Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
It must consistently prevail in fighter versus fighter contest assuming equal pilot skill. That is the fundamental metric.
Need to define the operational requirement, Bomber escort, Counter Air, Fast Ass CAS or interceptor, etc. These will also have a bearing on the final outcome of the design.
It must consistently prevail in fighter versus fighter contest assuming equal pilot skill. That is the fundamental metric.
May I venture to suggest the Hawker Hurricane?
It hits a lot of the points.
Cheers
John
Agree anything else is a bonus.
I think you may want to give this a little more analysis. Bf109 losses due to pilot error were so extremely high due to its landing gear that alone may be reason for elimination, amongst other reasons. More 109s made than anything else and still not enough. Spitfire on the other hand is meets average or better than average in many criteria, but may be below average in others that are of equal or at least significant value.Out of all piston-engined planes that were produced from Sept 1st '1939 - 1945, we can choose either Spitfire or Bf-109. So I'd choose Spitfire.
Dont think such a plane existed in WWII not sure if it has ever existed a warplane in fact any plane is a series of compromises. The least worst on balance is about as good as it gets.
...
I think you may want to give this a little more analysis. Bf109 losses due to pilot error were so extremely high due to its landing gear that alone may be reason for elimination, amongst other reasons. More 109s made than anything else and still not enough. Spitfire on the other hand is meets average or better than average in many criteria, but may be below average in others that are of equal or at least significant value.
It is not a land based fighter but certainly could be used as one. Why not? Apply the criteria and compare it to something comparable, like a P-47N or F8F or FW190D or Late mark Spitfire or P-51H. My first impression is that it is less than average due to maintenance issues.??
Should I/we contemplate Hawker Sea Fury (the one with Centaurus, from 1945) for 1939?
I think this issue is somewhat covered by "1. It must be possible to produce in sufficient numbers." Production cost is certainly important, and may be part of the reason for the production of the Mustang since it was cheaper than the 38 and 47. However, in a countries struggle for life or death cost can be largely negated by deficit spending and sacrifice of other budgeted items. Part of the reason for 30,000 109s is due to not have much else as good to produce.A critical issue for everyone except the USA. Germany was able to produce 30,000 Me-109s and 20,000 Fw-190s because both aircraft were relatively inexpensive.
It is not a land based fighter but certainly could be used as one. Why not? Apply the criteria and compare it to something comparable, like a P-47N or F8F or FW190D or Late mark Spitfire or P-51H. My first impression is that it is less than average due to maintenance issues.
The original posting states"This is purely a hypothetical situation in that what is being chosen would be what you would choose if you had to begin fighting WW2 again on September 1, 1939 with any of the aircraft available at any time during 1939-45. Being in production on 9-1-39 is not necessary. Please re-read the original posting.The Fury was just an example of a fighter from 1945 contemplated in 1939 - no point in doing that. I'll apply that for P-47N, Bearcat the rest: no point.
Now, if you want a discussion about the plane that was in production from Sept 1939, let me/us know.
The original posting states"This is purely a hypothetical situation in that what is being chosen would be what you would choose if you had to begin fighting WW2 again on September 1, 1939 with any of the aircraft available at any time during 1939-45. Being in production on 9-1-39 is not necessary. Please re-read the original posting.
I am glad that someone other than me stated the obvious. So what 1945 version of a piston fighter aircraft would you choose and why is it better than its contemporaries? I know which one I think is the right answer, but I would like to hear some answers and explanations from other members. I don't want to bias responses and I don't want emotion based dismissals of my choice.given the advance in technology in those 6 years it is a bit like asking which computer or cell phone do you want that was available from 2005 to 2011.
I doubt very much if anybody is going to take the 2005 models.
Really, the Hurricane? Of the criteria listed it is equal or superior to a Spitfire, Mustang, FW190, Lagg, Macchi, etc., etc. Why?
1. It must be possible to produce in sufficient numbers. It was
2. Its flight characteristics must be benevolent enough to allow inexperienced pilots to gain experience without frequently making fatal mistakes. It was
3. Its flight characteristics must be benevolent enough to allow experienced pilots who are disabled from fatigue or wounds to fly without making fatal mistakes. It was
4. It must have average or better than average ease of maintenance. It was
5. It must have average or better than average comfort to reduce pilot fatigue. It was
6. It must have average or better than average ability to continue to fight and fly after receiving battle damage. It was equal to the fighters of its time.
7. It must have average or better than average primary armament. 8x.303
8. It must have average or better than average ability to be modified to use secondary armaments.It was
9. It must have average or better than average ability to be modified to fight at night.It was
10. It must have the speed, maneuverability, armament, and resistance to catastrophic damage to allow a pilot with skill equal to his opponents to have an equal or superior chance to survive in a one on one fight by victory or retreat. I believe it was.
Not a quick choice.
To answer your thread the Hurricane ticks all your boxes for the early part of WW2. Obviously it won't compare to much later fighters. But, as power and weight increased so the ease of flying decreased. There is probabily an exponential graph to show this.
Cheers
John
Not a quick choice.
To answer your thread the Hurricane ticks all your boxes for the early part of WW2. Obviously it won't compare to much later fighters. But, as power and weight increased so the ease of flying decreased. There is probabily an exponential graph to show this.
Cheers
John