Choices

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

ralphwiggum

Airman
76
0
Mar 15, 2008
If the Luftwaffe could choose from any Allies fighter ( Russian French, U.S. or England) against the American Bombers, which do you think they'd want? ( including Pacific theatre Fighters too)

I thank you all for the Invaluable information info I've learned!! You've given me SO much info that I never knew about AND so much to think about too! Again Thank you all SO much
sincerely and earnestly
Ralph Wiggum
 
Probably the P-47
but only if they could up-gun it to house cannons/underwing gondolas

P-38 might get a call but the problem there is that it gives you too much warning that it's coming. However, since just about anything emerging from the cloud base below you was in all likelihood Axis, that might not be such a great issue. Nose battery would be slung out for MK108s, underwing provision for R4Ms.

Spitfires and P-51s wouldn't take much of a beating from the bombers' .50 stations.

So, for survivability and hitting power, the air-cooled P-47 and twin-engined P-38 for me.
 
I would not take a P-51 or Spitfire for use against allied heavy bombers. .50 Cal is not the best choice for heavy bombers. I think a varient of the P-47 with 20mm would have been good though.
 
If Germany gets the fighter as is with historical weapons that pretty well eliminates all American made aircraft. They just don't have enough firepower for knocking down heavy bombers.

I would probably pick the Spitfire. The Mk V and later have 20mm cannon. It can hold it's own vs the P-38, P-47 and P-51.
 
I agree. you want something with punch. as much as i love the mustang... if i was going against big bird i would want either a spit mk vc with 4 20mm cannons ( even tho it was a medium alt variant), a yak with 1 20mm....or a p39 with 1 20 and the 4 50s. i never saw a 47 with cannons but that would be idea cos the jug can take a pounding and if it had a coupe 20s it would be devastating.
 
That would be fine IF such an aircraft existed in quantity. I expect that gigantic hunk of metal could absorb a lot of .50cal gunfire and still keep flying. And you can always dive away from escorting P-51s. Hopefully the controls won't lock up and turn you into a lawn dart.
 
bobbysocks said:
...I never saw a P-47 with cannons but that would be ideal cos the jug can take a pounding and if it had a couple of 20mms it would be devastating
Click to expand...
That's because they were never fitted
but in keeping with the what-if theme, I had the Luftwaffe chuck the .50s out and install some. I'd be looking at 30mm cannons just outboard of the prop disc, not 20mm.
 
P38 in 1943. It's designed from the start as an interceptor. So was the P47, but the 8 .50s were better for a fighter to fighter mission than bomber intercepts, IMHO. Plus, you have 2 engines, all sorts of fuel to loiter, and a compact firing group.

After that in 1944, I'd go with the F4U-C. Four 20MM cannons would do a job on the bombers.



Long and short, you'll need the 20MM guns to get the job done. The .50 would do it as well, but it would take more time and, by extension, rounds.

I'm going on the assumption that the bombers we are attacking are 4 engined bombers of the B17/B24 variety.

I'd go with the F7F Tigercat in 1945. Tons of tight firepower. And fast.
 
Perhaps even 4 x 30mm in wings vs. P-47's 8 HMGs - weight would not be the issue, and wings were bigger than of Fw-190 that mounted 2 x 30mm outboard of prop disc.
 
Would the P-47 or P-39 have the ceiling to reach the bombers? I always thought ( maybe I'm wrong)
That they were the type to destroy battlefield targets
 
If anything P-47 had in abundance, that was practical ceiling through usage of turbo-supercharged engine.
P-39 is ground huger, no doubt about it.

Both were better in fighter's role than as bombers.
 
ralphwiggum said:
Would the P-47 or P-39 have the ceiling to reach the bombers? I always thought (maybe I'm wrong) that they were the type to destroy battlefield targets
Click to expand...
The P-47 certainly did
it was cutting it at 30,000ft - 5,000ft over the heads of the P-51s at their best altitude.

The P-39 had no chance of even reaching the P-51's ceiling but in an interceptor role I doubt it's situation would have been irredeemable; some form of two-stage supercharging would put it up there among the bombers and its armament, whilst not quite the tank-buster it was made out to be, would have been devastating against bombers.

The P-39's biggest issue, in my opinion, was range and that's not a factor here.
 
A shout too for the DH Hornet perhaps? 485mph and 4 20mm, maybe a tad too late though
 
Why not Mossie? Powerful Merlins, punch, maneuverability, two engines for extra survivability. What's there not to like?
 
welllllll.... if we are going to mod something. put a 37mm in a P38 and surround it with 4 20mm. talk about a can opener! i can only imagine when that 37 is fired the plane would stop in mid air or fly backwards..lol that shell is HUGE! ithe projectile is a little bigger than the diameter of a red bull can and half as long. the whole round is well over a foot long.
 
Last edited:
The original question was about fighters to down US heavy bombers - no question about escorts there
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

V
Engine choices for P-51 mustang ?
12 13 14
Replies
261
Views
22K
GrauGeist
1943: the best Japanese fighter
2
Replies
37
Views
8K
tomo pauk
Menu
Log in
Register