Top 12 Reasons Jug was best WWII fighter

[Seeker]

Originally posted by YUCCA
P-47 Reigns Supreme over P-51 Mustang
Don Whinnem  B-17 Escort Mission  
352nd FG  ETO -  

 

Great story ( I don't know the veracity; but I have a book that backs it up though not in detail).

Real life MA..... big; heavy; fast and in on a target fixed bandit; who WOULDN'T want to be in an eight gunned Jug?

But the Stang lived long enough to go up; didn't he?


And we all know what happens (would happen) next; don't we?

forgot to say thanks for the posts; Yucca>

[Ack-Ack]

Originally posted by F4UDOA


IMHO pilots like Bong, McGuire and McCampbell benifited greatly by getting most of there kills in 1944 or later. I give pilots like Joe Foss far more credit for scoring the majority of their kills when the Japanese could still put quality pilots in the air in numbers.

From December 27, 1942 to November 5, 1943, Bong had already 21 kills, a little over half of his war time total.


ack-ack

[davidpt40]

McCampbell also holds the record for the most kills during a single sortie; 9.

U.S. record, FW190 pilot got 12 kills in a sortie.

[Widewing]

Originally posted by davidpt40
U.S. record, FW190 pilot got 12 kills in a sortie.

McCampbell's record is also the Allied record. He shot down 9 fighters, with two more last seen spinning into an overcast on fire, so he very likely killed 11. He also damaged 2 more. Meanwhile, his wingman (Roy Rushing) shot down 6 fighters and damaged another 3.

(The Japanese force was a composite of IJN and JAAF fighters)

McCampbell was awarded the CMoH for this action, his wingman received the Navy Cross. Two guys took on about 40 Japanese fighters, killed at least 15, maybe 17 with 5 more damaged. Another F6F joined the fight mid way through the brawl (Albert Slack), and shot down 4 additional fighters for a total of 19 (maybe 21) kills. All three F6Fs returned undamaged.

This fight left McCampbell tied with Bong for top ace with 30 kills. McCampbell also holds the American record for the most kills in a single tour (34), both Bong and McGuire needed two tours to top his 34 kills. McCampbells VF-15 (he was the CAG) rotated back to CONUS in November of 1944. They had shot down 313 enemy aircraft in the air, destroyed another 317 on the ground and suffered just 21 losses. The losses break down as follows: 7 in aerial combat, 9 to triple A and 5 operational losses. In aerial combat, VF-15 holds the absolute Allied kill to loss record of 44.7/1, far ahead of their nearest rival.

My regards,

Widewing

[-ammo-]

I am glad we have you in this community widewing.  Thx for all the great information!

[Widewing]

Originally posted by -ammo-
I am glad we have you in this community widewing.  Thx for all the great information!

Thanks Ammo!

By the way, in case anyone was wondering how hard McCampbell pushed it in the previously mentioned fight, he was at the limit.

Upon landing back on Essex, he ran out of gas as he taxied out of the wires. Later, his armorer found just two rounds remaining in his magazines.

My regards,

Widewing

[Ack-Ack]

Maybe you can answer this question too Widewing.

Some have said that those pilots that went from the ETO to the PTO had a tough time transitioning, while those from the PTO that went to the ETO didn't have this problem.  This is in regards to air combat.  What's your take on this?


ack-ack

[Aaron_G_T]

Originally posted by Ack-Ack
I always get a kick out of the arm chair aces that read comments from a real life WW2 pilot that is talking from his combat experience in whatever plane and then dismiss the WW2 vets comments out of hand.

The thing is, if you read comments by
WW2 veterans, then a whole number
of different veterans will have different
opinions of what was best. Hence it
is reasonable for us in our arm chairs
to look at multiple sources and
consider all the evidence, not just
swallow the first quote we see.

Brown rated the F4U, for example.

Galland thought the P51 was superb.

In some ways all these might be
right in many ways as the plane that
fits the style of flying that an ace has
is probably better for that ace than
a plane that is of similar or slightly
better performance.

On a cost:effectiveness ratio, it
is telling that the USAAF decided to
end-of-line the P47 and continue
with the P51. This is not to say
the P51 was better, just that the
P47 wasn't seen as effective enough
compared to the P51 to justify the
cost post-war.

I'm more of a P51 than a P47 man.
It's just prettier.

[Aaron_G_T]

Originally posted by YUCCA
the top scoring aces of the ETO (Just for kicks :

Were they all scored in that type
of aircraft, and over how many sorties?

It could be a damn lies and statistics
thing - ace shoots down more planes over more sorties - or it could represent something else. Hard to tell with those base figures.

[HoHun]

Hi Aaron,

>Hence it
is reasonable for us in our arm chairs
to look at multiple sources and
consider all the evidence, not just
swallow the first quote we see.

Let me point out that Clausewitz* agrees with you :-)

He even suggests to take full advantage of hindsight to make up for lack of personal military genius.

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)

* Karl von Clausewitz, 1780 - 1831, Author of the classic text book "Vom Kriege" ('On War')

[Widewing]

Originally posted by Ack-Ack
Maybe you can answer this question too Widewing.

Some have said that those pilots that went from the ETO to the PTO had a tough time transitioning, while those from the PTO that went to the ETO didn't have this problem.  This is in regards to air combat.  What's your take on this?


ack-ack

This certainly appears to be true in many cases, with Preddy being but one example.

I suspect that it had a lot to do with the differing types of combat encountered in the theaters.

To be successful, even survive against the Japanese, you had to adopt the proven tactics of avoiding a turning fight. However, in the ETO, MTO and North Africa that wasn't a major issue as the P-38 could turn with anything the Luftwaffe was flying. Likewise the P-40 could mix it up fairly well down on the deck. Jugs proved more maneuverable at high altitude than any German ever expected. It goes without saying that the P-51 could hold its own in any type of fight.

Pilots coming from the SWPA to the ETO/MTO usually came from P-38 or P-40 outfits. Suddenly, they found themselves tackling fighters they could hang with in a genuine dogfight. Moreover, they had already honed their hit and run skills against the Japanese. P-38 pilots coming from the SWPA were far more skilled in their ride than the majority of their P-38 counterparts in Europe. Why? Simply because they hundreds of hours flying combat sorties, whereas the bulk of ETO P-38 pilots were trained for single-engine fighters and dumped in P-38 outfits with virtually zero familiarization prior to reporting for duty (more than 2/3 were expecting to fly the P-47). P-40 pilots from the SWPA found themselves in much faster machines, that could really rock and roll at high altitudes. They simply utilized their experience to good advantage.

Pilots transferring from the ETO to the Pacific had to learn what the SWPA pilots already knew about the Japanese fighters. As we all know, the tactics are completely different. Unlike the average AH player, they didn't have hundreds, maybe thousands of combat hours to draw lessons from. Most had far less than 200 hours in combat, and the majority had few encounters with the greatly depleted Luftwaffe (especially those transfering just after the surrender).

So by comparison, pilots transfering east to west had considerable combat experience under their belts, and could apply that experience immediately. However, those moving west to east had to new tactics to absorb, and generally had less combat experience.

Of course this is all based upon conjecture and simple analysis and to be taken only as a best guess.

My regards,

Widewing

[humble]

There is one important point that hasn't been covered here yet...that I can see.

I remember reading that not ONE Jug ace was lost in combat in the ETO (killed). It was in an article on the same topic and reached the same conclusion...that jug was #1...think it had mig-3 as #2.

[HoHun]

Hi Humble,

>think it had mig-3 as #2.

Pokryshkin probably would have disagreed, and he was a very  successful MiG-3 pilot. The benefit of hindsight might bring out strengths of the MiG he missed, but ranking it the #2 fighter in Europe seems a bit optimistic anyway :-)

>I remember reading that not ONE Jug ace was lost in combat in the ETO (killed).

That's interesting! It also brings up an important point: What are the criteria for identifying the "best" fighter? So far, we've only talked about "good" fighters.

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)

[mos]

Well, if we're talking the best US plane, the top two US aces flew the p38.

I think we have a winner!  

[Angus]

There would be one downside for a US fighter pilot to convert to the ETO. He would not be faster than his opponent any more. Even find himself Boomed and Zoomed, bounced, outrun and outclimbed by the LW.
British pilots going to the PTO had an initial shock,  -their Spitfires could not turn with the Zero's. However, outclimbing, outrolling, out-accelerating, outgunning and outrunning with a bigger difference than 70 mph, they found it to be not so much of a bother....