Best Aircraft in Many Different Roles Part II

[kool kitty89]

The 190's cannon wouldn't be much good aganst tanks (at least not much moreso than .50's). And the underwing MK 103's weren't practical. (not used in the anti-tank role anyway)

Read the tank buster thread, one of the most effective (if not the most) was napalm, which the Corsair did use to a limited extent.

Also the HVAR was decent in the anti-tank role as well. (as far as rockets go)
And the Corsair was a pretty accurate dive bomber. (not that dive bombing was particularly good aganst tanks with conventional bombs -with cluster bombs -which weren't used By the US iirc or naplam it's a bit different-)

[BIG BIRD]

The fw 190 was fitted with various anti tank armerments such as air two ground rockets and hevey anti tank cannons fitted under wing were more than capable of punching through the top armore of a sherman or even a t-34.


In theary the corsair could only carry five or six napalm bombs, I read that a napalm hit within 50 feet would kill a tank, The germans [ and japanise for that matter] rarly had more than one tank in a 50 feet radios, so lets asume that it takes one napalm bomb to kill a tank. I will be generous and say that a corsair can kill 10 tanks on any given sortie. Mean while it is thearyeticly posible, I am not saying that it ever apened, That a cannon armed plane could destroy up to 30 tanks in any given sortie. Napalm was more efective against tank masses and would not have wiped out the german tank force. I do have to admit if the germans had napalm they would have killed thousinds of russian tanks, the russians perfered massed tank attacks.

[BIG BIRD]

most people think wikipedia is a unrelible source, but I think it works. Acording to wikipedia the mk 103 was desigened as a anti tank and anti air gun.
Here is a link MK 103 cannon - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia




do you now if anybody developed a forword firing napalm rocket

[kool kitty89]

Napalm was droppted in tanks (in the case of the F4U the same type as its drop tanks)

The underwing MK 103's tried on the Anton (/R3 iirc) were intended as an anti-tank armament, but this configuration was unsatisfactory as I recall as the accuracy was too poor.


The antitank version of the R4M rockets (Panzerblitz 2) used with the Fw 190 were quite good though.

[BIG BIRD]

Ether way they are both versitile aircraft.

[kool kitty89]

No doubt about that, the Fw 190, F4U, and P-47 were probably the most versitile single engined aircraft o the war. (discussted earlier in the thread)

Though the F4U was probaly a bit more (at least in actual built versions) than the other 2. Being carrier capable (though the 190 probably would have made a good carrier aircraft) and a good dive bomber and doing so in standard configuration -the landing gear had a dive brake setting. (and nearly as accurate as SBD)

I don't think the Corsair was ever tested with a torpedo but it would apear to be capable of carrying one. (the center belly pylon could carry a 2000 lb bomb and it looks to have enough ground clearance)


But the Ju 88, Mosquito, and P-38 were probably moreso, particularly the Ju 88 and Mossie.

[BIG BIRD]

The focke fulf fw190 A8/u2 variant was a torpedo variant of the fw 190. The fiat g55 was also capable of carrying a torpedo. I found a website with a picture.


Fiat G.55 Centauro - history, photos, specification of the Fiat G.55 Centauro



If these plane could carry one than I am positive that a corsair could, I know that the ju88 were used as torpedo planes in the arctic. Sense the bristol bougfighter carried torpedos a am positive the mossie could to.

But the ju88 and mossie were let down by lack of day fighter capability. The p-38 is also a versitile plane. But they would have a hard time holding there own in europe if they were the "main" allied fighter, but the did respectible in any theature thay apered in. thats better than alot of aircraft in the world.

[kool kitty89]

A P-47 wouldn't be able to carry a torpedo though as the belly was too low. (it couldn't even carry a 1000 lb bomb on the belly, though it could carry quite heavy loads there, as long as they were fairly flat -ie drop tanks of 200 US gal)


The corsair was the only oneof theese that was capable as a true dive bomber in standard loadout. (most if ot all production corsairs had a setting for the landing gear to deploy as dive brakes)
The 190 and Jug did some "dive bombing" attacks in fighter-bomber mode, but those were not true dive bombing attacks (shallower dives at greater speeds pulling out at higher alts), they would have needed dive brakes -though I suppose the dive recovery flaps of the later P-47D's would work for this. (and in the case of the Ju 88, it had been equipped as a dive bomber, but I think it was found to be too unstable in a dive to perform satisfactory dive-boming attacks)

[BIG BIRD]

Late in the war dive bombers lost there efectivness becaues they wernt good verse tanks and rockets were more than capable against "soft" targets. The corsairs dive bombing ability still counts as browny points for this topic, I do have tgo agree the corsiar probily tops the list.

[kool kitty89]

None of theese single engine fighters/fighter-bombers could perform bommbing duties like the Ju 88 or mossie, and were less suited as nightfighters too.

[BIG BIRD]

The corsasir wasent the best bomber out there but could carry an equil load as the mossie and some variants of the ju 88. The night fighter variant of the corsair was a capable plane, the corsair had a simular combat radios to the mustang without drop tanks. range is vital for a good night fighter. In the koriean war a night fighter corsair pilot was the only non f-86 pilot to make ace for the allies. I personly think that the corsair was the best plane of world war two because it was good at almost evrything it did, and it did a lot.

[kool kitty89]

I meant that the Corsair (as well as the 190 and the P-47-had it been adapted to the NF role) was less practical to use as a sightfighter at the time. Firstly it wasn't until mid-late war that a radar package small enough to be practically mounted on the wing (especially if you look at the German radar). Also it was difficult for the pilot to effectively operate the radar in addition to piloting and fighting. (most of this had improved considerably by the Korean War)


The combat radius of the F4U-1/1A was quite similar to the P-51, but only with the unprotected (except for CO2 purging) wing tanks used. These were eliminated on later Corsair models as the extra range was not normally necessary for Navy use. (granted, had it been developed with longer range desired the wing tanks would likely heve been improved with self-sealing and possibly enlarged)


As for bombload, yes the Corsair could carry quite a lot, but like the P-38 at max bombload it couldn't go nearly as far as the Mossie or Ju 88.

[BIG BIRD]

So the question is whats more versitile a twin or a single engene plane.
The junkers ju88 was a torpedo bomber, tacticul bomber, dive bomber,Night fighter, hevey fighter, unmaned flying bomb called the mistel. I am not shure if you could call the mistel a variant of the ju88. It was also used as a electronic warfare aircraft. Just to add to the list there was trainer aircraft and fighter bomber.





The f4u was a Fighter, ground attack, dive bomber, carrier plane. interceptotre, strike aircraft and it is safe to assume that if the corsair entered survice in a time when the japs had more ships the corsair would have been used as a torpedo bomber.

The ju88, and mossie for that matter are probily the most versitile aircraft of world war two. I think that the corsair and fw190 were probily the most versitile single engene airplanes out there.

[kool kitty89]

This: http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/avi...fts-14841.html (Pics of rare US aircrafts) led me to this picture:



Of the P-38 equipped with torpedo.

[steelDUST]

Again, it's the Ju-88G.