Ummm, my point was more that if two aces met, one in a Zero, one in for example a Hellcat, things might be kind of even. But if you replace BOTH pilots with average skilled flyers, the Hellcat would probably come out on top. Assuming both pilots make mistakes, the one in the Hellcat seems much more likely to survive his.
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
SaparotRob
Unter Gemeine Geschwader Murmeltier XIII
I've read of the Hellcat being called the Ace Maker. Sounds true but is it a Caidinism?
MIflyer
1st Lieutenant
If a 1940 vintage fighter is flown by a pilot who knows its strengths versus his adversary and if the 1945 vintage fighter pilot is willing to try to fight his adversary on those favorable terms, then the 1940 fighter can win.
Example would be the A6M2 Zero versus just about anything. If the adversary decides he just has to get that kill and is willing to fight a Zero at 250 mph and below, down below 15,000 ft, then his P-38, P-47, P-51, F4U, F6F is likely to lose. At least one P-38 leader told his men in 1945 that the Zero was still very dangerous if you did not recall its strengths or got careless.
If a P-51D tried to fight a P-40E in its element, down low and relatively slow, it would lose every time. True, the P-51 could break off the engagement at any time or simple refuse to take on the P-40 except under good circumstances.
Recall that the F-94 versus the PO-2 in Korea did not yield good results for the USAF, losing about one F-94 for every PO-2 downed.
Example would be the A6M2 Zero versus just about anything. If the adversary decides he just has to get that kill and is willing to fight a Zero at 250 mph and below, down below 15,000 ft, then his P-38, P-47, P-51, F4U, F6F is likely to lose. At least one P-38 leader told his men in 1945 that the Zero was still very dangerous if you did not recall its strengths or got careless.
If a P-51D tried to fight a P-40E in its element, down low and relatively slow, it would lose every time. True, the P-51 could break off the engagement at any time or simple refuse to take on the P-40 except under good circumstances.
Recall that the F-94 versus the PO-2 in Korea did not yield good results for the USAF, losing about one F-94 for every PO-2 downed.
Shortround6
Major General
Except the example most often brought up is an A6M5, not an A6M2.
and that happened once? F-94 stalled and crashed?
I guess it depends on the definition of "compete".
Avoiding being shot down isn't really competing. If you can't do the missions of the newer planes or prevent the the newer planes from completing their missions they the older plane isn't really competing
GrauGeist
Generalfeldmarschall zur Luftschiff Abteilung
If I recall correctly, the F-94 tried to fight on the PO-2's terms instead of using it's superior speed, resulting in a unrecoverable stall.
On the otherhand, an A-4 did not fall for the bait and instead of getting into a turning fight, used it's speed to overwhelm the NVA Po-2 and downed it.
On the otherhand, an A-4 did not fall for the bait and instead of getting into a turning fight, used it's speed to overwhelm the NVA Po-2 and downed it.
Assuming two aces meet, then one should assume they both understand the strengths and weaknesses of both airframes. With that in mind the guy whose plane has more strengths should win (speed, firepower, armor, and self-sealing fuel tanks) versus (range, low speed maneuverability).
In my experience new guys like to pull too much (not show the patience experience brings) and would think the Zero driver will come out on top of Hellcat in that instance.
Cheers,
Biff
drgondog
Major
Changing airfoils was too dramatic to squeeze more speed. Only major increases in power.
P-39D was not a 400 mph plane. There was no P-38Ds in 1940, just two YP-38s.
When that happened (P-38 shedding it's tail)?
Change of inner wing section and central pod was far less dramatic, unfortunately it didn't happen on series-produced examples.
GrauGeist
Generalfeldmarschall zur Luftschiff Abteilung
November of 1941. They were testing the improved servo-tabs on the first YP-38 built, and the test pilot didn't appear to follow the test protocol and lost the tail during a high speed dive followed by a high G pullout attempt.
The YP-38 was destroyed and the test pilot perished.
GrauGeist
Generalfeldmarschall zur Luftschiff Abteilung
You're very welcome
drgondog
Major
It wasn't low priority - the funding for AAC was just being opened up. The P-38E model was the first to be modified for external pylon and internal plumbing to carry 330 gal Ferry tanks. The P-38E deliveries began in November 1941. The production insertion occurred early in the P-38F ~ Feb 1942
windhund116
Senior Airman
- 360
- Jul 3, 2017
Bf 109F-2, in the hands of an ace could be a handful. One-on-one, against a P51D or P47D, at altitudes less than 20,000 feet.
Last edited:
drgondog
Major
All presuming a maneuver dogfight at at low to medium altitudes - where the 51 diver gives up dive to escape a bad situation at low to medium speed.
windhund116
Senior Airman
- 360
- Jul 3, 2017
No, the P51D pilot could be an ace, too. But, the Bf109F2 pilot would need to be quite good.
windhund116
Senior Airman
- 360
- Jul 3, 2017
Yeah. If USAAF pilot follows proven tactics. I was just supposing a one-on-one maneuvering battle, only between two planes. The late 1940 Bf109F prolly is the only plane which could prove an lethal adversary to the 1945 P51D. Both competent pilots. I don't think a 1940 era Zero or Hayabusa would be as competitive.
