Best WWII prop plane

[SD_Film Artists]

Overall: Spitfire: A great all-round fighter plane, maneuverable and well armed.

Considered:
Hurricane: 12 machine guns (albeit small calibre by aircraft standards) and very easy to repair.

BF109 Z-Type: The German P38 Lightning

Mosquito: Radical design in manufacture, easy to produce and very fast for a bomber.

[Ottomark]

I don't care if the Spit or the Mustang was better, I'm just glad we had the 2 extremly good planes on our side.

Your move Hitler........

[Morrdh]

Silly Potarius. The US was the only allied state that had a REAL airforce in WWII. Sure, the British had a couple of planes, but nobody else did. Especially the Soviets. They were too busy retreating and being communist to have things like an air force or a navy.

Irony is that the USAF didn't exist as a service in its own right until around....1947?

P-51 only came into being because the North American Aviation in 1940 wanted to wow the British purchasing commission into buying an aircraft of NAA's own design rather than build the P-40 under license from Curtis who's plant was at full capacity. The Royal Air Force was the first ones to use the Mustang, only for tactical reconnaissance and ground-attack duties over the English Channel, but were thought to be of limited value as fighters due to their poor performance above 15,000 ft (4,600 m).

Only after Rolls Royce fitted their Merlin engine that the Mustang was able to shine as a fighter.

[Ottomark]

Go Allies! Use that team work.

[The Scandinavian Reich]

It's hard to say which was the best...but the Bf-109 was responsible for tens of thousands (no exaggeration) of kills. Just saying.

[Alien Space Bats]

OK, back to fighters. If the P-51 was so good, how come the top two American aces with the 8th Air Force flew P-47's by preference?

In Europe in the critical first three months of 1944, when the German aircraft industry and Berlin were heavily attacked, the P-47 shot down more German fighters than did the P-51 (570 out of 873), and shot down approximately 900 of the 1,983 claimed during the first six months of 1944.

- Wikipedia Article on the Republic P-47 Thunderbolt

BTW, most German pilots viewed the P-51 and FW-190 as essentially equal aircraft; in a dogfight between them, it was almost always pilot skill that carried the day.

Which, FWIW, is why I'm not as hip on the F-4F Corsair: It arrived in the Pacific Theater at a point in time where Japanese fighter pilot quality was plummeting. The weak link in Japanese aviation was the slow output of Japanese flight schools; as the war progressed, they could not keep up with losses, and so the Japanese began throwing a lot of almost untrained pilots into the cockpit and sending them off to die. Indeed, I consider the Zero a mediocre fighter (it was far too lightly armored and - like the early Spitfires - prone to catch fire, often leaving the pilot horribly burned even if he did manage to bail out). The RAF solved that problem with their Spits, but the Japanese never did with the Zero.

Thus, by the time the Corsair arrived on the scene, Japanese aviation had fallen to the point of near total incompetence as far as pilot effectiveness was concerned.

This is another reason why I like the Lockheed P-38 Lightning (my runner-up fighter choice): It fought the Japanese at the height of their game, and proved a worthy adversary, even when American pilots were probably less capable (in terms of experience in combat or simply hours flown) than their Japanese counterparts.

BTW: Back to the P-47: It was also flown by Brazil (in Europe) and Mexico (in the Pacific). The Brazilians lost only 15 planes and 5 pilots in 445 sorties over Italy, all to ground fire; the Mexicans flew an amazing 791 sorties without suffering any losses at all (although almost all of these were flown in 1944-45, at the same time as the U.S. Navy's F-4F's were mauling the Japanese).

[The Corparation]

P-61 BLack Widow.

ON a side note, why's the twin mustang up there? I'm pretty sure the war was over in '46

[Globexanter]

P-61 BLack Widow.

ON a side note, why's the twin mustang up there? I'm pretty sure the war was over in '46

Don't worry, loads of them are missing, even the most Epic ones.

[Licana]

P-61 BLack Widow.

ON a side note, why's the twin mustang up there? I'm pretty sure the war was over in '46

I think the Twin Mustang was technically introduced before the end of the war...

[Lentar]

the Polikarpov Po-2, an aircraft so utterly dire you could find most of the parts in today Ikea catalogue but yet had a production history spanning 31 years in which time it managed to be used to great effect in Korea due to the low radar properties of a deckchair

agreed

[Fellrike]

I cast my vote for "other", specifically, the Ilyushin IL-2 Sturmovik tank buster. The USSR produced some fantastic planes during WW2, yet they often are overlooked by Western-centric military historians. The Sturmovik has always been one of my favorites. It was fast, hard to hit, and well-armored. Its contribution to the defeat of Germany and the Axis was considerable, though I'm sure there are contrarians here who'll disagree. The Luftwaffe and the Royal Hungarian air force both examined and tested captured Sturmoviks, and they weren't impressed. It wasn't even worth using as a traner, they said. Many captured IL-2s ended up being used for target practice. But I don't care - in my opinion, they underrated a great plane.

[Risottia]

How many other propeller driven planes can claim as many goddamned ships as these beauties did?

The Swordfish I guess.

[Licana]

How many other propeller driven planes can claim as many goddamned ships as these beauties did?

The Swordfish I guess.

I doubt even this.

[The Corparation]

P-61 BLack Widow.

ON a side note, why's the twin mustang up there? I'm pretty sure the war was over in '46

I think the Twin Mustang was technically introduced before the end of the war...

Nope introduced in '46 It first flew in mid 45 so it pretty much missed the war.

Also why isn't the P-39/P-63 Cobra up here? Family had one of the highest amount of kills for its type.

[Kruplyan]

In Europe, the Spitfire. In the Pacific, the F4U.

[Delator]

Which makes it all the more impressive that the A6M Reisen, being neither a bomber nor a torpedo have sunk 52 ships, and damaged 300 more through kamikaze attacks.

Kamikaze attacks don't add ANY credibility to your argument that the Zero was somehow "Best"...

...any plane can fucking crash.

As I said, find me a plane that can match that record.

Any type of plane that sank a ship without crashing into it.

The N1k-J and Ki-84 are late war fighters. The A6M served all the way through and hence deserves it's highlighted position.

The Zero was only built all through the war because Japan didn't have the industrial capacity necessary to retool and produce better fighters exclusively. Even the Japanese knew by 1943 that the Zero was outclassed.

And strategic bombers were beyond useless in WW2. They were detrimental to the allied cause in fact.

Wrong, and wrong again...thanks for playing.

[Potarius]

OK, back to fighters. If the P-51 was so good, how come the top two American aces with the 8th Air Force flew P-47's by preference?

In Europe in the critical first three months of 1944, when the German aircraft industry and Berlin were heavily attacked, the P-47 shot down more German fighters than did the P-51 (570 out of 873), and shot down approximately 900 of the 1,983 claimed during the first six months of 1944.

- Wikipedia Article on the Republic P-47 Thunderbolt

BTW, most German pilots viewed the P-51 and FW-190 as essentially equal aircraft; in a dogfight between them, it was almost always pilot skill that carried the day.

Which, FWIW, is why I'm not as hip on the F-4F Corsair: It arrived in the Pacific Theater at a point in time where Japanese fighter pilot quality was plummeting. The weak link in Japanese aviation was the slow output of Japanese flight schools; as the war progressed, they could not keep up with losses, and so the Japanese began throwing a lot of almost untrained pilots into the cockpit and sending them off to die. Indeed, I consider the Zero a mediocre fighter (it was far too lightly armored and - like the early Spitfires - prone to catch fire, often leaving the pilot horribly burned even if he did manage to bail out). The RAF solved that problem with their Spits, but the Japanese never did with the Zero.

Thus, by the time the Corsair arrived on the scene, Japanese aviation had fallen to the point of near total incompetence as far as pilot effectiveness was concerned.

This is another reason why I like the Lockheed P-38 Lightning (my runner-up fighter choice): It fought the Japanese at the height of their game, and proved a worthy adversary, even when American pilots were probably less capable (in terms of experience in combat or simply hours flown) than their Japanese counterparts.

BTW: Back to the P-47: It was also flown by Brazil (in Europe) and Mexico (in the Pacific). The Brazilians lost only 15 planes and 5 pilots in 445 sorties over Italy, all to ground fire; the Mexicans flew an amazing 791 sorties without suffering any losses at all (although almost all of these were flown in 1944-45, at the same time as the U.S. Navy's F-4F's were mauling the Japanese).

1: About equal in flight performance, yeah. But all FW-190 variants had by far superior aileron performance at the cost of turn radius. And the guns packages on FW-190s were unparalleled; they put the six M2 .50cal machine gun armament of the Mustangs to shame.

2: F4U Corsair, not F4F, which was an entirely different aircraft. And the Zero was hardly mediocre: when it was a contemporary fighter, it was the best in the world. Not the highest top speed or pilot protection, though both of these facets weren't far behind its rivals; its range, rate of climb, acceleration, outrageous maneuverability, and armament were what made it famous.

3: Not really. N1K2, J2M3, Ki-84, and Ki-100 pilots tended to have more than reasonable success against USN aircraft. However, USN tactics were better than those used by the Japanese, which is what really won the air war, along with the loss of the best Japanese pilots earlier in the war.

4: The P-38, in all its variants, was superb. A ridiculously stable gun platform with the superb Mk.II 20mm cannon in the nose and the rest of its armament in the cowl --- it could rip just about anything in the sky to shreds in a relatively short burst.

5: The P-47 is an interesting specimen. At low altitudes it was only useful as a close support/ground attack aircraft, being so heavy. Up high, though, its tremendous speed (the P-47N could reach over 470mph at about 30,000 feet, if I'm not mistaken) and diving capabilities made it a very dangerous target to engage. To put it simply, it fit in perfectly with USAAF tactics.

[Potarius]

I cast my vote for "other", specifically, the Ilyushin IL-2 Sturmovik tank buster. The USSR produced some fantastic planes during WW2, yet they often are overlooked by Western-centric military historians. The Sturmovik has always been one of my favorites. It was fast, hard to hit, and well-armored. Its contribution to the defeat of Germany and the Axis was considerable, though I'm sure there are contrarians here who'll disagree. The Luftwaffe and the Royal Hungarian air force both examined and tested captured Sturmoviks, and they weren't impressed. It wasn't even worth using as a traner, they said. Many captured IL-2s ended up being used for target practice. But I don't care - in my opinion, they underrated a great plane.

Worth nothing to them as far as their doctrine and tactics were concerned.

The reason the Luftwaffe lost the air war in the East was because they refused to acknowledge that the air war was about ground support, thus they never developed any real countermeasures to thwart the Soviets' low-altitude monsters. Bf-109s, FW-190s, BF-110s, He-111s, Ju 87s, and Ju 88s were all designed for high performance above 10,000 feet --- an altitude where combat rarely occurred on that front. And even then, the Soviets had aircraft that could easily compete with the 109s and 190s (namely, the Yak-9 and various lend-lease aircraft like the Spitfire).

[Albion Rhodesia]

Though it's impossible to give a definite answer to this question, I'll have to say the Hawker Hurricaine on the simple basis, that it was the backbone of the Battle of Britain (and not the Spitfire).

[Potarius]

Though it's impossible to give a definite answer to this question, I'll have to say the Hawker Hurricaine on the simple basis, that it was the backbone of the Battle of Britain (and not the Spitfire).

Why? You can't qualify something like that simply because it was the backbone of one battle. Many other aircraft played collectively much more important roles later on in the war, and did a far better job of it.

[Albion Rhodesia]

Though it's impossible to give a definite answer to this question, I'll have to say the Hawker Hurricaine on the simple basis, that it was the backbone of the Battle of Britain (and not the Spitfire).

Why? You can't qualify something like that simply because it was the backbone of one battle. Many other aircraft played collectively much more important roles later on in the war, and did a far better job of it.

Considering that the Battle of Britain by all accounts is the longest and largest air battle in history, then it’s very easy to see why the Hurricane could very easily earn the title of “Greatest Aircraft of WWII”. Now obviously there’s no objective standard, since dependent on the nation and the tactics employed, there’s no actually objective standard to judge a truly greatest aircraft.

We could sit there and statistically examine each aircraft, but stats don’t mean a damn if the asset in question is piloted by less than able pilots, and many other variables.

[Potarius]

Why? You can't qualify something like that simply because it was the backbone of one battle. Many other aircraft played collectively much more important roles later on in the war, and did a far better job of it.

Considering that the Battle of Britain by all accounts is the longest and largest air battle in history, then it’s very easy to see why the Hurricane could very easily earn the title of “Greatest Aircraft of WWII”. Now obviously there’s no objective standard, since dependent on the nation and the tactics employed, there’s no actually objective standard to judge a truly greatest aircraft.

We could sit there and statistically examine each aircraft, but stats don’t mean a damn if the asset in question is piloted by less than able pilots, and many other variables.

An aircraft itself is judged by its capabilities on paper and in actual practice. More than just a handful of aircraft easily out-performed all variants of the Hurricane not too long after that particular battle. As it was, quality of pilots was the determining factor of the BoB, since both forces were about as evenly matched as is physically possible without borrowing tech and equipment from the enemy.

[Nazis in Space]

Obscure Aircraft ftw.

Then there's crazy shit like this.

And finally, the ultimate in prop-driven badassness.

Nazi science. Accept no substitutes, because MAD NAZI SCIENCE is BEST MAD SCIENCE.

[Morrdh]

An aircraft itself is judged by its capabilities on paper and in actual practice. More than just a handful of aircraft easily out-performed all variants of the Hurricane not too long after that particular battle. As it was, quality of pilots was the determining factor of the BoB, since both forces were about as evenly matched as is physically possible without borrowing tech and equipment from the enemy.

Bear in mind alot of the pilots were barely into their early twenties and were lucky to have had more than 10 hours flight experience total before climbing into the cockpit of a Hurri or a Spit on their first scramble. Fighter Command 11 Group that bore the brunt over Kent would've been smashed had it not been for a change in weather and a brief respite that allowed the RAF to replace almost depleted squadrons with fresh ones from other Groups ready for the big showdown on September 15th.

The Hurricane was good for a newbie pilot, it could be bounced on landing....whilst with the Spit such a thing resulted in the wheels smashing up through the wings.

[Miklesia]

Obscure Aircraft ftw.

Then there's crazy shit like this.

And finally, the ultimate in prop-driven badassness.

Nazi science. Accept no substitutes, because MAD NAZI SCIENCE is BEST MAD SCIENCE.

The 335 always was my favorite, though the P-75 Fisher (also never produced) is probably a tie.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P-75_Eagle
10 .50-caliber machine guns, 2,885hp, and a range of 2,000 miles. Not bad.
Also,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawker_Sea_Fury