Admiral Beez
Major
Could the best fighters of 1939-40 compete with the fighters of 1944-45?
For example, Spitfire Mk.II vs. Nakajima Ki-84?
For example, Spitfire Mk.II vs. Nakajima Ki-84?
What fighter of 1939-40 could compete with fighters of 1944-45?
- Thread starter Admiral Beez
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Shortround6
Major General
No.
ThomasP
Senior Master Sergeant
No.
GrauGeist
Generalfeldmarschall zur Luftschiff Abteilung
The only way it *might* be possible, is if there was a skilled pilot in the office.
One such example would be the IJN's Lt. Nishizawa, who was still flying an A6M late in 1944 and scoring victories against the newest USN types. Granted, he was flying a newer A6M5, but I'm mainly pointing out what a skilled pilot can do with an older type.
One such example would be the IJN's Lt. Nishizawa, who was still flying an A6M late in 1944 and scoring victories against the newest USN types. Granted, he was flying a newer A6M5, but I'm mainly pointing out what a skilled pilot can do with an older type.
The Basket
Senior Master Sergeant
- 3,712
- Jun 27, 2007
Maybe
I think Bf-109F v Hellcat.
Freddie v Yak 9
Fred v Ki-100...but not a Mustang.
So yeah...maybe.
I think Bf-109F v Hellcat.
Freddie v Yak 9
Fred v Ki-100...but not a Mustang.
So yeah...maybe.
michaelmaltby
Colonel
'... The only way it *might* be possible, is if there was a skilled pilot in the office."
IMAGINE: Buzz Beurling, flting a Malta-era Spitfire against a gaggle of 1945 'standard' issue USAAF-piloted Mustangs. I think he would score.
I appreciate that Beurling's Malta spits weren't Mark II's ...
IMAGINE: Buzz Beurling, flting a Malta-era Spitfire against a gaggle of 1945 'standard' issue USAAF-piloted Mustangs. I think he would score.
I appreciate that Beurling's Malta spits weren't Mark II's ...
Last edited:
Shortround6
Major General
rather depends on the 109F
as in F-0/1 or F-4.
Is the 109F really a 1939-40 fighter or a 1941 fighter?
everything depends on the definition, what is a fighter of '40?
a fighter that did the first flight in '40?
a fighter that did became operational in '40?
a fighter that actual combat in '40?
a fighter that was important in air warfare in '40?
and so on
My thought is if the 1940 and 1945 fighter got into a slower speed acrobatic dogfight, maybe. Otherwise, I think no. In 1945 fighters had significantly increased in speed more than anything and would be able to dictate the conditions for engagement. If we throw out outliers like an exceptional pilot vs a really bad pilot, it would pretty much be non-competitive.
- Thread starter
- #12
Admiral Beez
Major
Let's also consider the twin piston-engined fighters. The Kawasaki Ki-102 of 1944 vs. the Westland Whirlwind of 1940 (first flight 1938), for example.
I'd give Petter's fighter competitive odds against most of the traditional layout (excluding pusher-pull Dornier Do 335, etc.) twin-engined piston-powered fighters of 1944-45, some better than others, against the late model Lockheed P-38, not so much.
Last edited:
GrauGeist
Generalfeldmarschall zur Luftschiff Abteilung
So what does a military do with the older types as the newer ones are going into service, push them into the ocean?
Japan was still using older types late in the war because newer types couldn't be put into service fast enough. Especially since many of the newer types were being caught in transit and lost.
That's one of the reasons Nishizawa was still battling Hellcats with his A6M right through October '44
Re-engine them and make them MkV's, then MkIX's, send them to leaser theaters, then turn them into fighter bombers, then they go to training schools, then workshops for apprentices to learn on, museums, gate guards, locked in barns to be found 50 years later and sold for squilians, buried in Borneo and whats left scrapped making the barn finds worth more squilians.
The Basket
Senior Master Sergeant
- 3,712
- Jun 27, 2007
A 1940 fighter can still be an effective fighter. Even in 1945. Against bombers or recon or transports. Still can achieve.
A 20mm cannon shell will decide.
A 20mm cannon shell will decide.
How does a Spit Mk11, Me109E or A6M catch a B17 bomber group at 25,000ft and shoot them down with 15 sec's worth of .303's or 9 sec's of 20mm ammunition?. Every 1940's plane was replaced by a newer version either modified or redesigned based on lessons learnt in actual combat, fighter design throughout the war was an evolution, if it stood still you got left behind.
Shortround6
Major General
The early 20mm guns were good for more like 7 seconds of firing time, so you point is even more correct.
The Germans estimated to took about 1000 round of 20mm ammo fired to bring down a 4 engine bomber. (pilots at the time of the estimate were judged as getting 2% hits)
so you would need about eight Me109E or A6M2s to shoot down a single 4 engine bomber. Assuming they could all get into some sort of firing position.
A Spitfire Vc would reduce the needed fighters to about 4 but would need for firing passes. A Typhoon or Tempest holds 560 shells show you only need two.
Obviously individual pilot skill/marksmanship changes things considerably, this was one reason for the change to the 30mm cannon.
The 30mm was rated as needing so many fewer hits (3 if I remember right?) that even with 2% hits the number of fighters needed was much more reasonable.
The Basket
Senior Master Sergeant
- 3,712
- Jun 27, 2007
I am not saying a P-40 or Hurricane is an acceptable fighter by 1945 standards
But if that's what you got then that's what you got.
Plenty times older biplanes had to fly front line duties and Polikarpov fighters flew on the eastern front.
So if obsolete old tat is better than nothing then that's the way it is.
But if that's what you got then that's what you got.
Plenty times older biplanes had to fly front line duties and Polikarpov fighters flew on the eastern front.
So if obsolete old tat is better than nothing then that's the way it is.
Kevin J
Banned
Okay, so I-153 and I-16 opposing Ki-27 in Manchuria up until 1945 when USSR invaded.
