Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Oh and one more snide remark and I'll ignore you from now on, and this time it'll be for good.
But on aviation. IMHO at times Germans forgot that best is the worst enemy of good. Look for example Bomber B program. They could have replaced JU 88A by Ju 88B but thought that the improvement was not enough and continued Ju 88A production while waiting for Bomber B, only after it was cristal clear even to LW high command, that Bomber B program was failure, the improved Ju 88B was put in production as Ju 188.
Juha
I have to agree with this statement. My understanding is that the He280 could have been ready some time before the Me262. I am not saying that the 280 was a better aircraft as clearly it isn't, but that doesn't mean that the 280 was a lemon.
He 280 aircraft in service could well have tipped the balance in the air battles of 1943 which in many way was the crucial year in the war.
In no way, did he make a snide remark to you. He only disagreed with you. If you think that everyone disagreeing with you is making a snide remark, you better grow some thicker skin. In fact you might want to stay off the internet.
good idea wingnut if I could get some help in the next couple of days I could have a poll fourm set upMaybe a Top Ten would be even better, not only the best in an individual role but at a period in the war.
Another way of looking at it is what would be the consequences if any particular aircraft had NOT been produced at the time.
In the early part of the war in the pacific the Mitsubishi A6M Reisen/Zero would probably be the best coupled with the experiance and training of the pilots but by wars end both were outclassed.
Many others types only appeared or were used in large numbers towards the end ...as in the Me262, F4U Corsair etc.
...or in the case of German and Japanese aircraft appeared when resources were in short supply. as in the later Japanese fighters, other German jets and Arado232
IMHO the Ju87 was never very devastating in the early years. For instance, Dutch soldiers in 1940 were frequently attacked by these a/c, but hardly any died or were wounded while damage to equipment was minimal. The psychological effect of the stuka was another factor, though. When being confronted with the a/c for the first time, soldiers tend to panic. When soldiers got more experienced, the effectiveness of the stuka diminished rapidly and many were shot down.-Ju 87; get's very little credit today, but was one of a kind when first deployed and the most devastating single type of plane in the campaigns of '39-'40 and early in Barbarossa. A lot battles were only won because of well placed Stuka bombs.
Thank you, Juha. I would agree with you that my statement on the A6M was maybe a bit too extreme, but it deserves to be in the list anyways.Hello KrazyKraut
excellent list
I'd agree almost complety. Maybe A6M wasn't first but probably first built in significant numbers and with significant combat participation. For ex A5M was a pretty good when it arrived and some earlier biplane carrier fighters too. But as I wrote excellent list and well balanced opinion.
Juha
Grebbeberg was one instance where Stukas played a significant role, routing a Dutch counter attack (or at least playing a significant role in that). During the invasion of Eben Emael they essentially filled the role that field guns normally would, knocking out several artillery emplacements and repelling a counter attack by Belgian forces. Their effort was essential and would be again so in France, giving pseudo-artillery support for quickly advancing troops. How many were shot down? I have no numbers at hand, but I remember losses were acceptable, especially considering they very often attacking without any escort.Marcel said:IMHO the Ju87 was never very devastating in the early years. For instance, Dutch soldiers in 1940 were frequently attacked by these a/c, but hardly any died or were wounded while damage to equipment was minimal. The psychological effect of the stuka was another factor, though. When being confronted with the a/c for the first time, soldiers tend to panic. When soldiers got more experienced, the effectiveness of the stuka diminished rapidly and many were shot down.
Grebbeberg was one instance where Stukas played a significant role, routing a Dutch counter attack (or at least playing a significant role in that). During the invasion of Eben Emael they essentially filled the role that field guns normally would, knocking out several artillery emplacements and repelling a counter attack by Belgian forces. Their effort was essential and would be again so in France, giving pseudo-artillery support for quickly advancing troops. How many were shot down? I have no numbers at hand, but I remember losses were acceptable, especially considering they very often attacking without any escort.
Oscar best fighter? It was eventually shot down in droves. While it was extremely maneuverable and could be a formidable opponent in the hands of a good pilot, it was light and unarmored and basically became cannon fodder. Even the most veteran pilots flying the Oscar eventually found themselves either few in numbers or dead. Sorry but I think the final outcome speaks for it self.Since this is just an open question I can say the Ki-43 was the best aircraft. It out turned it's enemies and was very light allowing it to climb fast. There are several variants of it, the best i think is the one armed with the two 12.7mm machine guns. I read somewhere that at least one had a gun of a strange caliber. It was like 23mm or 27mm i think. Anyway, sure it had didn't have as many guns as the hellcat but nevertheless it's two 12.7mm guns was sufficient. It's canopy is much more modern than that of the Zero's glassy greenhouse. It all comes down to experience. If one was inexperienced then the Hayabusa would be a falling flame but an expert pilot would be victorious and the king of the sky. Now that I'm blabbering I'd like to mention an account where a ki-27 shot down at least one p-40. I also read about a biplane warding off superior and numerous enemies on it's own during the war. These two pieces of evidence is sufficient in that we can acquiesce that experience was the major factor that made any craft superb during the war. I agree that the question is too bland.