# Which modern plane best matches its WW2 counterpart?



## superunknown (May 26, 2005)

We all know that the A-10 was named after the P-47 (if you didn't you do now!), But which modern aircraft do you think is most like it's WW2 relative (not related).

Example-

F-15 Eagle - P-51 Mustang?

Both multirole, and main front line fighter of the US


----------



## Nonskimmer (May 26, 2005)

That's a tough one. The majority of modern fighters are multi-role and all are missile armed, so this will take some thought from me. 
Most can pull off some impressive manoeuvres too.


----------



## superunknown (May 26, 2005)

Well, for another example how about...
F-16 Falcon - P-47 Thunderbolt
Both more than able at multirole, but both better at ground strike?


----------



## plan_D (May 27, 2005)

I'd put F.6 Lightning and H.F. XIV Spitfire but the F.6 isn't modern!

My reasoning is simply, both remarkable short range interceptors.


----------



## superunknown (May 27, 2005)

Well the RAF were still using them until 1988. So I would say they are modern, sort of. Just imagine a man wearing a 50's style pinstripe suit dancing to 80's new romantic music


----------



## mosquitoman (May 27, 2005)

Mossie- Canberra is the only one I can think of


----------



## evangilder (May 27, 2005)

I think the A-10/P-47 is a good comparison, but tough and good for ground attack.

How about the F-18 and the Corsair. Both good multirole airplanes that can kick ass in the sky and pound the crap out of ground targets.

Similarly, Hellcat and the Intruder. Interestingly one is the F6F and the other is an A-6.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (May 27, 2005)

C-130/ C-47 =D>


----------



## evangilder (May 27, 2005)

Good one, FBJ!


----------



## FLYBOYJ (May 27, 2005)

8) Thanks!


----------



## superunknown (May 27, 2005)

FLYBOYJ said:


> C-130/ C-47 =D>



Have a quick read of this>

http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/about1870.html


----------



## FLYBOYJ (May 27, 2005)

superunknown said:


> FLYBOYJ said:
> 
> 
> > C-130/ C-47 =D>
> ...



Oh yea, Russian LI-2/ C-47 - I built a model of that with the turret and entered it in a model contest. The judges never heard or seen this so they thought I flipped!


----------



## Glider (Jul 12, 2005)

SU25 / IL2 both slow heavily armoured specialised ground attack


----------



## Aggie08 (Sep 1, 2005)

I know this post is a little old, but I just came upon it. 

What about the B-17/24 and the B-52? I know the Stratofort was developed only about 20 years after the first two, but they are similar. 

Also, I'd agree on the two Thunderbolts. 8 .50's on one, huge-normous gun on the other... Both could take an assload of punishment and deal out much more.


----------



## Wildcat (Sep 2, 2005)

I always thought the Beaufighter and A-10 were similar.


----------



## Parmigiano (Sep 2, 2005)

I think A10-Warthog and IL-2 : designed for the same role, similar armament concept, extremely effective and scary if used in the right environment. We don't know (and will never know) if the A10 would have performed better than the IL2 against enemy fighters, but it is reasonable to assume that it would have been in troubles too.


----------



## cheddar cheese (Sep 2, 2005)

I think maybe Hs-129 is a good match for the A-10.

What plane can match the G.91....


----------



## Glider (Sep 2, 2005)

Il2 and SU 26 Same Country and same task. Both slow, well armoured and packed a punch.


----------



## wmaxt (Sep 2, 2005)

Try these

F-16 - P-51 Smaller, single engine, cheaper but still capable
A-10 - P-47 Heavy weight ground bounders
F-15E - P-38L Twin engine multi-role
F-14 - Corsair Heavy duty multi-role carrier fighters
Lightning - Spitfire Great intercepters
C-130 - C-47 Workhorse transports
B-1 - B-29 Heavy weight advanced bombers
Tornado - Tempest Very good multi-role fighters 

wmaxt


----------



## Gnomey (Sep 2, 2005)

Nice list wmaxt, I'd agree with all of those.

How about this: Sunderland and Nimrod.


----------



## cheddar cheese (Sep 2, 2005)

I agree with all of that wmaxt, except Tornado and Tempest. Tornados really arent good.


----------



## Archangel (Sep 3, 2005)

im still thinking about the P38L and the eurofighter. both are rally fasr interceptors. (and can be used for other missions  )


----------



## cheddar cheese (Sep 3, 2005)

Nah I think wmaxt's link with the P-38 to the F-15E was spot on 8)

The Eurofighter is advanced though, as was the P-38 65 years ago.


----------



## mosquitoman (Sep 3, 2005)

Hows about Eurofighter and Me262
Both highly advanced for their time but in short supply


----------



## wmaxt (Sep 3, 2005)

Thanks,

How about this one F-111 - Mossie Bomber/fighter low or high for those jobs brute force just doesn't cut it.

wmaxt


----------



## cheddar cheese (Sep 3, 2005)

Or F-117 - Mossie?


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Sep 3, 2005)

I would put the mossie to the F-111 - My father in law told me the F-111 would just continue to build up speed until it started to self-destruct!


----------



## mosquitoman (Sep 3, 2005)

I thought the Canberra was a better match with the Mossie- both unarmed bombers, photo-recce, sleek lines, 2 engines


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Sep 3, 2005)

mosquitoman said:


> I thought the Canberra was a better match with the Mossie- both unarmed bombers, photo-recce, sleek lines, 2 engines



Now that makes sense!


----------



## mosquitoman (Sep 3, 2005)

I made sense? First time for everything


----------



## Nonskimmer (Sep 3, 2005)

Don't let it go to your head.


----------



## mosquitoman (Sep 4, 2005)

Don't worry, I won't

B-29 and B-52: Both have the word fortress in their names, made by the same company, both very heavy bombers


----------



## wmaxt (Sep 4, 2005)

mosquitoman said:


> B-29 and B-52: Both have the word fortress in their names, made by the same company, both very heavy bombers



That works, I was thinking B-1 and B-29 because they both are the heavest, advanced, 4 engined and fastest of their day. 

wmaxt


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Sep 5, 2005)

TSR.2-tiffy perhaps??


----------



## cheddar cheese (Sep 5, 2005)

Other than the Tactical Strike and Reconnaisaince bit I dunno..I dont really see a link. I think the TSR-2 would be better suited to something that perhaps didnt see service...


----------



## jrk (Sep 5, 2005)

hawker typhoon and sepecat jaguar both had good ground attack capabilities.

and 

handley page halifax and avro vulcan
both carried large bomb loads and both had long range capabilities.


----------



## cheddar cheese (Sep 5, 2005)

I suppose you could compare the V-bombers to the British heavies. 

Valiant - Lancaster
Vulcan - Halifax
Victor - Stirling


----------



## mosquitoman (Sep 5, 2005)

I'd put the Vulcan with the Lanc, mainly because they were both made by Avro


----------



## jrk (Sep 9, 2005)

fair point mossieman.


----------



## P38 Pilot (Sep 15, 2005)

How about this one:

The Mossie to SR-71.

Both served as spy planes, The Mossie was unarmed at one point and the SR-71 was always unarmed. Both were also pretty fast for their days.


----------



## evangilder (Sep 15, 2005)

Thats a big stretch. The Mossie did a whole hell of a lot more than reconnaissance. The Blackbird is only a spy plane. Sure, there was the A-12, but that was short lived.

I know the Germans had a high altitude reconnaissance jet (Erich, help me out here...). That might be a better match.


----------



## trackend (Sep 16, 2005)

My joice would be the C130 the Dakota the C130 has been going for a long while now and still is a terrific transport just like the good old Dak


----------



## cheddar cheese (Sep 19, 2005)

Thats a good comparison Lee. The C-130 is one of my fave planes.


----------

