Best Piston Engined Fighter Ever...

FLYBOYJ · 05-10-2007, 12:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rogthedodge

Yeah but in the Korean War? - ie a proper Mig, rather than ME262?

According to wiki the Sea Fury could take on the Mig 15 with some confidence - surely that's a measure of greatness?

I'm genuinely asking, not challenging what you say.

No problem...

Me 262s were brought down by recips during ww2 for several reasons. They were vulnerable during take off and landings due to the poor spool up times of early turbine engines and they were overwhelmed in numbers. Over Korea things didn't change much as far as 2nd generation jet engine performance except you had varying pilot skill levels on the Communist side.

I could assure you no matter how good the Sea Fury was, under normal conditions and 9 times out of 10, it was not going to better a Mig-15 assuming pilots of equal ability were flying each aircraft. BTW - the Chinese (flying Mig-15s) claimed 4 Sea Furies during the Korean War...you could check the dates yourself at two more reliable sites...

Korean Air War

Chinese Air-to-Air Victories during the Korean War, 1950-1953

rogthedodge · 05-10-2007, 01:23 PM

Fully appreciate that - that's why I cited it.

Also recognise this site is the home to many experts hence me asking rather than stating.

So is the Mig kill anything special or just one of many by a piston-engined aircraft?

Anyway the Fury - even the salty version - is still getting my vote

FLYBOYJ · 05-10-2007, 01:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rogthedodge

Fully appreciate that - that's why I cited it.

Also recognise this site is the home to many experts hence me asking rather than stating.

So is the Mig kill anything special or just one of many by a piston-engined aircraft?

Anyway the Fury - even the salty version - is still getting my vote

Well remember my first statement - A jet kill in a recip is only significant if you were on the giving end. It's a David vs. Goliath as far as technology and tactics are involved. I sure those jet pilots who were downed by a recip aren't talking about it much (if they survived). Those who were the victors made it well known. Putting this into perspective, those recips that downed jets shouldn’t be measured on their greatness based on one or two missions where an aerial combat oddity occurred, but rather their whole operational history as well as performance. In Post WW2 we're looking at the Sea Fury, F-51, Yak-9, Corsair, Skyraider, and the B-29 as a few of those recips that took on jets and won...

VA-176 MiG Killers 9 Oct 66

DerAdlerIstGelandet · 05-10-2007, 03:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rogthedodge

Anyway the Fury - even the salty version - is still getting my vote

Either way the Fury is a good pick. There are plenty of aircraft that actually would be good and wise picks. This is one of them.

drgondog · 06-03-2007, 07:27 PM

F4U-5 or Sea Fury. If it has the be best ever it also has to fly Carrier Ops?

Survivability at any altitude and threat environment? F4U-5

Load carrying/dirt punisher? F4U-5

Career? F4U-5

From a convicted Mustang lover

Bill

renrich · 06-11-2007, 04:36 PM

Amen, brethren!

Bird-Nerd · 06-16-2007, 10:31 PM

what? No Yak-3?

FLYBOYJ · 06-16-2007, 10:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bird-Nerd

what? No Yak-3?

A good aircraft but not even close to a Ta 152, P-51H or F4U-4...

kool kitty89 · 01-17-2008, 02:14 AM

Why isn't the P-47M up there? Not a whole lot were made, and rnge wasn't great but it was still better than the Spitfire and Me 109K.

The cowl-mounted MG 151/15's in the K-4 is an awsome dogfight and interceptor armament and the MK 108 adds to the interceptor strenghts, and with ~450 mph at ~20,000 ft as well I wouldn't want to see P-51D's trying to defend B-17's aganst them.

The P-47N is the best escort fighter, wich other single-engined fighter could range over 2,300 miles and boast a top-speed of 460 mph.

I've always wondered though, how much faster would the P-47M and N have been with a XP-47J type nose, possibly another 10-20 mph each and with an increase in range as well. Or just produce the P-47J, as it would have come much sooner than the P-72. Now that would have been a menace to German Jets, even if faught on the Me 262's terms. (and the P-47J shouldn't have been too hard to develop into an escort fighter, particularly with a 200 gal belly tank available... besides the paper one)

kool kitty89 · 01-18-2008, 04:01 AM

Though the new nose probably would have slowed initial production due to retooling needs, it took awhile for the teething problems to be solved with the R-2800-57C anyway and the P-47N had new wings to retool for as well.

kool kitty89 · 02-29-2008, 01:04 PM

I read some more, and it seems the nose of the XP-47J, while successful (in function and adding 30 mph to the top speed and improving range due to lower drag along with a slight increase in climb for the same weight and engine) it was deemed to cost too much and add mechanical complexity (due to the cooling fan).

drgondog · 02-29-2008, 02:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kool kitty89

I read some more, and it seems the nose of the XP-47J, while successful (in function and adding 30 mph to the top speed and improving range due to lower drag along with a slight increase in climb for the same weight and engine) it was deemed to cost too much and add mechanical complexity (due to the cooling fan).

I have read a lot of things but the one I believe is that we simply didn't need it (more speed, more complex logistics, more dollars consuming a future budget, etc) to achieve a small to medium, relatively speaking, increase in performance over the P-47N (or P-51H) - when the US was looking at the P-80 and Me 262 as the next 'generation'.

The P-51H was due to evolve into the P-51M with the -11 Merlin and position for a smaller performance boost - but all recips were bumping into the .80 Mach limit for conceivable combat ops.

I wouldn't be suprised if someone told me that USAAF looked long and hard at Ta 152 - but at the end of the day even it was a very minor progression over the P-51H or Spit 21, etc.

Having said that the fly high/Fly fast was clearly going to the jet.

The P-51H and P-82 was chosen to survive (over the P-38M and P-47N/M) because the Long Range escort role was deemed the prime mission in the nuclear age and the P-51 was both cheaper and deemed more capable overall in the escort role.

The F-84G was next in line for ground support. and the P-80 became the air superiority fighter over medium ranges - we just didn't have enough nof all of them including the 86 (and F9F and AD's) for Korea and the 51 was chosen to fill the breachfor USAF rather than complicate logistics and cost.

drgondog · 02-29-2008, 02:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kool kitty89

Why isn't the P-47M up there? Not a whole lot were made, and rnge wasn't great but it was still better than the Spitfire and Me 109K.

All the late model derivatives possessed advantages and disadvantiges in contrast with the late model adversaries - the same applies for the 109K against the Spit XIV or P-47M

The cowl-mounted MG 151/15's in the K-4 is an awsome dogfight and interceptor armament and the MK 108 adds to the interceptor strenghts, and with ~450 mph at ~20,000 ft as well I wouldn't want to see P-51D's trying to defend B-17's aganst them.

The P-51D's did quite well against them, and certainly were not 'afraid' of them - but the confidence levels of all the Allied pilots were understandably high when the 109K first appeared. If you go back to the October/November, December, 1944 battles very very few Mustangs of any kind were lost and a significant percentage of G-10's and K-4's were shot down. More a function of deteriorating pilot quality than 'inferiority' of fighter

The P-47N is the best escort fighter, wich other single-engined fighter could range over 2,300 miles and boast a top-speed of 460 mph.

Kitty, if it was such a clear choice as Best why did the 51H get picked as the survivor long term post war?

I've always wondered though, how much faster would the P-47M and N have been with a XP-47J type nose, possibly another 10-20 mph each and with an increase in range as well. Or just produce the P-47J, as it would have come much sooner than the P-72. Now that would have been a menace to German Jets, even if faught on the Me 262's terms. (and the P-47J shouldn't have been too hard to develop into an escort fighter, particularly with a 200 gal belly tank available... besides the paper one)

KK- the key factor is that prop fighters had maxed out in performance at performance leveles below early generation jets. The USAAF planners didn't think it be a good idea to improve the 'dead end', so they put most of their eggs on the 'growth/scalable' system, and the P-51H as the Transition fighter until jets could be long range escorts

Regards,

SoD Stitch · 02-29-2008, 02:42 PM

Well, I wanted to vote for the Do 335, but it's not in the poll, so I voted for the next best aircraft, the Ta 152C.

Soren · 02-29-2008, 03:23 PM

The Ta-152H is better than the Ta-512C though, esp. if it recieved the EB engine or the same DB-603 engine as the C variant, that would've significantly increased both speed & climb performance.

The best piston engined fighter of WW2 is without a doubt the Ta-152H-1, the Dora-12/13 getting honorable mentions. At 777 + km/h the Dora-13 was the fastest piston engined fighter of WW2.