Best World War II Aircraft?

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

Hi Guys,
I haven't had time to read this whole post yet but the question demands only one answer. I'm in total agreement with FlyboyJ.
C-47..........................PERIOD!
 

That's actually a pretty good point.
 
Too easy,
For a fighter it had to be the P-47. It had a living room, bathroom and a den. Some pilots got in trouble thinking it had a bedroom also.....I'll miss those guys.
 
CORSNING said:
Hi Guys,
I haven't had time to read this whole post yet but the question demands only one answer. I'm in total agreement with FlyboyJ.
C-47..........................PERIOD!
Click to expand...
+1...million.

...but what about the L-4?
It featured a similar versatility over its military carreer, just not exactly the same ones that the C-47 did.


Elvis
 
".... it had to be the P-47. It had a living room, bathroom and a den. Some pilots got in trouble thinking it had a bedroom also..."

You forgot the air con .... .

Definitely the P-47. And like those Cadillac North Star engines that run when the oil has gone - the 47 would bring a pilot home with a couple of cylinders shot off.

Peace of mind.

MM
 
Hy to all. What about japanes fighters? They have Zero, the last version, A6M5 HEI with guns was similar with F6 Hellcat in performances. With a pilot like Nishizawa, it was the best fighter ever.
What about KI 84 Hayate (Frank). It is a fact that the P 51 can't cach it.

And, no doubt, the Me 109 G6 flight by Bazu Cantacuzino it was the best.
 
bogy,
The title simply said best. If I'm reading it right that means did the most to win/support during the few years of WW2. Not the best fighter, bomber, cargo or anything else. Just simply the best of them all. C-47!!!!!
 
I have heard often that the KI84 was a high performing fighter but my source, "Aircraft of World War II" by Kenneth Munson says the KI84Ia, could get a vmax of 388 mph at 19680 feet. That is not even close to a P51D or for that matter the F6F5 or F4U4. Munson says the KI84-III was supposed to have a 2000 HP supercharged engine and was not completed before the end of the war. Where does the info about the Hayate being so fast come from?
 
renrich,
US test of late model Ki.84-Ia with high octain fuel gave it 427mph/20,000ft and 4,275fpm/S.L. A Japanese document gave it a speed of 430mph. (conditions vague). And then a US comparative document giving it 422mph around 20,000ft. This is all discussed in detail in another Thread elsewhere on this sight.
 
That sounds like a production model in service during the war would not approach those figures. Nevertheless, the Hayate could not run away from the P51D, 435MPH, P51B, 450 mph, or the F4U4, 446 mph. Of course, all those numbers are going to vary according to the airplane tested, it's condition and age.
 
not to mention build quality, I dont think we realise how variable the performance of hand built aircraft , built on a production line in a rush as it was in those days, we all like to quote performance figures but a lot would be worse in both handling and speed and some would be better!
Ginger Lacey in his book recounts giving Victor Beamish a sub standard Spit for dogfight practice and ran rings round him un till Victor suggested they swap planes!
 
As a rough generalization, Jap aircraft could not outrun Allied aircraft of the same time frame. They generally could outclimb their equivalent counterparts, nearly always had a good turn of range and firepower, but were generally weak defensively, even after this issue had been addressed in later designs.

These are the broad strengths and weknesses of Japanese designs
 
Those Japanese Army fighters in the CBI, according to Shores in "Bloody Shambles" were amazingly competitive, late in the war, with Allied aircraft. This being a somewhat Euro-centric forum, I don't believe many of the members are aware of that. I boggles my mind to think about the Japanese fighters that soldiered on with only two cowl mounted Mgs. Us members get all exercised about whether fighters need two or four cannons and several Mgs.
 
Just think of the trouble the Japanese could have caused in that theater, if instead of building thousands of Ki 43s during 1943-44, they had built a plane using the Ki-44 engine but using a wing between the Ki-43 and the Ki-84 and been able to arm it with even four 12.7mm mgs? or even two 12.7s and two 7.7s since many people believe a lot of the later production Ki 43s didn't use two 12.7guns. Fewer of the allied planes that came home "sporting" multiple hits would have made it. No difference in the final out come but the cost for the allies would have been higher.
 
I amazed the Japs didn't SR6. They were ( are) technically advanced in may areas, why the oversight with firepower I wonder?
The same could be said of some Italian aircraft from WW2.
Cheers
John
 
Maybe a process of elimination is a good way to go about this (?)
If there were no C-47, what would have been used, and how would this have affected the war?
Perhaps the C-46 would have fulfilled this role (?)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

Historic World War II aircraft hidden in plain sight
Replies
0
Views
617
GTX
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
1K
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
Menu
Log in
Register