Best fighter of the war?

Site Issues 2006 Archive Room
#21

Quoted from: http://www.csd.uwo.ca/~pettypi/elevon/baugher_other/iar80.html

The history of WWII aviation is dominated almost entirely by the aircraft of five countries, the USA, England, Germany, Japan and the Soviet Union. Although small numbers of other designs saw combat, the majority of these were poor performers and saw little action. The Romanian IAR.80 is an exception to the rule.
When it was introduced it could outperform many contemporary fighters, and even beat out advanced German designs in head to head competition. It went on to form the backbone of the Romanian fighter groups for a number of years and would score a number of surprising and important victories over the USAAF.

Edited: My petty argument…

#22

It’s included Dani - I might cut the list down a bit for simplicity (ie only have one type of Spitfire/Bf-109 etc). Otherwise this could go on for a long time.

#23

:oops: Sorry, I didn’t noticed your edit!

#24

Fw-190 D-9 (Germany) is the best

#25

Hosenfield, I could make 10,000 posts with … is the best.
We want to debate. :smiley:

#26

I’ve revised the list to 32 fighters, which is the ideal number. If anyone desperately wants any others adding, post them here and I’ll fit them in. Debates start at 1900Z tomorrow (ie, roughly 23 hours)

#27

19.00 GMT?

#28

That’s right mate.

#29

Right, since there are no more nominations, the draw has been made for the First Round:

Tempest (UK) v Ki-84 Hayate (Japan)
Hurricane IIC (UK) v La-7 (USSR)
P-63 Kingcobra (USA) v F-4U-4 Corsair (USA)
MC.202 Folgore (Italy) v P-47 Thunderbolt (USA)
Fw-190 D-9 (Germany) v F6F Hellcat (USA)
D.520 (France) v Yak-9 (USSR)
Ki-43 Hayabusa (Japan) v Ki-44 Shoki (Japan)
N1K1 Kyofu (Japan) v IAR-80 (Romania)
MB152 (France) v FM-2 Wildcat (USA)
A6M Zero (Japan) v Bf-109K-4 (Germany)
P-40E (USA) v Spitfire XIV (UK)
G.55 Centauro (Italy) v P-36 (USA)
MiG-3 (USSR) v P-39 Aircobra (USA)
Ki-61 Hien (Japan) v F2A Buffalo (USA)
P-51D Mustang (USA) v Boomerang II (Australia)

LaGG-3 (USSR) - Bye

editted to replace Gladiator with Tempest

editted second time - due to the Wildcat being put in twice, the LaGG-3 gets a bye to the second round. :oops:

#30

Might as well get the first one started now, no point waiting:

P-51D Mustang vs Commonwealth Boomerang II (Australia)

P-51D Mustang

Engine: 1,490hp Packard/Rolls Royce Merlin V V-12
Max Speed: 437mph (704 km/h)
Climb: 30000ft (9145m) in 13 minutes
Service Ceiling: 41900ft (12770m)
Maximum Range: 2,080 miles (3347km)
Weapons: 6x 12.7mm (0.5in) MGs in wings
Up to 2,000lb (908kg) of bombs or 6x 127mm (5in) rockets

First designed to a British specification (NA-73) for a long range escort fighter, the first Mustangs (MkIA) were rejected by the USAAF, although they were adopted in a close support role by the RAF. The British replaced the Packard engine, which they found underpowered, with the Rolls Royce Merlin which was already in widespread RAF service. They found this significantly increased the Mustang’s performance. The USAAF finally adopted the aircraft and both found it ideal for escorting the long range daylight bombing raids over Germany.

Commonwealth Boomerang II

Engine: 1200hp Pratt & Whitney Twin Wasp
Max Speed: 296mph (464km/h)
Climb:
Service Ceiling: 29000ft (8845m)
Maximum Range: 930 (1490km)
Weapons: 2x 20mm Cannon and 4x 7.7mm (0.303in) MGs in wings

In 1942, the Australians found themselves on the front line against Japan with only a few American Brewster Buffalo fighters, which were soon outclassed by the Zero fighters of the Japanese Navy. In desperation the Australians asked Commonwealth Aircraft Corporation to produce a stop gap fighter based on the North American Trainer series which Aussie pilots were trained on. The CA-12 Boomerang was like most things Australian: Tough, with no frills…but it worked. It was outstandingly maneuverable, and was in no way whatsoever outclassed by its Japanese enemies. The Boomerang never carried bombs, but it did mark targets for “heavies”. The Boomerang also carried out close support with its guns. The Boomerang was possibly the most successful stop-gap measure in history. It certainly proved its worth, for the Japanese never looked down their noses at the tough Boomerang. Production ceased in early 1944.

You’ve got until tomorrow evening (Brit time - roughly 35 hours from now) to get your votes in

ONE LINE ANSWERS WILL BE IGNORED - JUSTIFY YOUR OPINION!

#31

FW-TA-152? did it get into action?

It outperformed the Mustang.

#32

FW-TA-152? did it get into action?

It outperformed the Mustang.[/quote]

Small number were in action, I don’t think production got into full swing before the end of the war.

#33

Or we could just not bother I suppose

#34

Just been away this weekend and only found this today!

P-51 wins hands down. While the Boomerang may have been able to hold it’s own against Zero’s, as the war went on, even the feared Zero became outdated and outclassed by the later Allied fighters. The P-51 remained dominant in the more “competitive” (in terms of aircraft advances) theater. While the Boomerang is to be admired for what it was - a superb stopgap, as your summary mentions - the P-51 was something of a “definitive” design in it’s class. While both are “right aircraft at the right time”, I see the P-51 as very much The aircraft at the right time. It wasn’t a stop gap - it was an aircraft of “war winning” excellence. Of the blows that were landed on the German war effort, many would not have happened had the USAAF been forced to send it’s bombers beyond fighter cover for a prolonged period of the war. It wasn’t that it was faster or could turn tighter or had more guns than it’s contemporaries - it was that it could be there where it’s Allied contemporaries were not, and could then stand toe to toe with whatever enemy contemporary met it.

#35

Festamus, cheers for the reply, glad someone had a crack at reasoned debate in a ‘best ever…’ thread :wink:

#36

Well I should warn you that if it was down to me, it’d be P-51 vs. Spit in the final round, and it’d be a draw until the Spit wins on looks. :slight_smile:

#37

Sounds similar to my opinion that mate

#38

What about the Corsair though? Absolutely awesome, big radial air cooled, fast,and furious. I wouldnt write it off. I must do some reasearch on it.

#39

If the thread had taken off, the Corsair was paired with the Kingcobra in the first round.

#40

Now that could be interesting… I’d be tempted to vote the Corsair through, given the Kingcobra was “give it to the Soviets” stuff… but then the Corsair wasn’t the wonder plane people seem to remember it as. A Naval aircraft which had fundamental features leaving it none-too-suitable for carrier operation, with what sound like serious accident rates on landing… I know the Marines got good use out of it operating from island strips, but nonetheless, it’s not like the P-51 vs Boomerang … I actually have reservations about voting for the obvious choice. :wink: