Best all-round fighter of WWII

[NiceShotAustin]

Yak-3 could be easily the winner under 15000 ft, but maybe Spitfire is the best above 20000 ft? And then the P-47 above 30000 ft?

I'd agree with that. Although, in terms of a dogfight, I'd rather have a P-51 than a P-47 at 30,000

 

[diddyriddick]

For overall performance, I would vote for the 190 or the Spit. However, the Corsair wasn't at very much of a disadvantage and could do it all from a flight deck with no land in miles.

Corsair.

 

[wuzak]

I'd agree with that. Although, in terms of a dogfight, I'd rather have a P-51 than a P-47 at 30,000

And I would still rather have a Spitfire XIV over a P-51 at 30,000ft.

 

[pbfoot]

And I would still rather have a Spitfire XIV over a P-51 at 30,000ft.

provided you are dogfighting within 50 miles of aerodrome , I did a little test and used Google earth and drew an operational range circle around , try it with an area your familiar with , for Australia the Spit would have trouble going between Melbourne and Sydney and have proper reserves without refuelling

 

[NiceShotAustin]

And I would still rather have a Spitfire XIV over a P-51 at 30,000ft.

I don't know too much about Spits so I have no idea as to whether or not I'd fly a Mk XIV over a P-51 at those altitudes

 

[brucejscott]

Have to vote for the Corsair. Fast as a thief, maneuverable, able to take a beating and dish it out. Equally adapt at mixing it up in a furball or killin' crunchies. Plus no water cooled engine that takes a dive after one hit.

 

[Kryten]

deployment of the F4 to the ETO would have helped, but it didnt so we will never know how well or not it would have stacked up against the luftwaffe!

 

[CORSNING]

Didn't vote. Can't really vote without knowing the WHAT IS EXPECTED of this so called best. What is the maximum altitude it must be able to perform at? If the minimum altitude that this fighter must be able to reach is set at 40,000ft. That eliminates the Zero and Yak-3. If it must be able to fly at least 2,000 mls. That eliminates all but the P-38, P-51 and P-47. I think the F4U could be modified to fly that distance. At 2,000 mls. minimum you better add the P-63 to that list. Is a minimum load carrying ability going to be required? Say 1,500 lbs. That would knock about everything but the US aircraft off that list. Or does this A/C have to be able to reach 20,000ft. in around 5 minutes and 30,000ft. in less than 11 minutes? Wow, you can kiss over half that list goodby. My point is, you can't pick a best unless you have minimum levels of performance that will be expected of this fighter in order for this so called best to fill the needs that will be required of it. Of course, that is just my opinion.

 

[tbfighterpilot]

It was a tough choice between the P-51 and the P-47 for me. The P-51 was known as one of the best fighters ever, but the P-47 was very tough, and with 8 .50 cal machine guns, it could definately kill. I did end up voting for the P-51.

 

[stona]

I don't know too much about Spits so I have no idea as to whether or not I'd fly a Mk XIV over a P-51 at those altitudes

Which illustrates the problem with these polls. Too many variables. Above 30.000ft I'd take a Ta152!
I might not have the range to make it to the fight though.
I haven't voted
Steve

 

[juhaerik]

My best dogfighter would be Spit IV - and best all-around fighter P47, possibly 190. P-51 - jack of all trades, master of none.

 

[Aaron Brooks Wolters]

I voted for the T-bolt. With proper drop tanks it had good range. And in the M and N models this was even better. It had exceptional firepower. With the air cooled radial and great construction it could and did take a great pounding and still could make it home, and this made it a better ground attack machine also. It could carry two 1,000 pound bombs or rockets. Most of the time it was loaded with 500 pounders. The Corsair would be my second pick.

 

[drgondog]

I am (and well known for this) a passionate advocate of the Mustang (B/C/D/K/H) strategic importance. Having siad that the US could have picked one fighter and it would have served well in every thretre, for every serice, for every role - and I chose the F4U. Nothing else in the US arsenal could have served everay role with few detractions and many superlatives as this big ungainly heavy ugly superb cost effective multi role beast.

The LW did not want any part of this SOB in the ETO or MTO.

 

[Aaron Brooks Wolters]

I thought the LW did face it. Did not the British use it off of their carriers in the MTO or am I wrong?

 

[tomo pauk]

Corsairs were used above Norway, eg. as escorts in the sorties by Barracudas vs. Tirpitz.

 

[drgondog]

Yes - the Corsair appeared in a very small way with RN.

 

[renrich]

No combat was seen by Corsairs in the ETO although it was used on a few escort missions. A shame since it would have acquited itself well. If Marshall had not had an extreme bias against the Marine Corps the Corsair might have been used against V1 sites off of CVEs. I second drgondog's post strongly.

 

[spicmart]

The Fw 190D-13 had hydraulically boosted ailerons just as the P-38L improving upon its already impressive rate of roll.

 

[cimmex]

The Fw 190D-13 had hydraulically boosted ailerons just as the P-38L improving upon its already impressive rate of roll.

never heard of this, do you have a source?
cimmex

 

[spicmart]

never heard of this, do you have a source?
cimmex

Not directly, but there are several sources, also on this forum, who state this since the two remaining Doras (D-9 and D-13) in the US had their respective wings interchanged for a long time before that was corrected. They then found out that the D-13 has boosted ailerons. One has to look a little bit at the search function of this forum or google it. It's also stated on wikipedia (I know it's not the most reliable of sources).