Best WWII Air-Force

[JugBR]

But the AAF built more planes, trained more aircrews, flew in all theaters of the war.

Just because you win one battle at the beginning doesnt make you the best when the war ends.

yes, but britain land is 10% of american territory also the population is smaller and the islands was bombed by germans by a long time, destroyng london and many industrial facilities. the bombing operations just stoped when barbarossa started.

i believe britons fought like lions, congratulations mates !

 

[Burmese Bandit]

When we look at an Air Force we must consider the TOTAL package. This includes training, logistics, production rates, AIR TRANSPORT (let's not forget this silent but absolutely essential part of an air force!) as well as defensive/offensive capabilities...

When you add this all up, the USAAF in WW II wins hands down. No other comes even close.

 

[drgondog]

When we look at an Air Force we must consider the TOTAL package. This includes training, logistics, production rates, AIR TRANSPORT (let's not forget this silent but absolutely essential part of an air force!) as well as defensive/offensive capabilities...

When you add this all up, the USAAF in WW II wins hands down. No other comes even close.

You must also 'add' USN and USMC air assets to total national 'air' force - just different philosophy on bases and strategic deployment.

USN and USMC capabilities alone, while less than LW, RAF/RN, VVS and JAF/IJN in totality as national capability, were enormous by and of themselves.

 

[Burmese Bandit]

Yep, should have included that in my post. Thanks drgondog!

 

[Amsel]

In the beginning the Luftwaffe had some very good pilots. Barbarossa fixed that. The RAF surely held their own during the BoB and French campaign. But the USAAF on the western front alone was a mighty force to be reckoned with.

 

[Valo300]

Being as impartial as i can I believe the USAAF/USN were the best air arms of WW2 I really can't see any argument to point towards any other air arm. Numbers Quality and Logistics made them the winning combination

Agreed. The USAAF was the "dream team" of WWII. From hardware to quality personnel to quality logistics and maintenance to a 1st rate aviation industry, the USAAF had it all in WWII.

 

[Man O War]

Lets not forget that we also had the advantage of our pilot training. Not that were were better, but that or students didnt have to worry about enemy fighters shooting you down during training.

Axis student pilots did not have that luxury and as a result, their airforces were never able to make up for the loss of their experienced pilots.

US pilots were able to train better and longer and were more ready when sent oversea's. They had more hours in their aircraft which naturally made them better in combat.

As the war went on, US aircraft manufacturers were able to create aircraft that measured up to or surpassed the performance levels of our adversaries and were able to make them at a rate that no other nation, at that time, could hope to attain.

Kind of hard to stop an airforce with that kind of back-up.

 

[Amsel]

The RAF and US Bomber commands were literally like one during the war. I dont know if there will ever be that amount of cooperation and comeraderie again between two nations. They had a problem to solve and they did it without arguement.

 

[Waynos]

If one is talking about the size and capability of the air force then the USAAF has to take the crown quite easily. Maybe if it was a more complex issue like which air arm was the most influential? Might it then be said that it was the RAF?

The structure of fighter Command as used in the BoB with radar and ground sector stations etc acting a force multipiers to boost the effectiveness of the fighter defences must the the single biggest influential thing to come out of WW2 in regard to how a country's air defences have been organised ever since, feeding directly into todays AWACS fleets and netcentric datalinks so for true innovation the RAF even beats the Germans as this was a considered and careful plan instigated as early as 1936, compared to the things that Germans gave us, cruise and basllistic missiles, which were a desperate knee jerk attempt at survival in the later stages. Desperation breeds genius, but radar fighter control was invented in the apparent illusion of peace.

Maybe a point for further discussion?

 

[drgondog]

If one is talking about the size and capability of the air force then the USAAF has to take the crown quite easily. Maybe if it was a more complex issue like which air arm was the most influential? Might it then be said that it was the RAF?

The structure of fighter Command as used in the BoB with radar and ground sector stations etc acting a force multipiers to boost the effectiveness of the fighter defences must the the single biggest influential thing to come out of WW2 in regard to how a country's air defences have been organised ever since, feeding directly into todays AWACS fleets and netcentric datalinks so for true innovation the RAF even beats the Germans as this was a considered and careful plan instigated as early as 1936, compared to the things that Germans gave us, cruise and basllistic missiles, which were a desperate knee jerk attempt at survival in the later stages. Desperation breeds genius, but radar fighter control was invented in the apparent illusion of peace.

Maybe a point for further discussion?

I suspect that RAF should take crown for technology innovation for Allies - an example was Type 16 and MEWS was a very important contribution to fighter control - absolutely the grandfather of AWACS.. I suspect that in many cases RAF introduced leading edge/bleeding edge and US was superb with speed of further development and introduction into ops.

 

[carbonlifeform]

Well certainly as far as quantity and the ability to produce a wide variety of combat aircraft, including some superb ones, the USAAF had the best. Keeping in mind that the US didn't have it's industry regularily bombed either. From a purely innovative point of view, the LW had it going on. If Germany had the resources and industrial output of the US, it might well have been a different story in the air over Europe. Their night fighter force certainly was the best of its time.

 

[Locke]

I'd have to say that the Luftwaffe was the best trained airforce at the onset of WWII, and had it not been for the gross mismanagement it suffered throughout the course of the war, could have realized an entirely different potential.

 

[dennis420b]

The USAAF had a plane for every occasion and role, and the numbers to make them effective, So I voted for them. But my heart (a little green one) belongs to the Luftwaffe.

 

[zoomar]

By most measures of "best" in WW2 I don't see how one could not vote for the USAAF/USN duo. By 1944-45 the USA had the largest, best equipped, most versatile, and arguably best trained flying forces in the business (if for no other reason other airforces had lost most of their best trained pilots to attrition). This could not be said of 1941, 1942, or probably 1943 even, but if you had some way of averaging the war years out, I still would suspect the USA deserves top rung.

 

[diddyriddick]

The fact that the RAF and the USAAF were the only AFs to have a significant strategic capability pretty much rules out the rest for me. So between the two.....

Pure pursuit-The Spit and the Stang both had unbelievable performance. Call it a draw
Single-Engine attack-Pros and cons either way....Again, call it a draw.
Multi-engine attack-Have to give the edge here to the RAF....The Beaufighters and Mossies were exceptional.
Transport-Unquestionably the US with C-46s and C-47s
Strategic Bombing-Again, tough to call. Both AFs brought things to the table. Toss-up(maybe a slight edge to the RAF).

So all in all, I'd call it a toss-up. Until, of course.....

The B-29. The Superfortress clearly outperformed its RAF counterparts in all respects. It was at least 75 MPH faster, and could carry 6,000 more pounds of bomb 550 miles further than any of the British birds.

Moreover, the raw numbers have to count for something.

So I'd have to say that the total package goes marginally to the US.

 

[diddyriddick]

The fact that the RAF and the USAAF were the only AFs to have a significant strategic capability pretty much rules out the rest for me. So between the two.....

Pure pursuit-The Spit and the Stang both had unbelievable performance. Call it a draw
Single-Engine attack-Pros and cons either way....Again, call it a draw.
Multi-engine attack-Have to give the edge here to the RAF....The Beaufighters and Mossies were exceptional.
Transport-Unquestionably the US with C-46s and C-47s
Strategic Bombing-Again, tough to call. Both AFs brought things to the table. Toss-up(maybe a slight edge to the RAF).

So all in all, I'd call it a toss-up. Until, of course.....

The B-29. The Superfortress clearly outperformed its RAF counterparts in all respects. It was at least 75 MPH faster, and could carry 6,000 more pounds of bomb 550 miles further than any of the British birds.

Moreover, the raw numbers have to count for something.

So I'd have to say that the total package goes marginally to the US.

For the record....If we include naval aviation, the gap is larger, in my view.

 

[pbfoot]

Something being overlooked by the USAAF crowd is how much they were assisted by the RCAF , an influx of nearly5000 trained aircrew post Pearl Harbour to help out with the expansion of the USAAF

 

[BikerBabe]

RAF.

 

[syscom3]

Something being overlooked by the USAAF crowd is how much they were assisted by the RCAF , an influx of nearly5000 trained aircrew post Pearl Harbour to help out with the expansion of the USAAF

And the USAAF ended up training so many pilots, it was inconsequential.

 

[Glider]

The USAAF had a plane for every occasion and role, and the numbers to make them effective, So I voted for them. But my heart (a little green one) belongs to the Luftwaffe.

I think its true to say that until the last 6 months of the war the only serious hole in US capabilities was the lack of nightfighters. The NF versions of the Hellcat and Corsair obviously were OK in the benign environment in the Far East but I believe they would have struggled in Europe with its more complex electronic environment