Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Fighters, Bombers and Recon Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: Best All-Around Fighter of World War II
sentinel28a    10/13/2009 3:38:03 PM
Let's try a non-controversial topic, shall we? (Heh heh.) I'll submit the P-51 for consideration. BW and FS, if you come on here and say that the Rafale was the best fighter of WWII, I am going to fly over to France and personally beat you senseless with Obama's ego. (However, feel free to talk about the D.520.)
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
45-Shooter       4/23/2013 12:27:15 AM

The WORMs Formula works every time any time, All it does is give you the current range! It is very quick, for the mentally agile and lets you dial in the range knob, if you do not have a range computing gun sight that has a mechanical comp sight using the WORMs method!
But you do not know this. What don't I know? I just proved that I know more than you.
I do know how to duck hunt from a moving platform foolish one. So do I! I also know how to shoot sharks from a 150 MPH Helicopter and pheasant from a moving car. So what? Once you know the basics, all it takes is practice! If you do not understand, then know this also, you cannot use the WORMS formula at all from an aircraft lead computing gun-sight when you have to push the bullet stream UP the reticule cone. But you can, and I have! Think on this before you make a silly argument like this again! The average range of all aerial combats in WW-I was 250', in WW-II, it was 250 Yards and in Korea, 750 yards. That is a three X increase for each generation of fighter plane! It is now, at least for Planes armed with the M-61 2000 yards with the M-50 round, IIRC, and 2,500 M with the PGU-28 and the newest long barreled Gatling gun!
You do not understand? I don't have the three weeks to teach a pretender what he should have learned in school. Then you should have paid more attention in school!
I note that the link you provide makes and proves my point beyond any doubt! Thanks! You have to go down until you get to the part labeled "Binoculars" and they call the formula WORM! I merely used the plural form. But I know how to do it and I bet that you can not do it in real life while flying in a plane with a reflector gun sight.

Save your money, go to the Southwest and rent a fighter for one of the civilian "Top Gun" programs! You just might learn something! Try to find one that still uses the T-28 Trojan! It used to cost only two to four thousand bucks, plus air fair to and from. They give you a video tape/disk of your flight and have an instructor to go along and prevent you from killing yourself, or anyone else either.
Do not bitch and moan about the money, anyone can save that much over a year or two/maybe three over there because of the super bad economy et al.
Not counting work, my first ride was in a SIAI Marchetti  SA-260; out in Arizona, IIRC. It cost $2,200 for the two day course, Two sub-hour flights per day, but the plane was much to small and light to behave like a real fighter plane. That is why I recommend the T-28. Trying to swing that big gyro-prop around will drive you nuts! Unless you are a great stick and rudder man!

Quote    Reply

Maratabc       4/23/2013 12:32:50 AM
I would have to teach you remedial mathematics starting at for what would be for Americans about middle school. I don't have the time to teach an ignorant person such as you, simple algebra and geometry. 
Plus I do not think that this particular pupil, called shooter, could even try to learn.
Quote    Reply

Maratabc       4/23/2013 12:37:11 AM
And of course you are an out and out liar.
Helicopter to hunt sharks?
What prison do you write from?
Quote    Reply

oldbutnotwise       4/23/2013 2:58:46 AM
QUOTE from your link above, that makes many of my points: "Johnson saw the considerable increase in power as the primary advantage of a twin-engine fighter, thus overcoming his major obstacle. The XP-38 also had a number of advanced features. For example, the propellers turned in opposite directions, thus canceling engine torque forces. The aircraft was designed with a tricycle landing gear, which made takeoff and landing much easier and safer than the “conventional” gear arrangement. The gun installation was also very efficient, with all guns mounted in the nose. All skin sections were butt-joined with flush riveting throughout, and all flight controls were metal covered. Add to this an unusually long range for a fighter aircraft, which would become one of its most important assets."
If you read the entire article, It makes all of my points at one time or another! Great post! The part I thought, and still do think, not worth answering was the snipe at the Me110 and the idea that the P-38 was more of the same.
you are cherry picking again or failing to read.
Johnson may have liked the configuration but that was one aircraft designers point of view, engine tourque was not a big issue for single seaters until the 2000hp range, the design of the tail surfaces countered the engine torque (admittedly on take off the torque could be a problem but this was a minor issue and not worth the effort of contra props to cure)
Quote    Reply

oldbutnotwise       4/23/2013 3:10:09 AM
No, it is you who do not get it! Spits lost their arses over France from England, by a ~1/4 ratio!
Boring, all this proves is that you have learnt nothing from the hundreds of posts explaining facts to you 
In similar circumstances over North Africa,
Nothing like the same situation and if you think it is then you have a saddly lack grasp of the history of WW2
 badly out numbered by Nazi planes with pilots who had much more experience,
First part is wrong the Germans never had air superiority (the second is partly true the germans had a core of experianced pilots but the majority of pilots in the dessert were rookies)
the P-38 NEVER Had a LOSING record!
Yes it did in the Med and the the ETO, in fact often P38s recieved Spitfire escorts,  read reports by the Luftwaffe in the dessert and you will find instances of whole squardons of P38 being decimated with little or no loss by the Luftwaffe
 See pages 97-115 of Fork Tailed Devil, the P-38 story.
binned my copy as it has no relationship to actual events
When they were tasked to escort bombers and required to stay close, they still shot down more Nazi planes than the lost by a 3/2 ratio!
not they didnt they didnt get into +ve until late 44/45 when they had huge numerical advantages
 The Spitfire can not claim that kind of effectiveness from any post war study at any time in any theater!
You need to shead your bias, look at the Spitfires record as B17 escort, they may have shot down less but more importantly they lost less bombers
 For instance when they "Claimed ~725 kills for a loss of only ~425 Spits over France for 6 months before the invasion, post war research shows the Nazis only lost about 120 planes! Thus a 1/4 W/L record! (All numbers from my memory!)
firstly we know that your memory is worse than useless, and thst it is notoriously bias, but that aside this again shows you have a completed lack of ability to get the simple fact that the role being asked of the aircraft effects the figures far more than the aircraft involved, but I dont expect you to be able to understand this as only a dozen web sites and 50+ posters have beening trying to tell you this for the last 10 years without success

Quote    Reply

oldbutnotwise       4/23/2013 3:19:18 AM
Did they have less opportunities and more difficult missions? (YES!) - No they didn't they had easier time
Read the official history of the USAAF in North Africa, to find the truth to this lie. 
No lie but fact something that you seem to avoid
Pointability derived from the CR Props made getting Victories at longer ranges easy and made winning at shorter ranges positively sublime! yet as pointed out history does not agree
But it does agree, see pages 97-115!
No your propegander book on the P38 claims it, something disproved by reputable sources
 Then tell us about all the Spitfire pilots who actually became "Confirmed" Aces in a day, let alone how many shot down seven in one mission!
Sorry but how is this realvent? a Sunderland flying boat shot down 5 in one day are you claiming that this is a better fighter?

Yet results dont actual support this, Wrong! no its a fact of history See above.
sorry but your opinion counts for nothing
ok you provide a link to them because I cannot find a single gcf of a 1000yd kill and neither could Mick Spick and a lot of other historians than have investigated, yet they have found supporting evidence of the Spit kill Then post a link to it! Tell us how many Spit pilots made "Ace in a day", how many made seven or nine in a single mission? Let alone five over several missions in one day!
Cant answer so deflecting the question again, it was your claim so support it and stop changing the subject
Further more as any trained sniper knows range estimation is almost impossible at those ranges WO much time and effort, things a fighter pilot just does not have!
try reading up on Beirling, his distance skill were amazing He is one out of a thousand, so what?
He still did it but you cannot find supporting evidence for your claim can you
  500 yards is almost nothing and WO GCF, the claim is either completely BOGUS, or pure fabrication! Take your pick!
yet you make the claim for the P38 how hypocritical
But there is lots of P-38 GCF and almost none from Spitfires! How many reals per 1000 sorties?   
Rarly thier is GCF of P38s kills at 1000yrds, please do post as not only I would be fasinated to see I am sure Mike Spic and 100s of other historians would be too
PS -  you do realise that less then 10% of gun camera shots actually show hits? YES! Absolutely! Less than ~5% of ALL fighter pilots became Aces!
I was refering to film of actaul kills if you include film of misses then I have no idea what the % is but it will be < .1%, it would also be impossible to check as 99% of GCF has not survived
For the third time, post a list of all of the Spitfire "Confirmed, not claimed" Ace in a Day pilots!
I will the day AFTER you provide evidence of a 1000yd kill by a P38
Quote    Reply

oldbutnotwise       4/23/2013 3:54:02 AM
You are dead wrong about this! It is well researched and documented and it tells both sides of the story, both good and bad.
It is not well researched and is little more than an advert for the P38, it is pop history pandering to the US is best school

as the P38 was such a one trick pony then height and speed were life as if you didn't have them you were at the mercy of the oposition
as if you let it beed off it too so long to build back up, piston engined combat was about useabloe speed and energy management, the P38 bled energy mre than any other fighter, Wrong! The P-38 has one of the very highest SETs of any WW-II fighter and it's long and high aspect ratio wing was much more efficient at preventing bleed of speed!
Then it didnt work as it did bleed speed if requred to perform out of the virtical
See the chart in the link several posts above. It shows that only two of the types tested had a higher SET. (Specific Excess Thrust!) It also had a higher aspect ratio wing and bled speed more slowly because of it.
Only in the Virtical, in a turn or roll the size, weight and design led to loss of speed, but you cannot understand more than one diemension can you!
  But because the P-38 had more excess power/drag than the Mk-IX Spitfire,
No it didnt thats just made up by you
 and a higher aspect ratio wing there was absolutely nothing the Spit could do to stay alive in combat Vs a correctly flown P-38L! Nothing!
Balls, a MKIX would have a P38H/J for breakfast and would easy hold its own against a P38L, A MKXIV would easy overcome a P38L
The P-38 could out roll all but the Fw-190 and Me-163 at speeds above 250 MPH
Not according to official tests and they are far more reliable than your "I think that this sounds right therefore I will post it claiming it to be fact" way of supporting your posts
and the power boosted L mods could out roll them by 50% or more even at much faster speeds,
Shooters dream world strikes again, earth calling shooter come back you have travel to far out of reality again
no this is just pure rubbish and shows you have not actually read anything, the earlier P38 were all out turned We are not talking about turning! we are talking about the power to rotate the plane about the longitudinal axis! And like all planes ever built, it had better and worse parts of the envelope. In the good parts, it easily out flies any Spitfire ever made.
only in your dreams, if they did why did the USAAF use Spitfire as P38 escorts?
which is why they went to power boosted controls.
Cruising speeds higher than the TOP SPEEDS of early Spitfires and Me-109s. And it could do that for almost three hours.
only late models had such indurance earlier models (pre 44) wer not much better then Spitfires (<50 miles)
as the P38 didn't enter service until 42 that well past the early Spits and 109s you were into fw190s 109F and MKIXs
its a non statement But they were all still in service until they were all shot down. Note that the Me-109G was the only Me in North Africa.
and you are supposed to understand WW2 and have researched the Dessert war (according to your earlier posts), if this was actually true you would make sucha stupid statement, the Me109E was the first me109 in the dessert and wasnt replaced by the ME109F until much later as all the F's were required for the ETO and Russia, it was always the most expendable fighters that got sent to the Dessert, the Hurricane, the P40, the P38 the 109E then 109F and only very late the 109G
I have read it and cannot find anything to support this rubbish
Then read the entire book!
Good coming from you a poster who last time you accused my of NOT reading the book turned out that not only I had read it but it was YOU that was claiming to have aread a book that you clearly had not.
Quote    Reply

45-Shooter    Yepper! Absolutely!   4/24/2013 10:53:45 PM

Quote    Reply

45-Shooter    Maybe, we are not talking about the same thing?   4/24/2013 11:15:58 PM


Quote    Reply

45-Shooter       4/24/2013 11:43:38 PM

That is the kind of monumental pasting that defies any attempt at obfuscation, like your "missions vary" attempt above!

Quote    Reply