What if: each Axis and Allied nation had only one fighter?

[claidemore]

A recent thread started by Smoltachaos asks the question; what if the Allies had only one fighter type?
I thought it would be interesting to expand on that idea and speculate on one fighter type for each of the major combatants for either side.
Limitiation would be any type in serious developement (excluding the odd-ball planes) that could have been brought into combat service before the time the country in question entered the war.
Major players include Germany, Italy, Japan, Great Britain (Commonwealth), USA, Soviet Union.
Feel free to offer opinions on any or all.

 

[drgondog]

A recent thread started by Smoltachaos asks the question; what if the Allies had only one fighter type?
I thought it would be interesting to expand on that idea and speculate on one fighter type for each of the major combatants for either side.
Limitiation would be any type in serious developement (excluding the odd-ball planes) that could have been brought into combat service before the time the country in question entered the war.
Major players include Germany, Italy, Japan, Great Britain (Commonwealth), USA, Soviet Union.
Feel free to offer opinions on any or all.

For US - either F4U or P-51
For Germany - Fw 190
For Great Britain - Spitfire
For Japan - Ki 61 or A6M
Italy - Macchi C.200 which developed into C.202
USSR - Lagg 5

 

[Vincenzo]

109, macchi, zero, spit, buy spit, yak

 

[Vincenzo]

For US - either F4U or P-51
For Germany - Fw 190
For Great Britain - Spitfire
For Japan - Ki 61 or A6M
Italy - Macchi C.200 which developed into C.202
USSR - Lagg 5

"have been brought into combat service before the time the country in question entered the war"

are you sure on corsair, mustang, 190, ki 61 and Lagg 5 (and why not La 5?)


p.s. for mustang if talking for allison version maybe possible

 

[BombTaxi]

Fw-190 wouldn't have been available at the outbreak of war either - Hitler would need to postpone the invasion of Poland quite substantially to wait for it, then there might not have been a war

My choice

UK - Spitfire
Germany - Bf109
USSR - LaGG 3
USA - P-40 (the P-51 might not have been developed if the RAF hadn't asked for it...)
Japan - A6M (the Ki-43 wasn't designed for carrier use)
Italy - C.200

So the US would potentially be without a carrier fighter while the Japanese had a very capable one - alternative history of the PTO anyone?

 

[claidemore]

Just to clarify: Limitation would be IN SERIOUS DEVELOPEMENT before outbreak of war, and COULD HAVE BEEN BROUGHT INTO PRODUCTION IN TIME FOR COMBAT.

Since it's a 'what if', we are assuming that if one type is going to be concentrated on, then development and production of that type will take priority and it will be available for combat at outbreak of hostilities for each country.

FW190 for example: first prototpe flew June 1, 1939. In that scenario there might have still been Me109s in use at outbreak of war, but the 190 would have been replacing it.

 

[Vincenzo]

it's impossible for FW 190 was ready in september '39 maybe for september '40 but no so fast

 

[davparlr]

For US - either F4U or P-51
For Germany - Fw 190
For Great Britain - Spitfire
For Japan - Ki 61 or A6M
Italy - Macchi C.200 which developed into C.202
USSR - Lagg 5

I like this list but I think the Lagg 3 would better fit the latest time frame. Similarly the Ki 61 is marginable (fly Dec 1941)

 

[drgondog]

it's impossible for FW 190 was ready in september '39 maybe for september '40 but no so fast

An airplane flying in the timeframe is definitely in Serious Development. The 190 was flying in June 1939.

If the scenario posed was "Operational" the answers are different. It is doubtful that several of my choices would have been operational unless each country ahd foresight and accelerated focused devlopment on my choices.

 

[drgondog]

I like this list but I think the Lagg 3 would better fit the latest time frame. Similarly the Ki 61 is marginable (fly Dec 1941)

Dave - I stuck to Serious Development guideline rather than 'operational' and an airplane that has gone into prototype fits that definition for me. But I do not argue your points!

 

[Vincenzo]

Ki 61 fighting in spring '43 i can understand a best development, but they are 15 months, at point it's best change the required time so all give planes with same timeline

 

[Vincenzo]

pratically this is a simply "best" fighter for nations so my choice it's
Me 262, G 55, Ki 84, Spitfire (griffon), P 47M, Yak (VK 107)

 

[Soundbreaker Welch?]

Let's see.

Britain: Spitfire
Germany: Fw 190D
Italy: Fiat G.55
USA: P-38L
Russia: La-7
Japan: A6M Zero

 

[MikeGazdik]

Fw-190 wouldn't have been available at the outbreak of war either - Hitler would need to postpone the invasion of Poland quite substantially to wait for it, then there might not have been a war


So the US would potentially be without a carrier fighter while the Japanese had a very capable one - alternative history of the PTO anyone?

No, same as the Royal Navy with the Spitfire, the U.S. would have had no choice but put arresting gear on the P-40. The Spitfire wasn't a great carrier aircraft, but it did the job when needed.

 

[claidemore]

I reckon I should give it a go too.

Britain: Spitfire. It was operational at start of war, and the design was flexible enough to meet the demands of a fighter right up till 1945 (and after).
USA: P51. Again it was operational before USA entered war (I know this is stretching the rules a bit, since if Britain is using only 1 fighter, it might not have been developed, but who cares? ) Best range of any WWII fighter, and used 1/2 as many engines as a P38 (less drain on production and resources for same number of fighters).
Soviet Union: Yak. Operational at start of war, design lent itself to developement and improvement.
Germany: FW 190. More versatile than 109, might be pushing it for this plane to be operational in 1939, but by late 1940 it could have been replacing 109s.
Italy: RE 2000/2001/2005. Not produced in the numbers it should have been, but eventually it was developed into 'arguably' the best Italian fighter.
Japan: Ki-43 Oscar. I know it didn't officially develop into the Ki-84 (though there are plenty of similarities), but it's my fav Japanese plane.

 

[drgondog]

I reckon I should give it a go too.

Britain: Spitfire. It was operational at start of war, and the design was flexible enough to meet the demands of a fighter right up till 1945 (and after).
USA: P51. Again it was operational before USA entered war (I know this is stretching the rules a bit, since if Britain is using only 1 fighter, it might not have been developed, but who cares? ) Best range of any WWII fighter, and used 1/2 as many engines as a P38 (less drain on production and resources for same number of fighters).
Soviet Union: Yak. Operational at start of war, design lent itself to developement and improvement.
Germany: FW 190. More versatile than 109, might be pushing it for this plane to be operational in 1939, but by late 1940 it could have been replacing 109s.
Italy: RE 2000/2001/2005. Not produced in the numbers it should have been, but eventually it was developed into 'arguably' the best Italian fighter.
Japan: Ki-43 Oscar. I know it didn't officially develop into the Ki-84 (though there are plenty of similarities), but it's my fav Japanese plane.

I would have gone with the Yak and the Ki 43 but my feeling was that the excellent derivatives were different airframes rather than modifications..

To me it was the same as picking F4F and going through F6F and F8F as Grumman. Was I wrong about the differences between Yak 1, 3 and 9?

 

[tomo pauk]

If I may (Re: differences between Yak models):
Yak 1 3 were the one branch ('light' in Soviet terminology), while Yak 7 9 were the other one (heavy).

I'd go for LaGG-3, since it could mount heavier engines then Yak-1 series (Yak 7 9 were not available during the summer of 1941).

 

[claidemore]

Yes, Yak 3 evolved from Yak 1 and Yak 7 and 9 were evolved from the UTI-26 (eventually Yak-7UTI) trainer. Yak 7 was in production September of 1941.

The Yak-7UTI dual seat trainer was 'based' on the Yak-1, some call it a seperate design, some say it was a modified Yak-1. It was intended as an advanced trainer for all three modern Soviet fighters, Mig, LaGG and Yak and they used about 1500 of them in that role.

It takes an informed eye to tell the different Yaks apart, the two original designs, UTI-6 (Yak-1) and UTI-26 were submitted within weeks of each other, shared nearly every component. Main difference was shifting the wing further back, a 2nd cockpit, and the structural modifications for the shifting of the wing.


Good point about the LaGG tomo. Thats how it came to be developed into the La5/7.

 

[Capt. Vick]

There would be a lot less models for us to build!