Best Pacific Fighter? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter cheddar cheese
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
- Status
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
Tactics.....
Yep 100% agree........and perhaps a little ego by the RAF. They probably thought they would send in the beloved Spitfires to kick butt.....instead their Spitfires got kicked.
But I agree it had more to do with tactics then the machines.
kool kitty89
Senior Master Sergeant
And the standard Spitfire lacked the range to be really useful in the PTO. WIth the seafire this was not as bad of a problem though.
syscom3
Pacific Historian
kool kitty89
Senior Master Sergeant
I said AS bad a problem, it was certainly still a disadvantage. (But the Seafire had other problems as well, personally I think the Sea Hurricane was a better choice despite the lower performance, untill they had better fighters like the Corsair anyway)
The F4F was at a range disadvantage as well, albeit not as much. (and the 2x 50 gal drop tanks had to be hand pumped if fitted)
The F2A-2/3 had excelent range (1,500+ mi clean, drop tanks were never fitted), in fact the F2A-2 had the longest range of any fighter when it first entered service, only surpassed by the A6M shortly after. (and only then with a drop tank) But let's not get into this discussion here. (about the F2A) It's been/being done in other threads. (let's just say the development of the design and company its self was badly mismanaged, the best all around vaiant probably being the F2A-2)
The F4F was at a range disadvantage as well, albeit not as much. (and the 2x 50 gal drop tanks had to be hand pumped if fitted)
The F2A-2/3 had excelent range (1,500+ mi clean, drop tanks were never fitted), in fact the F2A-2 had the longest range of any fighter when it first entered service, only surpassed by the A6M shortly after. (and only then with a drop tank) But let's not get into this discussion here. (about the F2A) It's been/being done in other threads. (let's just say the development of the design and company its self was badly mismanaged, the best all around vaiant probably being the F2A-2)
bf109 Emil
Airman
The only fault i see with comparing the much Vaunted Japanese Shiden Kai, with other examples of the best fighter, is the others fought, while this new plane was designed...yes in performance, etc, it was great, but so was other countries planes developed at the very end of hostilities...not trying to ink, or erk fans of this plane, but would maybe be like saying the best plane in European theatre was say...Gloster meteor with 4 20mmcannons, 16, 60pound 3" rockets, etc...but a spec or limited duel with an adversary is hard to judge...The ShidenKai, may have battled with Allied aircraft...How did it do, or kill ratio??? likewise with the Meteor???
the US of A had the lockhead P-80 flying in january of '45, can we count this plane as to one of the best in Europe, or Pacific??
bf109 Emil
the US of A had the lockhead P-80 flying in january of '45, can we count this plane as to one of the best in Europe, or Pacific??
bf109 Emil
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
Neither...
The P-80 in 1945 was still a very volatile aircraft - In actuality it wasn't combat ready till the end of 1945.
syscom3
Pacific Historian
Today is the 65th anniversary of the Yamamoto shoot down mission (see my thread for the details).
P38's were chosen for the mission over Corsairs.
P38's were chosen for the mission over Corsairs.
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
kool kitty89
Senior Master Sergeant
The Meteor was far from a fully combat capable aircraft at the end of the war as well. The Meteor III wasn't much faster than the Mk.I (~450 mph max, opposed to ~420 mph of the Mk.I at ~10,000-15,000 ft) untill long chord nacelles were fitted, which allowd ~495 mph at altitude with Welland engines and ~520 mph with Derwent I's. These also reduced compressability problems quit a bit. (crit Mach ~.83, but buffeting and control problems still experienced down to ~.78 mach due to aiflow separation over the tail, mach limit same as Mk.IV at .8 mach; this was improved with the addition of a new tail on the F-8 )
Due to structural issues with the wing (a failure was experienced in testing high speed maneuvers) the ailerons were wired heavy on the F.III to prevent the wings from being overstressed which allowed it to be cleard for aerobatics. It aso resulted in a poor roll rate and was tiring for the pilot to operate. (clipping the wings would have helped as well for both stress and roll rate, but this wasn't implemented until the Mk.IV, along with a strengthened airframe)
It was also noth that great for range without the long nacelles due to the high drag of the short nacelles. The F.III could acheive a max range of ~1,300 mi, but only with a conformal belly tank bolted on (not droppable) which would reduce performance somewhat.
Due to structural issues with the wing (a failure was experienced in testing high speed maneuvers) the ailerons were wired heavy on the F.III to prevent the wings from being overstressed which allowed it to be cleard for aerobatics. It aso resulted in a poor roll rate and was tiring for the pilot to operate. (clipping the wings would have helped as well for both stress and roll rate, but this wasn't implemented until the Mk.IV, along with a strengthened airframe)
It was also noth that great for range without the long nacelles due to the high drag of the short nacelles. The F.III could acheive a max range of ~1,300 mi, but only with a conformal belly tank bolted on (not droppable) which would reduce performance somewhat.
syscom3
Pacific Historian
I wonder why?????
Best pilots for the job no doubt. Whenever you need something done, call in the AAF.
parsifal
Colonel
I seriously question that air force boys would be better than the marine flyers in the theatre. Wasnt Pappy Boyington a Corsair joc in the solomons at this time???
Maybe the P-38s were just at the right place at the right time, maybe they had a better performance arc at the point of interception, but pilot quality???? seems very unlikely to me
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
In actuality the P-38 was deemed reliable and it also had the range to carry out this "aerial assassination."
syscom3
Pacific Historian
The Corsair pilots were at the officers club during the mission.
renrich
Chief Master Sergeant
Either at the O Club or on the beach with the nurses. Shows good judgment.
syscom3
Pacific Historian
The bullets from the P38 had parts of an arrest warrant glued to them.
They were only delivering them.
parsifal
Colonel
Good answer...Ill take it....
The interception of Yamato was as task that transcends American history and delves into mythology.
David vs Goliath
Battle of Thermopile
Stalingrad
The evisceration of the architect of Pearl Harboir
Wildcat
Major
I have to pretty much agree with Joe here, the spit wasn't really suited to combat in the PTO, however it did serve a purpose especially in point defence of Allied air bases ie Darwin, Kiriwina, Morotai etc freeing up longer ranging a/c to undertake offensive operations. Regarding Spits V Zero's over Darwin, I'm holding my judgement until more research has been undertaken, especially regarding Japanese losses.
Agreed, an excellent aircraft that served with distinction in the Pacific not in dogfighting but in the air to ground/maritime strike role. However RAAF Beau's did have great success in air to air combat against the Japanese especially over Taberfane, Timor etc however this was mainly against Pete's, Rufes, Nicks and other twin engined bombers.
The Mossie - I'd guess they would of dry rotted!
Pretty much. Though an excellent a/c it was introduced too late in the Pacific to make much difference in that theatre. Infact I'm unaware of any aerial victories scored by mossies in the Pacific (not talking CBI here).
As for the best fighter, I like most here, believe it's between the P38, F4U and F6F and seeins as I can't decide which one, I'm no real help to this discussion!!
- Status
