Carrier, Land, Jungle, Desert, Photo Recon, Interceptor, Fighter, Bomber. Carried a heavier payload, could take more damage and fly faster
Not as old a design and the Spitefull (spit derivative) was clocked at 472mph.

Yes. (the Corsair, not that you're an idiot). Tha Chance-Vought Corsair was an amazing aircraft and though it's extremely difficult to define what "best" means given the strategic circumstances of the war (the Germans playing defense after 1942 for example), the Corsair as with the Mustang survived to fight in the 1950's arsenal during the Korean Conflict. In terms of handling, firepower, kills, speed, and sheer air superiority you can fairly argue that the Mustang and Corsair were evenly matched. The edge goes to the Corsair because of it's versatility (land and sea-based, thanks Great Britain for showing us how to land it on a carrier) and the fact that it was air-cooled. This means that a hit to the engine was not as fatal as that incurred by the water-cooled Mustang (and Spitfire). Longer life, better engine protection meant survivability - the Corsair edges out the win.
Hawker Tempest, fought and shot down Mig 15s in dog fights in Korea. This is all a bit of a futile exercise as the best means different things to different people.

the p38 lightining...one of the most manuverable planes of the era,also very well armed....
No it was not very manouverable which is why it tended to be used outside the Eurpeon theatre or for bomber interception. If you want a twin engined aircraft that was manouverable the the Dehavelan Hornet (arived too late to see action) it was the first aircraft to perform a wing tip roll (cart wheel). It could also do over 460 mph loaded and operate over 40,000 feet.

the p38 lightining...one of the most manuverable planes of the era,also very well armed....
Zero was in a class of it's own, shame it lacked the fire power and the durability.
Oh all those that spout about the 262. American thunderbolts shot down a number (no I don't know how many) in dog fights! No not when taking off and landing, in the air at altituded.

The best tactic (as far as I know) for the "Schwalbe" (The '262) was to head for their enemies at high speed, and do what is known as the "slashing" attack or whatever. A rapid burst of cannon fire, blow past the target, and return for another shot. If an Allied pilot could somehow get a '262 into a turning battle, the Allied pilot would win, barring qualtity differences and that stroke of luck. I don't know much about dogfighting, but I do know that he who has the most energy wins.

By the way, am I right to say that the WfGr 21 mortars mounted on the '262s were only used to disperse bomber streams? Are there accounts of creative pilots who used them to hit fighters? I know P-47 pilots can destroy enemy aircraft by landing on top of them, then raising their gear so their fuel tak smashes into the cockpit. ;)

By the way, am I right to say that the WfGr 21 mortars mounted on the '262s were only used to disperse bomber streams?

True, but they also used rockets like on the Me-163, "Komet"

I am a fan of the F4U Corsair, which was good enough to remain in production until 1954, and was very successful not only in the Pacific, but also in Korea and is probably the best piston engined carrier aircraft every built (except maybe the AD1 Skyraider, but it was a strike plane)

Excellent range, 400 MPH plus in level flight, heavy armament, and deadly to Japanese fighters of all types... and did well at high altitude as well as low and medium altitudes..

Would have made an excellent escort fighter for the 8th Air Force too, but oh well.

In Korea, the F4U even bagged a few Mig15s

Although clearly the Me262 is the best jet, but it was more of an interceptor than an air superiority fighter.

The German Ta 152 was pretty impressive too, but didn't participate in combat enough to be accurately rated.

But it is hard to beat the sheer beauty of a P51 in flight, and the D and H models were superior to everything except for the ME262 in almost all characteristics

Best twin engined fighter is clearly the P38, but I really love the fighter versions of the Mosquito (another beautiful bird too)

Not as old a design and the Spitefull (spit derivative) was clocked at 472mph.
Correction speed was 472 mph but was clocked at 494 mph

I am a fan of the F4U Corsair, which was good enough to remain in production until 1954, and was very successful not only in the Pacific, but also in Korea and is probably the best piston engined carrier aircraft every built (except maybe the AD1 Skyraider, but it was a strike plane)

Excellent range, 400 MPH plus in level flight, heavy armament, and deadly to Japanese fighters of all types... and did well at high altitude as well as low and medium altitudes..

Would have made an excellent escort fighter for the 8th Air Force too, but oh well.

In Korea, the F4U even bagged a few Mig15s

Although clearly the Me262 is the best jet, but it was more of an interceptor than an air superiority fighter.

The German Ta 152 was pretty impressive too, but didn't participate in combat enough to be accurately rated.

But it is hard to beat the sheer beauty of a P51 in flight, and the D and H models were superior to everything except for the ME262 in almost all characteristics

Best twin engined fighter is clearly the P38, but I really love the fighter versions of the Mosquito (another beautiful bird too)
The only problem with saying which is best,is that obviously designed made during the war would have the edge over those drawn before the war or at the start.
The p51 was eventualy a great plane, but not the ultimate dog fighter, it was however the best at what it did, long range escort. It along with the 262 did not have the rate of climb, roll or turn speed other aircraft did.
P51D could not out dog fight the later spits, but then iot would not have to as it could be five hundred miles away with it's far greater range.
So can we change this to what's your favourite fighter.
I have a list, sticking to aircraft that saw combat and in no order:
The Mosquito
Thunderbolt (Jug) just look at the size of the thing!
The Spitfire
Westland Whirlwind (don't know why, just looks a bit different)
Boomerang (it was crap but just looked weird, or it did to me)
Mitchell B25 (not a fighter really but just love the way some one came along and said 'how many .5 inch guns can we pack onto this pointing forwards? 12 and the two from the turret, tha'll do!')
komet (Looks like it was brought from the future, and the whole light the blue touch paper and stand back thing is quite awe inspiring. tha people actually got in those things!)
And there are so many more, for all different reasons.. But best,, best at what?

Mitchell B25 (not a fighter really but just love the way some one came along and said 'how many .5 inch guns can we pack onto this pointing forwards? 12 and the two from the turret, tha'll do!')



Can't forget the forward firing 75mm cannon they later took off of that and put in the sherman tank.

F4U Corsair

F4U Corsair


w00t

yet another person realizes the pure versatility and awesomeness of that airplane.

The US Marines used it for 20 years

It is probably the only true multirole aircraft to exist in it's time.

It could divebomb anything, take on the best fighters, and was durable as hell.

And it was a very good carrier based aircraft.

Some days you just wish the jet engine was never invented...

It is probably the only true multirole aircraft to exist in it's time.

It could divebomb anything, take on the best fighters, and was durable as hell.

And it was a very good carrier based aircraft.

Some days you just wish the jet engine was never invented...

I have to agree..... although the late model P47 was a damn good multirole aircraft too (just not a carrier one)

Best was probably the Mustang (at least of the piston engined), coolest has to be the p-61 'blackwidow', largest craft to ever carry the 'P' (for pursuit) designation. An overgrown derivitive of the p-38 with 4 20mm cannons in the belly and a turrent with 4 .50 cal, it could shred a 'betty' with one burst.

If they had carried on attacking the airfields they might have won the battle by simple attrition, but letting the RAF repair the airfields and bring in replacement aircraft and pilots turned the attrition the other way.

From what i read and have seen as documentaries and encyclopedies, i remember the Germans did attack the airfields. They basically destroyed them, but at one point one airfield was build up whereas the Germans assumed all airfields were destroyed. The result: massive casualties in German bombers.

From what i read and have seen as documentaries and encyclopedies, i remember the Germans did attack the airfields. They basically destroyed them, but at one point one airfield was build up whereas the Germans assumed all airfields were destroyed. The result: massive casualties in German bombers.

They did attack the airfields, and hard too, but there are several holes in the theory that had they continued to, the BoB would have been won. Only the RAF's bases in Southern England were under threat, German fighters did not have the range to escorts bombers anywhere north of London to attack other RAF airbases, so to do so would be suicide missions. If th Southern Bases would have been knocked out, the RAF's reaction time would have been slowed, but they would have cut their ground losses, and been operating from mostly invulnerable bases.

Somebody might have already mentioned this (I don't feel like reading the whole thread), but it seems kinda unfair to put a jet fighter (Me262) with all those prop planes.

And some planes on the list, like the Hurricane, were outdated when the war began. Also, you forgot the Lightning, which was an eccelent airplane. But I can't really decide if any of those options are really the 'best'. It's all really a subjective judgement, and I'm too tired rigt now to think that hard.

Somebody might have already mentioned this (I don't feel like reading the whole thread), but it seems kinda unfair to put a jet fighter (Me262) with all those prop planes.


Why? I saw the 262 and voted P-51D Mustang. The reason is simple. The 262 was weak at landing and take off. The Mustangs just waited over the bases and took the 262s out like they were nothing.

Why? I saw the 262 and voted P-51D Mustang. The reason is simple. The 262 was weak at landing and take off. The Mustangs just waited over the bases and took the 262s out like they were nothing.

Yeah. The poor 262s... :(

Changed my mind, if we have to make a call on one aircraft then for me the Martin Baker MB5 is it.

I can see why some one might say the corsair but the Mustang! It was a good escort but lacked the rate of climb etc. I say again this was becuase it was good at what it did, escort fighter but was not the ultimate dog fighter. If dog fighting is what your after the Yak is hard to beat.
The Black widow was an ugly bugger and for the ,ost part the four gun turret was removed due to the excess buffeting it caused. Leaving it with 4 20mm cannon, which is less well armed than the good old mosquito, and not as fast or flickable. But it was an ok craft. Oh and the Mosquito was also fitted with 40mm boffers guns for anti sub duties, can't find any pictures though.

I don't think anyonehas mentioned the Hell cat. Not the best, but it's contribution to the American effort was huge as it allowed them to start to win the air war, in which until it was introduced they ad been outclassed by the Zero etc. Plus without it other US craft would not have been developed.

I don't think anyonehas mentioned the Hell cat. Not the best, but it's contribution to the American effort was huge as it allowed them to start to win the air war, in which until it was introduced they ad been outclassed by the Zero etc. Plus without it other US craft would not have been developed.

I should mention right away I have no opinion on the topic. Now that no one is reading-

I played a game once called Mustangs & Messerschmidts that uses six-foot tall stalks on bases with wheels and model airplanes. The people who play it are anal retentive about history and the like (they like to point out that actual pilots tend to do better in the game). Anyway, I showed up a bit late and they where out of Corsairs so they had to have this big-ass discussion on whether the avialable model of the Hellcat could have appeared. They decided that while not likely, it was possible so I got paired up with another newbie in a Corsiar. I would fly just off his tail and the Zeros would come in and attack then peel down or up where the Corsiar couldn't follow, but I could. Ended the day as an ace as we spent time weaving between Marines fighting Zeros and the Air Force(army). I almost rammed into a P-48. It's a fun game.

The p-51 Mustang.
Tankbusters.

Props must also be given to the Messerschmits and the Spitfire.

The p-51 Mustang.
Tankbusters.

Props must also be given to the Messerschmits and the Spitfire.
Want a tank buster you will be hard pressed to better the Ill 2.

Hawker Hurricane. The plane that saved Britain, hands down.

Want a tank buster you will be hard pressed to better the Ill 2.


it's an attack aircraft, not a fighter


if this included attack aircraft you'd use the A-26, SBD Dauntless, Ju-87, etc( i only know american attack aircraft, cept the IL-2)

Hey! I'm rather chuffed people are still adding to this! Hoorah!
Anyhew...
The reason that the only jet powered plane on the list is the 262 is simple, I ran out of spaces to add more aircraft! Otherwise the the Gloster Meteor would have been there, as well as the Heinkel jet fighter (can't remember its designation at this second) would also be there, though it did look startlingly like a 262!
Can't say I'm surprised that the P51 is winning, though I personally don't rate it that highly. As has been already mentioned it was a good escort fighter, and its sheer numbers helped, but until it was fitted with a Merlin derivative it was useless as a fighter.
Bit disappointed about the Spit and Hurricane, my personal faves, not just because I'm British bu also because I think they were the most versatile and useful designs for the entire length of the war, but hey, thats my opinion!
I'm very happy that the 262 has as many votes as it does! Again, a great fighter and continued in service, albeit with different engines, in many airforces around the world for many years after (when I find the links again I'll put them up!)

"Quote"
The Sword and Sheild

They did attack the airfields, and hard too, but there are several holes in the theory that had they continued to, the BoB would have been won. Only the RAF's bases in Southern England were under threat, German fighters did not have the range to escorts bombers anywhere north of London to attack other RAF airbases, so to do so would be suicide missions. If th Southern Bases would have been knocked out, the RAF's reaction time would have been slowed, but they would have cut their ground losses, and been operating from mostly invulnerable bases.

There are holes in this theory, but had it not occured like it had the Battle would probably have been lost as the Germans would have had the ability to land paratroopers into Southern England and take control of the damaged airfields. Given time they would have been able to mount an invasion of the Southern Coasts and, using the damaged airfield which would have invariably been repaired enough to land aircraft, would than have been able to attack the rest of the UK with fighter escorts.
Also, had the Battle progressed to this point, not only would RAF forces have been severely depleted in both aircraft and pilots, but they would have lost the use of RDF (radar) as they pointed only out over the coast, not inland so making it almost impossible for them to scamble fighters in time to defend any targets that the Germans wished to attack.

Also, Radar wasn't the major factor for the RAF winning the Battle. It was more due to the decryption of Ultra as the RAF knew most of the targets the Luftwaffe were going to attack before they did, thus allowing Park and Dowding to position their aircraft better. This isn't in most history texts as it was kept very secret at the time and its full use is only just being released.

Thanks everyone for being involved in this thread, and I hope to see it on the front pages again!

Me-262 and Focke Wulf 190. Other opinions are stupid.

well, you could also look at the best fighter year by year.....

my choices,

1939 ME109E
1940 Spitfire Mk 1
1941 FW190A
1942 Mitsubishi Zero
1943 F4U Corsair
1944 P51 Mustang or Me 262
1945 Me 262, Corsair, Mustang, Meteor or P80A (which barely reached Italy as the war ended), the Japanese fighter "George" was also excellent

well, you could also look at the best fighter year by year.....

my choices,

1939 ME109E
1940 Spitfire Mk 1
1941 FW190A
1942 Mitsubishi Zero
1943 F4U Corsair
1944 P51 Mustang or Me 262
1945 Me 262, Corsair, Mustang, Meteor or P80A (which barely reached Italy as the war ended), the Japanese fighter "George" was also excellent

Nice post NS, but why do you give the Zero as best best fighter in 42, thus better then the Mk1 and Fw 190 and Me 109E(mile)?

First, the FW 190 was not in the air in 1941 but in late 1942 and I would prefer to be in the Spit, FW and Me then in a Zero in 1942 (altough a great and easy to make plain).

Nice that you are aware of the not well known "George" ;)
Why did not you post the Thunderbolt from Republic? Very good one to and even faster in the latest version then the Mustang.

Changed my mind, if we have to make a call on one aircraft then for me the Martin Baker MB5 is it.

I can see why some one might say the corsair but the Mustang! It was a good escort but lacked the rate of climb etc. I say again this was becuase it was good at what it did, escort fighter but was not the ultimate dog fighter. If dog fighting is what your after the Yak is hard to beat.
The Black widow was an ugly bugger and for the ,ost part the four gun turret was removed due to the excess buffeting it caused. Leaving it with 4 20mm cannon, which is less well armed than the good old mosquito, and not as fast or flickable. But it was an ok craft. Oh and the Mosquito was also fitted with 40mm boffers guns for anti sub duties, can't find any pictures though.

I don't think anyonehas mentioned the Hell cat. Not the best, but it's contribution to the American effort was huge as it allowed them to start to win the air war, in which until it was introduced they ad been outclassed by the Zero etc. Plus without it other US craft would not have been developed.Most Mosquitos carried no armament at all, those that did certainly weren't 'fast and flickable', you just can't load up a plane that uses that much plywood and canvas in it's structure. Even without the turrent the blackwidow carried enough to do it's job, it was a nightfighter that used it's radar to sneak up behind Japanese bombers and transports and 4 20's would easily leave them in pieces. I agree about the F6, the Hellcat was a great plane and turned the tide in the pacific. I don't think you give the Mustang enough credit especially if you only consider the D version, not the B.

Another plane I like, just for it's oddity, is the Aircobra. I know it had lots of problems but it was radical in it's design and showed imagination and progressive thinking.

I've always been partial to the P-38 Lightning myself. Fast, heavy armor, long distance, maneuverable, big guns, What's not to like.

Most Mosquitos carried no armament at all, those that did certainly weren't 'fast and flickable', you just can't load up a plane that uses that much plywood and canvas in it's structure. Even without the turrent the blackwidow carried enough to do it's job, it was a nightfighter that used it's radar to sneak up behind Japanese bombers and transports and 4 20's would easily leave them in pieces. I agree about the F6, the Hellcat was a great plane and turned the tide in the pacific. I don't think you give the Mustang enough credit especially if you only consider the D version, not the B.

Another plane I like, just for it's oddity, is the Aircobra. I know it had lots of problems but it was radical in it's design and showed imagination and progressive thinking.
First I also like the Aircobra, looks a bit different and was pretty quick considering it's HP.
But what are you talking about 'you can't load up a mozzy!' The bomber version carried enough fuel to give it a range of over 1200 mile carrying a 4000lb bomb load. The fighter version of which there were many, so I will stick with the normal type (the night fighter version had radar and 4 20mm connon before a black widow ever flew) with 4 20mm and 4 .303 carried plenty on ammo and was a very succesfull night fighter.
A mozzy could perform climbs rolls and other acrobatics with one engine off and feathered, not many twins can sya the same. Not saying the Widow wasn't a good night fighter but that was all it was.
The mozzy had low blown versions with big guns for anti sub and shipping work, night fighter versions, day fishter version, phot recon versions, bomber versions both light and heavy, both armed and unarmed, bombers that drop land bouncing bombs, high altitude interceptors and the list goes on and on, and in every role they were good if not ecellent.
Oh and as for speed the high blown fighter version could top 425mph some were faster but that depended on the engines fitted, it's replacement that was built the same way but was a single seater could top 470mph, so yes I would say they were pretty fast, the reason the bomber versions were not armed was because there was not a German fighter at the time with the speed to catch them!
What can you say about fighter bomber that's favoured form of attack was to have one aircraft come in at about 2000ft full throttle to distract the gunners etc when the others flew in at 200ft and over 300mph to deliver the bombs!

Nice post NS, but why do you give the Zero as best best fighter in 42, thus better then the Mk1 and Fw 190 and Me 109E(mile)?

First, the FW 190 was not in the air in 1941 but in late 1942 and I would prefer to be in the Spit, FW and Me then in a Zero in 1942 (altough a great and easy to make plain).

Nice that you are aware of the not well known "George" ;)
Why did not you post the Thunderbolt from Republic? Very good one to and even faster in the latest version then the Mustang.

The Zero absolutely dominated the Pacific Theater from Pearl Harbor until the Americans developed the proper tactics to deal with it in the Guadalcanal campaign....no other fighter until the Mustang so drastically affected the course of the war.

All of the fighters I listed dominated the theater of operations they were in for a specific period of time... I am reasonably sure the FW190 game along in 41, but guess I am wrong... but when it showed up, the Allies couldn't match it for several months. It didn't have the same impact as the Zero though.

Only two fighters changed the course of the war in the Pacific (Hellcat designed to beat the Zero, and the Zero, the Hellcat was the principal US carrier fighter for the final two years of the war and destroyed the rebuilt IJN carrier air groups, and the Zero made mincemeat of everything it met until the Guadalcanal campaign where it was beaten by superior American tactics)

only one fighte had the same impact in the European theater, and that was the Mustang

Although critical, in that it was a match for the Germans and won the Battle of Britian (along with a larger number of Hurricanes), the Spitfires moment of glory was just that, a relative moment were it was the decisive edge. Same with the ME109 (over Poland and France) and the Me262 was an amazing aircraft for its day, but it didn't affect the course of the war the way the Mustang and zero did, and the Hellcat isn't as good as the Mustang or the Corsair, there were just more of them than the Corsair.

anyway, thats my reasoning

Although I like the Jug a lot myself and as a tactical fighter bomber, only the Tempest and Typhoon came close (they werent as tough though in terms of the ability to take battle damage)

The Zero absolutely dominated the Pacific Theater from Pearl Harbor until the Americans developed the proper tactics to deal with it in the Guadalcanal campaign....no other fighter until the Mustang so drastically affected the course of the war.

All of the fighters I listed dominated the theater of operations they were in for a specific period of time... I am reasonably sure the FW190 game along in 41, but guess I am wrong... but when it showed up, the Allies couldn't match it for several months. It didn't have the same impact as the Zero though.

Only two fighters changed the course of the war in the Pacific (Hellcat designed to beat the Zero, and the Zero, the Hellcat was the principal US carrier fighter for the final two years of the war and destroyed the rebuilt IJN carrier air groups, and the Zero made mincemeat of everything it met until the Guadalcanal campaign where it was beaten by superior American tactics)

only one fighte had the same impact in the European theater, and that was the Mustang

Although critical, in that it was a match for the Germans and won the Battle of Britian (along with a larger number of Hurricanes), the Spitfires moment of glory was just that, a relative moment were it was the decisive edge. Same with the ME109 (over Poland and France) and the Me262 was an amazing aircraft for its day, but it didn't affect the course of the war the way the Mustang and zero did, and the Hellcat isn't as good as the Mustang or the Corsair, there were just more of them than the Corsair.

anyway, thats my reasoning

Although I like the Jug a lot myself and as a tactical fighter bomber, only the Tempest and Typhoon came close (they werent as tough though in terms of the ability to take battle damage)
What are you on about the Spit was there at the start of the war and at the end, it was a force through out, the Mustang had no where near the impact.
Oh and just to bang on about the Mozzy again [URL=http://www.aviation-history.com/dehavilland/mosquito.html]

Well, I voted Supermarine Spitfire. The Hurricanes did all the work in the BoB, but the Spitfires were superior planes, and if Britain had as many Spitfires as it had Hurricanes, the BoB would have gone even smoother for Britain.

Dude, the F4U Corsair wasn't even an option? Look at its kill ratio, its speed, its six machine guns-not to mention it's just a great looking plane.


EDIT: But you know, it's always gonna be impossible to decide. They're all such fantastic aircraft. It's ultimately just a game of playing favorites.

Dude, the F4U Corsair wasn't even an option? Look at its kill ratio, its speed, its six machine guns-not to mention it's just a great looking plane.
Yep lots of good aircraft missed off, but the list would be huge. As Best can cover all sorts of things.

The Focke Wulf Ta 152. Why, you might ask. Because it's probably one of the greatest piston engined fighters of all time. Kurt Tank (it's, and the FW 190's, designer) proved it himself when he vas flying a one and got ambushed by four Mustangs and escaped. Simply by opening to it's full throttle, which, at 472 (!) mph was a lot faster than the Mustang, or any other non jet at the time, could go.

the p40 warhawk in the hands of a capable pilot it was a killer aircraft.....but in my opinion any of the aircraft mentioned so far in the hands of a good pilot
is an excellant fighter.