5 Best WW2 Allied Forces Planes (5 German And Japanese Planes That Were Even Better)

[NVSMITH]

-Absolutely ridiculous. "...the Ju-87 is the most feared WW2 German aircraft."
https://www.hotcars.com/best-ww2-allied-forces-planes-better-german-and-japanese-planes/

 

[SaparotRob]

Looking forward to the replies to this one!
No Axis bombers better than Allied ones (asked the B-17 fan boy)?

 

[pbehn]

Spitfire MkI MKII MkIV Mk IX and Mk XIV.

 

[pbehn]

-Absolutely ridiculous. "...the Ju-87 is the most feared WW2 German aircraft."
https://www.hotcars.com/best-ww2-allied-forces-planes-better-german-and-japanese-planes/

Depends who is doing the "fearing" possibly true for Polish, French and other civilians.

 

[Shortround6]

Shows that having a good press agent is more important than actual performance.

A bit like Paul Revere was a HERO in the Amercan Revolution.

 

[Shortround6]

2nd entry " the Zero eked out an impressive 346 mph top speed from a Nakajima NK1C rated at 940 hp." tells us all we need to know about the accuracy of information on this website.

 

[Thumpalumpacus]

Unimpressive. He should stick to cars.

 

[Ovod]

-Absolutely ridiculous. "...the Ju-87 is the most feared WW2 German aircraft."
https://www.hotcars.com/best-ww2-allied-forces-planes-better-german-and-japanese-planes/

What is so ridiculous about it – I'm sure that Hans-Ulrich Rudel and the crews of HMS Illustrious, Warspite and Indomitable would concur.

The Ju-87 was probably one of the most successful – if not the most successful – anti-shipping aircraft in the European theatre, certainly against military ships at least. If we are to talk about an aircraft used against mainly miltary targets (as opposed to a strategic bomber) possibly the most prolific and successful bomber or attack aircraft in Europe throughout WW2, whether it be a single, twin or 4-engined.

I really don't know where anyone got the idea that the combat record of the Stuka was anything less than exemplary?

 

[pinehilljoe]

"Best" is subjective. B-29 is noticeably absent from the list if one talks about Best.

 

[GrauGeist]

The Ju87 was the best at what it did, where it did - until the Luftwaffe lost air superiority.

Then it became the best way to accrue Allied aerial victories...

 

[nuuumannn]

The Ju-87 was probably one of the most successful – if not the most successful – anti-shipping aircraft in the European theatre, certainly against military ships at least.

I suspect the Fairey Swordfish and possibly Bristol Beaufighter researchers might be able to provide figures to counter that assertion...

 

[WARSPITER]

The Swordfish is credited with the most tonnage sunk.

 

[Snautzer01]

The Ju87 was the best at what it did, where it did - until the Luftwaffe lost air superiority.

Then it became the best way to accrue Allied aerial victories...

Dint forget Russia. Even without air superiority it was good for an awfull lot of damage.

 

[AerialTorpedoDude69]

What am I reading?!?! Did an AI write this or something? The author got some major facts wrong. Such as:

"Given larger numbers of Ki-84s and crews, the Pacific campaign would have been longer. All things being equal, the Ki-84 Hayate could turn, climb, and accelerate faster than US F4Us. Only at low altitudes was the Japanese fighter disadvantaged."

Absolutely silly that the author compared land-based aircraft to carrier-based aircraft. Honestly, I can't think of any Axis aircraft that were "better" than an F4U-4 (EDIT) or a P-51D. Both were remarkable aircraft for their designed role.

IMO, an actually valid comparison should have been like a 1945 Brewster Buccanear vs an Aichi Ryusei "Grace". But the Buccanear wasn't a combat aircraft. And I can't think of any aircraft that the Axis had that were objectively better than its competition within the Allied aircraft pool. You have to find some real dogs that never saw combat before a comparison could be made.

 

[GrauGeist]

The KI-84-I was a formidible fighter at low and medium altitudes and was able to operate high enough to intercept B-29s.
It was well armed, fast with a good rate of climb and extremely dangerous in the hands of a good pilot.

It could match anything the Allies had (along with the KI-100 and N1K2-J) but like Germany, did not make enough fast enough to have any difference in the air war.

 

[AerialTorpedoDude69]

The KI-84-I was a formidible fighter at low and medium altitudes and was able to operate high enough to intercept B-29 is.
It was well armed, fast with a good rate of climb and extremely dangerous in the hands of a good pilot.

It could match anything the Allies had (along with the KI-100 and N1K2-J) but like Germany, did not make enough fast enough to have any difference in the air war.

This was a quote from the article:

"Given larger numbers of Ki-84s and crews, the Pacific campaign would have been longer. All things being equal, the Ki-84 Hayate could turn, climb, and accelerate faster than US F4Us. Only at low altitudes was the Japanese fighter disadvantaged."

In other words, the writer thought the aircraft was only good at high altitude and performed less well down low.
I think a lot of these freelancer writers are just cranking the garbage out in order to pay the bills.

 

[Shortround6]

F4U-5

was not a WW II fighter.
Production didn't start (signed letter of intent) until Feb 1946.

 

[AerialTorpedoDude69]

I always mix up the F4U models with the F6F models. I was thinking of the -5 Hellcat. You are on top of your dash model # game.

 

[GrauGeist]

I think a lot of these freelancer writers are just cranking the garbage out in order to pay the bills.

Pretty much and sadly, it creates a considerable amount of confusion due to poor research and embellishment.

The internet was originally intended to promote knowledge, but it's become a clickbait cut-and-past wasteland.

The cat videos, on the otherhand, I'm ok with.