Oreo
Senior Airman
We'll lay it right out there-- which of those early war fixed gear fighters was the best? By best, we mean, most combat-worthy, and reliable. Go for it. Probably I'll forget something significant-- I usually do.
Best fixed-gear monoplane fighter?
- Thread starter Oreo
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
- Thread starter
- #3
Oreo
Senior Airman
Why didn't you vote for it then? I put it on there.
parsifal
Colonel
kool kitty89
Senior Master Sergeant
parsifal
Colonel
your right, gosh im a dummy
kool kitty89
Senior Master Sergeant
I'd say the 920 hp Pegasus powered D.XXI-5 was the best, albeit only 5 built.
The D.XXI-2 (with 830 hp Mercury) was also quite good. Decent performance and armament. (the Hawk also having a decent armament, but worse performance, although long range)
The D.XXI-2 (with 830 hp Mercury) was also quite good. Decent performance and armament. (the Hawk also having a decent armament, but worse performance, although long range)
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
I went with the D.XXI-2. Look what the Finns did with it and it did hold its own against the 109 considering.
parsifal
Colonel
Here are the performance stats for the major types (taken mostly from wiki)
Fokker DXXI
Max takeoff weight: 1,970 kg (4,399 lb)
Powerplant: 1× Bristol Mercury VIII air-cooled, 9-cylinder, radial, 619 kW (830 hp)
Maximum speed: 418 km/h (260 mph)
Range: 930 km (502 nm, 574 mi)
Service ceiling 9,350 m (30,675 ft)
Rate of climb: 6,000 m in 7 min 30 sec (19,680 ft)
4 × 7.92 mm FN Browning M36 machine guns
Hawk 75N
Empty weight: Unknown
Max takeoff weight: 2568 kg (5305 lb)
Powerplant: Wright Cyclone R1820 Derated (875 HP)
Maximum speed: 450 km/h (280 mph)
Range: 1950 km (1058 nm, 1210 mi)
Service ceiling 9,693 m (31,900 ft)
Rate of climb: Unknown
1 or 2 .50 and 2 or 3 .30 guns
Nakajima Ki-27
Empty weight: 1,174 kg (2,588 lb)
Loaded weight: 1,598 kg (3,523 lb)
Max takeoff weight: 1,790 kg (3,946 lb)
Powerplant: 1× Nakajima Ha-1 Otsu air-cooled radial engine, 485 kW (650 hp)
Maximum speed: 444 km/h (275 mph)
Range: 630 km (390 mi)
Service ceiling 10,040 m (32,940 ft)
Rate of climb: 15.3 m/s (3,010 ft/min)
2 × 7.7 mm Type 89 machine guns, 500 rounds/gun or 1 x 12.7 machine gun and 1 x 7.7 machine gun on later models
External bomb load of 220 pounds
Mitsubishi A5M Claude
Empty weight: 1,216 kg (2,681 lb)
Loaded weight: 1,705 kg (3,759 lb)
Max takeoff weight: 1,822 kg[10] (4,017 lb)
Powerplant: 1× Nakajima Kotobuki 41 9-cylinder radial engine, 585 kW (785 hp) at 3,000 m (9,840 ft)
Maximum speed: 440 km/h (237 knots, 273 mph) at 3,000 m (9,840 ft)[10]
Range: 1,200 km (649 NM, 746 mi)
Service ceiling 9,800 m (32,150 ft)
Rate of climb: m/s (ft/min)
Guns: 2 × 7.7 mm Type 97 machine guns(0.303 in) fuselage-mounted machine guns
The comparisons are a lot closer than I had imagined. The nakajima and the Mitsubishi would have been the most manouverable IMO, but were the lightest built and most lightly armed. I also think that the two Japanese models would have been the best climbers, but the worst divers.
The Fokker would have been more manouverable than the Curtiss IMO, and would have climbed better. It did not poses quite the range of the Curtiss.
The Curtiss was the most heavily armed, and possessed the best range. It would have been the most ruggedly constructed, but i think its climb and turn characteristics would have been the worst. I am betting its diving capability would have been the best out of the bunch.
So it gets down to what you consider to be the most important characteristics I guess.
Fokker DXXI
Max takeoff weight: 1,970 kg (4,399 lb)
Powerplant: 1× Bristol Mercury VIII air-cooled, 9-cylinder, radial, 619 kW (830 hp)
Maximum speed: 418 km/h (260 mph)
Range: 930 km (502 nm, 574 mi)
Service ceiling 9,350 m (30,675 ft)
Rate of climb: 6,000 m in 7 min 30 sec (19,680 ft)
4 × 7.92 mm FN Browning M36 machine guns
Hawk 75N
Empty weight: Unknown
Max takeoff weight: 2568 kg (5305 lb)
Powerplant: Wright Cyclone R1820 Derated (875 HP)
Maximum speed: 450 km/h (280 mph)
Range: 1950 km (1058 nm, 1210 mi)
Service ceiling 9,693 m (31,900 ft)
Rate of climb: Unknown
1 or 2 .50 and 2 or 3 .30 guns
Nakajima Ki-27
Empty weight: 1,174 kg (2,588 lb)
Loaded weight: 1,598 kg (3,523 lb)
Max takeoff weight: 1,790 kg (3,946 lb)
Powerplant: 1× Nakajima Ha-1 Otsu air-cooled radial engine, 485 kW (650 hp)
Maximum speed: 444 km/h (275 mph)
Range: 630 km (390 mi)
Service ceiling 10,040 m (32,940 ft)
Rate of climb: 15.3 m/s (3,010 ft/min)
2 × 7.7 mm Type 89 machine guns, 500 rounds/gun or 1 x 12.7 machine gun and 1 x 7.7 machine gun on later models
External bomb load of 220 pounds
Mitsubishi A5M Claude
Empty weight: 1,216 kg (2,681 lb)
Loaded weight: 1,705 kg (3,759 lb)
Max takeoff weight: 1,822 kg[10] (4,017 lb)
Powerplant: 1× Nakajima Kotobuki 41 9-cylinder radial engine, 585 kW (785 hp) at 3,000 m (9,840 ft)
Maximum speed: 440 km/h (237 knots, 273 mph) at 3,000 m (9,840 ft)[10]
Range: 1,200 km (649 NM, 746 mi)
Service ceiling 9,800 m (32,150 ft)
Rate of climb: m/s (ft/min)
Guns: 2 × 7.7 mm Type 97 machine guns(0.303 in) fuselage-mounted machine guns
The comparisons are a lot closer than I had imagined. The nakajima and the Mitsubishi would have been the most manouverable IMO, but were the lightest built and most lightly armed. I also think that the two Japanese models would have been the best climbers, but the worst divers.
The Fokker would have been more manouverable than the Curtiss IMO, and would have climbed better. It did not poses quite the range of the Curtiss.
The Curtiss was the most heavily armed, and possessed the best range. It would have been the most ruggedly constructed, but i think its climb and turn characteristics would have been the worst. I am betting its diving capability would have been the best out of the bunch.
So it gets down to what you consider to be the most important characteristics I guess.
Hello Parsifal
I doubt that Fokker D. XXI was more manoeuvre than Hawk 75N. Fokker had light controls and effective control surfaces but also harsh stall and it stalled rather easily being tip staller and went rather easily to spin. Good points were that because its light controls speed didn't had much effect on its manoeuvrability and good control in dives. Bad, needed careful control because tendency to tip stall at any speed and to spin.
Finns thought that Fokker was a good interceptor but not a good dogfighter.
On the other hand Hawk 75A was very manoeuvrable horizontally but a poor climber. I don't have info on Hawk 75N.
Juha
I doubt that Fokker D. XXI was more manoeuvre than Hawk 75N. Fokker had light controls and effective control surfaces but also harsh stall and it stalled rather easily being tip staller and went rather easily to spin. Good points were that because its light controls speed didn't had much effect on its manoeuvrability and good control in dives. Bad, needed careful control because tendency to tip stall at any speed and to spin.
Finns thought that Fokker was a good interceptor but not a good dogfighter.
On the other hand Hawk 75A was very manoeuvrable horizontally but a poor climber. I don't have info on Hawk 75N.
Juha
kool kitty89
Senior Master Sergeant
According to: WW2 Warbirds: the Fokker D.XXI - Frans Bonn
The top speed of the D.XXI-2 at altitude (16,730 ft) was 386 mph.
The top speed of the D.XXI-2 at altitude (16,730 ft) was 386 mph.
- Thread starter
- #17
Oreo
Senior Airman
that's not very fast-- I think the dutch version was a little faster, maybe
- Thread starter
- #18
Oreo
Senior Airman
Not sure but I''m thinking that might supposed to be 286 mph. The figure I was thinking of for the D.21 was around 276, which would put it right smack in the middle of the other three for performance. By the way, does anyone know how the PZL did for maneuverability versus the others? We know it's slower, it did have 4-gun armament available, and with the high gull wing vision must have been excellent. It managed to hold its own against the German bombers, but was a full 100 mph slower than Bf 109E.
kool kitty89
Senior Master Sergeant
THe takeoff ratings for the Finnish D.XXI with 825 hp Twin Wasp Jr. was similar to the Dutch version's 830 hp Mercury, but I think the critical altitude for the Wasp was around 12,000 ft while the Mercury was at ~16,500 ft.
However the 286 mph figure may have been mistakenly mixed in, as that seems to be the figure for the Pegasus powered version.
However the 286 mph figure may have been mistakenly mixed in, as that seems to be the figure for the Pegasus powered version.
