Best possible fighter

[Adolf Galland]

what do u mean by payload? how much a bomber carry?

 

[Adolf Galland]

stuka can carry 2000lb bombs, but even a p-47 can carry 2X1000lb bombs AND 6 4.5" rockets as a normal fighter-bomber payload

 

[Adolf Galland]

whats the ceiling 4 the Ta-152H?

 

[Anonymous]

I find it interesting that whenever the question of the Best fighter comes up the P-38 is excluded!

Without the P-38K being part of the consideration, it just doesn't quite rate. Had they been willing to stop the production likes in mid 44 for about 12 days to do the conversion, the P-38K would have dominated the skies everywhere it saw action. Without that prop upgrade, there are just too many other planes which were better - the F4U-4 comes to mind for me.

=S=

Lunatic

 

[Cheap Labour]

Best plane is like this:

-A triplane with staggered wings - 1 in the front, 2 in the back.
-Randomly placed control surfaces.
-1 engine in the front, 1 on top, so that the fighter flies in an upwardly diagonal direction.
-Vital components like the bracings or wing-warping wires are designed to come off for no reason and without warning "just for kicks."
-A fixed undercart because all those moving bits are so complicated.

The advantage to this aircraft is that no flight training is required. The pilot has either "got it" or "not got it" and the "not got its" will be seperated from the "got its" by a distinct class barrier known as "dead" and "not dead," the "not deads" being the "got its" and the "dead" being the "not got its."

The justification for the aircraft is simple: The Sopwith Camel, being a somewhat tricky plane to fly shot down over 1500 enemy aircraft while killing in excess of 2000 of it's own operators. My aircraft, being exponentially more difficult to takeoff (let alone fly - let aone in combat) should kill something to the extent of 99% of it's operators (being the "not got its" of previous paragraph). However the 1% (See: "Got its") that will become aces in the aircraft should shoot down about 5000 aircraft (each).

Countries like Russia with disposable income and populations will be delighted with the fighter, as it is a way to dispose of political enemies as well as your standard run-of-the-mill war enemies.

Aircraft also functions in peacetime operations, so fathers can get rid of troublesome young men trying to date their daughters, etc.

 

[cheddar cheese]

stuka can carry 2000lb bombs, but even a p-47 can carry 2X1000lb bombs AND 6 4.5" rockets as a normal fighter-bomber payload

Stukas could carry nearly 5000lbs.....


Ta-152 ceiling - 48,760ft

 

[the lancaster kicks ass]

Best plane is like this:

-A triplane with staggered wings - 1 in the front, 2 in the back.
-Randomly placed control surfaces.
-1 engine in the front, 1 on top, so that the fighter flies in an upwardly diagonal direction.
-Vital components like the bracings or wing-warping wires are designed to come off for no reason and without warning "just for kicks."
-A fixed undercart because all those moving bits are so complicated.

The advantage to this aircraft is that no flight training is required. The pilot has either "got it" or "not got it" and the "not got its" will be seperated from the "got its" by a distinct class barrier known as "dead" and "not dead," the "not deads" being the "got its" and the "dead" being the "not got its."

The justification for the aircraft is simple: The Sopwith Camel, being a somewhat tricky plane to fly shot down over 1500 enemy aircraft while killing in excess of 2000 of it's own operators. My aircraft, being exponentially more difficult to takeoff (let alone fly - let aone in combat) should kill something to the extent of 99% of it's operators (being the "not got its" of previous paragraph). However the 1% (See: "Got its") that will become aces in the aircraft should shoot down about 5000 aircraft (each).

Countries like Russia with disposable income and populations will be delighted with the fighter, as it is a way to dispose of political enemies as well as your standard run-of-the-mill war enemies.

Aircraft also functions in peacetime operations, so fathers can get rid of troublesome young men trying to date their daughters, etc.

interesting theory.............

 

[cheddar cheese]

It works as well

The Russians would then go on to use with with incredible effect, shooting down Ta-152's in their hundreds, and baffling everyone how they did it

 

[wmaxt]

The P-38k was fantastic however when the L model performance is not far behind. As for the F4u there is an article on the "Planes and Pilots" web page trying to make the point for the F-4u he keeps using the phrase "except for the P-38". A phrase that is used a lot in fighter comparisons.

 

[Cheap Labour]

It works as well

The Russians would then go on to use with with incredible effect, shooting down Ta-152's in their hundreds, and baffling everyone how they did it

Yes. Make sure, however, that your pilotical enemy has no chance of becoming a "got it" because if he has "got it" then you've really "done it."

You can't chop a national hero, can you?

 

[R Pope]

The deHaviland Hornet would fly rings around the P-38. Two Merlins instead of those wimpy Allison "Time bombs"!

 

[Cheap Labour]

And a B-17 has FOUR engines and it couldn't fly a ring around my house. Put less stock in powerplant, and more in airframe.

 

[wmaxt]

Actuly the P-38L was very reliable enough so that the last mission of WWII into Borneo on Aug. 14. 45 is reported to have been 2,800 mi round trip. It also had a top speed of 443 mph at wep throttle settings. The P-38L didn't give up anything to any WWII piston fighter.

 

[Adolf Galland]

Stukas could carry nearly 5000lbs.....

The Ju 87D was able to carry this huge bomb of 4000lb - the most it can carry, not 5000lb, AND only at short ranges

 

[Hurricane IIc]

Best possible fighter? How about a late model P-38 with the contra-rotating engines of the Hornet; kind of like the P-51 combination but twin-engine safety.
Also a contender might be the Hawker Tempest II if produced earlier due to a better attitude toward it!
EARLY-WAR TWIN: Westland Whirlwind with Merlin engines - FAST! For cross-channel offensive. Also Gloster twin (F.35 or F.37 I think) with 1500 HP radials from Beaufighter.
JUNGLE: Hurricane IV with "b" wing armament. 1620HP, 4-blade prop, 2-20mm + 4-.303mg + bombs/rockets. Versatile, reliable, easy to fix, tough; better low-level speed could be attained by replacing belly radiator with leading-edge ones onto those thick wings as done on Mosquito; resulting increased wing area would give more lift for jungle strips? Or even on Aircraft Carriers?

 

[R Pope]

The Hornet was the fastest prop plane of WW2, lighter and more agile than the P-38.

 

[Cheap Labour]

That doesn't mean it could fly a ring around a P-38.

 

[Anonymous]

The P-38k was fantastic however when the L model performance is not far behind. As for the F4u there is an article on the "Planes and Pilots" web page trying to make the point for the F-4u he keeps using the phrase "except for the P-38". A phrase that is used a lot in fighter comparisons.

Yes, but that compares the P-38G with the F4U-1 or F4U-1d. In this comparison, the P-38 still has a climb rate advantage and an altitude advantage.

But the F4U-4 is a whole different story. 463 mph @ 20.7K (448 with capped pylons) makes it one of the fastest planes of WWII. The paddle prop makes it accelerate about as well as the P-38L. And at under 4.9 mins to 20,000 feet, it is the best climbing US plane of WWII. And it turned better than the P-38L too (except slow - which doesn't matter).

Many 1945 F4U-1d's also had much improved performance. Almost all recieved water injection by Fall 1944, and many recieved a paddle prop upgrade as well.

Finally, the F4U was the toughest fighter of WWII, bar none. No plane could take the damage it could and return home, not even the P-47.

=S=

Lunatic

 

[cheddar cheese]

Stukas could carry nearly 5000lbs.....

The Ju 87D was able to carry this huge bomb of 4000lb - the most it can carry, not 5000lb, AND only at short ranges

I read somewhere the G model could carry 4960lbs of bombs...



And R Pope, the Allison was a great engine, very effecient and pretty reliable too. If the P-38 had Merlins it would have been incredible. I think there were plans for this to go ahead but a flying version was never built.

 

[the lancaster kicks ass]

remember you don't have to talk about realy planes here, just aspects of different ones.................