1946: Best piston engine fighter in the world?

Which was the best piston engine fighter, 1946?


  • Total voters
    70

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

From the single engine fighters i would also take the hawker fury I with the sabre vii engine.
Overall the Hornet because of the longer range and two engine safety and almost indentical performance. In fact i feel that should be faster than the fury on max continius power.
I also like the spiteful.
It appears that england created the best all around fighters, a great mixture of all critical paramerers, with reasonable cost.
 
3500 HP with water injection on = emergency.

I boobed with the engine model. The Sabre VII was a 3,050hp engine that could do 3,500hp with Water-Methanol. The engine I was thinking about was called the Sabre E122 which had all the tricks, 3 speed 2 stage blower, contra rotating prop, Water-Methanol, annular radiator and was supposed to be 4,000hp emergency power. It never got anywhere near a post war order so didnt get a mark number.

Napiers had a test rig Turbo charged Sabre run at 45 psi boost giving 5,500hp which must have shaken the test cell to its foundations.
 
My vote would be the Sea Fury, although I think the other aircraft are also great. There was a lot of improvements in aerodynamics technology between 1940 and 1945, and the variants of pre-war designs, a category some of these fell into, would not make the first tier.

All of them, however, suffered from the very simple fact that, in 1946, the sell-by date for front-line piston-engine fighters had probably passed. To some extent, the best piston-engine fighter of 1946 was beginning to look like the best biplane fighter of 1938: well-designed, still useful, but definitely tending towards obsolescence.
 
I chose F4U-5, as to me if it cannot cover all the planet (requires carrier operability) it isn't the best.

Sea Fury would be a very close #2 (losing only because of ground-attack/CAS capability issues), with Sea Hornet #3.

F7F Tigercat is very tempting, as it is technically carrier-capable - but in reality the USN did not approve it for normal deployment aboard ship, and it was used as purely land-based aircraft.

F8F loses out because it was not as capable in a large portion of the missions a prop fighter would be called on to perform in 1946 - ground attack, interdiction, etc. (1,000lb external payload vs 4,000lb for the F4U). Spiteful shares the Bearcat's weaknesses. Both of these are primarily task force protection aircraft.
 
Problem is that other planes on that list will be able to get to height quicker. Certainly the F8F could, and the Spitfire.

And if you're not at the higher altitudes (30,000ft or so) you probably won't have much of a speed advantage. If at all.
I believe the Spitfire could, but not the Bearcat...it was no good for high altitudes...there are several planes on this list that would outclimb it above 20K feet...
 
The problem with the Bearcat was its poor high altitude performance...below 20K feet it was probably the best performer of this group...above 20K feet however, many others on this list would outperform it considerably...
 

Users who are viewing this thread