The one most over-rated plane of WWII

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

I think the Spitfire is over rated because it has those roundel thingies on it...
All better now
ggy009-2%2fAmerican+Spitfires%2fSpitfireFMkVbAA963.jpg
 
Look, I wasn't going to go into tech specs, discussion and a pissing contest, I was just offering my opinion on the most over rated fighter of WW 2.
You may not like it and I'm not asking you to, it's my opinion.
You are all welcome to worship the P-51 as much as you like, I choose not to. It was a good airplane, not the best and not a Saint.
And dat's all I got to say 'bout dat.
I like your moxie, kid!
 
Grumman products were a waste of aluminium, drawing paper and blue paint and dat is all I have to say about dat.
Oh, but Grummans were manly man aeroplanes because of their hand-crank main gear.
Hydraulic gear is for girly-men and HIGHLY over rated...
 
I thought the roundels were substituted for armor plate and nose / tail weight, in lieu of fuel (so it could have short range, like all British aircraft), and were also used to shift the center of gravity so the airplane naturally headed for a coastal British airfield where it would land due to fuel shortage.

Red Stars meant you were going to get shot down, at least in the first two years of the Russian Front.

The U.S. insignia meant you were going to fly an 8-hour mission at high altitudes, see no German airplanes, and would very definitely be freezing when you got home, where you would grumble about the war while drinking lukewarm beer, chasing British women, and generally being an "Ugly American" until morning, when you would do it all over again.
 
Both sides were fitting armour and SS tanks as quickly as possible for a reason after the battle of France, thinking the unprotected A6M is going to survive in view of the facts is strange logic.

And yet, across the other side of the world the A6M was found to be more than a match than heavier armoured Allied fighters and pilots flying the type shot down a lot of aircraft with armour, not only that it earned itself a myth of invincibility, which, incidentally is why we are here, so strange logic? Not me. But of course, lets apply yours and say that despite its victories and its formidable reputation in the SEA campaign it wouldn't have been any use at all in the Battle of Britain, that is, if the Japanese had a time machine...
 
The fact that I think is most important is that in early 1942, when the Zero gained its reputation, the Zero/Wildcat kill ratio favored the Zero by only 1.5 to one, which is not that big an advantage. By the beginning of 1943, after the Americans had learned how to use the Wildcat's advantages effectively, the Zero/Wildcat kill ratio had swung to favor the Wildcat by nearly 6 to 1. This indicates that the superior maneuverability of the Zero (that part is not under question) was not enough to guarantee victory. The Wildcat's advantages (ruggedness, diving speed, a radio), along with superior pilot tactics and training (especially in gunnery) more than outweighed the Zero's advantages.

What's not under question here is the US response to a threat, nor its tactics, which were necessary simply because the F4F was outclassed by the A6M. In hands of powers with less training and resources than the US Navy the differences between the two types would have been more marked. To be fair, the standard of aircraft carrier based fighters between 1940 and 1943 up to when the F6F enters the scene isn't that spectacular, there's the A6M, the F4F, the Brewster Buffalo, the Fairey Fulmar, the Hawker Sea Hurricane, the Gloster Sea Gladiator the Supermarine Seafire I (later Seafires were obviously far more potent), so the A6M looks pretty good compared to its contemporaries.

To really appreciate the capabilities of a weapon it needs to be considered next to the other aircraft in use at the time it was, rather than attempting to compare it to everything else. Obviously the A6M was in service until the very end of the war, so that means it was contemporary to almost every fighter in theatre throughout the war, but to begin with, in the first year when the USA is taking its first steps into the war, the A6M is by far one of the best fighters in theatre.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back