PDA

View Full Version : What is the *most Superrior Prop Plane of WWII ? or whats your favourite?



Top_Gun_1_0_1
05-25-2006, 12:08 PM

Megile_
05-25-2006, 12:16 PM
Me262

Top_Gun_1_0_1
05-25-2006, 12:21 PM
ME-262,<---My fav Jet of WWII http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif

I think the spitfire will come up on top at the end!

They should change the P-51s game performance,its not accurate!specially the 0.50s infliction of damge.

MrMojok
05-25-2006, 12:21 PM
We ALL know which one "won teh war!"


http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

BrewsterPilot
05-25-2006, 12:22 PM
Hurricane; it killed more planes than the Spitfire! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/mockface.gif

Top_Gun_1_0_1
05-25-2006, 12:24 PM
But the hurricane would be shreaded like a paper "literally" by any one of those planes on the pictures http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

Megile_
05-25-2006, 12:28 PM
I'd go with a high boosted mustang.

Quick as fook, and the best range.

Friendly_flyer
05-25-2006, 12:42 PM
All of the above planes are superb fighters, though they are optimized for slightly different roles. The P-47 is a very stable ground ponder, with a build to match, the later marks 109's where primarily interceptors, heavily armed, but a tad stiff on the controls, etc.

Possibly the purest fighter of them all is the Spitfire. It lacks the P-51s range, it doesn't take the punishment the P-47 and FW 190 can take and it doesn't have the 109's massive armament. If I where to go dog fighting in WWII, I would want the Spitfire. The 109 would be my second choice.

tigertalon
05-25-2006, 12:46 PM
Where are the russians, japanese and italians?? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

Yak9U and Ki84 pwnz these all!

Seriously, if I'd have to pick a single fighter for all the different possible roles of a fighter, Dora would be my choice.

Top_Gun_1_0_1
05-25-2006, 12:50 PM
their prop Fighter planes have "No chance in Hell"
compared to the planes listed except for that PIG P-47!
Why not put the YAK-9?!!

BTW,Howcome theres only (5) slots?

I want to add the corsair and the hellcat http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

& BTW,Italian fighters $@CKS!

RegRag1977
05-25-2006, 12:51 PM
My favourite would be Fw190A...

Very original fighter, with a modern conception, a good ergonomy...

But not the best, some will say.

Eagle_361st
05-25-2006, 01:22 PM
My favorite is the Jug, but honestly this topic has been hashed and fragged over about 9 million times here and well nevermind.........


/grabs a chair and popcorn\ Let the goodtimes roll!!!!!!!!!!!!

JSG72
05-25-2006, 01:24 PM
Unfotunately not IN SIM http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/bigtears.gifSpit MKxiv.

However as I am a Luft Flyer: TA 152C http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/inlove.gif
Is the bestest..... After the DO 335

Top_Gun_1_0_1
05-25-2006, 01:24 PM
Corsair is the " BEST " Naval plane of the war!

I added it and replaced the obsolete looking flying Box

Sordid_Sinister
05-25-2006, 01:24 PM
My plane of choice would be the 109, both for its aesthetical value and because its flight characteristics best match my flying style. Or maybe I've just become so accustomed to it that I find all other aircraft somewhat inferior simply for being different.
...
Or something coherent.

Top_Gun_1_0_1
05-25-2006, 01:28 PM
sorry m8
http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

I love the 109 to.the 109 have a togher armament than any US fighter could muster
The 109s are good for Bomber intercept missions!
I just figured out that theres no naval A/C on the list...

tigertalon
05-25-2006, 01:55 PM
Originally posted by Top_Gun_1_0_1:
their prop Fighter planes have "No chance in Hell"
compared to the planes listed except for that PIG P-47!
Why not put the YAK-9?!!

BTW,Howcome theres only (5) slots?

I want to add the corsair and the hellcat http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

& BTW,Italian fighters $@CKS!

Hm, I consider Mc205 one of most potent fighters in game... that digital ammocounters for that HUGE ammosuply simply r0xx0rz! And without a 1km alt advantage I would not dare to mix it up with Ki84 in my pony...

(and, basically I made a comment on russian/italian and japanese planes simply because you put 1 british, one german and 3 american planes to the list... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif)

domenlovrec
05-25-2006, 01:58 PM
P51

Why? Because it won teh war. Be sure! Watch discovery channel! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif

Top_Gun_1_0_1
05-25-2006, 02:00 PM
B-17 eeeAnddd P-51 won the Air war!...in europe

In the Pacific,Corsairs and Fat Cats won the air war...the B-29 Wraps it up http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

tigertalon
05-25-2006, 02:02 PM
Originally posted by Top_Gun_1_0_1:
B-17 eeeAnddd P-51 won the Air war!...in europe


Hehe, it's funny how the REAL winner team, the IL2/Yak9/La5 combo gets mentioned so rarely...

BSS_CUDA
05-25-2006, 03:09 PM
name another plane that could match the P-38 in these combined catagories.
1. Range, only the 51 was close
2. Payload, no fighter carried a bigger payload
3. Dogfighting ablilites, it could match any plane in the world for its day
4. Climb rate, with the L's climb rate of 5,000 FPM not many could match it.
5. Top speed, depending on your sources any where from 414 to 434+, the equal of anything in the air.
6. Stall speed. with a Power on stall speed of 54 MPH it was a match even for the Zero

there was not another plane that could match the 38 in these combined catagories. individual ones yes but not combined

bazzaah2
05-25-2006, 03:15 PM
probably the Jug.

Badsight.
05-26-2006, 12:36 AM
Originally posted by Top_Gun_1_0_1:
their prop Fighter planes have "No chance in Hell" Mark Hanna got to fly P-51D's & Spitfire Mk9's against a Yak-3 - all based in the same collection here in the sth island NZ

the Yak-3 ran rings around the other 2 in mock DF's

he also rated the DF ability of the La-9 as being higher than the Bearcat or SeaFury which were its contemporarys - as in the La-9 was the most deadly & capable . & if anyone of the modern era should know its him - he didnt just get to fly them all , he thrashed them

Siwarrior
05-26-2006, 12:59 AM
geez great choices, where are the p40s, la5s, italian planes etc

The-Pizza-Man
05-26-2006, 01:08 AM
Originally posted by BSS_CUDA:
name another plane that could match the P-38 in these combined catagories.
1. Range, only the 51 was close
2. Payload, no fighter carried a bigger payload
3. Dogfighting ablilites, it could match any plane in the world for its day
4. Climb rate, with the L's climb rate of 5,000 FPM not many could match it.
5. Top speed, depending on your sources any where from 414 to 434+, the equal of anything in the air.
6. Stall speed. with a Power on stall speed of 54 MPH it was a match even for the Zero

there was not another plane that could match the 38 in these combined catagories. individual ones yes but not combined

Can the P-38 match the P-51, Spitfire, Focke Wulf, Messer, Mosquito in exactly the same combined categories? No, it couldn't. Pretty pointless statement if you ask me.

SATAN_23rd
05-26-2006, 01:18 AM
It is clear that whichever plane I am flying will be the most superior...

ImpStarDuece
05-26-2006, 03:29 AM
Spitfire fanboy here, always have been, always will be. However, the FW-190 was the best prop fighter of the war.

It doesn't matter what form it took: A,D, F or G it was always competitive, always dangerous and always at the very least, just as capable as any of its opponents.

Lucius_Esox
05-26-2006, 03:35 AM
Amazing really that the Spit will probably win this pole. Even more amazing is that maybe people vote on the ingame characteristics.

The Spitfire line is missing something very big, i.e mk14.

He he there is enough moans about the plane now just imagine how many the mk14 would generate..


Such a shame it's not here http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

WOLFMondo
05-26-2006, 04:27 AM
Best two are:

In this sim: FW190D9 - The best prop fighter in this sim. Utterly superior to anything else. The Jug is 2nd.

In RL: Tempest V Series II W/Sabre IIB

hotspace
05-26-2006, 05:15 AM
Me and a few m8's Formation Skip Bomb (A tight Formation that is http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/winky.gif) with P-38's online.

Beautiful plane http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

Xiolablu3
05-26-2006, 05:48 AM
Originally posted by Badsight.:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Top_Gun_1_0_1:
their prop Fighter planes have "No chance in Hell" Mark Hanna got to fly P-51D's & Spitfire Mk9's against a Yak-3 - all based in the same collection here in the sth island NZ

the Yak-3 ran rings around the other 2 in mock DF's

he also rated the DF ability of the La-9 as being higher than the Bearcat or SeaFury which were its contemporarys - as in the La-9 was the most deadly & capable . & if anyone of the modern era should know its him - he didnt just get to fly them all , he thrashed them </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Very interesting stuff. I totally agree about Mark Hanna being the best judge of WW2 fighters in this modern day. He was a young lad with the opportunity to fly these warbirds, and as his family owned them, he could really put them through their paces without worrying about crashing someone elses plane. (I think most of us are more careful with a friends belongings than your own)

What a sad loss, such a great opinon on WW2 planes to have. That film of him beating the airfield in a Spitfire is fantastic.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5032538990033127959

TgD Thunderbolt56
05-26-2006, 06:36 AM
Originally posted by tigertalon:

Hehe, it's funny how the REAL winner team, the IL2/Yak9/La5 combo gets mentioned so rarely...


I strongly agree. Under 5k the La/Yak combo is tough to beat. I'll take an La5 any day of the week. The other night I was in an La5f (non fn version) on HISTORIA and encountered 4 Axis birds co-"E". I'm not THE MAN, but I sent two down in flames and had another leaking all sorts of important stuff before I was simply overwhelmed by them and was ultimately shot down (STS-Predator is a good pilot too http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif ). Add the IL2 for those pesky ground targets and you've got easily one of the most potent combinations in the sim...bar none.



TB

Jabout
05-26-2006, 06:38 AM
Hanna seems to sit a lot higher in the cocpit than I do.

WOLFMondo
05-26-2006, 06:53 AM
Originally posted by Xiolablu3:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Badsight.:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Top_Gun_1_0_1:
their prop Fighter planes have "No chance in Hell" Mark Hanna got to fly P-51D's & Spitfire Mk9's against a Yak-3 - all based in the same collection here in the sth island NZ

the Yak-3 ran rings around the other 2 in mock DF's

he also rated the DF ability of the La-9 as being higher than the Bearcat or SeaFury which were its contemporarys - as in the La-9 was the most deadly & capable . & if anyone of the modern era should know its him - he didnt just get to fly them all , he thrashed them </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Very interesting stuff. I totally agree about Mark Hanna being the best judge of WW2 fighters in this modern day. He was a young lad with the opportunity to fly these warbirds, and as his family owned them, he could really put them through their paces without worrying about crashing someone elses plane. (I think most of us are more careful with a friends belongings than your own)

What a sad loss, such a great opinon on WW2 planes to have. That film of him beating the airfield in a Spitfire is fantastic.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5032538990033127959 </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Don't forget Eric Brown, who probably flew way more types than Mark Hanna ever didm certainly when it comes to German aircraft, Naval aircraft and test aircraft.

Xiolablu3
05-26-2006, 07:17 AM
Yes I agree Wolf, sorry I should have clarified, I meant the best judge out of people who didnt fly them in service.

I cant help thinking that people who flew them in service will have a bit of bias towards their own planes.

wayno7777
05-26-2006, 08:14 AM
From your list, it's the "Dora"....

Abbuzze
05-26-2006, 09:03 AM
Superiority donÔ┬┤t means the best performance, so in the selectable planes I would take the Corsair, because it was much better than the Zero with the poor guys in it.

But the most superior plane was the 109 in Poland vs the PLZ11.

mynameisroland
05-26-2006, 09:21 AM
Originally posted by BSS_CUDA:
name another plane that could match the P-38 in these combined catagories.
1. Range, only the 51 was close
2. Payload, no fighter carried a bigger payload
3. Dogfighting ablilites, it could match any plane in the world for its day
4. Climb rate, with the L's climb rate of 5,000 FPM not many could match it.
5. Top speed, depending on your sources any where from 414 to 434+, the equal of anything in the air.
6. Stall speed. with a Power on stall speed of 54 MPH it was a match even for the Zero

there was not another plane that could match the 38 in these combined catagories. individual ones yes but not combined

P38 was and is great but I get extra fed up reading all of these partisan patriotic cherry picking posts.

P51 had more impact and played a greater role in the ETO as did the P47. The Spitfire was a better fighter for fighter vs fighter combat and as a bomb truck why waste all that money on the P38 when a Mossie would do a better job at a lower unit price?

WOLFMondo
05-26-2006, 09:41 AM
Originally posted by Abbuzze:
Superiority donÔ┬┤t means the best performance, so in the selectable planes I would take the Corsair, because it was much better than the Zero with the poor guys in it.

But the most superior plane was the 109 in Poland vs the PLZ11.

Not 109F's vs 3 Gladiators in Malta?

Xiolablu3
05-26-2006, 09:53 AM
Originally posted by WOLFMondo:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Abbuzze:
Superiority donÔ┬┤t means the best performance, so in the selectable planes I would take the Corsair, because it was much better than the Zero with the poor guys in it.

But the most superior plane was the 109 in Poland vs the PLZ11.

Not 109F's vs 3 Gladiators in Malta? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Someone should make a film about Malta. It would make for fantastic movie. Through the dark early Gladiator period, they are overjoyed to recieve their Hurricanes, and finally SPitfires where they can finally fight back on equal/superior terms.

Would make a great 'against the odds' movie.

I am sure using a mixture of real planes and CGI this would be possible nowadays or very soon.

I would even put up with a false history version by Hollywood, starring a young American fighting for the RAF, just to see the great warbird action http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

faustnik
05-26-2006, 10:36 AM
Originally posted by mynameisroland:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by BSS_CUDA:
name another plane that could match the P-38 in these combined catagories.
1. Range, only the 51 was close
2. Payload, no fighter carried a bigger payload
3. Dogfighting ablilites, it could match any plane in the world for its day
4. Climb rate, with the L's climb rate of 5,000 FPM not many could match it.
5. Top speed, depending on your sources any where from 414 to 434+, the equal of anything in the air.
6. Stall speed. with a Power on stall speed of 54 MPH it was a match even for the Zero

there was not another plane that could match the 38 in these combined catagories. individual ones yes but not combined

P38 was and is great but I get extra fed up reading all of these partisan patriotic cherry picking posts.

P51 had more impact and played a greater role in the ETO as did the P47. The Spitfire was a better fighter for fighter vs fighter combat and as a bomb truck why waste all that money on the P38 when a Mossie would do a better job at a lower unit price? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, Cuda is talking about the P-38L. I don't know about his stall speed and climb rate quotes, but, it's hard to argue with the general ability of the L in both fighter and fighter-bomber roles. Cuda's claims for top three characterisctics for the P-38L, range, payload and fighting ability are right on.

gates123
05-26-2006, 11:06 AM
Well from what Yeager said he mentioned the Dora as the best preforming prop plane he ever test flown. So personally I think its a toss up between a Dora and a Yak-3 (maybe La-9/11) under 15,000ft which is where all dogfights end up. Seafury get honerable mention.

BSS_CUDA
05-26-2006, 11:35 AM
Originally posted by The-Pizza-Man:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by BSS_CUDA:
name another plane that could match the P-38 in these combined catagories.
1. Range, only the 51 was close
2. Payload, no fighter carried a bigger payload
3. Dogfighting ablilites, it could match any plane in the world for its day
4. Climb rate, with the L's climb rate of 5,000 FPM not many could match it.
5. Top speed, depending on your sources any where from 414 to 434+, the equal of anything in the air.
6. Stall speed. with a Power on stall speed of 54 MPH it was a match even for the Zero

there was not another plane that could match the 38 in these combined catagories. individual ones yes but not combined

Can the P-38 match the P-51, Spitfire, Focke Wulf, Messer, Mosquito in exactly the same combined categories? No, it couldn't. Pretty pointless statement if you ask me. </div></BLOCKQUOTE> you just dont get it do you. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/touche.gif the 38 could do all of those things in 1 aircraft, try looking at it reversed. can all those plane match the 38 in those combined catagories. it would take all those planes to do the same things the P-38 could do. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif

Megile_
05-26-2006, 11:43 AM
Originally posted by mynameisroland:


P38 was and is great but I get extra fed up reading all of these partisan patriotic cherry picking posts.



That's kinda silly.. considering your own post.


P51 had more impact and played a greater role in the ETO as did the P47.

This is irrelevant. THe Me-262 was a much better fighter than the Spitfire.. but there is no doubt the Spitfire played a greater role in the ETO.


The Spitfire was a better fighter for fighter vs fighter combat

Maybe.. but the P-38 could do it for longer.. much greater range... it also was a much better tactical fighter.


when a Mossie would do a better job at a lower unit price?

again.. unit price is irrelevant... F-22 costs twice as much as an F-16... and it sure as heck flies better.


Roland.. your post doesn't mean anything really. You just appear to be arguing for the sake of arguing, ie. cherry picking posts.

BSS_CUDA
05-26-2006, 11:49 AM
Originally posted by mynameisroland:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by BSS_CUDA:
name another plane that could match the P-38 in these combined catagories.
1. Range, only the 51 was close
2. Payload, no fighter carried a bigger payload
3. Dogfighting ablilites, it could match any plane in the world for its day
4. Climb rate, with the L's climb rate of 5,000 FPM not many could match it.
5. Top speed, depending on your sources any where from 414 to 434+, the equal of anything in the air.
6. Stall speed. with a Power on stall speed of 54 MPH it was a match even for the Zero

there was not another plane that could match the 38 in these combined catagories. individual ones yes but not combined

P38 was and is great but I get extra fed up reading all of these partisan patriotic cherry picking posts.

P51 had more impact and played a greater role in the ETO as did the P47. The Spitfire was a better fighter for fighter vs fighter combat and as a bomb truck why waste all that money on the P38 when a Mossie would do a better job at a lower unit price? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>I'm sorry I thought this was the best prop plane of WW2 not the ETO, while its debatable if the 51 had more impact in that theater. that would be for another topic so I wont even get into that argument. but now take the MTO and the PTO where the 38 was a dominant MULTIROLE aircraft. and again your taking 5 planes to do the job of what the 38 could do, so now lets add up the cost of those 5 planes compared to the 38.

38 $110,000

51 $55,000
47 $97,000
spit approx $50,000
mossie approx $90,000

so now you've spent $292,000 to do what $110,000 could do in the P-38


P38 was and is great but I get extra fed up reading all of these partisan patriotic cherry picking posts. whats your point??? no partisan or cherry picking here unless its by you. I posted facts about the 38's abilities. prove those facts wrong if you dont agree, if you can, but saying that 5 planes at almost triple the cost of the 38, made the 38 a non-cost effective aircraft is shall we say, miss informed http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Xiolablu3
05-26-2006, 11:59 AM
I disagree with point 3 in CUDAs post.

From www.SPitfireperformance.com (http://www.SPitfireperformance.com) US trials of P38 :-


'Knowledge of the local enemy fighter performance will dictate the tactics
to be used by the P-38F in the combat zone. It is doubtful if this
aircraft will meet in combat any type of enemy aircraft in which close-in
fighting will be its best offensive action. '

Doesnt sound like its the best dogfighter at all from that statement.

faustnik
05-26-2006, 12:11 PM
Originally posted by Xiolablu3:
I disagree with point 3 in CUDAs post.

From www.SPitfireperformance.com (http://www.SPitfireperformance.com) US trials of P38 :-


'Knowledge of the local enemy fighter performance will dictate the tactics
to be used by the P-38F in the combat zone. It is doubtful if this
aircraft will meet in combat any type of enemy aircraft in which close-in
fighting will be its best offensive action. '

Doesnt sound like its the best dogfighter at all from that statement.

Xiolablu,

That comment refers to the P-38F. It lacked the Fowler flaps, power assist aelerons & dive brakes that the P-38L had and didn't have near the horsepower of the L.

The true combat flaps gave the P-38L excellent turn ability. The V-1710F-30 provided great acceleration and the power aelerons gave the P-38 great roll rate at high speeds. It might not have been dominant over late Japanese and German designs but, it was certainly equal to them in a dogfight.

BSS_CUDA
05-26-2006, 12:15 PM
Originally posted by Xiolablu3:
I disagree with point 3 in CUDAs post.

From www.SPitfireperformance.com (http://www.SPitfireperformance.com) US trials of P38 :-


'Knowledge of the local enemy fighter performance will dictate the tactics
to be used by the P-38F in the combat zone. It is doubtful if this
aircraft will meet in combat any type of enemy aircraft in which close-in
fighting will be its best offensive action. '

Doesnt sound like its the best dogfighter at all from that statement. In fact it says it should keep out of dogfights.
show me where I said it was the best?!?!?!?!?!?! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/compsmash.gif good lord you people are so single minded, yes the spit was a better dogfighter than the 38, BUT!!
did it have the range of the 38?????
did it have the payload of the 38???????
did it have the climb rate of the 38???????
did it have the stall speed of the 38??????
the spit was a great dogfighter, but it could not do ALL the things the 38 could do.
also get off the F model which was the worse 38 of the lot it didnt not have the manouver stops HP, climb rate, and couldnt turn well, now try the L and come back to me after you study up a little

Xiolablu3
05-26-2006, 12:21 PM
I understand this but I just cannot see a P38 dogfighting with a high performance single engined plane like a SPitfire or La7 and coming out on top.

Maybe boom and zooming, I can understand it would be good at that, but not close in dogfighting.

Sorry if people disagree with me, but I have no evidence to say otherwise. It just seems common sense to me that the smaller fighter will generally be more manouvrable.

You could pick points of many planes and say

FW190 for eg

Best firepower of any WW2 plane
Incredible roll rate
Fastest fighter in the world
Best Dogfighter - Could match any plane of its day
Pilot protection - A match even for the P47

This is what Roland mean by 'cherry picking' Pick a fighter and then say 'It could match any plane at this' ' Best at the world at this' You could find 5 points which every one of the top fighters matched or excelled others at. SPitfire, FW190, BF109, La7, Yak 3.

Yes the P38 was a great plane BUT

Can it out roll the FW190?
Can it carry as much firepower as the 190?
Was the pilot protection as good as the 190?
Was it as easy to produce as the 190?
Was it as easy to fly as the 190?
Was it as good bomber killer as the 190?

See my point?

BSS_CUDA
05-26-2006, 12:34 PM
Aparently you missed the thread title

<Vote>What is the *most Superrior Prop Plane of WWII ? or whats your favourite? no where does it say what plane was the best fighter, of WW2


I understand this but I just cannot see a P38 dogfighting with a high performance single engined plane like a SPitfire or La7 and coming out on top.
this is the same mentality that most 1940's people had. because it wasnt a single engine plane if couldnt dogfight. that assumption is incorrect, now I'm not saying it was better than a Spit or La7 but what I am saying is that it could more than hold its own in the same senario.



Can it out roll the FW190?

uhm yes it could, over 380 MPH the 38 was the best rolling fighter of the war, even better than the FW, I can pull up the graphs if you like

Xiolablu3
05-26-2006, 12:41 PM
Originally posted by BSS_CUDA:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Can it out roll the FW190?

uhm yes it could, over 380 MPH the 38 was the best rolling fighter of the war, even better than the FW, I can pull up the graphs if you like </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


PLease post these charts. If this is true, I would like to see them. I am guessing there are other 'conditions' as well as being at almost top speed.

If it was such a fantastic plane why did the RAF refuse it? Why not forget the P51 and keep all P38s because they saved so much money doing all the different roles?

You said that the P38 could MATCH any plane in a dogfight. This means you think it was EQUAL. I doubt that fact.

I love the P38, its great for mixed roles, hitting the target and fighting its way out, or maybe a bit of B&Z. But against German fighters, I would put money on the small, nimble single engined planes every time.

You also said it could outclimb the Spitfire, are you sure this is true? How does the 1944 P38 stack up against the 1944 25lb Spit or the Spitfire MkXIV? I havent looked Im not sure.

Xiolablu3
05-26-2006, 12:51 PM
Just been reading about P38 roll rates :-

'The first 180 degrees took 1.5 secs longer than with a Fw190. Pilot
>reports speak of applying aileron and waiting for the roll to come in. At
>speed, neither differential throttle nor rudder make that much difference.'

Doesnt sound great in a fast high manouvring dogfight does it?

MB_Avro_UK
05-26-2006, 12:52 PM
hi all,

With regards to the Poll results so far,perhaps we should include the voter's country of origin and how many there are? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif

Best Regards,
MB_Avro.

BSS_CUDA
05-26-2006, 12:52 PM
go here for the rollrate chart, and my mistake, the P38L could outroll the FW at anything over 350 MPH not the 380 I stated.
http://www.acompletewasteofspace.com/modules.php?name=F...storder=asc&start=15 (http://www.acompletewasteofspace.com/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&t=9588&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=15)

faustnik
05-26-2006, 01:00 PM
Cuda,

Be careful with that chart. I put the P-38 curves in there based on some data that Gibbage found. It's not hard evidence, but, a good indicator that the P-38L could at least match Fw190 roll at high speeds. (The Fw190 roll rate is suspect on that chart too, supposedly there were issue with the aelerons on the captured plane that was tested.) Regardless, the P-38L had fantastic high speed roll ability.

Xiolablu3
05-26-2006, 01:01 PM
Originally posted by BSS_CUDA:
go here for the rollrate chart, and my mistake, the P38L could outroll the FW at anything over 350 MPH not the 380 I stated.
http://www.acompletewasteofspace.com/modules.php?name=F...storder=asc&start=15 (http://www.acompletewasteofspace.com/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&t=9588&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=15)

Just look at how much faster the 190 rolls lower down the speed range, and the P38s advantage is tiny even above 350.

Throughout the whole usual speedrange the 190 far, far outrolls the P38, its in a totally different class. In fact the 38 has a very poor roll at lower speeds than 300mph, its nearly as bad as the Zero at 220mph.

Sorry that graph just reinforces my thoughts that the P38 wasnt a good close in dogfighter.

AT the 350mph stated the P38s controls would be very heavy wouldnt they?

faustnik
05-26-2006, 01:02 PM
Originally posted by Xiolablu3:


AT the 350mph stated the P38s controls would be very heavy wouldnt they?

No, they are power assisted.

WOLFMondo
05-26-2006, 03:02 PM
I'm assuming the entire discussion is purely about a single version of the plane ignoring production costs and pilot training etc?

P38L and all the 38's looses it for me because its an enormous target thats actually hard to miss. I think its a great plane however. No torque and centrally mounted guns is a great combination. In some respects as well, the view sucks, while out the front its fantastic, if not the best.

Choctaw111
05-26-2006, 03:42 PM
The Do335 has always been my favorite. I was so happy when we finally got this in 4.04...

CUJO_1970
05-26-2006, 05:00 PM
Originally posted by ImpStarDuece:

the FW-190 was the best prop fighter of the war.

It doesn't matter what form it took: A,D, F or G it was always competitive, always dangerous and always at the very least, just as capable as any of its opponents.


ImpStarDuece:

Did you just ask me out on a date? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/winky.gif

JG4_Helofly
05-26-2006, 05:17 PM
I think that the best plane for dogfight was the fw 190. It was extremly manoeuvrable, very easy to fly with automatic engine controles ( Kommandoger├┬Ąt ), exellent gun sight view and cockpit view, high fire power, good protection for plane and pilot, very good in vertical manoeuvres and finaly good speed performances.

The only disadvantage I see is the bad high altitude performance for the Antons.

Bremspropeller
05-26-2006, 05:26 PM
Fw 190.

panther3485
05-26-2006, 11:58 PM
If this is a poll on the 'most superior prop plane of WWII', why is it that all five alternatives offered here are single engine fighter types?

What if somebody wanted to select the Lancaster, B-29, B-26 or Mosquito? Are these types automatically disqualified because they are not single engine fighters?

Or should we consider that the intent of the question was to ask 'most superior prop fighter plane of WWII' (because that's how most seem to be answering)?


panther3485

HellToupee
05-27-2006, 12:05 AM
http://www.ww2guide.com/tempest_5.jpg

Top_Gun_1_0_1
05-27-2006, 12:22 AM
Its all about:

P-51
Spitfire
FW-190

isnt it?! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif(according to the poll)

How come the poll only have (5) slots?,*V**!

Its such a shame that the ( 0.50 ) does not make that much damage like in RL...They need to fix this problem!-->On --->SOW<---

The-Pizza-Man
05-27-2006, 03:11 AM
you just dont get it do you. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/touche.gif the 38 could do all of those things in 1 aircraft, try looking at it reversed. can all those plane match the 38 in those combined catagories. it would take all those planes to do the same things the P-38 could do. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif

I asked you to look at it reversed in my last post http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif . Ask the same questions for the P-51, Fw-190, Messer, Spit or any of the other leading fighters of the war. No other fighter can match any other in everyway. For example, can any other plane match the Spitfire in all areas of the envelope. The answer is no. That is why the original question of name another plane that could match the P-38 in these combined catagories. is flawed.

You are better off asking:
1. Was there a better interceptor? - Spitfire, Messer,
2. Was there a better escort? - P-51
3. Was there a better fighter-bomber? - P-47, Corsair, Hellcat, Typhoon, Tempest, Fw-190
5. Was there a better air-superiority fighter? - P-51, Spitfire, Messer, Fw-190, Tempest, Yak's and La's
6. Was there a better night fighter? - Mossie, Ju-88, He-219, Me-110
7. Was there a better heavy fighter? - Fw-190, Mossie, Beaufighter, Ju-88

You build aircraft for missions, not missions for aircraft. It was economical to produce different fighter types so there was no point in having a multirole aircraft.<pre class="ip-ubbcode-code-pre"> </pre>

OldMan____
05-27-2006, 05:18 AM
On the time of its introduction.. FW190 ( was much more superior to its enemy than any fighter ever did later).

At end of war I would say late Spitfires (like the 14th)or the Ta-152 series that was going to become a legendary series if they had a better chance to try that.

Bewolf
05-27-2006, 05:32 AM
Messerschmidt 109.

No other fighter ever before or after shot so many enemy aircraft down. And even in it's last 2 years of the war it was a match for every allied plane if flown by comparably capable pilots.

Top_Gun_1_0_1
05-27-2006, 10:13 AM
The fact is German Aces are the best in the BIZ in ETO http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif Like Gunther Rall and many others

The top scoring Ace of all time!
http://www.taivaansusi.net/reich/aseet/hartmann.jpg
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/c/cc/RK_EK_mit_ol_sw_di.png

Hartmanns Tally:

Hartmann's kill tally included some 200 LaGG fighters, more than 80 American-built P-39s, 15 Il-2 ground attack aircraft, and 10 twin-engined medium bombers. He often said that he was more proud of the fact that he had never lost a wingman in combat than he was about his rate of kills.

Pretty "insurmountable" isnt it http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif...its hard to do even in IL2/PF http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif

heywooood
05-27-2006, 10:18 AM
Amerika won teh war b shure

F0_Dark_P
05-27-2006, 10:31 AM
Originally posted by Bewolf:
Messerschmidt 109.

No other fighter ever before or after shot so many enemy aircraft down. And even in it's last 2 years of the war it was a match for every allied plane if flown by comparably capable pilots.

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/agreepost.gif

why aint the 109 one of the shoices http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_mad.gif

Vike
05-27-2006, 11:16 AM
Originally posted by Bewolf:
Messerschmidt 109.

No other fighter ever before or after shot so many enemy aircraft down. And even in it's last 2 years of the war it was a match for every allied plane if flown by comparably capable pilots.

Indeed.
That plane is all the best when in the right hands.

So,i vote the 109 too,and with a special mention for the Kurfurst,for its ultimate aesthetic:

http://i76.photobucket.com/albums/j32/Vike01/bf109k4.jpg

http://i76.photobucket.com/albums/j32/Vike01/bf109k4r3.jpg

@+

Top_Gun_1_0_1
05-27-2006, 11:22 AM
The 109s cockpit is tooooooo shaky when firing http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_mad.gif

They need to fix this problem at SOW..geez!

BTW,109 has no "aileron/rudder trim"
howcome? is it a bug?


Anywazzz The 109's have a huge punch like the ME-262 http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif