Warbird Information Exchange

So what conclusions can we have after 5 forums examining different assets of a top fighter. I rate in order speed(vital as it allows a pilot choice of attack or escape), arms, turning&maneuvering, and climb with ceiling(like speed can offer either attack or escape). Secondary factors are range, armor etc. The two fighters that I believe rate highest are P-51 and Spitfire. If you were to grade them on a scale of ABCDF, for each asset, I'd give the P-51D A-,C+(no cannons) B+, B+, and finally A+ on range. The Spit MkXIV rates even higher A(slightly faster level than the D and definitely faster mach crit dive) B(cannon as well as m guns) , A-(well know for turn ability at any speed) A(tops at altitude and climb, and finally B-for range. P-47 has good speed, great dive,,decent turn & arms but no cannon, and does not climb as well. 38 has arms and range but the Allison is not the equal of the Merlin, either in speed or up high, maybe not the equal of a DB. Others, Corsair, Hellcat may be tough down low, but the Spit and 51 are good both. Finally, although I did not list it as a category the Spit has something no other fighter has. It fought the entire war, both in Europe in 1940 athrough 45, and in the Paciific the last part. Everywhere it was either equal to or became superior to the opponent, with development mods and tatics, and it was pretty first rate in most every category except range. Merlin fighters are critisized as strafers, but it was a Spit that knocked out Rommel before D day and 51s did a lot of strafing. It is a plus that Spits especially the Merlin ones are easy to fly and forgiving to fight in. Also were verstile with great photo recon, and Seafires, even one on floats. So given my goals of a dogfighter I think the Spit is best all around, unless the range reqires a 51. Good as the 51 was especially on long range escort, it wasn't a factor until 1943. With only 4 guns and an Allison the 109s would have chewed up the 51A as they did the 38 in Europe. So how about it guys, does this sound legit or am I ready for the Thanksgiving oven ?And thanks for all those who wrote in, and most of all thanks to those who fought with these planes when the world need them.

_________________
Bill Greenwood
Spitfire N308WK

Huh. Bill picked the Spitfire. Never woulda seen that coming.

A couple of points worthy of mention.
1. The Spits got their asses kicked in the Pacific.
2. The P-51A acquitted itself well in the ETO and in the MTO has the A-36.
They also performed very well in Burma with the 1st ACG and in China with the 311th FG.
3. I've never heard range being a possitive asset for a Spit where as P-38s flew 12 hour missions from the Philippines to Boreno in 1944/45.
4. As for the amount of weapons, Reade Tilley told me that on Malta their Spits had a MGs removed leaving only the 2 cannon. The idea was that if you could hit the target you really didn't need 6 guns and you saved a lot of weight besides.
5. Wildcats also flew the whole war and in 1945 were downing Franks, Jack ect.
As for the best all around I'd say the P-38L-5 or the F4U-4 but since the Corsair could do it on land or sea I'll say F4U-4.

_________________
Don't touch my junk!!

How about a fighter pilot from that era having the final say on this one?

The following is a poem written by Richard West published in "War in Pacific Skies" by Charlie and Ann Cooper.

When fighter pilots get together,
They speak of women, wine, and weather.
They brag about the planes they flew,
And all the things that they would do.

The Navy liked the Hellcat best
And sing its praises east and west.
For some the Jug is where it's at,
Like their airplanes big and fat.

The Mustang gets its fair acclaim,
As well as others that they name.
But when the accolades are through
And statements nearer being true-

The best airplane that ever flew,
The one that brightened up the blue,
The one that won the war as well,
Was a Lockheed Lightning Model L.

Can anyone put it any better?

Old Glenn never bettered.
He made a Tigar that could.
It shot and bled the first day of the war.
But gave fighting men a chance to live.
Angels at 15, but alas we cannot meet.
As our Warhawks don't have enough legs to reach.
As stronger brother comes.
And the war nears the end.
Remember one thing.
Our Warhawk never quit.

Maybe we could start a new thread to closely examine which of the various Marks was the best Spitfire Mark for a given fantasy mission and atmospheric condition.

_________________
Eric

"I spent most of my money on alcohol, women and skyraiders....and the rest of it I just wasted."

nice summery bill
but like others here i differ on the choice of the spitfire.
in the pacific early mk's like the mkvc were badly mauled by the zero's that they came up against (but they were very good for morale in dawin)
later ones like the mkviii were better but lacked range.
on speed,a lack of speed didn't stop the early zero's from dominating the pacific for the first 6 months of the war.
arm's, saburo sakai in his bio said that in his oppinion that the american (p40/47/51/helcat corsair/wildcat) use of a larger number of fast firing single callibre gun was superior to the ijnaf use of mixed calibre guns as they were easer to set up.
turning, most japanese aircraft of the war could out turn most allied aircraft but with modfied tactics the advantage was pretty much removed .
fighting at both low and hi altitude,whilst most of the pacific was fought at fairly low hight aircraft like the ki-100 and ki-84 were still very capble up high (so was the ki-61).
both the zero and bf 109 fought before the start of the war and were still opponents not to be taken lightly at the end of the war.
one final part of this discussion is maintinance my father is a retired airframe mechanic and this part seems to be an often over looked part of a great fighter,without maintainability no matter how great your airframe is it would spend most of its time on the ground not in the air where it can do it's job.
so my opinion of the greatest fighter would be the ki-61/100 series as they were (in ki-61 form) were equal or better than most of the allied aircraft in the early part of the war and still (in ki-100 form) able to hold their heads high against mustangs,seafires.etc had good speed great rate of turn good range and pretty good arms and in a time when most japanese aircraft were becoming harder to maintain the ki-100 was still fairly simple to service as the airframe was well known to the mechanics and the motor was also well known as they had been in use most of the war.
an hornerble mention should also go to the p51-d ,p47-n,tempest, h1k2 george,late model spitfire's and ki-84 as all were fine fighters .
bill i have been following this thread since the begining and was curious as a current spitfire pilot what other fighters you have flown ? and what was your opinion of them?
paul
ps the brisol beaufighter was used as a night fighter during the battle of britain and served in europe till the end of the war ,and the raaf in the pacific recieved it's first beau" in 1942 and they also seved till the end of the war, and whilst it mat not have been in the same class as the spit as a fighter nothing on the ground or on the sea was safe i couldnt help my self

Fw190D-9 must be up there with the best of them, air combat wise at least.

Dave

Guys, thanks for replies, I don't see too many facts that offset the Spit and 51D choice. Perhaps I missstated one point. Because the Spit fought the whole war, first in Europe, the Med. Africa and finally Pacific, we can get a idea of not only how it peformed in many situations and against many oppenents but also that the allies kept using it because it was, of course with development, up to the task. I don't know of any other top fighter that did this. 109 did not go to Pacific, nor did LA-7, etc. and Japanese fighters did not go t Europe. Some mentioned Wildcat & P-40, certainly you don't think these early designs are equeal to a Spifire IX, XIV, 51D, or other top fightrers? Other than pehaps range, what possible performance margin does a Wildcat have over a Spit?

_________________
Bill Greenwood
Spitfire N308WK

Bill when my father was CO of the 355thFG at Gablingen he had a lot of time on his hands. He flew Typhoon, Tempest, Spit XII, FW 190A8 and 190D-9, 109K and 47M... he actually flew about 50 hours in the 190D. He flew the 51H when he got home

As a died in the wool 51 Driver he remarked that if the game was pure fighter on fighter, range not essential, he would pick the Spit. If destroying heavy bombers and being able to battle top notch fighters like the Spit and Mustang, the 190D was hard to beat. If you had to do the long range air superiority 'thing' he'd keep the 51, and liked the H best of all.

This argument will never be settled as all the top choices were ones anyone could embrace and make work.

Fun topic though,

Regards,

Bill

hi bill
some russian fighter's did fight the japanese as after the fall of berlin the russians turned their attention to the kirril islands. (ww2 didnt offically end until gorbachof signed a treaty in japan as part of glastnos)whilst i'm not sure of what types and numbers or how they did the russians captured the kirril islands of japan and still hold them.
im pretty sure there must be pics and records out there so maybe the future will tell us how they rated ,there is however at least one pic of a captured lagg 3 and also a polikapov i/16 in japanese markings for testing and they rated very poorly by japanese standards.

Dog, your info sort of goes along with my findings. I hope your dad was dyed in the wool, not the way you wrote. How did he get access and that much time in all those types? Re FW190, with the extra power it gave the Spit V a hard time, then the 2 stage intercooled supercharger Merlin in the MKIX and later the Griffon Spits restablished Spit as better all around. The XIV was a little faster than a 51D yet still turned well. The XVIII was faster still, may have seen some service, and the 20 series post war Spits were over 450mph, potent, but probably not as nice to handle. Notably,top aces like Hartmann did not switch from 109 to FW, partly through familiarity and also the 190 had a deadly stall and was not as good at high altitude. Like the 51H,F8F, the long nose FW was fast but did not get proven in combat and had bugs. My info comes from aces reports and RAF comparisons. The Spit XII, the low altitude specialist was faster than the same FW. The top allied ace in victories over fighters, Johnson, tested 109, 190, 51, and other planes, and wrote " a well flown MKIX was the equeal of anything." Obviously if range is the main misson as in B-29 escort, the 51 is tops then perhaps 38, Mosi, Zero. 109 or early Spit is short on range, MKIX better, not really a strenght, but adequate.

_________________
Bill Greenwood
Spitfire N308WK

LOL - on 'died in the wool' - jeeez!

The 355th rotated from Steeple Morden in July 1945 to Gablingen, GY. Looking at Dad's logbook he had far more time in Fw 190D and 109K (and B-26/A-20) than 51's.

He was an Instructor for 2 1/2 years and almost went to combat in B-26's before being 'saved' for fighters - ended up teaching a lot of 355 pilots how to fly both the B-26 and A-20. he 355th actually had a B-26 assigned to the group which was frequently used on 'supply runs' for wine/food etc under the guise of X-country time.

As Exec and then CO he pretty much had the run of the flight line and there was a 2 seat 190 and 109 to start with - I don't know how he got the access to Typhoon and Spit but only had 3-4 hours in both.

He never flew the P-38.. so no comment one way or the other on that subject

Regards,

Bill

the long nose FW was fast but did not get proven in combat

Bill, I'm curious as to your source of information for this. Most references identify "Langnase Dora" delivery starting in August/September of 1944 and the aircraft being responsible for multiple victories over allied aircraft (including late marks of Spitfire).

_________________
It was a good idea, it just didn't work.

Dan, I got my info from the Official White House Book Of Weapons Of Mass Destruction And Other Fables. You don"t think those guys would fudge the truth do you? Really I could be wrong about the last FW. I got my test info on the early FW vs. MXII from the Jeffery Quill(factory test pilot) book, and on general reading on the late FW, perhaps in the book on testing at Boscome Down. There's also a small paper back series(Signature???) on most types like FW. Most had the big radial(BMW?), and SPIT XIV had better performance, especially at altitude. The long nose one had an inline and was fast. I recall it had engine problems, I assumed it had limited combat. I'm not at home now to check my books, will continue to look. Do you have performance figures or test results for this model? Kills are so dictated by the pilots and the scene, like when Spit or 51 downed ME262, and Hellcat outscored Corsair, it doesn't tell all. Obviously FW and even late 109 were nothing to take lightly.

_________________
Bill Greenwood
Spitfire N308WK