Best naval fighter II

[plan_D]

All the talk of Mk. I Spitfires. When refering to the Spitfire you refer to the mark because all the marks were a different plane. Would you put the Mk. XIV in with a Mk. I Spitfire? They look, fly and perform very differently.

 

[MP-Willow]

Plan_D, at best in 1941 the Mk V was rolling, but it did not make it to the Pacific until latter, and that is the key to this little debate. The RAF would have learned the hard way as did the USN the the Zero can turn better then you!! But if I was in a spitfire and knew how agiale that arcraft was the why not try and turn with it.

For any of you B-24 lovers or just lovers of producton lines my new sig is for you and Me!

 

[the lancaster kicks ass]

ohoh, yes, i am an avid lover of production lines, they're almost as good as the lancaster......................

 

[plan_D]

MP, the RAF sent very few Spitfires out in the first place. The discussion should be, had the RAF sent out what it did in Europe, then what?

 

[MP-Willow]

Ok Plan_D, if we say that, and the RAF would have been able to get the aircraft to the Pacific, where would they be produced? So here is a point for you all to ponder; producing the Spitfire in the US or Canada in large numbers and equiping troops for the Pacific.

Lanc, the Lancaster might have done ok on a line like Willow Run, but the Lanc still needed to have sseveral changes to make it line ready. Please corect me if I am wrong, but the British production of Lancs had more man hours per plane us?

 

[Lightning Guy]

The British Commonwealth should have given some thought to senting up Spit production in Australia. The Aussies were desparate for a fighter to hold back that Japanese and although the Boomerang gave good service they Spitfire (even the early marks) was far superior.

 

[the lancaster kicks ass]

but the British production of Lancs had more man hours per plane us?

yes but we didn't need to pump them out like you did *grolsh advert voice* shtop, they're not ready yet.....................

 

[plan_D]

I don't think many Americans will get that one...
Yes, the production of the Spitfires could have been set up in Australia and New Zealand, only Darwin was bombed. Spitfires would have actually been able to dogfight with the Japanese.

 

[Lightning Guy]

Only at high speeds. The Spitfire was good, but in 1941 there was nothing that could touch the Zero in a traditional turning fight. Still, the Spitfires would have proven useful in the Pacific even though their range would have been something of a liability.

 

[the lancaster kicks ass]

but as you said yourself, it had to be a slow fight, the spitfire pilot could use his speed, climb and dive t his advantage...............

 

[MP-Willow]

Yes speed was the key to attacking the Zero. As for the Spitfire legs it was solved in latter marks but if the Austraila had it under licence then they could creat improvments that would not have to effect the production at Southahmpton.

Lanc are you trying to say we created aircraft on a massive and crazy scale? WE did create a lot yes, but we used a lot up and gave or sold a lot as well.

 

[the lancaster kicks ass]

Lanc are you trying to say we created aircraft on a massive and crazy scale

not at all, i know we couldn't produce anything near the numbers of America and Germany....................

 

[Lightning Guy]

Early Spits wouldn't have been able to outclimb a Zero Lanc.

 

[the lancaster kicks ass]

but a P-40 could couldn't it?

 

[plan_D]

Lanc, Britain was producing on the same scale as Germany.

 

[Lightning Guy]

I don't know of anything in the Pacific in 1941 that could outclimb a Zero. A P-40 or a Spit could probably hang with it in a zoom climb, but once that Zoom wore off the Zero would pull away from both easily.

 

[the lancaster kicks ass]

Lanc, Britain was producing on the same scale as Germany

but they produced 35,000+ 109s, 20,000+ 190s, many bombers and other fighters, we produced 12,000+ hurricanes, 20,000+ spits and 7,000+ lancs.........................

 

[plan_D]

No, in total 33,000 109s were produced from pre-war, war and post war (in Spain).

 

[the lancaster kicks ass]

ok but that 2,000 doesn't make a huge difference.....................

 

[MP-Willow]

the Bf 109 production is a hot iteam. Of the 30,000 or so produced only a few hundred finished the war. Personally I go for the 34,000 number, but it could be 32 to34k and I would not have a problum.

The A6M ruled the skies in 1941. The P-40s were able to hold out because of tactics and solid construction. For an in-line engine it could take a lot of damage. Any compairison to the P-38s engine?