which was the real biggest fighter in WW2?

[renrich]

Many US fighters were large(and heavy) because they were designed around a big, heavy and powerful engine. The Hellcat, Corsair and P47 all used the R2800 engine. What has been quoted many times is, "the Corsair was designed to be the smallest air frame that could accomodate the new engine, the R2800". (or something like that.) The original XF4U was a relatively small airplane but the production model was made larger to accomodate more internal fuel and more armament. Because the Hellcat and Corsair were designed to be ship board aircraft, they had to have enough wing to create enough lift so that they could operate safely from a carrier. The P47 was designed for a different mission. It was only landbased and it was desired to get high performance at high altitudes. It had a relatively small wing (which was why it required a lot of runway) but the fuselage was large (and heavy) to allow it to carry all the plumbing for the turbo supercharger( which gave it such good performance up high). Big engine which meant it used a lot of fuel. so a lot of fuel was needed if long range was desired, which meant more space was needed for fuel, which meant more weight, which meant enough wing(lift) to satisfy performance requirements and then space was needed for armament and the more armament, the more weight and here we go all over again.

In the PTO, the late model P47s which could carry a lot of fuel for the long distances in the Pacific, were handicapped sometimes because of the short runways which were the only ones available in certain areas. Sometimes the amount of armament carried was cropped as well as the amount of ammo and sometimes the maximum amount of fuel carried was less than possible because the planes could not get off safely. This could be a consideration in the ETO also.

The point is that all aircraft designs are compromises. If British or German designers had designed for the R2800, I expect that the designs would have been remarkably similar to the ones in the US, if the performance parameters had been the same.

 

[Gixxerman]

Does the YB 40 count?

 

[NZTyphoon]

Another "might have been" with impressive weight and size credentials is the Lockheed XP-58 which was bigger and heavier than the P-61B, but not quite as heavy as the P-61C.

 

[Civettone]

Now that would be something!!!! Did it come with drop tanks?

No drop tanks needed. Plenty of room inside for some extra fuel

The story is that one Me 323E-2 was rebuilt into a Me 323 WT (Waffenträger). Armament consisted of 11 x 20 mm MG 151/20s and 4 x 13 mm MG 131s.

Kris

 

[rousseau]

I didn't say it was any good.
The first design was a real collection of spare parts flying in formation.

Without getting into converted bombers,the Vultee XP-54 sure takes some beating for a single engine, single seat fighter in the size category if not weight.

and a contender for the fighter category even though it had a bomb bay is the Boeing XF8B

A bit smaller if heavier and with more fighter like performance.

Shortround got point! Doubtless XP-54 and XF8B-1 were the biggest fighter on size.

 

[CPWN]

Big, but not too heavy

A7M Reppu(Even bigger than P-47N?)

Length: 10.99 m (36 ft 1 in)
Wingspan: 14.00 m (45 ft 11 in)
Empty weight: 3,226 kg (7,112 lb)
Loaded weight: 4,720 kg (10,406 lb)

Ta 152H

Length: 10.82 m (33 ft 11 in)
Wingspan: 14.44 m (48 ft 6 in)
Empty weight: 4,031 kg (8,640 lb)
Loaded weight: 4,625 kg (10,470 lb)
Max takeoff weight: 5,217 kg (11,501 lbs)