What defeated the japs?

[Banshee7]

really?
 the p-51s were hugely involved over germany, almost entirely in the escorting scene. without them escorting the "big friends" there wouldnt really have BEEN a strategicc bombing campaign after 1943-ish. the P-51s were used very little over the Pacific, especially in the late war, as the Japanese were losing planes (and pilots) all over the place, so eventually, the B-29s didnt need a real escort.

That's what he said...read it again.

[TequilaChaser]

Delirium answered the question as far as the topic title is concerned with..... The American industry and civilians both Men and women along with children all volunteering for the war effort, gathering aluminum, copper, metal, scrape etc..... to produce the Us Military build up.....

the Fighter part of the op's post, the answer is the F6f

and seriously...... try and drop the slang term and use "Japanese" instead....... we have a good many Japanese AH members who play along with us in this game

[Yeager]

Some might argue that it was the blood, sweat and tears of the USMC that ultimately defeated Japan.  I might even agree with that  

[Wildcat1]

hands down it was the F6F that won the air war for us in the Pacific.

[cactuskooler]

From an obviously unbiased source.

"In my opinion, the P-38 Lightning did more to win the air war in the South Pacific than any other airplane, including what the Navy had."

   -Norb Ruff, P-38 Pilot, 80th FS

[oakranger]

Ladies, ladies, ladies....just ask what AC fighter, nothing eals.  Thanks for the answer.   

[jay]

the fact the navy and the army couldnt agree on anything

[Guppy35]

Probably best to look at the fighters that held the line until US production could get rolling and new birds appeared.

P40, F4F

Those two and the pilots who flew them really had to take on the most experienced Japanese pilots and in the end decimated the Japanese pilot ranks by the end of the Canal fight.  And if you were going to pick from the two, you'd have to go with the F4F since I think it's fair to say the Japanese Navy pilots in their Zeros were the 'elite' at the start of the war.

The others may have had higher kill rates, but they were also doing it against a Japanese pilot corps that never caught up in training and quality after 1942.    It's kind of like those who claim the 51D won the airwar in the ETO.  Tell that to the guys who fought the war in other birds prior to D-Day when the fight for air supremacy was won and the veteran German pilots had been killed or knocked out of the fight for the most part.

[-tronski-]

I thought it was the Higgins Boat, but I guess the various Marines & US Navy a/c did the aviation bit

 Tronsky

[bozon]

If you are restricting the argument to which plane had the most contribution to winning the air war against Japan then is it the F6F Hellcat, no question.

It accounted for such a huge fraction of the total kills and its appearance is the point in which the paradigm shifted - the F4F held the line admirably and had victories, but the opinion was that these were achieved in-spit of the F4F not due to it. The appearance of the F6F gave a significant amount of confidence in the ability to win large air engagements and allowed a more daring carrier operations.

The F4U was a big hype that made very little difference. It started development was in service before the F6F, yet had almost zero impact on war progression, regardless of how many planes one squadron shot down - no carrier operations means it does not operate where it is really needed. Small production numbers means not enough impact.

P51s, P47s and P38 and even P-40 all had an important contribution, but being land based (like the F4U...) they were operating in the wrong (Ok lets say less than optimal) places. The Pacific campaign was all about naval war and the naval war was oddly fought in the air. You needed carrier planes for that.

The F6F is an excellent example of "less is more": development started long after the F4U and instead of trying to make the best possible fighter, Grumman made the most sensible fighter. The design was not revolutionary (most unique feature was the way the wings were folded) and stat for stat it is inferior to the F4U, but actually showing up to the fight is more important than hyping about a few mph and deg/sec roll rate. This was achieved by making a more reliable,  easy to operate, easy to manufacture (breaking setting world production records) and to top it all, even cheaper fighter than the F4U. By the time Vought had finished tweaking their spoiled over-hyped child and produced enough to equip a couple of squadrons, the navy was already full of F6Fs actually wining the war. The F4U was the better plane, but the F6F was by far the more important plane.

[Ack-Ack]

Ok, i need your help.  My dad and brother are arguing with me on what U.S. fighter defeated the japs.  They both said the P-51.  I disagree to a certain extent and said the F4U did.  What is the answer.  (ack-ack and/or krusty will be by to answer this) 

The P-51 didn't see wide spread use in the PTO as it did in the ETO and wasn't that major of a player.  As for the plane that broke the back of the Japanese, it's really not that easy of a question to answer as it's a very subjective question that will never have one answer.

In my opinion it was planes like the P-39, P-40, P-38 and Wildcat that first held the line and then started the attrition that would by 1943 make the IJAF and IJNAF a spent and broken force.

ack-ack

[Hap]

If you are restricting the argument to which plane had the most contribution to winning the air war against Japan then is it the F6F Hellcat, no question.

It accounted for such a huge fraction of the total kills and its appearance is the point in which the paradigm shifted - the F4F held the line admirably and had victories, but the opinion was that these were achieved in-spit of the F4F not due to it. The appearance of the F6F gave a significant amount of confidence in the ability to win large air engagements and allowed a more daring carrier operations.

The F4U was a big hype that made very little difference. It started development was in service before the F6F, yet had almost zero impact on war progression, regardless of how many planes one squadron shot down - no carrier operations means it does not operate where it is really needed. Small production numbers means not enough impact.

P51s, P47s and P38 and even P-40 all had an important contribution, but being land based (like the F4U...) they were operating in the wrong (Ok lets say less than optimal) places. The Pacific campaign was all about naval war and the naval war was oddly fought in the air. You needed carrier planes for that.

The F6F is an excellent example of "less is more": development started long after the F4U and instead of trying to make the best possible fighter, Grumman made the most sensible fighter. The design was not revolutionary (most unique feature was the way the wings were folded) and stat for stat it is inferior to the F4U, but actually showing up to the fight is more important than hyping about a few mph and deg/sec roll rate. This was achieved by making a more reliable,  easy to operate, easy to manufacture (breaking setting world production records) and to top it all, even cheaper fighter than the F4U. By the time Vought had finished tweaking their spoiled over-hyped child and produced enough to equip a couple of squadrons, the navy was already full of F6Fs actually wining the war. The F4U was the better plane, but the F6F was by far the more important plane.

[Spikes]

really?
 the p-51s were hugely involved over germany, almost entirely in the escorting scene. without them escorting the "big friends" there wouldnt really have BEEN a strategicc bombing campaign after 1943-ish. the P-51s were used very little over the Pacific, especially in the late war, as the Japanese were losing planes (and pilots) all over the place, so eventually, the B-29s didnt need a real escort.

Please re read my post. THAN IN GERMANY.

[Ghosth]

F6f would get my vote as well.

I seem to remember seeing that the F6F had the best service record in the pacific, but I could be wrong.

[RTHolmes]

like Del said, industrial capacity beat the Japanese.

btw if we're not allowed to abbreviate Japanese, then I'm going to have to insist that the term Brit be banned too.

henceforward please refer to us as Citizens of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland ...