Best World War II Aircraft?

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

pD's got a point there.

[Parmigiano]

pD's got half a point there... Italy cannot be counted on the winning side, actually it can be said it managed to lose the war twice.

But it's not laughable the statement that the series 5 was a good match for Spits and Mustangs.

We already have discussed and compared the performances of this machines, and at equal development (= mid 43 versions) no other fighter can be claimed
superior.
And the allied planes had always tough times in facing them, even in 1944 (look at the score of RSI aviation)

Besides, except the Mustang no single engine fighter can be vaunted for long range escort, and the tactical use of the '5' did not call for external fuel tanks.

Also true the fact that the Germans were highly impressed by the series 5 and planned the production of the G55.

Then we can say that the reports from Italian airmen are biased like the reports of airmen of any other Country, but also it is not impossible that Galland was 'impressed' by the Breda 12,7: it all depends WHEN the demo took place.
Being in Belgium it is likely that it was the time od BoB (the only time when Italian planes were deployed in Belgium), and so the comparison was with the British 7,7 and the current armament of the German planes (7,9 and slow firing 20mm MG FF)
No wonder that a good 12,7 with a very good cartdrige (like the Breda was) could be considered very effective.
Six months later every other plane had improved the armament far beyond the 2x12,7 while Italians had to wait 1943 and the Macchi 205 to be back on track.

[Pegasus]

I would choose the Horten 229. Not great maneuverability but shredding weaponry and blinding speed and range.

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

While I think the Ho-229 would have been a great aircraft we can not for certain place it into the catagory of the best of WW2. It only flew on test flights and never saw combat. Therefore we will never see how it handled against other aircraft.

[the lancaster kicks ass]

and whilst the design does offer some advantages you can't believe all the stats for an aircraft untried in combat, which is what adler's saying, there's always problems that you can't find until you're flying combat sorties, so this belongs in the what ifs..........

[Parmigiano]

I agree with Adler and Lanc: I love the 229, is full of charme and was probably the most innovative approach, but was only a prototype.
Besides, the concept proved valid with the B-2 but only after fly-by-wire was available.

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

I think the 229 would have been allright without the fly by wire technology only because of its small size. Still though it is a what if only.

[FLYBOYJ]

Rolls back to the gooney bird!

[rochie]

saw a program on history channel yesterday called battleground i think ?
it was supposed to be about d-day in normandy but the producers must have been the biggest P-51 fans because all they banged on about was how the invasion couldn,t have happened without the mustang, it seems it was the only fighter good enough to match luftwaffe.
then it was off shooting up every thing on the ground,destroying railstock and you would think it was the only aircraft in the allied inventory they even tried to pass off footage of a low flying spitfire as a P-51 no mention was made of P-47's, spitfires, typhoons or P-38's etc, i know the P-51 was a good aircraft but come on other planes made a contribution to the air war in europe !
sorry to rant but just annoyed me what do you all think did the P-51 deserve its reputation as the ultimate piston engine fighter ?
i'm not sure it does other planes were better in certain roles

[twoeagles]

Keep in mind the P-51 has had 60 years of glowing press, is highly
recognizable (even my wife knows a 'Stang), and not only flew over
Berlin, but over Tokyo, too. It flew on into the Korean war. No F4U Corsair
escorted 8th Air Force bombers, for instance, but it is highly recognizable
yet comparatively rare in the public's eye. Getting an objective documentary
isn't easy because they are written and produced by real people who also
have their own prejudices, and also large knowledge gaps.

My son is at Pensacola starting flight school and has loved airplanes his
whole life (he had no choice). Ask him about the P-51 and he will gush.
Ask him about the Hawker Tempest and he will return a blank stare. Every
airshow we attend has a P-51, but neither of us has seen a real Tempest.
So familiriarity plays a role, especially on TV aimed at a mass audience.

Look at it this way: if you could hands down with no argument nail down
the best aircraft in every type, we wouldn't be having any fun here talking
about it.

[rochie]

i agree with everything you say and i think the P-51 was an amazing aircraft and great at it's job but it didn't win ww2 on its own which this show seemed to suggest that's what got me worked up

[The Jug Rules!]

To put it all simply...The mustang is overated, a handful of hits in the right spot, and she's out of the fight. If you're over enemy territory, then you are sol, because your engine probably wont make it all the way home.

I think that the -4 corsair, or an M model thunderbolt would give her a run for her money, but it all depends on the pilot and his tactics. That goes for any plane. A guy in a b model p-40 could slaughter a pilot in a p51 H if he doesn't know how to handle his bird. Try to get in a turning fight with a 51, and youre in a thunderbolt, you will LOSE badly. The Jug Pilot would use his supereior firepower in a head on run, or use a diving attack. I believe that when the performance between aircraft are very close, then It comes down to the pilots themselves.

[rochie]

you might have a point there jug still it deserves some credit though, nice pic of a P-47 by the way

[Erich]

sorry Jug but the pilots of the top scoring unit in the ETO, the 354th fg disagree. they hated the Jug

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

I wuold still rather have a Jug. I like its ruggedness...

...how having said that the best aircraft of WW2 was the C-47!