The Best Fighter Aircraft of all Time

[GScholz]

... And since this thread is going to become a 109 vs Spit or P-51 thread real soon I invite everyone to read this previos 404 post monster thread that adresses the same issues:

http://www.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=100221&highlight=109+kill




Fore those that do not want to read 404 posts I made a short summary on page five. Of course there were four more pages after that, so this summary is perhaps only half complete.

Originally posted by GScholz
Ok, lets review this thread and see what we have found out:

First of all we found out that Nomak is delusional, or perhaps has "cannon envy". ;)

The Spit and 109 were both designed as short-range interceptors and evolved throughout the war.

The 109 was liked by its pilots, including the slats and the cockpit. The cannon gondolas on the other hand was not. The slats were especially helpful if the pilot was drunk. ;)

Batz would like to think he could win the war for Germany if he was in charge. ;)

Arlo thinks he has superior second and third hand sources. ;)

The 109 had a 6.5:1 k/d From April 1941 to November 1942.

Nomak and myself love to play "Quote the Aces". ;)

Nomak thinks .50 cals are better weapons against bombers than 30mm cannons. Hmmm ;)

dBeav joins Nomak in being delusional. ;)

Dtango comes forward as a Mustang lover yet believes the 109K4 was superior. Takes guts. :)

I brag about my recent success in the 109G10. *whistles innocently*

F4UDOA bursts into the thread with claims of the "Über Pony". It was soon clear that this was just the first of a series of boisterous post that also would grow in vile with each installment.

Questions raised about how many serviceable aircraft was available to the LW in 1945 ... which is completely inconsequential to the discussion.

Hartmann's last ride in WWII was the 109K4.

A long and heated debate about "light" 9000 lbs Mustangs. My conclusion: at 9000 lbs the Mustang was too light to do anything but cruise home to the UK, however in late 44 and 45 "light" Mustangs were probably fighting the LW.

150 octane fuel was used by the 8th USAAF from about mid 1944, but not by the 9th USAAF.

RAF some if not most Spitfires stationed in the UK used 150 octane fuel, but Spitfires on continental Europe did not use 150 octane fuel until January 1945. So combat between 150 octane Spits and LW fighters were probably a very rare event until 1945.

F4UDOA vehemently protests the 109G10/K4 superiority in climb, and argues that a "light" P-51D using 150 octane fuel would best the 109. He is of course wrong.

Isegrim makes his debut in the thread, and defends the 109 with charts and whatnot. His data later comes under question by Nashwan, MiloMorai and Neil Sterling. Isegrim and Nashwan seems to have some "prior history" ... which in this case is a polite term for blood feud.

The Merlin using 150 octane and +25 lbs boost would generate 1940 HP, but at speed at low alt would generate a shade over 2000 HP due to ramair aiding the blower.

>>> Follow up question: The 109G10 and K4 are rated at 2000 HP using MW50 boost. Would they too gain some HP from the ramair effect?

There is some debate on when the 109K4 was cleared for different boost levels. This issue remains unresolved.

F4UDOA shows lacking knowledge about elementary Newtonian physics presenting his "P-51 out-accelerate 109 theory".

Widewing enters the thread with information on the JG-26 and how they didn't like the 109K4 they had received, and that they preferred the 109G10. He also informs us that the K4's were equipped with cannon gondolas which were disliked by the pilots. He also tells us about the P-51's nasty departure characteristics and quirks. Widewings contributions to this thread were refreshingly objective and most welcome. :)

There is some debate on the 109K4's high alt handling, and if the cannon gondolas were the culprit. This issue remains unresolved.

Isegrim, Widewing and myself clumsily but amusingly work out the weight vs. fuel issues with the P-51, and as a byproduct find out a +25 lbs Merlin has horrible fuel economy.

There is some discussion on the drag coefficient of the 109 vs P-51. Remains unresolved.

Widewing has some problems with pounds and gallons. ;)

Isegrim and Nashwan continue their blood feud with renewed vigor and viciousness.

I reveal I'm a night owl, discussing 60 year old airplanes at 3 o'clock in the morning. ;)

F4UDOA insults me and reveals his bias against the 109 by uttering "The FACT is that the 109 was ***** slapped into history in a big way."

MiloMorai calls Isegrim "Herr Goebbels" and points to old discussions on a different BBS posted by Neil Sterling as proof of Isegrim being untruthful. Isegrim is now being ganged by MiloMorai, Nashwan and Neil Sterling. Not good.

Isegrim argues that the 109's slats would give the 109 an edge in combat against the P-51. This remains a disputed topic.

Hogenbor pops in to say the 109 has gentle departure characteristics while the P-51 does not.

Nomak proclaims he'll take opinions over facts anyday, whatever that means.

I make a "Freudian slip" and DiabloTX takes great pleasure in pointing this out to me. ;)

Dtango and I work out that the P-51H would be a great perk ride, however unlikely it is that it will be included in AH due to it's late appearance in the war.

Dtango agrees with Isegrim in that the 109's slats do make a difference, but argues that the P-51's flaps would even the playing field. He encourages further study, but sadly this is not followed up on. Remains unresolved.

F4UDOA posts an unreadable chart to prove his "400mph 3-hour cruise" claim. I would very much like to read this chart and hope F4UDOA will post the chart in higher resolution. Remains unresolved.

Neil Sterling posts performance figures of the P-51B running 75" HG boost. The figures show the P-51B to be superior to the 109G10 in speed under 10K, but otherwise inferior.

Neil Sterling informs us that only RAF Mustang fitted with the -7 Merlin were cleared for +25 lbs /81" HG and delivered 1940 static HP at sea level. He also says the US P-51's were only cleared for 72" HG / +20.5 lbs boost.

>>> Follow up question: How many RAF Mustangs had the -7 Merlin and were cleared for +25 lbs, and in what role were these Mustangs used? How much HP did the US P-51's develop at +20.5 lbs boost.

Finally Angus pops in to tell us that the RAF pilots were freezing their butts off while the US pilots were warm and comfortable. ;)

See? This thread is going to be just the same ... complete with Isegrim, Nashwan and MiloMorai fighting like cats in heat.

[Wrecker]

In response to Furball's earlier statement about the leading Allied Ace, Air Marshal Ivan Nikitovich Kozhedub scored 62 confirmed kills during WWII.  He flew the LaGG-5, the  La5F and the La7.  Yeah we know, a LaLa pilot.  According to this quote, he doesn't seem very modest about his number of kills.  Never the less, a legend in air combat.

"I destroyed my first enemy aircraft in the air during the Battle of Kursk. Historians have been setting forth my total score as 62 victories. As a matter of fact this figure requires revision. There were many victories that either remained unconfirmed or were credited to fellow pilots. I reckon that my personal score actually is in excess of 100 victories while I never counted enemy aircraft destroyed jointly with my comrades."

He went on to command a unit during the Korean Conflict (I consider it a war) that claimed 207 UN aircraft with a loss of 15 Mig-15s.  And in comparison to Johnie Johnston's 38 kills, the Soviet Union had 16 pilots with more than 38 kills during the war.  Of course, all aces do deserve their recognition.

[Widewing]

Originally posted by Wrecker
In response to Furball's earlier statement about the leading Allied Ace, Air Marshal Ivan Nikitovich Kozhedub scored 62 confirmed kills during WWII.  He flew the LaGG-5, the  La5F and the La7.  Yeah we know, a LaLa pilot.  According to this quote, he doesn't seem very modest about his number of kills.  Never the less, a legend in air combat.

"I destroyed my first enemy aircraft in the air during the Battle of Kursk. Historians have been setting forth my total score as 62 victories. As a matter of fact this figure requires revision. There were many victories that either remained unconfirmed or were credited to fellow pilots. I reckon that my personal score actually is in excess of 100 victories while I never counted enemy aircraft destroyed jointly with my comrades."

He went on to command a unit during the Korean Conflict (I consider it a war) that claimed 207 UN aircraft with a loss of 15 Mig-15s.  And in comparison to Johnie Johnston's 38 kills, the Soviet Union had 16 pilots with more than 38 kills during the war.  Of course, all aces do deserve their recognition.

Well, I can understand Kozhedub being modest, especially when considering that there isn't a single aviation historian who believes he actually shot down much more than half that number. Russian over-claiming was so high, that they would have had to shoot down every Luftwaffe aircraft ever sent to the eastern front THREE TIMES to equal the number of "confirmed kills".

Soviet claims in Korea were just as imaginative. Total claims for F-86s kills exceeded the total number deployed in theater by 250%. Their very best went to Korea, and modern investigations show that they lost four MiGs for every Sabre they knocked down. Rather pathetic when one considers that they had every tactical advantage possible by flying close to home base, from fields that were off-limits to American attack. Since the Sabres had to fly to their fuel limits, and the Soviets had plenty of time to prepare (always being above the Sabres, and usually having superior numbers by a factor of 3-4 times), you would think they would have done better... There's no substitute for pilot quality when the aircraft are nearly equal.

My regards,

Widewing

[GScholz]

Widewing, how many Soviet pilots fought in Korea? A handful or two? And some of them made ace in that war. You're counting NK and Chinese pilots.

[MiloMorai]

Your education is lacking Sholtzi, but that is understandable since you believe whatever Barbi says without question.  It was more than a handful of Soviets that fought over Korea.

For starters there was ~40 Soviet aces from Korea.

units: 303 IAD, 324 IAD, 151 IAD, 29 IAP, 176 GvIAP, 304 IAD, 97 IAD, 535 IAP, 878 IAP, ......

[GScholz]

Yes it seems I was wrong. There were definitively more than a handful of them, although they did fly under Chinese colors and from Chinese bases. Only 16 of them made ace though, not 40.

[Red Tail 444]

I dont know what funnier.the thread, or the comments reading....the vulch.great reply....

But the F4U-4 trumps all....sorry fellas

[Halo]

Right on, Widewing -- the undefeated F-15.

[TBolt A-10]

Originally posted by MiloMorai
How many 109s left on May 8 1845, when Germany unconditionally surrendered?

Check your facts, Milo.  

TBolt

[artik]

EDIT: Note that 750 km/h is 468 mph.

468 mph - but it is 404 knots (navy mile per hour that is 1853 meters).

All the speeds in AH are in Knots and not MPH that are about 1.6 kph.

Can we copare that planes without referring to pilots? I think no

The best jet fighter ace had flown Mirage IIIC only. Did it make Mirage best jet fighter plane of this period? (The most beautifull - yes )

When IAF had compared Mirage and Iraq MiG-21 in 1966 they found them quite similar aircrafts in their perfomances.

The same about F-86 and MiG-15. 109g10 and Spitfire Mk XIV and lot of others.

Compare pure date - speed, climb, firepower, manuverability, field of view, low and high speed handlelling the armor etc.

And compare them according to the period.

I can tell - the best fighter in late 1944 early 45 is 262 - it outclassed all other planes. So..... what does it mean? After short period there were Meteors (even slower but that didn't suffered from 50% deaths on engine failture like it was for 262)

Probably you make mistake in defenition - most succesefull and not best.

[Knegel]

Originally posted by Widewing
Well, I can understand Kozhedub being modest, especially when considering that there isn't a single aviation historian who believes he actually shot down much more than half that number. Russian over-claiming was so high, that they would have had to shoot down every Luftwaffe aircraft ever sent to the eastern front THREE TIMES to equal the number of "confirmed kills".

-------------------------------------------

Hm,

iam pretty sure that Kozhedub isnt a liar, at least i dont have a hit to believe that, you have??
He fought a long war, like the other WWII-highscoring aces and there wasnt many Russian pilots with so many kills and the German´s always was carefully if they had a elitesquad as oponent.
To believe there wasnt a russian pilot who was similar good like the german-, finnish- , japanese- , brit- or US-aces sounds abit like rassisn, there is no reason to think so!
That the majority of the russian pilots dont had a very high skill is maybe right(no wonder if the Aces get concentrated in some squads and cant teach the others), but i think its rubbish to think all was bad and its a insolence to say they did lie.
If the headquater make wrong statement as a part of propaganda, thats one thing, but why the russian pilots should lie, while all other pilots dont?

Iam pretty unsure about the russian countingsystem, but if they would have had the chance to lie, all would have a much higher scoring and if their skill dont would have been remarkable the germans wouldnt have take notice of the guardsquads and the pilots dont would have get into a guardsquad.

I often wonder how the US-boys got their kills confirmed, many of them was done while high alt fights, how they did know if a downgoing plane was a kill or 'only' a damaged escaping enemy?

Greetings, Knegel

[hogenbor]

Very amusing post by GScholz, not in the least by the fact that he even quotes me

I sometimes wonder if it is worth it to get so worked up about 60 year old planes. Furthermore, if you compare impressions of the same aircraft flown by pilots today, their opinions differ as much as ours it seems

And what I said about the departure characteristics of the P-51 and the 109, that's only my experience in AH. How could I know more? I'm happy enough to have TOUCHED at least one 109 and several P-51's

[MiloMorai]

Originally posted by TBolt A-10
Check your facts, Milo.  

TBolt

Why? Just a typo error.

[VO101_Isegrim]

Leave poor Squire alone, he is having his period. They are very touchy around those days, you know.

[2bighorn]

Originally posted by artik
All the speeds in AH are in Knots and not MPH that are about 1.6 kph.

Speeds in AH are in MPH

Source: http://hitechcreations.com/ahhelp/cptinst2.html