# Which US WWII fighter shot down the most enemy aircraft?



## Bucksnort101 (Sep 7, 2011)

This popped into my head over my lunch hour today. Which US aircraft piloted by American pillots is credited with shooting down the most enemy aircraft? I'm not talking which model aircraft, but which specific airframe/serial number is credited with the most kills during the Second World War.


----------



## GregP (Sep 26, 2011)

That has several answers. My answers come only from kills by American fighters flown in US service.

1) In any single theater of oeprations, the top would be the F6F Hellcat, with 5,168 kills in the Pacific Thearter of Operations. Next would the P-51 Mustang with 4,950 kills in the European Theater of Operations.

2) For the entire war combined, all theaters, it would be the P-51 Mustang with 5,954 kills in ETO, MTO, PTO, and CBI all combined, followed by the Hellcat with 5,168 in PTO and ETO.

These numbers come from a 1945-1946 report compiled by the US Navy for the Hellcat and the Air Force Historical Society for the P-51.

Since the war, there have been several "revisions" of kills .... sadly. They should let them stand as approved in the conflict of interest, by people in the service at the time. Just my opinion.

Either way, the Hellcat and Mustang are neck in neck for the title.

The third-ranking fighter for kills was the P-38, with 3,785 in all Theaters of operation combined. The theater of operations with the most enemy aircraft shot down was the PTO, with 12,666 enemy aircraft shot down.


----------



## Jabberwocky (Sep 26, 2011)

GregP said:


> .
> 
> The third-ranking fighter for kills was the P-38, with 3,785 in all Theaters of operation combined. The theater of operations with the most enemy aircraft shot down was the PTO, with 12,666 enemy aircraft shot down.


 
Minor quibble:

US Army Air Forces Statistical Digest lists 13,623 enemy aircraft shot down in the ETO: 7,422 by fighters, 6,098 by heavy bombers and 103 my medium and light bombers.


----------



## drgondog (Sep 26, 2011)

Alas - the probability of bomber claims to actual enamy a/c destroyed was excessive - probably an order of magnitude off.

Reactions: Agree Agree:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## drgondog (Sep 26, 2011)

I have no idea how to definitively arrive at that answer. One would have to parse all the operational orders of battle, match squadron code and pilot to victory credit, parse the engineering records to obtain continuity in service as well as changes from one squadron code to another when battle damaged and out of service for awhile.

I would start with PTO and look at P-38/F6F and F4U but also look at what serial number continuity existed for Bong, McGuire, McCambell, Boyington and Foss as my first pass. The ETO had a very fast pace of upgrades to airframes..


----------



## Thorlifter (Sep 26, 2011)

Corsair kills amounted to 2,140 claims. Very respectable but not the winner.

One of the stats that always made me think about losses not combat related is there were only 189 Corsairs lost in combat, but about 700 lost to non combat flights. Heck, it was safer to go up against the enemy than to fly it to get the oil checked.

Reactions: Informative Informative:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## post76 (Sep 26, 2011)

Rob Johnson was credited with 28 kills, but he claimed 35. I'm not sure how many air frames he went through. He always boasted about "Lucky" his early Razorback model with modified waste gates and WEP. 

Richard Bong was the top scorer with 40, but i haven't found anything that describes or mentions a single air frame and serial number he favored or used. 
Most of them were in a P-38 however.


----------



## davebender (Sep 26, 2011)

I find that difficult to believe.

The F6F operated mostly from CVs and only during the final two years of the war. How did F6Fs manage to shoot down over 5,000 enemy aircraft during 1943 to 1945? Total Japanese aircraft production was about 40,000 during 1943 to 1945. However most Japanese aircraft operated in places like China, Manchuria, Indochina, East Indies etc. where USN CV aircraft weren't likely to be encountered.


----------



## GregP (Sep 26, 2011)

I have a pretty good file of the USAAC individual kills in WWII, but no file for individual US Navy / Marine kills.

I have been searching for a good, authoritative list for victories and losses for years. All the ones you find disagreee with one another, and they really disagree if the lists are more than 10 years apart in age. It seems the farther we get from WWII, the fewer planes everyone shot down, particularly Americans. All that really means to me is we have better records since we weren't bombed everyday during the war. if the records for Germany, the former Soviet Union, Japan, etc. were available, we'd probably see their kills totals dropping, too. Since the Axis records are partly missing, they don't get investigated as often. Just my theory, yours may vary, and you well might be right.

So, I can't say for sure, but would gladly collaborate with anyone in here to build a valid list of victories and losses for WWII ... or any other war. Ideally, the list I am looking for would have the date, name of the victor, the victor's aircraf type, unit, and country, the name of the victim, vitim's aircraft ype, unitm and country. amd perhaps a comments field for any information available.

The lists I have now have a lot of this info, but not the aircraft type of the victor or the aircraft type of the victim ... and they are only for the USAAC (Air Force Historical Society) for the US claims. I must say, they are available, but not in convenient form.


----------



## davebender (Sep 26, 2011)

> if the records for Germany, the former Soviet Union, Japan, etc. were available, we'd probably see their kills totals dropping, too


With the exception of the Soviet Union I fail to follow your logic.

The best way to confirm kills is to examine enemy records after the war ends. British and American records are intact and should have been available since 1946. Therefore German and Japanese kills of British and American aircraft should have been settled by 1950 or so. 

German and Japanese pilots who claim Soviet aircraft kills are an entirely different matter. I have my doubts as to the accuracy and completeness of Soviet records. So conclusive proof of aerial victories over Soviet controlled territory may be impossible.


----------



## GregP (Sep 26, 2011)

You fail to follow my logic. OK, I often miscommunicate unintentionally.

We do not have complete records for German aircraft production, so ... me make estimates. We do not have full and complete records of German claimed victories, so we list what we have. The Japanese ddid not keep official victory lists .... most of the totals we got from WWII came from examination of individual war diary entries by the pilots. Many came rom Martin Caiden, who was a good author, but not often concerned with the real facts when a good yarn would do as well.

I maintain there is nobody out there who knows the real Japanese victory totals, especially by pilot, type, and victim type. We know what WE lost and when, but not necessarily who shot it down. So, we tend to examine out own lists more heavily ...because that's the data we have.

You may not agree with this premise but it is my opinion substantiated, I might add, by Saburo Sakai, whom I met in the mid-1980's in Arizona when he was a guest at the Doug Champlin Museum. He said that the Japanese did not keep official lists of individual victories. The individual pilots did and, if they died ... and if their war diaries did not get returned to the family, then nobody knew what happened in their sorties, except for the people who were there in the fight. He stated categorically that thwere was no way to get an accurate and complete list as long ago as the mid-1980's. I doubt the chances today are any better, but I could be wrong.

We ALL know how easy it is to get data from the former Soviet Union! So it is tough to see how we can ever get a real list of WWII victories and losses. Heck, I can't even find a GOOD list from the USA, and we HAVE our records. I think the government and individual services have little interest in the data or it would be available much more easily today. Since it is not, I conclude it is not in their best interests for the data to be easily retrievable. Again, just my opinion.

Yours obviously varies. 

I cannot reasonably argue the subject other than to print my opinion since I can't find the definitive data. If you can, let's get together, compile it, and publish it.


----------



## evangilder (Sep 26, 2011)

I think a lot of the reason that the data is in it's form is that when the war was over, everyone wanted to get back to their pre-war lives. It was over, and they wanted to move on, or to train for the next war. I honestly don't think they knew then that the battles they fought would still be researched, discussed and talked about 60 years later.

Reactions: Agree Agree:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## GregP (Sep 27, 2011)

Pretty good conjecture! Could be spot on


----------



## MikeGazdik (Sep 27, 2011)

Im reading the question different than most. I think he is asking which plane, 1 particular aircraft, had the most kills. Such as, P-51 serial # ABC1234. Which may have had kills while piloted by more than 1 pilot. 

And if that is the way it is asked, man thats a neat question! I know Johnson had to get a new plane after the 1 Thunderbolt got shot to hell, but I don't remember how many he had shot down by then. I think as mentioned the "early" guys like Foss may have been stuck in 1 plane longer. I think I remember Gabreski getting at least 3 different Thunderbolts. I read Boyington's too long ago to recall. What about a guy like McCambell in Hellcats?

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## R Leonard (Sep 29, 2011)

davebender said:


> I find that difficult to believe.
> The F6F operated mostly from CVs and only during the final two years of the war. How did F6Fs manage to shoot down over 5,000 enemy aircraft during 1943 to 1945? Total Japanese aircraft production was about 40,000 during 1943 to 1945. However most Japanese aircraft operated in places like China, Manchuria, Indochina, East Indies etc. where USN CV aircraft weren't likely to be encountered.



Do you have some other operational results to report? And be assured, the F6F did not only operate from CVs. There were land based F6F squadrons in combat, both USN and USMC, not to mention those operating in CVLGs and CVEGs.

The number 5,168 is somewhat of a moving target, I'd admit. US Naval Aviation combat aviation statistics compiled in 1947 or so mark the F6F total credits as 5163 fighters and bomber types only. If you look a little deeper into the report you can also find just for the period 1 Sep 44 to 15 Aug 45 a total of 3,518 credits to F6Fs, this includes 2,278 single engine fighters, 36 land based single engine reconnaissance, 515 bombers/torpedo bombers, 89 floatplanes, 530 twin engine combat types, 17 flying boats, 36 transports, and 17 trainers. Were one to add just the land based single engine reconnaissance, floatplanes, flying boats, transports and trainers from this last year of the war to the gross 5163 reported fighter and bomber credits, the F6F total rises to 5,358, higher than that which you protest and still does not count any of these types credited to F6Fs from their introduction to combat through 31 August 1944. And to forestall the question, these numbers do not include any destroyed on the ground.

Frank Olynyk's compilation of just USN awarded credits comes to 5136, giving a pilot's name, date, place for each credit for an aircraft destroyed in the air as well as probables and damaged. Frank's numbers also do not include any destroyed on the ground. If you add the USMC F6F credits for enemy fighters and bombers from the combat statistics compilation, 93, to Olynyk's USN F6F total you get 5,229, again, higher than that which you protest.

Overall, the Naval Aviation combat statistics reports the aerial destruction of a total of 9,249 enemy aircraft over the course of the war. 

If you want to cite Japanese production, then I’d suggest you look at the end of the war. A SCAP inventory of remaining Japanese aircraft reports (combining both army and navy): fighters - 4,554, bombers - 1,790, reconnaissance - 1,076, transports - 169, trainers, 6,681, and other not specified - 2,097 with no report for flying boats, a total of 16,367; this end result from a total production, from 1 January 1941 through 15 August 1945, of 69,270.

Do you have some other sources?

Reactions: Informative Informative:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## davparlr (Sep 30, 2011)

R Leonard said:


> The number 5,168 is somewhat of a moving target, I'd admit. US Naval Aviation combat aviation statistics compiled in 1947 or so mark the F6F total credits as 5163 fighters and bomber types only. If you look a little deeper into the report you can also find just for the period 1 Sep 44 to 15 Aug 45 a total of 3,518 credits to F6Fs, this includes 2,278 single engine fighters, 36 land based single engine reconnaissance, 515 bombers/torpedo bombers, 89 floatplanes, 530 twin engine combat types, 17 flying boats, 36 transports, and 17 trainers. Were one to add just the land based single engine reconnaissance, floatplanes, flying boats, transports and trainers from this last year of the war to the gross 5163 reported fighter and bomber credits, the F6F total rises to 5,358, higher than that which you protest and still does not count any of these types credited to F6Fs from their introduction to combat through 31 August 1944. And to forestall the question, these numbers do not include any destroyed on the ground.



What I would like to know is how many of these were clay pigeons, I mean, kamakazes?


----------



## R Leonard (Sep 30, 2011)

A reconciliation of the data reported in various, and often conflicting, Japanese and US sources is found in “An Analytical History of Kamikaze Attacks against Ships of the United States Navy during World War II” produced by the Center for Naval Analyses (Study No 741 by Nicolai Timenes, Jr.) in 1970. This synthesis notes:

_ Most kamikazes were lost to interceptors. As defense became more important, and bombing strikes were replaced by fighter sweeps, aircraft carrier complements changed to include more and more fighters, some of which (such as the Hellcat (F6F) and Corsair (F4U)) could also serve to attack . . . The rise in fighters was constant, and by the end of the war fleet carriers embarked 70 to 90 fighter types. Escort carrier complements also changed, from 16 fighters and 12 torpedo planes to 24 fighters and 9 torpedo planes.

As a result, hundreds of fighters were available for intercept roles . . . As the Okinawa campaign progressed fewer carriers were usually available, but those present carried a higher proportion of fighters and employed them as CAP. In preparation for the kikusui attacks on 1 I April 1945, for example, the bombers and torpedo planes of Task Force 58 were emptied of gas and ordnance and parked on the hangar deck. The force was able to maintain 12 CAP over the pickets and 24 over each of 2 task groups - - a total of 60 CAP airborne and ready. Additional aircraft were launched as required.8 Three escort carriers with the replenishment groups (oilers, ammunition ships, etc.) carried replacement planes and pilots to replace losses. During the period 19 February to I March 1945, the escorts delivered 254 aircraft and 66 pilots and aircrew to fleet, light, and escort carriers.

The superiority of American aircraft and pilots has been discussed. Control of the CAP by the fighter-director team on the pickets and ships of the main force was good throughout. The CAP defenses were weakest at dusk, since kamikaze pilots were too poorly trained to fly even from land bases at night, and night takeoffs and landings were still hazardous and little practiced by carrier aviators. _

Referring to the Kamikaze threat in the Philippines campaign and the Okinawa campaign, the study provides the following conclusion data:

Philippines:
Kamikaze Sorties = 650*
Returned to base = 65 (10%)
Net attacks = 585
Splashed by CAP = 263 (45%)
Appearing over force = 322
Splashed by AA = 148 (46%)
Hits plus damaging near misses = 174*

Okinawa:
Kamikaze Sorties = 1900*
Returned to base = 190 (10%)
Net attacks = 1710
Splashed by CAP = 855 (50%)
Appearing over force = 855
Splashed by AA = 576 (68%)
Hits plus damaging near misses = 279*

*from USSBS Japanese Air Power

If this analysis is in the ball park, then it would appear that somewhere in the neighborhood of at least 1,118 Japanese aircraft, IJN and IJA combined, were shot down by CAP aircraft in the course of Kamikaze sorties. The report notes:

_ . . . It has been noted that most of the kamikazes and conventional aircraft which attacked the task force were shot down by airborne interceptors combat air patrol (CAP) and deck-launched interceptors (DLI). Attrition of conventional attacks by CAP had risen to over 60 percent by mid-1944, and given the similarity of kamikaze airframes and tactics to the conventional strikes (at least outside the immediate vicinity of the task force), CAP effectiveness against kamikazes must have been similar, i.e., in the range of 50 to 70 percent, leaving 30 percent to 50 percent (176 to 292 in the Philippines, 513 to 855 at Okinawa). 

These numbers seem low when compared with the numbers of aircraft which arrived over the force. Assuming 45 percent CAP attrition would appear to produce good agreement with estimates of kamikazes over the force (322 versus 320 or 364) in the Philippines. Improvements in CAP procedures off Okinawa may have increased the CAP attrition rate to about 50 percent, which produces fairly good agreement with estimates of the number of aircraft reaching the force there. 

Another comment on the nature of CAP defense suggests that data from the Philippines campaign are not representative of the ability to defend a force at sea: 
“Apparently fighter defense of task forces out at sea is much more effective than are patrols near shore. At least 60 percent of the attacking enemy force has been consistently shot down by the CAP of fast carrier task forces before the enemy reached our ships. However, the Army Air Forces report that - - - 771 enemy aircraft were encountered and 230 destroyed in their defensive missions from the Philippines. Thus it appears that in the case of task forces in harbor or near shore, only about 30 percent of the enemy attackers are downed by fighter defense before they get to the ships.” (Anti Aircraft Operations Research Group Study 4, Feb 1945 page 3)

At Okinawa, although some units were attacked in the harbor, the enemy had to approach over water and past defensive picket forces; as a result, the defensive posture was much like what would be expected of a fast carrier force. Thus the estimate of 50 percent attrition by CAP is not inconsistent with these observations. 

Further indication of the effectiveness of CAP may be gained by examining the results of kamikaze escort missions - -which would not have been subjected to anti-aircraft guns and which would not have deliberately expended themselves. In the Philippines, Inoguchi notes that, of 239 escort sorties, 102 (43 percent) were expended. Since the escorts were none too aggressive in their defense of the kamikazes, and since some of them, at least, were also responsible for returning to report results of the kamikaze attacks, they may have allowed similar attrition of the kamikazes. Attrition of kamikazes is not likely to have been much larger than that of the escorts, however, so the estimates of 45 percent in the Philippines and 50 percent at Okinawa seem reasonable._

An interesting report if you can get your hands on one.

Reactions: Informative Informative:
2 | Like List reactions


----------



## Ratsel (Sep 30, 2011)

see post below. thanks.


----------



## R Leonard (Sep 30, 2011)

P-40s, operated by American pilots including the AVG, was, world-wide, the 6th most prolific producer of credits. The only theater where P-40s with US drivers finished at the top was the CBI.

Credited claims for aircraft flown by US pilots by theater for aircraft being operated as day or night fighters or variants:

Pacific Theater (includes Aleutians, Central Pacific, South Pacific and Southwest Pacific operating areas):

F6F = 5,221
F4U/FG = 2,155
P-38 = 1,700
F4F/FM-1/FM-2 = 1,408
P-47 = 697
P-40 = 661
P-51/A-36/F-6 = 297
P-39/P-400 = 288
P-61 = 64
PV = 20
F2A = 10
P-36 = 3
P-70 = 2
P-26 = 2
P-35 = 1

European Theater:

P-51/A-36/F-6 = 4,239
P-47 = 2,686
P-38 = 497
P-61 = 59
Spitfire = 15
F6F = 8
Beaufighter = 6
P-39/P-400 = 3
F4F = 2

Mediterranean Theater:

P-38 = 1,431
P-51/A-36/F-6 = 1,063
P-40 = 592
Spitfire = 364
P-47 = 263 = Fifth Place
F4F = 26
Beaufighter = 25
P-39/P-400 = 25
Mosquito = 1

China-Burma-India Theater, including the AVG:

P-40 = 741
P-51/A-36/F-6 = 345
P-38 = 157 
P-47 = 16 
P-39/P-400 = 5
P-61 = 5
P-43 = 3

Overall against European opponents

P-51/A-36/F-6 = 5,302
P-47 = 2,949 
P-38 = 1,928 
P-40 = 592
Spitfire = 379
P-61 = 59
Beaufighter = 31
P-39/P-400 = 28
F4F/FM-2 = 28
F6F = 8
Mosquito = 1

Overall against the Japanese

F6F = 5,221
F4U = 2,155
P-38 = 1,857 
F4F/FM-2 = 1,408
P-40 = 1,402
P-47 = 713
P-51/A-36/F-6 = 642
P-39/P-400 = 293
P-61 = 69
PV = 11
F2A = 10
P-43 = 6
P-36 = 3
P-26 = 2
P-70 = 2
P-35 = 1

Add them all together:

P-51/A-36/F-6 = 5,944 = 1st Place
F6F = 5,229 = 2nd Place
P-38 = 3,785 = 3rd Place
P-47 = 3,662 = 4th Place
F4U = 2,155 = 5th Place
P-40 = 1,994 = 6th Place
F4F/FM-2 = 1,436 = 7th Place
Spitfire = 379 = 8th Place
P-39/P-400 = 321 = 9th Place
P-61 = 128 = 10th Place
Beaufighter = 31 = 11th Place
PV = 20 = 12th Place
F2A = 10 = 13th Place
P-43 = 6 = 14th Place
P-36 = 3 = 15th Place
P-26 = 2 = 16th Place tied
P-70 = 2 = 16th Place tied
P-35 = 1 = 17th Place tied
Mosquito = 1 = 17th Place tied

Regards

Reactions: Informative Informative:
3 | Like List reactions


----------



## GregP (Sep 30, 2011)

From a 1946 US Navy report I have 5165 kills in the Pacific and 8 kills in the ETO for 5168. This is from the US Navy, not made up by me. It might have been revies downward to 5163 ... but the number is quite valid.

You can check it out yourself online anytime. 19 to 1 kills ratio for teh Hellcat; nothing else came close. Next closest in US service was about 13 : 1, and that isn't even close.


----------



## GregP (Sep 30, 2011)

R Leonard, 

what is the source of your numbers? Is the data in a form where you can see the pilot, the type of the victor, the type of the victim, etc?


----------



## R Leonard (Oct 1, 2011)

GregP said:


> From a 1946 US Navy report I have 5165 kills in the Pacific and 8 kills in the ETO for 5168. This is from the US Navy, not made up by me. It might have been revies downward to 5163 ... but the number is quite valid.
> 
> You can check it out yourself online anytime. 19 to 1 kills ratio for teh Hellcat; nothing else came close. Next closest in US service was about 13 : 1, and that isn't even close.



You might want to read my post above re F6F scores. I am well aware of the source for your numbers and even mention it in my post, indeed the Naval Aviation Combat Statistics - World War II produced by a team led by CDR Stuart Barber USNR for OpNav is one of the first places I go for data. You might note in my post on the F6F, above, I am careful there to point out the 5163 that jumps out at one from that report for an F6F total is only the credits for, as is generically noted "Fighters" (3,718) and "Bombers" (1,445) and does not count the Japanese equivalents of VOS/VCS, VP, VN, VR, or VJ types which appear much later in the report. If you want a full count for F6Fs you have to figure those in. Go look at the tables again and, indeed, the entire report; they were very careful about how they phrased things and specified categories. If you don't pay attention to the nuances, it is very easy to make a mis-count. Also, look at Table 1 again. It does not say anything about Pacific only; the title is "Consolidated Summary of Navy and Marine Carrier and Land‑Based Air Operations and Results For Entire War," that means the 8 F6F credits for VF-74 and VOF-1 in Operation Dragoon are included, you are counting them twice. 

Olynyk, on the other hand, author of Stars and Bars - A Tribute to the American Fighter Ace, 1920-1973 and the recognized historian for the American Fighter Aces Association, went back through the combat reports and connected the dots with a pilot name to each credit, probable, or damaged, and the enemy type cited in the report, something not found in Barber's team's Naval Aviation Combat Statistics. You might want to try to avail yourself of a copy, USN Credits for the Destruction of Enemy Aircraft in Air-to-Air Combat - World War II, and give it some study before jumping. Of course, it is not easy to get. There is a companion volume on USMC credits around which I’d like to get my hands as well as volumes on the USAAF in the ETO, MTO, CBI, and POA. I’ve the USAAF CBI and POA, but not ETO or MTO - since I’ve little interest in that part of the world, ‘tis no great loss.

I'd also point out that unless you have carefully gone through the Barber report and put it all in nice new spread sheets with nice new formulas you may find yourself zeroing in on some typos . . . that is, the numbers in calculation fields are not always typed in correctly, certainly not often, not even in every table, but enough for someone with a background in operational statistics to spot just eye-balling it. Another quaint oddity, with which I happen to agree, in the Barber report is that it follows the convention of the practitioners of period in tracking FM scores separate from F4F scores - now if you want to see an interesting credit to loss ratio, look at the Eastern FM-2.

So, using the 5163 figure or even 5165 as the total for F6F credits is pretty close, but not entirely accurate, the number is higher. On the other hand, I doubt we’ll ever have a 100% accurate accounting.


----------



## R Leonard (Oct 1, 2011)

[


GregP said:


> R Leonard,
> 
> what is the source of your numbers? Is the data in a form where you can see the pilot, the type of the victor, the type of the victim, etc?



See Posts 15 and 22. Other data comes probably from the same official reports you've seen. Another good source is the research of Ray Wagner. 

The trick is compiling the information correctly and in a usable format so that you can sift through the data. That's what computers are for and where training in operational analysis and statistics comes in handy. For cross checking, a library of some 175 specifically related WWII naval aviation titles does not hurt - out of some 600 naval and military volumes; not to mention a couple-three of file cabinets full of reports, periodicals, and individual articles (and an accurate catalog of all so I can find things and, more importantly, avoid the purchase of duplicates); and, literally, about 2000 digital pdfs gleaned from the net on WWII aviation, easily half of which are directly USN related.

In all this, I am a collector of names, names of WWII period US naval aviators, USN, USMC, USCG and even a few who when over to the AAF (though that's where I stop tracking those individuals). Don't have all that many individuals, but it keeps me amused. Estimate about 70,000 active duty naval aviators December 1941 to September 1945. My list has over 33,300 entries for information on about 19,500 individuals, from LCDR Philip V Aaronson 2d CO of VPB-145 in FAW-11 out of NAF San Julian Cuba on 1 Mar 45 to ENS Herman L Zwick who on 4 Sep 44 was assigned to VPB-128 in FAW-5 out of NAS Norfolk.


----------



## gjs238 (Oct 1, 2011)

R Leonard said:


> now if you want to see an interesting credit to loss ratio, look at the Eastern FM-2.


Can you elaborate? You've aroused my curiosity.


----------



## R Leonard (Oct 1, 2011)

> gjs238
> Can you elaborate? You've aroused my curiosity.



According to the Naval Aviation Combat Statistics - World War II OpNav report, for the entire war, the FM-2 was credited with destroying 422 aircraft in air-to-air combat in the Pacific for the loss of 13, a ratio 32.46 to 1. This includes a 235-12 (a 19.58 to 1 ratio) record in 1944, and an incredible 187-1 record in 1945. Oh, and before anyone jumps and says the OpNav report does not say FM-2, it only says FM, I'd suggest that with some diligent researching one might be able to determine that there were no FM-1 credits, QED, FM credits = FM-2 credits. As with the F6F accounting, the OpNav FM-2 basic totals is only for, generically, "fighters" and "bombers." 

Comparing this result with Frank Olynyk's USN credits research one finds that he turns up 428 FM-2 credits, a 1.4% difference. Olynyk further identifies 39 probables and 32 damaged which do not appear in the OpNav report. 

So, one could pick their choose, 422:13 (32.5:1) or 428:13 (32.9:1).

Regards


----------



## drgondog (Oct 1, 2011)

Everybody has ignored the purpose of this thread -namel:

"*This popped into my head over my lunch hour today. Which US aircraft piloted by American pillots is credited with shooting down the most enemy aircraft? I'm not talking which model aircraft, but which specific airframe/serial number is credited with the most kills during the Second World War.*

Everybody has been deep diving Airframe TYPE.. look to Boyington, McCambell, Foss, Bong and McGuire for usual suspects as the airframe changes did not occur so fast in pacific as in Europe, Then I might take a quick look at Hofer and Gentile - as most of teir scores were in the same P-51B airframe/serial number from March through May/June 1944.


----------



## MikeGazdik (Oct 1, 2011)

Yes, thats they way I read it as well. I have been trying to dig on this since I posted before. I'm not sure of where exactly to go to find more info yet. I have hit some other "ACE" websites, and refered to a few of my books. It looks like Bud Anderson has between 9 to 12 claims in one of his P-51B Old Crow Mustangs, then that plane was turned over to another pilot. I'm researching now names like McQuire, Kepford, Lynch, Preddy, Foss.

According to his bio, Dominic "Don" Gentile, 4th FG, downed 15 between March 3rd and April 8th 1944. These were in his famous "Sangri La" P-51B. Which he crashed at his airfield showing off. (stuff of which movies are made ! )


----------



## MikeGazdik (Oct 4, 2011)

In researching this, I found the above conversation on "history.net" I cut a paste the information: _ANDY SNELL says: 
9/21/2008 at 11:33 pm
You left out,in my opinion, a very important part ot the George Preddy story. CRIPES A MIGHTY #3, Georges Last P-51-D @ the 487fs, survived WW11 was assigned to Capt. Stewart when george went state side. there were 4 or 5 others pilots that flew C.A.M.#3 in-cluding the CO., Col. John Meyer, who got 4 kills in it.
CRIPES A MIGHTY #3 went on to make history as having highest,confirmed, no. of KILLS,(27.5). Higher, than any aircraft in WW-11. 18.5 in air combat 9 ground kills. CRIPES A MIGHTY #3 did make History for George. Art Snyder was the crew chief. Andy Snell/487fs_


----------



## MikeGazdik (Oct 4, 2011)

I found this on "history.net" _ANDY SNELL says: 
9/21/2008 at 11:33 pm
You left out,in my opinion, a very important part ot the George Preddy story. CRIPES A MIGHTY #3, Georges Last P-51-D @ the 487fs, survived WW11 was assigned to Capt. Stewart when george went state side. there were 4 or 5 others pilots that flew C.A.M.#3 in-cluding the CO., Col. John Meyer, who got 4 kills in it.
CRIPES A MIGHTY #3 went on to make history as having highest,confirmed, no. of KILLS,(27.5). Higher, than any aircraft in WW-11. 18.5 in air combat 9 ground kills. CRIPES A MIGHTY #3 did make History for George. Art Snyder was the crew chief. Andy Snell/487fs_

And this: _When Preddy completed his tour and rotated back to the States for a well earned rest 44-13321 continued in service with the 352nd FG under the guise of other names; "The Margarets" of Capt. H.M. Stewart and "Sexshunate" (pronounced "Section 8") of Capt. Marion J. Nutter. Lt. Ray Littge and Lt. Warren Padden also flew the aircraft. 44-13321's last mission was on 16th April 1945 when it was lost with Lt. Padden (killed in action).

A total of 18.5 aerial and 9 ground victories were tallied in 44-13321, including 4 by Col. John Meyer on 10 September 1944. More aerial victories were scored by pilots flying this aircraft than in any other Mustang serving in WWII._

I will dig into to this to see if it is accurate.


----------



## GregP (Oct 4, 2011)

An FM-2 is simply a Wildcat with 150 more horespower. Sorry, but is gets lumped into the F4F kills, as it should.

Nobody tries to separate Fw 190A kills from Fw 190F kills, and they shouldn't for Wildcat kills, either. A Wildcat is a Wildcat. All fighter get improvements, if they see mllitary service.

The Hellcat reigns supreme in US air-to-air kills unless you are a statistician who is attempting to slice and dice the kills. If you are, then you are not slicing all the OTHER fighter variants for reference and, thus, your compariosn is not factual except for the FM-2. If you're gonna' slice and dice Wildcat kills, then do it for ALL fighter variants or quit posting one-sided claims.

Sorry guys, but a Spitfire I kill is counted with ehe Spitfire XIV kills. Let it ride for Wildcats which, in the grand scheme, are also-rans in the kills category.

They held the line until the Hellcats and Corsairs could join, and then were obsolescent, FM-2 or F4F notwithstanding. They deserve the credit, but not undue credit.

FM-2 equals a Wildcat airframe in my book, and should unless you are willing to slice and dice all types, including Allied and Axis, not just Wildcats.

Jsu my opinion ... I realize yours may vary ... but, if so, please justify whhy you break out the FM-2 and not the F4U-4, the Spitfire XIV, etc.


----------



## MikeGazdik (Oct 4, 2011)

We have two parallel discussions: aircraft type, and particular aircraft. As far as type, everything I have read in the past shows the F6F as having the most kills overall.


----------



## Milosh (Oct 4, 2011)

Because the OP was asking which *airframe* ie the same serial number, had the most kills.


----------



## buffnut453 (Oct 5, 2011)

MikeGazdik said:


> CRIPES A MIGHTY #3 went on to make history as having highest,confirmed, no. of KILLS,(27.5). Higher, than any aircraft in WW-11. 18.5 in air combat 9 ground kills.



Sorry but that's not even close. Brewster Buffalo BW-393 of the Finnish Air Force can claim 39 air-to-air victories. CAM might have been the highest-scoring US or even Allied airframe but it wasn't "Higher than any aircraft in WWII".


----------



## claidemore (Oct 5, 2011)

The question was which "US" airframe, flown by US pilots, for which CAM#3 might well be the one, the incorrect wording of the quote notwithstanding. 
AFAIK BW-393 would be the clear winner for WWII from any nation.


----------



## buffnut453 (Oct 5, 2011)

I wasn't trying to be an @*sehole - I agree, CAM may be the top-scoring US airframe piloted by US personnel.


----------



## R Leonard (Oct 5, 2011)

GregP said:


> Jsu my opinion ... I realize yours may vary ... but, if so, please justify whhy you break out the FM-2 and not the F4U-4, the Spitfire XIV, etc.



Because the USN, in the report *which you like to cite as definitive*, counts the FM-2 separately. Read it again. Practitioners of the times opinion trumps non-practitioners opinion from 60+ years away. It was considered a different airframe from the F4F-3 and -4. All of the "Wildcat" drivers I've known, and that's probably more than anyone on this forum, where the conversations steered in this direction, always referred to F4Fs and FM-2s separately. We've beat this to death in other places. If you have a problem with the USN accounting in _Naval Aviation Combat Statistics - World War II_, I'd suggest, as I have to you before, that you take it up with the USN - I am sure they'll be happy to change the record just for you. I have no further comment, nor will I, on the subject; we shall have to disagree. Also, despite my personal preference for naval types, the P-51, in all its versions, scored more air-to-air victories than the F6F in all it's versions.


----------



## drgondog (Oct 5, 2011)

44-13321 Cripes A Mighty 3 had 14 air scores, JC Meyer got 2 in 44-13597 which is the Only P-51D-5 that he scored in.

Henry Stewart may have gotten 44-13321 after Preddy went home in September but his first score (air) was November 27 - can't verify the a/c number

Gentile got 15.5 in P-51B's but in three separate birds.

For US ETO/MTO Preddy's 44-13321 seems to be high w/14 verified, I question Stewart but he did get 4 in the air after 11/27/44.

Tommy McGuire got 18 in P-38L-1 (no serial number stated) - his last 18 before KIA with one more unverified

McCambell had 15.5 in an F6F-5 (serial unspecified)

Boyington, Vraciu, Kepner, Bong, etc all had less than Preddy's CAM3..


----------



## GregP (Oct 5, 2011)

I suppose we'll just have to disagree, Leonard. To me, a Wildcat is a Wildcat, and it seems to be that way too when we have a Wildcat day at the Planes of Fame, when I speak with former Wildcat pilots. So, I suppose we have different experiences when taking with the pilots, and that's OK. Many of them disagree with one another.

It's OK to disagree, and it doesn't have to get personal. Let's just say we think about it differently. 

You won't convince me and can see I won't convince you, so your numbers are slighty different when it comes to the FM-2, and that's OK.The Wildcat is nowhere ner the top anyway. Other people can't seem to agree on such mundane things as the number of aircraft buiilt, much less kills, claims, probables, etc.

Calculate your FM-2 kills any way you want and do it in good health. Cheers. Really.


----------



## drgondog (Apr 18, 2016)

MikeGazdik said:


> We have two parallel discussions: aircraft type, and particular aircraft. As far as type, everything I have read in the past shows the F6F as having the most kills overall.



Mike - I have nearly finished the final linkage of my own - namely USAF 85 compilation (Frank's base when he started his doctoral studies).

Verified to USAF 85, matched pilot to unit to equipment flown by date (i.e. 4th FG transitioned to Mustangs in February 1944 and all WWII victory credits after that were P-51), the Mustang had 5944 plus 313 RAF/Commonwealth - I have the F6F with 5229 but checking for Brit Navy totals.


----------



## Timppa (Apr 23, 2016)

drgondog said:


> 44-13321 Cripes A Mighty 3 had 14 air scores, JC Meyer got 2 in 44-13597 which is the Only P-51D-5 that he scored in.,



How about Gabreski's D-11 (42-75510) ?


----------



## drgondog (Apr 23, 2016)

T


Timppa said:


> How about Gabreski's D-11 (42-75510) ?


Timppa - Gabby flew several HVA's that are undifferentiated by Olynyk, which I use as a fall back to my own data.

Frank has 'blank' serial numbers from P-47D-1RE 42-7871 (Dec 11) until June 7. After June 7 HVA was P-47D-25RE 42-26418 (the one he went down in). He also got 6 VCs in HVE and HVZ before his last HVA 43-26418. In between he flew HVA P-47D-21RE 42-75510 but not definitive when he got the -21 and when he traded in 42-7871. I would have to do some research on the IARC's to figure out the transition but I believe the -21RE's started ops in late April, 1944 with 56th FG.

That said, allowing for all 1944 VCs Jan1 through June 6 as 75510, then maximum in 75510 is 8.


----------



## MiTasol (Apr 25, 2016)

Some of the numbers in the Pacific are definitely suspect.

Years ago had a few beers with Supe Hoysington at Aero Sport, Chino CA (Greg P probably knew the man) 

He was on the USAAC/USAAF crash/rescue boats based at Kiriwina in PNG during the war and they were regularly strafed and bombed by US aircraft based at Milne Bay even though the decks of all 3 boats were painted with the US flag.

He said they were never hit and occasionally got the aircraft buzz number

On their regular supply runs to Milne Bay they would go to the records there and demand the flight records for the buzz numbers that had strafed and/or bombed them.

According to those records the US crash boats were always a Japanese vessel, usually a destroyer but once even a cruiser, and were always sunk.

I bet the same applied to most, if not all, other services.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## DarrenW (Jul 9, 2018)

Old Thread but still an interesting one. From what I've read in _Hellcat Aces of World War 2 _and elsewhere_, _there's a pretty good chance that Cdr David McCampbell has the record for number of kills scored on a single airframe by a US pilot. As many as 23.5 victories were scored in his F6F-5 named _Minsi III_ (BuNo 70143), which McCampbell flew almost exclusively during Sept - Nov 1944 (he was the CAG so he had that privilege). It's quite possibly the most recognizable Hellcat in history.

McCampbell was also the highest scoring US Naval aviator with 34 aerial victories, as well as the highest scoring US fighter pilot to survive the war. He's also noted for scoring a US record of nine aerial victories during a single combat mission (five _Zekes, _two_ Hamps,_ and two _Oscars _on 24 Oct 1944), and achieved "ace in a day" on two separate occasions.







Photo Source: https://en.valka.cz/files/mccampbell1_868.jpg

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Informative Informative:
2 | Like List reactions


----------



## Smokey Stover (Jul 9, 2018)

I dont know the numbers off the top of my head like the rest of you all, but my first guess was the Hellcat. Does anyone have any ideas why it was not used in large numbers in Europe? Same goes for the Corsair. I mean i know they were carrier based aircraft but the Corsairs were operating from land based runways for quite some time. At least the US pilots were anyway. Britain were pretty quick to figure out how to land one on the deck of a carrier. Not surprising it was hard though with that huge R2800 right up front. The famous curved approach was standard for FAA pilots.


----------



## fubar57 (Jul 9, 2018)

Fleet Air Arm operated Corsairs and Hellcats around Norway. I'll have to get to the books for more accurate info


----------



## Glider (Jul 9, 2018)

Not many carrier operations in Europe but I think the germans did get hold of a Corsair from one of the operations

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Schweik (Jul 10, 2018)

GregP said:


> That has several answers. My answers come only from kills by American fighters flown in US service.
> 
> 1) In any single theater of oeprations, the top would be the F6F Hellcat, with 5,168 kills in the Pacific Thearter of Operations. Next would the P-51 Mustang with 4,950 kills in the European Theater of Operations.
> 
> ...



I actually think if you counted RAF / Commonwealth, Soviet, and American victories, it's probably the P-40.

P-40 is the 4th ranking in terms of victories from US pilots, but was also in very heavy use by the Commonwealth and Soviets, each of whom had close to 50 pilots who made Ace (or double or triple or quadruple Ace) while flying the type.

Depends if you count victories with US aircraft by pilots of other countries or only by USAAF pilots.

As for the revisions, the cross-checking of claims and so on - I think it's a good thing. you just have to compare Apples to Apples. Cross -verified victories and victory claims are two different things, you have to be careful not to mix them. For example when comparing aircraft types or Aces.

The Cross-verified victories are at least to date, somewhat more limited because you can't always be sure about who shot down what plane on a given day. I have tried to do this myself - on some days for example you have 20 victory claims by 12 pilots flying three types of aircraft, and the enemy records show 11 losses - you can't always tell who got a victory, who probably got a partial victory (3 aircraft shooting at the same damaged enemy plane for example) and who just made a mistake (somebody who shot at a plane but missed, and later saw the pilot bail out because somebody else hit it, or somebody who shot at a plane and saw smoke and saw it going down, but didn't realize it was just burning oil because the pilot firewalled the throttle and did a Split S to escape etc.)

At least some of the time it can however give you a much clearer idea of what was happening on a given day, and sometimes there really is very little doubt what actually happened based on the records of both sides.

S

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## GrauGeist (Jul 10, 2018)

Glider said:


> Not many carrier operations in Europe but I think the germans did get hold of a Corsair from one of the operations


The Corsair was one of the few Allied planes that the Axis had few examples of.

The Germans did capture an intact FAA Corsair, an F4U-1A of 1841 Naval Air Squadron (JT404) when it suffered engine trouble and had to set down near Bodø, Norway in July 1944. Lt. Mattholie was taken POW and the Corsair eventually ended up at Reichlin. For one reason or another, no photos of the captured Corsair survive.

The Japanese managed to cobble together a some-what complete Corsair from several airframes, but there doesn't seem to be any surviving document as to whether it was flown or not. It was last seen at Kasumigaura Flight School.

Reactions: Informative Informative:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Peter Gunn (Jul 10, 2018)

Remember, the OP was asking about which AIRFRAME had the highest amount of victories to its credit, not a plane type. It's not "the Hellcat" or "the Mustang", it's A Mustang, probably George Preddy's Cripes 'A Mighty III P-51D 44-13597 if I've read the thread right.


----------



## fubar57 (Jul 10, 2018)

That's what I thought as well but it could go the other way also


----------



## Schweik (Jul 10, 2018)

fubar57 said:


> That's what I thought as well but it could go the other way also



Yeah it's two different conversations at this point. I'd be interested to know the other answer too though. You do run across those planes sometimes in which multiple pilots got numerous victories. I can't remember the right sources for the examples though.

Reactions: Agree Agree:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## DarrenW (Jul 10, 2018)

Peter Gunn said:


> Remember, the OP was asking about which AIRFRAME had the highest amount of victories to its credit, not a plane type. It's not "the Hellcat" or "the Mustang", it's A Mustang, probably George Preddy's Cripes 'A Mighty III P-51D 44-13597 if I've read the thread right.



Seeing that statistically they were number one and number two for the greatest number of "shoot-downs" in US aviation history, one would expect the answer to the OP to be a particular Mustang or a particular Hellcat....

Reactions: Agree Agree:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## fubar57 (Jul 10, 2018)

This won't be the most by any means but W/CDR James Edgar “Johnnie” Johnson shot down 12 aircraft and shared five plus six damaged in Spitfire Mk.IX EN398 and in a Spitfire LF Mk. IX MK392 he shot down 12 aircraft plus one shared destroyed on the ground
From: Johnnie Johnson’s Spitfire Revisited — Camouflage & Markings | 1943 | Spitfire Mk. IX

Reactions: Informative Informative:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Zipper730 (Jul 10, 2018)

Bucksnort101 said:


> This popped into my head over my lunch hour today. Which US aircraft piloted by American pillots is credited with shooting down the most enemy aircraft? I'm not talking which model aircraft, but which specific airframe/serial number is credited with the most kills during the Second World War.


What American flown plane has the most kills on it?

I'm not sure if that was ever asked before...


----------



## GregP (Jul 10, 2018)

I started out thinking of the airframe type with the most kills. It is likely the Hellcat for a single theater of war and the P-51 overall for U.S. pilots. Then it was pointed out the question was the single airframe serial number with the most kills is what was asked for.

Then Schweik started thinking about the P-40 in Soviet service.

I'd say we confine our desires for research to something with some records that can be perused. Personally, I've never run across a primary Soviet source, and have relied on people who have researched the Soviet side by way of being able to speak, read, and write Russian. But during the communist reign over the Soviet Union, history was conveniently "revised" on several occasions, when someone was written out of history due to some transgression. Alas, I have never identified any really good Soviet sources and have only taken other's word for it.

I have some books, but they lack credibility as primary or even secondary sources.

If anyone knows of some good Soviet sources, particularly sources that have been translated into English, please post the source that might still be available. If not, maybe we should stick to western sources that can at least be found, even with some trouble.

Whatsay, any good sources for Soviet data out there? Maybe Schweik has a good case for the P-40, but I can't really discuss it one way or the other from what I know right now.


----------



## fubar57 (Jul 10, 2018)

Good freakin' Gawd.....every single thread. I'm outta this one now as well

Reactions: Funny Funny:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Zipper730 (Jul 10, 2018)

fubar57 said:


> Good freakin' Gawd.....every single thread. I'm outta this one now as well


I revised it Georgie Boy!


----------



## Zipper730 (Jul 10, 2018)

R Leonard said:


> Olynyk, on the other hand, author of Stars and Bars - A Tribute to the American Fighter Ace, 1920-1973 and the recognized historian for the American Fighter Aces Association, went back through the combat reports and connected the dots with a pilot name to each credit, probable, or damaged, and the enemy type cited in the report, something not found in Barber's team's Naval Aviation Combat Statistics.


A lot of work, but it might be the best way to get the data.


> I'd also point out that unless you have carefully gone through the Barber report and put it all in nice new spread sheets with nice new formulas you may find yourself zeroing in on some typos . . . that is, the numbers in calculation fields are not always typed in correctly


Good heads up for everybody


> it follows the convention of the practitioners of period in tracking FM scores separate from F4F scores - now if you want to see an interesting credit to loss ratio, look at the Eastern FM-2.


I guess you'd have to add the FM kills with the F4F if you were going by type anyway.


----------



## Schweik (Jul 10, 2018)

GregP said:


> If anyone knows of some good Soviet sources, particularly sources that have been translated into English, please post the source that might still be available. If not, maybe we should stick to western sources that can at least be found, even with some trouble.
> 
> Whatsay, any good sources for Soviet data out there? Maybe Schweik has a good case for the P-40, but I can't really discuss it one way or the other from what I know right now.



Lets not go way down that road. You can find a lot of good interviews with former Soviet pilots here. That is basically what i was referring to, those interviews plus some overviews of Soviet records you'll find there, all in English. But of course yes, you can't be sure about Soviet records (I frankly don't think we can trust Nazi records 100% either but that is another ball of wax).

Maybe it's best to return to the OP and focus on the specific airplane, as in which serial number, accrued the largest number of victories.

If you want to discuss the other subject lets make another thread for it I don't want to mess up this one. For that matter I think there are a few old threads on this subject (which aircraft _type _had the most kills) already out there one of which could be revived.

S


----------



## GregP (Jul 10, 2018)

Hi Schweik,

I agree, but the problem is how to establish the airframe with the most victories. We have to start somewhere. I've seen a lot of combat reports, and not many state the airframe serial number flown by the victor that I have seen. Also, most pilots did not always fly the plane with their name on it. If they were out of crew rest and a mission needed to go, someone else flew it.

So, my question was aimed at trying to establish a baseline where we could go LOOK for that information.

I have a LOT of data on aircraft and aerial victories from both sides, but almost none of it mentions the aircraft serial number flown by the victor and NONE of it mentions the aircraft serial number of the victim, as we would expect. Asking these questions is EASY. Getting answers is NOT, as we see.

Cheers.

Absent the data needed to support the conclusion, I'd nominate the Bf 109 as the type with the most victories, but the Yak-3/9 series might have an edge if only we knew had data to support it. Certainly the U.S. type with the most victories has to be either the F6F or the P-51. I'm leaning toward the F6F for the single aircraft serial number with the most victories (David McCampbell: F6F-5 Bu No 70143: 23.5 victories) and the P-51 as the U.S. airframe type with the most victories overall for the war.

Reactions: Agree Agree:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## GrauGeist (Jul 11, 2018)

To try and find which actual airframe had the highest tally of victories may be nearly impossible.

A person would have to weed through all the Aces (of all nations) and identify which aircraft they were flying at the time of each victory awarded. Then they'd have to check through all the non-Ace victories to see if they were flying a certain aircraft that had been shared with an Ace at one point or another. This alone is going to require literally thousands of pilots' records from all Allied and Axis nations.

Then they're going to need to build a database to start confirming each airframe's victory and weed through the tens of thousands of airframes that were involved in victories that match the pilot's logs.

I honestly think that there isn't enough time in a person's lifetime to be able to find which single airframe had the highest victory count of the war.

There are several aircraft that were known to have high victories via their pilots, but many of those were either destroyed during the course of the war or shortly afterward.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Agree Agree:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## DarrenW (Jul 12, 2018)

GrauGeist said:


> To try and find which actual airframe had the highest tally of victories may be nearly impossible.
> 
> A person would have to weed through all the Aces (of all nations) and identify which aircraft they were flying at the time of each victory awarded. Then they'd have to check through all the non-Ace victories to see if they were flying a certain aircraft that had been shared with an Ace at one point or another. This alone is going to require literally thousands of pilots' records from all Allied and Axis nations.
> 
> ...



I totally agree. I guess the best we can do is look at cases of particular airframes that have "careers" which are well documented and leave it at that. It's certainly not a definitive answer to the question at hand for obvious reasons (too many unknowns), but what we learn along the way may still be interesting nevertheless....

Reactions: Bacon Bacon:
1 | Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## David Fred (Jul 12, 2018)

Bucksnort101 said:


> This popped into my head over my lunch hour today. Which US aircraft piloted by American pillots is credited with shooting down the most enemy aircraft? I'm not talking which model aircraft, but which specific airframe/serial number is credited with the most kills during the Second World War.



I watch and read a LOT about WW2. And I have seen 5 planes claimed as being the first to reach 400 mph in level flight (Corsair, P-38, Tempest, and a couple of others) Same with most kills. Hellcat, Mustang, P-38 and Tempest (counting the doodlebugs).

I wish I could get my hands on the official report. I found one on allied tank losses, and performance of anti-tank Guns, all in one final,post war report. But only the documentary film makers version of statistics on aircraft.

I’m sure one exists, but the documentary film guys are THE worst repeaters of myth and rumor ever created.


----------



## Shortround6 (Jul 12, 2018)

David Fred said:


> I watch and read a LOT about WW2. And I have seen 5 planes claimed as being the first to reach 400 mph in level flight (Corsair, P-38, Tempest, and a couple of others)


It was the Hawker Hurricane
rolls-royce merlin | northolt | fighter | 1938 | 0911 | Flight Archive




Strength of tailwinds not recorded for many of the early 400mph flights by several aircraft.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## michael rauls (Jul 24, 2018)

David Fred said:


> I watch and read a LOT about WW2. And I have seen 5 planes claimed as being the first to reach 400 mph in level flight (Corsair, P-38, Tempest, and a couple of others) Same with most kills. Hellcat, Mustang, P-38 and Tempest (counting the doodlebugs).
> 
> I wish I could get my hands on the official report. I found one on allied tank losses, and performance of anti-tank Guns, all in one final,post war report. But only the documentary film makers version of statistics on aircraft.
> 
> I’m sure one exists, but the documentary film guys are THE worst repeaters of myth and rumor ever created.


 Well there are certainly guys here that know alot more than I do but I'll take a somewhat educated guess( although some may take issue with the educated part.) Of the aircraft you listed the p38 flew first to the best of my knowledge and broke 400 pretty quickly after that so I would think it would have to be the p38. I could be wrong( and if that's the case im sure well both find that out in short order)

Reactions: Funny Funny:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Dan Fahey (Sep 14, 2018)

Interesting comment that did not get fully answered.
US Fighters that Russia used during WW2, what were their shootdown records?

Most dominate Allied fighters were the P40, P39, Hurricane, Spitfire.
The vaunted Spitfire ended up being used in a secondary roll as they were not as rugged.
They did receive a handful of Mustang, Thunderbolts and Lightnings and large batch of P63.
Finns had the P36 and F2A, French the P36

My opinion the Warhawk series was quite a useful aircraft in WW2.
Used as fighter and bomber and everything else. 
My guess is that every US pilot trained in it !
A decent 2 stage 2 speed supercharger would have improved performance envelop.
Instead of receiving incremental improvements.

Based on reading how the Russians used the P39 and P40.
Figure the overall shootdown record in WW2 for both would be more toward the top.
Especially the P39 that fit very well in Eastern Europe combat environment.

The P40 was a very versatile weapons platform.
Perform well enough in every combat area except England is impressive.
The Wildcat, Hellcat and Corsair would be in that same league had it been used in more theaters.
But it was the P40 that got distributed to the most combat areas.

D


----------



## Schweik (Sep 14, 2018)

So far as I know nobody has (yet) compiled any list or total of victory claims by type (that includes Lend Lease aircraft) available for the whole war for either the Soviets or the UK, there are some stats for the Battle of Britain and I've seen numbers for both the Hurricane and the Spitfire which are presumably for the whole war, but I haven't seen it for other types especially Lend Lease. Nor for the Soviets.

I can say that the RAF / Commonwealth fighter squadrons (including Australian, South African, and New Zealand air forces) had 46 aces who had 5 or more victory claims while flying the P-40, per Osprey. Plus another ~200 aces who scored one or more of their kills flying that type.

The Soviets had a similar number of aces purely on the P-40 but I can't remember the exact count. They had about 2000 P-40's but seemed to burn out the engines pretty fast and didn't make as wide a use of them as they did the P-39 (of which they had 4700).

But I suspect if you did have the total numbers, and combined US claims with UK / Commonwealth and Soviet, the P-40 would be in the top three of Allied fighters for total victory claims. Then there is another layer (and a new argument) where we get to try harder to figure out actual losses vs. claims.

Some Russians did claim the Spitfire was too fragile but the bottom line is, while they didn't have good luck with the Spit Vs they tried in the Crimea they used the Spit IX's for air defense (as they also did later with P-40s) and I think that is mainly because they had good high altitude performance unlike most of the Soviet fighters. I think they did value the Spitfires - they didn't see that much action because of being in PVO units but they desperately needed good air defense, if you look what happened to Russian industry in say, 1942 it's clear why.

Jean

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## R Leonard (Sep 16, 2018)

Dan Fahey said:


> My guess is that every US pilot trained in it !



Not in the US Navy and US Marine Corps

Reactions: Funny Funny:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Peter Gunn (Sep 17, 2018)

R Leonard said:


> Not in the US Navy and US Marine Corps



I've heard the Navy and Marines used something a little more their speed...

Reactions: Funny Funny:
3 | Like List reactions


----------



## Vincenzo (Sep 18, 2018)

As i known the first airplane to broke the 400 mph was the Supermarine S.6B, the 13th september, 1931

Reactions: Agree Agree:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## BiffF15 (Sep 18, 2018)

Peter Gunn said:


> I've heard the Navy and Marines used something a little more their speed...
> 
> View attachment 509893



All I can say in my best Forest Forest Gump draw is, "JennyA"!

Cheers,
Biff

Reactions: Funny Funny:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Dan Fahey (Sep 18, 2018)

Schweik said:


> So far as I know nobody has (yet) compiled any list or total of victory claims by type (that includes Lend Lease aircraft) available for the whole war for either the Soviets or the UK, there are some stats for the Battle of Britain and I've seen numbers for both the Hurricane and the Spitfire which are presumably for the whole war, but I haven't seen it for other types especially Lend Lease. Nor for the Soviets.
> 
> I can say that the RAF / Commonwealth fighter squadrons (including Australian, South African, and New Zealand air forces) had 46 aces who had 5 or more victory claims while flying the P-40, per Osprey. Plus another ~200 aces who scored one or more of their kills flying that type.
> 
> ...


I wonder if Diego Sampini has some information.
He and Cookie Sewell battled over details of Korean War shoot downs for almost a decade!


----------



## Dan Fahey (Sep 19, 2018)

Schweik said:


> So far as I know nobody has (yet) compiled any list or total of victory claims by type (that includes Lend Lease aircraft) available for the whole war for either the Soviets or the UK, there are some stats for the Battle of Britain and I've seen numbers for both the Hurricane and the Spitfire which are presumably for the whole war, but I haven't seen it for other types especially Lend Lease. Nor for the Soviets.
> 
> I can say that the RAF / Commonwealth fighter squadrons (including Australian, South African, and New Zealand air forces) had 46 aces who had 5 or more victory claims while flying the P-40, per Osprey. Plus another ~200 aces who scored one or more of their kills flying that type.
> 
> ...


Hmmm..the P39 would also have had an interesting shoot down record !
Sure the Finns kept records of the kills per AC. 
Considering the Brewster and P36 were the best they had until the Me109 was introduced.


----------



## Schweik (Sep 20, 2018)

The Finns do have good records but their activity was small scale compared to the rest of the Russian Front.

I suspect the Russians have detailed records because you can find lists of Russian aces that show all the aircraft types they flew. Somebody just probably needs to translate it from Russian. Sadly cooperation with the Russians seems to have declined sharply in the last few years. We got a lot of really interesting data out of Russia for the first ten years or so after the fall of the Soviet Union.


----------

