Best WWII Air-Force

[HealzDevo]

The LW would have really had a rough time later on as they were really getting out-classed due to smaller potential aircraft flights. It would have required the Germans not losing the oil-fields of Potez to be able to continue to carry out their offensives. The Stuka was past its prime, so was the He-111, the Bf-109 was okay but it was starting to just about hit the wall in terms of potential performance upgrades in 1944-1945. Also if we are assuming history stayed relatively similar up to a point, the Germans had no chance really without oil. That was why the Battle Of The Bulge was launched- a last dying attempt to snatch a stalemate from the jaws of defeat which failed. Also they were losing experienced pilots to US escort planes and bomber crews. These pilots weren't quite as easy to replace due to problems with getting the oil through to run these aircraft and bombers. Therefore once the oil fields were bombed, in 1943, the LW really didn't have that much of a chance of outright victory.

 

[trackend]

I am undecided. In terms of equipment and organization I say the US the Commonwealth forces where so intermixed I think its hard to pick one for example my uncle was a Wellington pilot flying with the RAF. English he was trained in Canada and had a mixed crew at one time or another of British ,Australian Canadian It was very much a joint effort .
The Luftwaffe although excellent for Blitzkrieg never had the force in depth required for an extended campaign so IMO lacked the Organizational requirements so aptly displayed by the US.
As for pure pilot ability no overall nation comes out on top, each having good and poor flyer's. The BOB was a major turning point but I believe as much credit has to go to the organization of the tactics and that 20 odd miles of water as should go to the pilots for the victory.
So overall I probably lean slightly in favour of the US

 

[syscom3]

I am undecided. In terms of equipment and organization I say the US the Commonwealth forces where so intermixed I think its hard to pick one for example my uncle was a Wellington pilot flying with the RAF. English he was trained in Canada and had a mixed crew at one time or another of British ,Australian Canadian It was very much a joint effort .
The Luftwaffe although excellent for Blitzkrieg never had the force in depth required for an extended campaign so IMO lacked the Organizational requirements so aptly displayed by the US.
As for pure pilot ability no overall nation comes out on top, each having good and poor flyer's. The BOB was a major turning point but I believe as much credit has to go to the organization of the tactics and that 20 odd miles of water as should go to the pilots for the victory.
So overall I probably lean slightly in favour of the US

Slightly?

The US completely dominated all the other nations when it came to production and supply of aircraft of all types, not to mention the training of tens of thousands of pilots and ground crews that were of overall good quality.

 

[trackend]

That's what I said sys best and size are not in separable.

 

[Paul Krumrei]

Acutually should it not be the USAAF? Not the Air Force?

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Acutually should it not be the USAAF? Not the Air Force?

People are taking in a informal general way about the Airforces (Army, Navy, and Marine Corps) of the US therefore Air Force as in Forces of the Air.

 

[Soren]

I have to bud in here..

How do you define the best airforce of WWII ??:

1. The best performing AF of the war ?
2. The most advanced AF of the war ?
3. The best equipped AF of the war ?
4. The most successful AF in terms of the total outcome of the war ?
5. The largest AF of the war ?

In my opinion its very hard to define which AirForce was the best of the war as its a combination of many things. The US no doubt held the advantage in terms of numbers of aircraft available, but Germany fielded better more advanced a/c and Britain did in some areas as-well - the British, Japanese and US fielded carriers though. Other things that have to be taken into account is pilot training, service field service of a/c, AF doctrine etc etc... how else do you define the best airforce of WW2 ??

Perhaps the title should be the most powerful airforce of WW2 ??

 

[syscom3]

1. The best performing AF of the war ?

The US incorporated all theories (pre-war and "during the war") of air warfare into a successfull doctrine. The LW was lacking in strategic vision and logistics.

2. The most advanced AF of the war ?

For every advanced weapon the LW had, the US had others. Want to talk bombers Soren? Tell me about the LW 4 engined bombers that were the equivelant of the Lanc/B17/B24/B32 and B29. Long range fighters? What was the LW equivelant of the P38 and P51 (and of course the P47N) in terms of range and being able to fight with a good probability you wouldnt be shot down. Want to talk about long range navigation? LORAN was a US invention. Did Germany have anything similar? Aviation Fuels? The US was mass producing hi octane av gas by the tanker load long before the Germans did.

3. The best equipped AF of the war ?

The USAAF was so well equiped from 1944 onwards, it dwarfed the other combatants. Soren, did you know that in 1945, B24 groups in the Pacific were told not to waste to much time fixing the damaged bombers as it was easier to get a brand new one than repair them.

4. The most successful AF in terms of the total outcome of the war ?

The B29 with an atomic bomb sort of proves the USAAF was on top for your comment.

5. The largest AF of the war ?

By 1944, the USAAF was the largest in the world in 1944. In 1945 it was even larger. Then figure in how many aircraft were built for the navy (of which Germany didnt have to use resources for), and the size of the combined army and navy air forces was staggering.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

I have to bud in here..

How do you define the best airforce of WWII ??:

1. The best performing AF of the war ?
2. The most advanced AF of the war ?
3. The best equipped AF of the war ?
4. The most successful AF in terms of the total outcome of the war ?
5. The largest AF of the war ?

In my opinion its very hard to define which AirForce was the best of the war as its a combination of many things. The US no doubt held the advantage in terms of numbers of aircraft available, but Germany fielded better more advanced a/c and Britain did in some areas as-well - the British, Japanese and US fielded carriers though. Other things that have to be taken into account is pilot training, service field service of a/c, AF doctrine etc etc... how else do you define the best airforce of WW2 ??

Perhaps the title should be the most powerful airforce of WW2 ??

The best airforce should be the one that has the most capability and can project its power the most.

In the beginning of the war that would have been the Luftwaffe but by the late parts of the war the US takes its place and never lets go and has been the most powerful, most capable and most projectable force the world has ever seen.

 

[trackend]

Sorry guys if I pushed the thread off in a bit of a tangent.

 

[blu3y4]

go the RAAF, even though it was all USAAF in the pacific,europe,north africa etc.

 

[Soren]

The US incorporated all theories (pre-war and "during the war") of air warfare into a successfull doctrine. The LW was lacking in strategic vision and logistics.

Thats very untrue and you can't back it up one bit.

For every advanced weapon the LW had, the US had others.

Complete and utter BS on your part Syscom3 !

The US had NO answer to the Me-262, Ar-234 Ta-152H-1 just to name a few.

Want to talk bombers Soren? Tell me about the LW 4 engined bombers that were the equivelant of the Lanc/B17/B24/B32 and B29.

Sure:

Ju-388
Ju-390
Ju-290

He-277 - top speed 570 km/h !:

He-177 Greif - top speed 565 km/h ! (Twin engined):

Both able to carry a bigger bomb load than any Allied bomber.

Long range fighters? What was the LW equivelant of the P38 and P51 (and of course the P47N) in terms of range and being able to fight with a good probability you wouldnt be shot down.

The Ta-152H-1 beats them all on a massive scale.

Want to talk about long range navigation? LORAN was a US invention. Did Germany have anything similar?

Ever hear of Naxos Z ???

Also want to talk about infrared equipment, accoustic homing torpedoes, guided misiles bombs, AA misiles, homing AT misiles, rocket science, Jet science, motion detection sensors ?? Thats right, the Germans were way ahead in all areas !

Aviation Fuels? The US was mass producing hi octane av gas by the tanker load long before the Germans did.

Christ Syscom3

The Germans were using synthetic fuel ! (Which the Allies were eager knowing how to make btw)

Oh and besides the lower octane figure take a look at the power levels achieved by German engines, thats right they superceded any Allied engine - and thats not all, the German engines could be run for over 10min on full boost, the Allied engines for only 5min or you'd risk wrecking the engine.

The USAAF was so well equiped from 1944 onwards, it dwarfed the other combatants.

I don't think you understand what well equipped means - well equipped means you have a good and dependable tool for every necessary action.

The B29 with an atomic bomb sort of proves the USAAF was on top for your comment.

No it doesn't, the Germans knew about this long before the Americans, however again Hitler didn't like the Idea and rejected it, the Americans had to ship German scientists to fully understand the theory and realize it.

By 1944, the USAAF was the largest in the world in 1944. In 1945 it was even larger. Then figure in how many aircraft were built for the navy (of which Germany didnt have to use resources for), and the size of the combined army and navy air forces was staggering.

The USAAF was definitely the largest AF no doubt.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Soren how many of the Ju-388, Ju 390, Ju 290, and He 277s were bombing allied targets?

Sorry the Luftwaffe did not have anything to match the B-17, Lancasters and B-24s.

The bombers they did have that were just as good they did not have eneogh of.

So yes syscom is correct, the Luftwaffe did not have anything on the large bomber type aircraft that could compare.

 

[Soren]

Soren how many of the Ju-388, Ju 390, Ju 290, and He 277s were bombing allied targets?

Sorry the Luftwaffe did not have anything to match the B-17, Lancasters and B-24s.

The bombers they did have that were just as good they did not have eneogh of.

So yes syscom is correct, the Luftwaffe did not have anything on the large bomber type aircraft that could compare.

We weren't talking numbers Adler.

The He-177 He-277 were both superior to any Allied bomber of WW2, that there weren't enough is another matter.

 

[pbfoot]

We weren't talking numbers Adler.

The He-177 He-277 were both superior to any Allied bomber of WW2, that there weren't enough is another matter.

Better in the fact they made better holes in the ground you must admit that the LW did not possess any credible Stategic or Heavy bombers I do believe even Canada fielded a larger heavy bomber component

 

[Glider]

I think that the case is being pushed a little hard. The He177 as we all know had a large number of problems, some self inflicted (coupled engines) others forced on the design team (Dive bombing) and shouldn't be considered the equal of the B24/B17/Lancaster. It just had too many bugs.
The He277 is what the He177 should have been all along, a bit like the Manchester to the Lancaster and I do not doubt that it would have been a very capable bomber. However to say that it matched the B29 is going too far, its more similar to the Lincoln development of the Lancaster

 

[syscom3]

Soren, their was absolutley no strategic vision in the LW. Period. End of story.

The US had NO answer to the Me-262, Ar-234 Ta-152H-1 just to name a few.

The US had the P80, P47N and P51H. (And I will let the RAF experts counter with the advanced Brit types).

What impact on the war did the Me262 have? Ta-152? Ar-234. None.

Ju-388
Ju-390
Ju-290

Numbers built, sorties flown and quantity of bombs dropped?

[quoteThe Ta-152H-1 beats them all on a massive scale.[/quote]

An excellent plane no doubt. In fact, potentially the best fighter plane in the last month of the war in the ETO. Now what impact on the war did it have?

Ever hear of Naxos Z ???

Actually no. But since the LORAN was further devolped after the war, and used by almost everyone, meant it was the superior system.

infrared equipment,

Used by the LW?

accoustic homing torpedoes,

Used by the LW? By the way, USN and RN had their own verisons that worked quite well.

guided misiles bombs, AA misiles, homing AT misiles, rocket science, Jet science, motion detection sensors ?? Thats right, the Germans were way ahead in all areas !

Yes, advanced.... but.... impact on the war?

The Germans were using synthetic fuel ! (Which the Allies were eager knowing how to make btw)

Low octane synthetic fuels, that needed additional refining steps to make it hi octane to keep up with the allied mass production of high quality fuels. And the allies didnt need synthetic fuel technology during the war did they?

Oh and besides the lower octane figure take a look at the power levels achieved by German engines, thats right they superceded any Allied engine - and thats not all, the German engines could be run for over 10min on full boost, the Allied engines for only 5min or you'd risk wrecking the engine.

Plenty of allied pilots ran their engines over the 5 minutes and flew home to tell the mechanics about it. But then, it didnt matter because the allies were building engines by the tens of thousands and it was easier to replace an engine than repair it.

I don't think you understand what well equipped means - well equipped means you have a good and dependable tool for every necessary action.

So the inferior allies flying inferior aircraft, flown by inferior pilots ended up shooting down the whole LW?

No it doesn't, the Germans knew about this long before the Americans, however again Hitler didn't like the Idea and rejected it, the Americans had to ship German scientists to fully understand the theory and realize it.

The facts are clear. The allies developed the A bomb and the Germans didnt. This thread is about the here and now, not the should have, could have.

 

[Soren]

Soren, their was absolutley no strategic vision in the LW. Period. End of story.

Wrong. Goering had a limited strategic vision, which held back the LW many times. To say the LW had no strategic vision is to just plain lie - Britain nearly fell hadn't it (again) been for Hitler.

The US had the P80, P47N and P51H. (And I will let the RAF experts counter with the advanced Brit types).

The P-80 wouldn't fly properly until 1946, and even then it was inferior to the Me-262a1. The P-47N and P-51H are no match for the Me-262a1, just gunfodder.

And no a/c had a hope catching the Ar-234, it would be far far away from the point of radar detection to intercept.

What impact on the war did the Me262 have? Ta-152? Ar-234. None.

Thats the thing about you, you don't give the slightest thought as to how, cause you're one of those people who fool themselves by saying *The allies won so everything they made must have been better*.

FACT: The LW was grossly out-numbered in the air - sure they had a good number of a/c at their disposal, the big problem was however a huge lack of trained pilots and most crucially fuel ! If you had just the slightest idea of how the shortage of fuel affected the LW - many LW pilots could only watch from the ground as the Allies flew over, there simply wasn't anywhere near enough fuel for all a/c to get airborne.

The Me-262 would also have had a far greater impact on the war had Hitler not have it act primarily as a fighter/bomber, a role it wasn't at all built for, it was a pure fighter and should've had this role from the beginning.

An excellent plane no doubt. In fact, potentially the best fighter plane in the last month of the war in the ETO. Now what impact on the war did it have?

How are less than 50 a/c going to affect the war nomatter how good they are ?? Esp. if only half of them or less can take off because of fuel shortage.

Actually no. But since the LORAN was further devolped after the war, and used by almost everyone, meant it was the superior system.[]

Wrong.

Used by the LW?

Yes, extensively.

By the way, USN and RN had their own verisons that worked quite well.

Waay to small and only effective at low depth - plus easily countered. The German Torpedoes were far better, but they also started out way earlier in this field.

Yes, advanced.... but.... impact on the war?

Again think about the odds...

Low octane synthetic fuels, that needed additional refining steps to make it hi octane to keep up with the allied mass production of high quality fuels.

Wrong, C3 wasn't needed, even with B4 fuel the German engines out-performed their Allied counterparts.

And the allies didnt need synthetic fuel technology during the war did they?

Could've saved them alot of expense...

Plenty of allied pilots ran their engines over the 5 minutes and flew home to tell the mechanics about it.

Ten maybe ?? Far more didn't even attempt it or wrecked the engine trying.

But then, it didnt matter because the allies were building engines by the tens of thousands and it was easier to replace an engine than repair it.

Can you call that "effective" ?? No, a utilization of superior industrial capacity.

So the inferior allies flying inferior aircraft, flown by inferior pilots ended up shooting down the whole LW?

Huh ?? No, well trained Allied pilots flying medicore aircraft defeated the grossly out-numbered, later poorly trained, starved of fuel Luftwaffe pilots flying equal or superior aircraft.

The facts are clear. The allies developed the A bomb and the Germans didnt. This thread is about the here and now, not the should have, could have.

Yes the fact ARe clear, fact is Hitler rejected the Idea and therefore "robbed" the Germans of the A-bomb - fortunately so.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

The He-177 He-277 were both superior to any Allied bomber of WW2, that there weren't enough is another matter.

So they didn't make a difference and doesn't even rate in this equation.

And although both aircraft were superior in their own rights we know the operational problems that plagued both of them. I would guess had there been 100 He 177s ready to bomb a strategic target in the Soviet Union, half of them would not of been fully mission capable for one reason or another.

But again that is only hypothetical...

 

[syscom3]

Soren, "Naxos Z" is a radar detector, not a navigation aid.

I give you the opportunity to clarify what the German equivalent was to LORAN.