You are correct, muscogeemike. Perhaps I got their Korean use mixed up with Viet Nam. I read so much stuff, I can’t remember it all! LOL! However, under MAP, (miltary assistance program) many F51 Mustangs (P for pursuit was dropped by USAF for F, fighter in 1947) were sent to French Indo-China and other unspecified Asian countries. The last one downed in combat was in the Domonican Republic, during Operation Power Pack, in 1965. The Dominican Republic retired thier last one in 1984!
Believe me, colmhain, I understand. I have problems with decreasing brain cells to process increasing data.
P-39 “lighting” should read P-38 “Lighting”
P-47 is my choice of the listed ones. Unlike most others, it doesnt have any real vices, flaws or weaknesses. Except maybe its big size.
P-51 is fairly fast, decently maneuverable and very nice range, but deary its waay vulnerable. With it using the same engine as the Spitfire, i´ve never figured out why its engine was more vulnerable…?
The P-38 is huge compared to what you get for the size, and its notorius “Death Dive” is NOT something i would like to try out thank you very much. Far too many problems overall for me to ever like it. Pretty good when it worked as long as the enemy was known enough to use good tactics against them. But when used against unknown enemy planes, -38s several times took bad losses due to being so dependent on tactics.
Me-109? shudder Yeah, darn good in a fight, especially a turning fight…
But, a huge number of pilot casualties in this plane happened on the ground due to its poor ground handling ability and the extremely cramped cockpit.
A severely unforgiving plane. Excellent in the hands of aces, but not good for average or rookie pilots.
Fw-190 is probably my 2nd pick here. Beyond the heatrisks with the engine, not alot of problems and its an excellent energymaneuver fighter even if its not quite as good as a vertical slasher.
A6… Mmm the Zero, greatness combined with dreadfulness. Oh how interesting it would have been if the designer hadnt been overruled but instead had been allowed to fit the engine he had planned on and wanted, for the serial production model, the extra HP would have kept it mostly “superior”(except for its large hoard of flaws at least) for an additional year and mostly defeated several of the tactics used against it, like the standard attack that was followed by diving away, because the Zero´s thick wing design made it slow in dives… Pitifully poorly protected(more like UNprotected) and the base model with weapons with vastly different ballistic trajectories, even if the 20mm cannons at the time of introduction was a huge benefit despite being very weak compared to most other 20s. But truly magnificent range, excellent climb and turning ability and a fairly “nice” plane for the pilots.
F4U, heh well its a big brute of a beast… Pretty good, but feels more like it should have been designated as an attack plane rather than a fighter.
That’s why i go for t Do, a hit in t front of t pfeil (arrow) could mean t end of front engine, t back engine -i think- would be hard to hit if you attack it from t back, so attacking a 335 from left or right side seems logical. Than t streamlined design should make it a fast plane, in speed and roll rate. I’m far from being a experten it’s just my favourite for it’s original lay-out, and i can’t help wondering: what it would have done if it had been built & used in greater numbers.
Does Do335 maybe hafe some flaws?, it’s design hasn’t been copied much (atleas not to my knowledge -so that doesn’t say much hehe-), perhaps because of t jet planes taking over? I’ll choose it non the less, but i’ll be gladly to get in any other fighter 
Greetings stano666
Tenshen,
Every aircraft mentioned on this board has severel upgrades during their brief flights of glory. But…
P-47 is my choice of the listed ones. Unlike most others, it doesnt have any real vices, flaws or weaknesses. Except maybe its big size.
You need to consult the works of Don Blakeslee, Co. of the 4th Fighter group, on the P-47. Climbing was not one of it’s assets until the later marks.
P-51 is fairly fast, decently maneuverable and very nice range, but deary its waay vulnerable. With it using the same engine as the Spitfire, i´ve never figured out why its engine was more vulnerable…?
Engine itself was not any more vulnerable than any other, but note where the oil cooler is located. THAT made it more vulnerable to ground fire.
The P-38 is huge compared to what you get for the size, and its notorius “Death Dive” is NOT something i would like to try out thank you very much. Far too many problems overall for me to ever like it. Pretty good when it worked as long as the enemy was known enough to use good tactics against them. But when used against unknown enemy planes, -38s several times took bad losses due to being so dependent on tactics.
Everything is about tactics. No plane made could fight with out a set of tactics that emphsized it’s strong points and minimized it’s weak points (and all of 'em had weak points I assure you!) The 38 was not huge if you looked at it head on or to the side, which was mostly how it was viewed unless it was directly below you. It’s main virtue was it’s long legs.
Me-109? shudder Yeah, darn good in a fight, especially a turning fight…
But, a huge number of pilot casualties in this plane happened on the ground due to its poor ground handling ability and the extremely cramped cockpit.
A severely unforgiving plane. Excellent in the hands of aces, but not good for average or rookie pilots.
Go look at the F-16 and it’s landing gear. Of the F-8 Crusader. Again, each airplane has it’s good points and bad. Do note the 109s ‘birdcage’ cockpit and how hard it is to see everywhere. THAT is a bad point.
Fw-190 is probably my 2nd pick here. Beyond the heatrisks with the engine, not alot of problems and its an excellent energymaneuver fighter even if its not quite as good as a vertical slasher.
Only below 20,000 ft or so above that it tended to loose power.
A6… Mmm the Zero, greatness combined with dreadfulness. Oh how interesting it would have been if the designer hadnt been overruled but instead had been allowed to fit the engine he had planned on and wanted, for the serial production model, the extra HP would have kept it mostly “superior”(except for its large hoard of flaws at least) for an additional year and mostly defeated several of the tactics used against it, like the standard attack that was followed by diving away, because the Zero´s thick wing design made it slow in dives… Pitifully poorly protected(more like UNprotected) and the base model with weapons with vastly different ballistic trajectories, even if the 20mm cannons at the time of introduction was a huge benefit despite being very weak compared to most other 20s. But truly magnificent range, excellent climb and turning ability and a fairly “nice” plane for the pilots.
It was a stunt plane Tenshen, an unarmored stunt plane. Only good at low airspeed. Faster planes, if they knew the A6Ms weakness in speed, could pick the time and place and manner of the enguagement. And they could break away at will while the A6M could not.
F4U, heh well its a big brute of a beast… Pretty good, but feels more like it should have been designated as an attack plane rather than a fighter.
It was good as any… and better than most. Note it was still used past the Korean War!
Deaf
With regard to the Do335, in Eric Brown’s book (Wings on my Sleeve) he was one of the evaluation pilots at Farnborough in 1945 after the German surrender and one of the very few Allied pilots who actually flew one. I remember that the main problem with the aircraft was if you needed to bail out, that as the top of the canopy hinged upwards and had a nasty tendency of dislocating the pilot’s arms before he could get out if you held on to the release handles. Excellent concept, but as was the case - too late to make a difference.
My choice of fighter would be : Head - P51D, Unbelievable performance and range. An excellent amalgam of superb engine (60 Series Merlin) and arguably the finest wing design to see service in WW2. Heart : LF Mk9 Spitfire, in 1942 the Spitfire was returned to the forefront of the ETO theatre of operations with the same two stage merlin which powered the P51C/D. Relative range was the achilles heel of the Spitfire (in relation to the P51) but was superior or equal to all Luftwaffe fighters (except Fw190D/Ta152).
You only have to listen to the wonderful tone of the Merlin to understand why Alex Henshaw titled his excellent memoirs “Sigh for a Merlin”
Having had the privilege of hearing Merlin engines in full song, powering both Spitfires, Hurricanes, and P51D’s: Emotionally I agree with you.
My liking for the Do.335 and the Ta.152H1 is that of technological advancement over sentimental preference. The P51H probably comes closest in technological expertise from the US side, while the Spitfire Mk21 probably meets the same requirement from the UK side.
I’m certain we can discount the Spiteful as a failure to successfully marry the P51 laminar flow wing to the Spitfire Mk 21 fuselage. Jeffery Quill hated the Spiteful, and he was certainly in a position to make experienced, reasoned comparisons.
I’m far from a Luftwaffe wunderwaffe fan-boy, but I do feel the German aircraft were, as exemplified by the Do 335 and Ta 152H, the He. 280, the He.219 and the He.162 and the Me.163/Me.263 and Lippisch P12/P13/P14 and Horten/Go.229; technically superior to all but very very few Allied counterparts.
Regarding Capt. Eric Brown’s comments on the Do.335 and bailing out: it has to be remembered that Brown was making that comment from the position of a pilot who had NO prospect of exiting the aircraft safely if he’d ever had to abandon it mid-air.
The British, not at that time fully understanding either ejector seats (as in the case of He. 219, He.162, Do.335) or explosive-bolt released props as in the case of the Do.335 had disabled those safety systems. Brown does not acknowledge that fact until the late 1980’s iIrc. Thus, his comment on exiting the Do.335 has to be taken in the context of the above disabling of features designed to save pilot lives.
It is of interest that Doddy Hay
“The Man in the Hot Seat” supports the fact of safety systems having been disabled, because Hay mentions that Martin-Baker were called-upon by RAE Farnborough to investigate the German safety and ejection systems as part of M-B research into developing British-built ejector seats.
Respectful Regards Greycap Leader, Uyraell.
Brown’s favourite fighter (of WW II) was the Me 262, accordingly his own testamomy he preferred it above the spit and P 51. (wings of the luftwaffe, 2010 edit
Other’s -non german pilots, designers, engineers etc.- where quite positive too, that should say something on behalf of (some previously mentioned) luftwaffe material too. Luckely (for us) it was too late and little that the luftwaffe deployed their warbirds, they might have prolonged the war a good while and to the cost of more human life.
Greetings stano666
ps M-B ?, i’m curious what it means… (that i’m a noob obviously LOL)
Technologically speaking, German avaition achieved some incredible innovations. My personal favourite designer was Kurt Tank, the arrival of the Fw190 in European operational service in 1941 gave the RAF a major headache. If the Luftwaffe had been able to develop this incredible fighter in time for service in the Battle of Britain, the outcome could have been radically different for us in the UK. I believe that a raid was planned to steal an operational 190 from a French airfield by inserting Jeffrey Quill, in company with a special forces soldier. Fortunately for the planners, at the same time a German pilot, flying an Fw190A had got lost over the UK and landed by accident at Pembrey in Wales. The aircraft was captured intact before the pilot was able to destroy it, so the very dangerous plan to steal a 190 was abandoned. I have been fascinated by German aircraft design since my schooldays. The head of my Art Department at school was J.W.Mitchell (A relative of R.J.Mitchell, the Spitfire designer) Jim was an excellent teacher and proved to be an authority in German aircraft, I have been hooked on the subject for the last 30+ years since I left school. Jim left teaching in the 1980’s to become a professional aviation artist,his work can be found on the net and has also produced artwork for aviation history books. His work is predominantly focussed on Spitfires & Hurricanes, I’m biased in my view but I believe that his work is of the highest standard.
I look forward to the opportunity to open the discussion on to any specific type, in comparison with allied aircraft
Kind Regards,
M-B = Martin-Baker.
This UK company began as an aircraft design business, and indeed turned out some useful if somewhat unorthodox by the standards of the time, designs.
Research the Martin-Baker MB2 and Martin-Baker MB5. Both will show you aircraft of much technical innovation and interest.
After World War Two, Martin-Baker becomes interested in ejection systems, beginning with explosive-released canopies and moving shortly thereafter to ejection seats and related fittings.
It is somewhat of a poetic irony that the most successful Martin-Baker ejector seat during the 1960’s, 1970’s, and 1980’s was the Martin-Baker Mk5. That product had been very deliberately named after the WW2 fighterplane built by M-B, which very nearly won a production contract from the Air ministry, but which in the event was built only to the amount of two or three production prototypes, it being that its’ aerodynamic cousin, the P51 Mustang was by that time available to the UK via Lend-Lease.
Kind and Respectful Regards Stano666, Uyraell.
I have all my life admired the Spitfire unashamedly.
I find it to be of somewhat curious irony, that the man who continued Spitfire design, George Sommerfield, has remained largely unknown outside almost all circles bar those of Spitfire afficionados.
That the evolution of the Spitfire continued in a manner largely faithful to R.J. Mitchell’s original intent is surely a silent yet potent tribute to both Mitchell and Sommerfield.
For what it is worth, my “favourite” Spitfire was not an operational variant. It is the Mk21 contra-prop-equipped early canopied example, powered by a Griffon 61, replicating JK 535, a Merlin 61- powered early contra-prop prototype.
Arnim Faber’s FW. 190 A4 was a most fortuitous arrival to the RAE Farnborough.
The aircraft went on to survive a couple of years, and was well and thoroughly investigated.
These days, I’m uncertain what became of that particular aircraft, though I knew some details in my youth.
Kind and Respectful Regards Greycap Leader, Uyraell.
I totally agree with your view of the Spitfire, it invokes powerful emotions for whoever sees one. It must be remembered that the farsighted design of both the airframe and also the engine allowed for flexibility in development which saw it remain highly effective throughout it’s fighting career. The advent of the Fw190 almost brought about it’s demise,as the Hawker Typhoon was envisaged by the Air Ministry as it’s logical successor. The Merlin in my opinion will go down in history as one of the finest piston engines ever developed, rated at just over 900hp in it’s original configuration, advances in fuels and more crucially supercharger and intercooling technology increased the power output to almost 1700hp, without any increase in the 27 litre capacity. I was fortunate to attend the Battle of Britain airshow at Duxford in September, there were 12 spitfires in the air at the same time - absolute bliss!!. There were three airworhy examples of Hurricanes displaying also, there are some excellent video clips on youtube of the display, highly recommended. Whilst I’m thinking of youtube, look for Spifire Low Pass, this clip is one of my personal favourites.
Kind Regards, Uyraell
Greycap Leader
I have “Spitfire, Low Pass” permanently bookmarked.
The pilot was Ray Hanna. I’ve seen Ray flying out here in NZ, along with (the late) Richard Hare.
I have Mark Hanna (RIP) on video flying Me.109 “Black 6” in NZ, a couple years before his unfortunate demise flying (another?) Me.109 in France.
The “low pass” on YouTube has to be one of the finest pieces of flying and filming I have ever viewed. I enjoy it immensely.
(Parenthetical aside: you may wish to read the thread on the Churchill Tank on this forum. I posted there on the RR Meteor engine and its’ origins from Merlin.)
Kind and Respectful Regards Greycap Leader, Uyraell.
I forget the fact merlin engines have 27 litre capacity, the German engines did it with (about) 35 litres, if you take the DB engines it did grow a bit during it life-cycle, and it probably much needed the growth for it Hp/kg. ratio. The planes tho had roughly the same size. It’s mindbuggling how cose the planes (comparing the spit against FW190 & BF109) where. I think the spit has amazing all-round performance, in flight and on the ground, their German adversaries did go for a bit more of specialety for the messer high altitude & speed, the FW low ground & toughness.
There’s more surprises the web has in stall for me on this subject (together with the above)
I’ve read that some Rusian aces preferred to fight the FW because it was slower than a Messerschmitt, that surprised me a bit since i’ve understood that the east front did the fighting on the “low” altitudes where the 801 engines where at their best?
Theres so much to be taken in the account when you comparing fighters, speed, stability, agility, strength of the frame, structure etc. The weather, day or night -time, air -pressure/temp., the list is endless if you want to create a top-notch equation, in the time you (or me or santaclouse for that matter) are half way, a new fighter (or new weaponsystem) pops up, turning the tide, making old calculations obsolete.
I’ll be webbing this week, a lot, you all gave me good inspiration and nice derections, i tank you all,
Wish you the best for 2011, i’m off to town buying a few 1:72 scale messers, spits and such, so i can evaluate these with my niece 'n nephew, see if we can find some facts to trow in to the (allready overloaded) equation -LOL-
Greetings, marry christmas & happy newyears, stano66
A great 2011 year to you too my friend! And lots of fun building those 1/72 beauties with your niece & nephew. Hey don’t forget to pick-up a P-38! 
ME109 for me.
Why? Really capable, formidable fighter and sometimes it’s fun to fly for the bad guys!!
The irony is, wasn’t the last hurrah for the 109 (or it’s Czech variant) the Israeli war of independance…on the Jewish side?!
What would old Herman have made of that??:shock:
The Aircraft you are referring to is the Avia S199, built in Czechlovakia. After the war they ran out of the Daimler Benz 605 engines, but replaced the units with Junkers Jumo engines and propeller combinations from the Heinkel 111. The Jumo engine was far heavier and less responsive than the DB units and made the S199 a challenge to fly and particularly difficult to land. It is no wonder that it gained the nickname the Mule.
Kind Regards,
Greycap Leader
Being a whorey, cynical opportunist–he might have asked them for a job.
Fw 190!