WW II Planes

[Sgt Doomball]

it was more of a gunship but ill count it.

[tater]

I voted for the F4F. It's not a pretty aircraft, but it was immensely capable, and kept USN pilots alive and fighting during the period of the war when people at large thought that it might be in question, and when the people at the sharp end were, regardless of the certainty of ultimate victory, very much unsure that any particular day or battle might be their last. The plane was very evenly matched vs the A6Ms that were the usual foe, where the A6M had vastly better range and rate of climb (as well as maneuverability in some energy regimes), and the F4F was far more durable, better armed (IMO, though the A6M had 2x20mm cannon, I think even the F4F-3/FM-2 with only 4 x 0.50s was better armed), and very slightly faster at sea level.

Given the doctrines of the pilots, the IJN really had the wrong airplane, lol. Their pilots were effectively irreplaceable assets, whereas the US had a much larger pool, and the US doctrine was many pilots who were really good, vs the IJN notion of very few who were truly exceptional. As a result, our guys got to learn from any mistakes they made, and limp home, whereas a single API round in a Zero was usually a death sentence. 

Edited February 22, 2017 by tater

[Sgt Doomball]

Remind me to get a YB-40 sometime. It's seriously OP with 18 or more 0.50 caliber machine guns

[tater]

USN fighter pilots never had a negative kill/loss ratio during the war as long as you look over multiple engagements (obviously if the first encounter was a Zero win, then it would be, but I'm talking time averaged over campaigns).

[razark]

10 minutes ago, munlander1 said:

Those things existed?

They built a handful of them.  With the additional weight of guns, ammo, and armor, plus the worsened aerodynamics from the additional gun turrets, it ended up with poorer performance and had a hard time keeping up with the formation.  The chin turret developed for it was added to the B-17G model, though.

They also tried the same thing with a single B-24.

 

Edit:

Back on topic, I've always liked the P-38.  Can't really say why.  Probably the unique look of it.

Edited February 22, 2017 by razark

[Bill Phil]

Either the P-39 or the P-63. If I remember correctly, the P-63 had better high altitude performance... these two plane were the result of putting a huge cannon on an airplane, and putting the engine behind it.

[legoclone09]

I only voted for the Bf109 because it has a lot of skins in War Thunder, I don't know much about WWII planes. I like tanks more.

[tater]

3 hours ago, razark said:

Back on topic, I've always liked the P-38.  Can't really say why.  Probably the unique look of it.

I've always loved that airplane as well. They're gorgeous things. The best US ace flew one (Richard Bong). Stay fast, and they are exceptional planes, and for a liquid-cooled fighter, survivable far from home, as they carry a backup engine  .

 

[Bill Phil]

Why does the 109 show up twice?

The Me-109 is the Bf-109. The company's name changed, and the fighter was referred to as both designations in official documents (even on the same page). They are the same plane.

[Sgt Doomball]

6 hours ago, Bill Phil said:

Why does the 109 show up twice?

The Me-109 is the Bf-109. The company's name changed, and the fighter was referred to as both designations in official documents (even on the same page). They are the same plane.

Okay

[linuxgurugamer]

P-38.  

Only fighter in production at the beginning of the war, still in production at the end

Only fighter with the range to intercept & shoot down Yamoto in his plane

Top two American aces flew the P-38

One survived a mid air, head on collision with a ME-109.  And landed back at base.

1st American squadron to reach 100 kills flew it

Edited February 22, 2017 by linuxgurugamer

[tater]

The P-51 was in full production before the US entered the war, and continued to be produced throughout. I'd need to look at one of my F4F books, but I'd not be surprised if it was produced throughout the war as well, since the majority were in fact labeled as "FM-2" by BuAer since they were built by Eastern ("M") under license from Grumman ("F")---same airplane, different name (they were called 'Martlet" by the FAA (Fleet Air Arm) of the RN, BTW.

[linuxgurugamer]

1 hour ago, tater said:

The P-51 was in full production before the US entered the war, and continued to be produced throughout. I'd need to look at one of my F4F books, but I'd not be surprised if it was produced throughout the war as well, since the majority were in fact labeled as "FM-2" by BuAer since they were built by Eastern ("M") under license from Grumman ("F")---same airplane, different name (they were called 'Martlet" by the FAA (Fleet Air Arm) of the RN, BTW.

Ummm, sorry, please quote facts, and back them up.  I just verified with Wikapedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_P-51_Mustang

P-51 first flight:  October, 1940

Introduced into service:  January, 1942, in the RAF

 

P-38 first flight:  January, 1939

Introduced into service:  July, 1941

and, quoting the Wikipedia page:  

Quote

The P-38 was the only American fighter aircraft in production throughout American involvement in the war, from Pearl Harbor to Victory over Japan Day

Look at the book:  Fork-Tailed Devil: The P-38 (https://www.amazon.com/Fork-Tailed-Devil-Military-History-Ibooks/dp/0743413180) for a very complete history of it.

[razark]

5 minutes ago, linuxgurugamer said:

Ummm, sorry, please quote facts, and back them up.  I just verified with Wikapedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_P-51_Mustang

"After the arrival of the initial aircraft in the UK in October 1941, the first Mustang Mk Is entered service in January 1942, the first unit being 26 Squadron RAF."

By the bolded portion, the aircraft must have been in production prior to the US being involved in the war, even if they were not yet in active service.

[linuxgurugamer]

19 minutes ago, razark said:

"After the arrival of the initial aircraft in the UK in October 1941, the first Mustang Mk Is entered service in January 1942, the first unit being 26 Squadron RAF."

By the bolded portion, the aircraft must have been in production prior to the US being involved in the war, even if they were not yet in active service.

The war started in 1939, not 1941.  so the quote may have been inaccurate, but my statement was not.  P-38 was around before the war started, the P-51 wasn't until 1940, after the war started.

And, some people consider that prior to the addition of the Merlin engine, the P-51 wasn't really the same plane.

Edited February 22, 2017 by linuxgurugamer

[razark]

6 minutes ago, linuxgurugamer said:

The war started in 1939, not 1941.  so the quote may have been inaccurate, but my statement was not.  P-38 was around before the war started, the P-51 wasn't until 1940, after the war started.

And, some people consider that prior to the addition of the Merlin engine, the P-51 wasn't really the same plane.

You objected to @tater's statement that "The P-51 was in full production before the US entered the war...", which is accurate.

Tater did not state it was in production before the war started.  That is the fact you should have objected to to make your point.

Edited February 22, 2017 by razark

[linuxgurugamer]

22 minutes ago, razark said:

You objected to @tater's statement that "The P-51 was in full production before the US entered the war...", which is accurate.

Tater did not state it was in production before the war started.  That is the fact you should have objected to to make your point.

I don't understand what you are trying to say.

Tater DID say:

Quote

The P-51 was in full production before the US entered the war, and continued to be produced throughout

 

[razark]

You: "P-38.  Only fighter in production at the beginning of the war..."

Tater: "The P-51 was in full production before the US entered the war..."

You: "Ummm, sorry, please quote facts, and back them up."

 

The P-51 was in production by October 1941, prior to the US entering the war in December.  This is what Tater stated.

You objected to this, stating that the P-51 was not in production by September 1939.  This is an objection to something Tater did not say, but you challenged him to back it up with facts.

[tater]

1 hour ago, linuxgurugamer said:

Ummm, sorry, please quote facts, and back them up.  I just verified with Wikapedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_P-51_Mustang

P-51 first flight:  October, 1940

Introduced into service:  January, 1942, in the RAF

 

P-38 first flight:  January, 1939

Introduced into service:  July, 1941

and, quoting the Wikipedia page:  

Look at the book:  Fork-Tailed Devil: The P-38 (https://www.amazon.com/Fork-Tailed-Devil-Military-History-Ibooks/dp/0743413180) for a very complete history of it.

The P-51 were in service in January '42, but were delivered to the RAF the previous fall. They were in production before that fall, earlier in 1941. The US entered the war in December, obviously.

The US war started on December 7th, 1941, after all. Which is why I explicitly said "before the US entered the war." If you want to be precise, the start date of the war could in fact be moved to the early 1930s, as Japan's Imperial ambitions started in ernest long before the German/Soviet invasion of Poland.

35 minutes ago, linuxgurugamer said:

I don't understand what you are trying to say.

Tater DID say:

The P-51 was in full production before the US entered the war, and continued to be produced throughout

Yes, and it was.

BTW, even ignoring the US war vs the war at large, the P-38 was not in production before the war started. Poland was invaded Sept 1, and the first YP-38s (experimental, not "production" versions) were not even ordered until 19 days later. The first production P-38s were not delivered until 1941, and the French and British orders made in 1940 were either changed, or not delivered, and regardless were not even produced during 1940.

That they were designed before the start of the war is certainly true, and really true of almost every aircraft to actually see service in the war. The F4U and F6F were designed an accepted by BuAer before the war as well (contrary to oft reported myths about the F6F being designed specifically to counter the A6M). 

Edited February 22, 2017 by tater

[Snark]

Folks, let's keep it civil.  Friendly discourse is fine, personal animosity is not.

Note that @linuxgurugamer and @tater are arguing at cross purposes here.  They're talking apples and oranges.  In this particular case, the confusion stems from the subtle distinction between "when the war started" versus "when the US entered the war."

Purely going by the facts stated here and taking them as gospel at face value (as I have no intention of going off and researching WWII fighter production myself), here's what was said:

• @linuxgurugamer says that the P-38 was the only fighter in production at the start of the war, which according to the facts thus far cited is true.
• @tater says that the P-51 was already in production when the US entered the war, which according to the facts thus far cited is also true.

These two statements are not contradicting each other.  So arguing angrily back and forth about it is just silly.

But that's not the real issue here.  The real issue is, why on earth are people getting so steamed.  Please, let's talk about this like grown-ups.  There's never any reason to get irate in a discussion like this.  If someone has said something you believe to be factually incorrect, or hasn't cited sources, there's absolutely no reason to get personally annoyed-- nor is there if someone asks you to cite sources of your own.

It's never a good idea to post angry, folks.  If you find yourself getting angry, just step away from the keyboard and go take a walk or have a nice cup of tea or whatever you need to settle down, then come back when you're calm.  Everybody wins.

On a closing note:  Please don't discuss reporting posts in the open forum.  Post reportage is purely between the reporting user and the moderator team; there's no need to discuss it publicly.

Thank you for your understanding.

[tater]

32 minutes ago, Snark said:

Folks, let's keep it civil.  Friendly discourse is fine, personal animosity is not.

Note that @linuxgurugamer and @tater are arguing at cross purposes here.  They're talking apples and oranges.  In this particular case, the confusion stems from the subtle distinction between "when the war started" versus "when the US entered the war."

Purely going by the facts stated here and taking them as gospel at face value (as I have no intention of going off and researching WWII fighter production myself), here's what was said:

• @linuxgurugamer says that the P-38 was the only fighter in production at the start of the war, which according to the facts thus far cited is true.
• @tater says that the P-51 was already in production when the US entered the war, which according to the facts thus far cited is also true.

These two statements are not contradicting each other.  So arguing angrily back and forth about it is just silly.

But that's not the real issue here.  The real issue is, why on earth are people getting so steamed.  Please, let's talk about this like grown-ups.  There's never any reason to get irate in a discussion like this.  If someone has said something you believe to be factually incorrect, or hasn't cited sources, there's absolutely no reason to get personally annoyed-- nor is there if someone asks you to cite sources of your own.

It's never a good idea to post angry, folks.  If you find yourself getting angry, just step away from the keyboard and go take a walk or have a nice cup of tea or whatever you need to settle down, then come back when you're calm.  Everybody wins.

On a closing note:  Please don't discuss reporting posts in the open forum.  Post reportage is purely between the reporting user and the moderator team; there's no need to discuss it publicly.

Thank you for your understanding.

I implicitly acknowledged this, actually, by specifically stating when the US entered the war, vs when the war started. It is a US aircraft, after all, and aircraft that certainly existed before the war were also continuously produced, but not by the US were not mentioned (the 109 and Spit). The P-38  was certainly in production before the US entered the war.

I'm not "steamed," I'm merely typing (I don't get steamed, generally, I argue/debate ideas, not people  ).

Specifically, however, I don't think the P-38 production models actually existed before the start of the war in Europe (I'm being specific in this case, because the start of WW2 is very much debatable, unless one is specific, since many put 1931 as the start if they include Japan moving into China).

I'd argue that it would be better to talk about when they were designed, instead, as the movement from experimental models to production was often something that took a great deal of time.

I was also thinking that the Bf-109 likely fills the claim as well*, and the Spitfire for sure was continuously produced from the mid 1930s until a few years after the war.

*the only reason it wouldn't be if somehow the Messerschmitt factories were stopped before VE day due to bombing/capture, and versions were produced even after the war (Spain flew them into the 1960s).

Edited February 22, 2017 by tater

[Sgt Doomball]

Cheerio Chaps

[tater]

Why not add some pretty pictures. This is an image (against overexposed clouds, hence white) of a flight of the first production Spitfire Mk1 aircraft received by No. 19 Squadron in the late 30s. My fondness for other aircraft doesn't keep me from thinking that the Spitfire is likely the prettiest aircraft ever built. (not the very first spits, the first received by that squadron in 1938)

Edited February 22, 2017 by tater

[Mad Rocket Scientist]

F4U corsair all the way. One of them once was able to successfully kill another plane by chopping off it's tail with their propeller.

[tater]

Yeah, Hogs are awesome aircraft.