Best World War II Aircraft?

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

The only reason I would not count the P-80 is because we have no basis on it. We do not know how it would have handled with a Me-262. We dont know how it would have handled in combat at all.

Welcome to the site by the way.
 
DerAdlerIstGelandet said:
The only reason I would not count the P-80 is because we have no basis on it. We do not know how it would have handled with a Me-262. We dont know how it would have handled in combat at all.

Welcome to the site by the way.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the warm welcome

The P-80A was well tried and tested after the war, and its F-80C development saw combat in Korea, so I think there are enough elements to compare the two aircraft.

A mockup combat test was flown in 1946 between a production P-80A and a captured Me-262 at Wright Field, and the results showed how the two aircraft had very similar flight performances

The 262 was found to have a slight edge in critical mach-number as well as an armament better suited for the role of bomber destroyer, while the P-80A had a slight advantage in terms of maximum speed, climb rate, and absolute ceiling, with a definite edge in terms of maneuverability, thanks to its boosted ailerons that gave it a phenomenal (for the time) roll rate – if memory serves me right, in the region of 360°/sec - whereas the 262's was further penalized by the position of its engine pods.

One item that had been seriously overlooked by the German designers was fitting the 262 with speed-brakes, as this prevented it from exploiting its major advantage over the P-80, i.e. its higher, critical mach-number, that would have allowed it to get away from the Shooting Star in a prolonged dive.

An important factor in my opinion seldom considered in a theoretical air-to-air combat, is the careful handling that both the General Electric I-40 (J-33) and the Jumo 109-004 required; this condition, if not quickly corrected, could lead to 'interesting' situations like flameout and compressor-stalls (the axial-compressor of the Jumo built with the technologies of the time being even more prone that the I-40's centrifugal-type).
Indeed a severely limiting factor in the combat flight-envelope for both aircraft, and one nonetheless common to all early jets, with the possible exception of the Rolls Royce Derwent I engines installed on the British Gloster Meteor F.MK.IIIs which – according to the Aircraft's Pilot Notes – could accelerate thru a compressor-stall, without damage to the engine itself.
 
Yeah I never knew that also.

Good info though Pete. I like how you talked about negatives in both aircraft and showed the good and bad of each. Keep up the good posting.
 
I have seen the mockup combat mentioned on several publications: I'd like to be more precise, but all my books and magazines are still 'in a limbo' as I have recently moved into a new apartment - following four moves in a 10 month period!!! - and my personal library is currently split between three, different locations.

There was a similar discussion on the TGP Community forum a couple of years ago and one of the participants claimed - again if memory serves me right - that two or three mockup combats had been flown at W/F, with the first involving the very first P-80 prototype (the XP-80) which did not fare too good against a Me-262A-1a/U3.
This makes sense, considering how the XP-80 was underpowered (it had a De Havilland H-1 engine - one of the De Havilland Goblin MKI prototypes), while the possible reason for first using the XP-80 instead of one of the YP-80As or P-80A-1s was that the production aircraft where busily involved in a program aimed at ironing out the type's bugs.
As well, the same individual had published a 'comparative table' to support the claims, taken from the publication where he had found the information.
I contacted him to get more details, but unfortunately, there was no follow up.

I'm planning to pay the Natl. Archives a visit, someday, to see if I can get a copy of the report(s) as well as to find more information on the 1st FG YP-80As in Italy.

Regards.
 
I also often read about this flyoff but so far no sources have come to light to me. That´s an interesting post regarding the Dervent-I, Pete.
However, I am a bit sceptical about 360 d/s roll rate. One advantage the Me-262 had over it´s contemporary jets was a generally superior high speed handling (>400 mp/h). The P-80 was a much more modern jet but as You already pointed out, the plane was not combat ready anyway. Evaluation of the prototypes lasted well after wars end. The planes send to europe had to be grounded after a P-80 accident.
 
delcyros said:
The planes send to europe had to be grounded after a P-80 accident.
Click to expand...

True. It involved one of the two ETO Project Extraversion YPs, and it took place at 11:40AM on January 28, 1945 on a test-flight at BAD 1, Burtonwood (UK); the aircraft S/N 44-83026, Lockheed C/N 1005, broke up in mid-air, due to a tailpipe flange-attachment failure, and crashed taking the life of Major Frederic Austin Borsodi of Wright Field's Air Service Command.
(For details, please see http://web.ukonline.co.uk/lait/site/YP-80A 44-83026.htm )

It appears, however, that the flight restrictions had been removed by the time the two aircraft were delivered to the 1st FG.
I received an e-mail from the son of one of the 1st FG pilots who flew the aircraft - Maj. Ed LaClare - in reply to a request for information I had sent, dealing, amongst others, with details on the flight indoctrination.
Mr. Ed LaClare Jr., told me that, from what his father had told him, it was a pretty quick affair, with ground school lasting but a few days.

The MTO YPs did not experience any major problem and routinely flew mock combat against the conventional, Allied fighters stationed in Italy.

Nonetheless, the YP-80As and P-80A-1s initially showed an appalling safety record; this, however, could not be attributed to technical problems only, with overconfidence on the pilots' side, and incomplete knowledge of some of the high speed problems, playing a not so minor part.

Regards.
 
Absolutely. There was an often underrated pioneering aspect in the aviation world of the mid 40´s.
I personally tend to think that the Bell P 59 Airacobra could have been what the allies needed. It has an excellent thrust-to weight ratio, a common type wing configuration and layout, a decent, fuselage mounted gun array. The only thing it lacks was speed. A thinner wing and proper aerodynamic engine shildings could do the job.
 
Its off topic here, but since the P-59 has been mentioned, I understand that the -59 residing at Chino is on the list for having a flyable restoration done to it.

Wouldnt that be a site to see a -59, a P80 and an F86 all in the air together?
 
I am afraid that I wouldn't count the P80 as being a WW2 plane as I believe it didn't fly any combat missions. I understand four were shipped out with the maximum haste so they could claim to have fought in the war but the two that went to the ETO didn't fly and but the two that went to the MTO might have flown some unofficial missions as they had a little extra time but hadn't been officially cleared.

The title of the thread is 'What was the Best WW2 aircraft'. For that I would try to find one plane that dominated its role across all the countries involved in the conflict.

My personal choice based on the Title of the Thread is the C47 Dakota. There were transports that carried a heavier payload a longer distance, but no plane dominated its role to such a degree in all theaters.

Even if you allowed the P80, the fact that you could have a good debate as to its merits compared to the Vampire, Me262, He162, Meteor III (with the longer nacelles) would prove that it wouldn't dominate the others.

So apologies to you jet jockeys, its the C47
 
Glider said:
My personal choice based on the Title of the Thread is the C47 Dakota. There were transports that carried a heavier payload a longer distance, but no plane dominated its role to such a degree in all theaters.
Click to expand...

Since I think the C-47/DC-3/R4D/Russian Li-2 is the most significant aircraft of the first 50 years of flight (excluding the Wright Flyer), I agree with your assessment.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

What (or what would) make a good tactical recon aircraft in World War II
Replies
10
Views
1K
ColFord
A
Best WW2 Seafire vs. best A6M Zero
Replies
9
Views
531
Shortround6
S
Bomber Command, World War II (1939-45); and the lies and corruptions of Geopolitics
2
Replies
21
Views
3K
ThomasP
T
Best "general purpose" prop fighter also capable of best high altitude performance
2
Replies
31
Views
3K
PAT303
P
A
Best of the pre-war rest: Czechoslovakians, Poles, Romanians or Yugoslavs?
Replies
7
Views
1K
mack8
M
Menu
Log in
Register