P51 Mustang Vs. Japanese Zero

[Evigglaede]

For a lot of the war the Japanese pilots were better trained(since the US was using conscript pilots fresh out of training and their only experience was generally in the same war they were already fighting. By the time the US pilots were experienced the Japanese Navy and Air Force had been all but destroyed,) and the Zero was much closer to a "true" fighter than the Mustang. As for Lacadaemon's post regarding the Me262, I would agree the Me would win out. The Meteor had some issues and German pilots through both world wars were almost always top notch. Something like half the top 10 fighter aces were German, and there was obviously the total fucking genius that was Erich Hartmann with his 350 air victories.

YThe main reason for the high ranking of second world war german pilots were the awfull quality off soviet planes. If you look over the names you will see that most top asses flow on the eastern front. Neverthe less yu are vright in a one on one fight german planes were the best doing most of the war. Even though i might lean towards british piltos being better pilots doing most of the war.

[Coltarin]

Teh P-51 was a british designed escort fighter/ground attack plane. And the zero was a total rip off of the pre-war hughes. Neither of them are particularly good examples of a pure fighter, so it isn't a fair comparison (given the different mission types).

A far better thread would be Gloster Meteor v. Messerschmitt Me 262.

Probably the Me 262 would win that one. But its engines were considerably crapper than the Gloster.

north AMERICAN designed plane

[Mikedor]

Teh P-51 was a british designed escort fighter/ground attack plane. And the zero was a total rip off of the pre-war hughes. Neither of them are particularly good examples of a pure fighter, so it isn't a fair comparison (given the different mission types).

A far better thread would be Gloster Meteor v. Messerschmitt Me 262.

Probably the Me 262 would win that one. But its engines were considerably crapper than the Gloster.

north AMERICAN designed plane

That was awful until it got a British engine.

[Brandenburg-Altmark]

For a lot of the war the Japanese pilots were better trained(since the US was using conscript pilots fresh out of training and their only experience was generally in the same war they were already fighting. By the time the US pilots were experienced the Japanese Navy and Air Force had been all but destroyed,) and the Zero was much closer to a "true" fighter than the Mustang. As for Lacadaemon's post regarding the Me262, I would agree the Me would win out. The Meteor had some issues and German pilots through both world wars were almost always top notch. Something like half the top 10 fighter aces were German, and there was obviously the total fucking genius that was Erich Hartmann with his 350 air victories.

YThe main reason for the high ranking of second world war german pilots were the awfull quality off soviet planes. If you look over the names you will see that most top asses flow on the eastern front. Neverthe less yu are vright in a one on one fight german planes were the best doing most of the war. Even though i might lean towards british piltos being better pilots doing most of the war.

Not really, the Yak-3 is widely regarded as the best fighter of the war. The British lost a lot of good men in the Battle of Britain, as well. It's historical fact that warfare was something the Germans dominated for thousands of years on an individual level. They just tended to develop into better warriors in their chosen fields on average.

[Neo Arcad]

Zero's too flimsy. The P-51 could take a hit much better.

[SD_Film Artists]

Zero's too flimsy. The P-51 could take a hit much better.

Yes but the Mustang's firepower was weak even by WW2 standards, as were most American planes. I'd still put my money on the Mustang though..

[Licana]

Zero's too flimsy. The P-51 could take a hit much better.

Yes but the Mustang's firepower was weak even by WW2 standards, as were most American planes. I'd still put my money on the Mustang though..

This. The Mustang could likely shrug off the light machine guns of the Zero, but the wing mounted cannons would be able to seriously mess it up, I think. Really, if one gets behind the other, they could both cause serious damage.

[Novikov]

YThe main reason for the high ranking of second world war german pilots were the awfull quality off soviet planes. If you look over the names you will see that most top asses flow on the eastern front. Neverthe less yu are vright in a one on one fight german planes were the best doing most of the war. Even though i might lean towards british piltos being better pilots doing most of the war.

Not really, the Yak-3 is widely regarded as the best fighter of the war. The British lost a lot of good men in the Battle of Britain, as well. It's historical fact that warfare was something the Germans dominated for thousands of years on an individual level. They just tended to develop into better warriors in their chosen fields on average.

I'd say Yak-9, although that's a late-war design. If I recall correctly, some Polish and Free French units got their hands on them and racked up a pretty impressive combat record.

As far as the Zero v. Mustang goes, I've got to take the Mustang. In a low altitude dogfight, and especially with a veteran Japanese pilot, the Zero would be a pretty even match for a P-51, though. (Although a low-altitude fight would never happen, because the P-51 would just out-climb the Zero, turn, and dive on it again and again.)

[Langorham]

This is one of the best information sites I have found regarding WW2 aircraft

http://www.acepilots.com/

And this discussion on the best fighter of WW2.

http://www.acepilots.com/discussions/best_fighter.html

As for which plane, the P51 or zero is the better fighter. I think it would depend on which pilot is more skilled. With equally skilled pilots then where the fight took place, especially the altitude, would more than likely determine the outcome. But then again fights are usually won by the opponent that makes the next to last mistake.

[New Chalcedon]

Two of the most infamous aircraft of World War II, the American P-51 Mustang vs. The Japanese Zero.

First some notes on the two legendary Aircraft.

When it was introduced early in World War II, the Zero was the best carrier-based fighter in the world, combining excellent maneuverability and very long range.[1] In early combat operations, the Zero gained a legendary reputation as a "dogfighter", achieving the outstanding kill ratio of 12 to 1.

The North American Aviation P-51 Mustang was an American long-range single-seat World War II fighter aircraft. Designed and built in just 117 days to a specification issued to NAA by the British Purchasing Commission, the Mustang first flew in Royal Air Force (RAF) service as a fighter-bomber and reconnaissance aircraft before conversion to a bomber escort, employed in raids over Germany, helping ensure Allied air superiority from early 1944.

The scenario, a Summer morning in the Pacific Ocean, 1944, both aircrafts are launched from carriers and meet in the skies above. Who will win?

Honestly, I can see how either aircraft would win. The Japanese Zero had a larger barrel size on it's gun (20mm as opposed to the Mustang's 12.7 mm M2 Browning machine guns, and while the Mustangs were excellent fighter aircraft (found great use as an escort), the Japanese Zero were designed to BE dog fighters. However, the Mustang did have a better engine and better aerodynamics, which would give it an advantage.

I'd have to say, in a knock out drag out dogfight, the Mustang would win, mainly because it did have a better engine and fuselage design. The 20mm cannon won't do you any good if you can't swing your aircraft around fast enough to aim.

I believe that the question was more or less answered in WWII: the Zero, while a superb fighter, was showing its age in the last years of the war, and was distinctly inferior in terms of firepower, maximum speed and durability to the late-war Allied designs, including the P51.

[Potarius]

Not really, the Yak-3 is widely regarded as the best fighter of the war. The British lost a lot of good men in the Battle of Britain, as well. It's historical fact that warfare was something the Germans dominated for thousands of years on an individual level. They just tended to develop into better warriors in their chosen fields on average.

I'd say Yak-9, although that's a late-war design. If I recall correctly, some Polish and Free French units got their hands on them and racked up a pretty impressive combat record.

As far as the Zero v. Mustang goes, I've got to take the Mustang. In a low altitude dogfight, and especially with a veteran Japanese pilot, the Zero would be a pretty even match for a P-51, though. (Although a low-altitude fight would never happen, because the P-51 would just out-climb the Zero, turn, and dive on it again and again.)

The Yak-9U was pretty much the cream of the Yakovlev crop. It also happens to be one of my favorite rides on Aces High II. The Yak-3 did surpass it in low altitude performance, but the Yak-9U still out-performed every German fighter at low altitude. Along with that, the -9U could hang with (and defeat) 109s up high. Also, don't forget that the Yak-9 was introduced in 1942, whereas the Yak-3 was introduced in 1944.

Pretty much spot-on with that description of the P-51 vs. Zero. The Mustang can always make the fight its own; the pilot of the Zero would have to luck into the P-51 pilot not really knowing what advantages he had.