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