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
oldbutnotwise       7/8/2013 1:43:40 PM
there are no ignorant questions just ignorant people and you certainly fit that, you ask questions but have no intention of learning from the answer, you have your ingrained opinion and will not adjust that even when presented with insurmountable evidence. that is why every one groans when you appear and it is also why you have been banned by pretty much every site you have posted on
 
Quote    Reply

oldbutnotwise       7/8/2013 2:03:20 PM
Lebanon Still flys Hunters,
Four (grounded, no parts). Not twenty (against insurrectos).    
four in active service currently according to many sites 

it is also of note that 

Airborne Tactical Advantage Company  operates Mk.58 Hunters for tactical air and adversary training of U.S. military fighter crews

Not the ones the Swiss retired I hope? Those damned things had wing fatigue issues!      
Some had fatigue problems - but then some of their f5s have too,  due no doubt to hotdogging round the mountains
 Not bad for a rubbish fighter is it.

For an air frame rated as airworthy for 2500 hours use and with an in air endurance on internal fuel of one and a half hours? That marks it as about as good as a Mig. Draw your own conclusions.
      
I have and so have every site I have found and none seem to agree with you
How many were shot down?      
of those shot down how many A2A losses occurred when fully loaded with bombs? (hint all of them) and how many A2A victories not bad for an aircraft crewed with pilots who had zero A2A training
 
 
http://www.thunder-and-lightnings.co.uk/hunter/history.php                

Please read your own post it doesn't seem to agree with your view and even flatly contradicts you about its performance in the Indian/PAF conflict
 
ps - The Hunter was not designed as a bomber and orginially didnt carry bombs or rockets these were added to later marks

http://www.thunder-and-lightnings.co.uk/hunter/history.php           

And paid for it, dearly.  
you load any aircraft up with bombs and it will perform under par and if you need to make this point then you must be scraping the barrel   
 
 
Now about Sydney Camm and the Harrier.
 
The first Kestrels CRASHED. Paris air show (1963). All Camm contributed was stubborness. RAF Farnborough sorted the plane out.
 
so no aircraft can be any good if the prototype crashes, well that counts out all Lockheed's famous fighters the P38/P80 and f104 all suffered prototype crashes and only the f104 went on to make this its defining quality does this make your Kelly Johnson in the same mould (I am pointing out how wrong you are not actually implying Johnson was in any way a poor designer)
 
And you will see that Belgium ditched their dog Hunters for Starfighters in a big hurry?
 
as they needed a fast interceptor to counter the Russian threat the SUPERSONIC f104 was a better fit, just as the RAF was moving to Lightings for the same reason (and you complain about the lack of range in a Hunter!) how many families in Belgium would have wished they had stayed with the Hunter?
 
The Hunter isn't the plane the British claim
 
maybe but then again it was not the dog you are claiming
 
Quote    Reply

marat,jean       7/8/2013 2:09:29 PM
The Indians seemed to still lose them in air to air dogfights. Here is the hint. When you are bounced at altitude, burdened with bombs and drop tanks, what is the first thing you do as your start your turn into that Sabre?      
 
You dump wing stores and hot your guns.
 
No excuses. 
 
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

marat,jean       7/8/2013 2:11:57 PM
Just so we are clear... the F-104 is not the plane the Americans claim it is either, because it was shot down with the same monotony as the Hunter and for much the same reason.
 
Quote    Reply

oldbutnotwise       7/8/2013 2:17:37 PM
not much use warming your guns when you are already on the way to the crash site, from what I read the losses were pretty much bounce kills and that is one thing shooter was right about, if you get caught and hit then there is little you can do about it, remember that none of these aircraft had radar
 
seems the F86 and Mig17 also lost the same way! by your measurement exactly what were the best aircraft? because it looks like you are just against Hawkers
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

oldbutnotwise       7/8/2013 2:19:54 PM
least the Hunter had to be shot down the f104 managed it all on its own, in fact I think it killed more pilots that were lost to enemy action
 
you do seem to be using different standards when assessing planes
 
Quote    Reply

oldbutnotwise       7/8/2013 2:23:58 PM
least the Hunter had to be shot down the f104 managed it all on its own, in fact I think it killed more pilots that were lost to enemy action
 
you do seem to be using different standards when assessing planes
 
Quote    Reply

marat,jean       7/8/2013 10:16:08 PM
Bounce kills. Good one. Might want to explain that FACT to shooter... about how the USAF determined that 70% of shoot-downs are ambushes...
 
Exceptions.
 
F-86 was routinely bounced (Korea), The Mig 15 had the altitude advantage and climb advantage. Seems the USAF pilots managed somehow, before they lost their dogfighting skills.
 
Mig 17? In the hands of Arabs? You jest. Vietnam was a little bit different.
 
 

not much use warming your guns when you are already on the way to the crash site, from what I read the losses were pretty much bounce kills and that is one thing shooter was right about, if you get caught and hit then there is little you can do about it, remember that none of these aircraft had radar

 

seems the F86 and Mig17 also lost the same way! by your measurement exactly what were the best aircraft? because it looks like you are just against Hawkers

 

 

 
Quote    Reply

marat,jean       7/8/2013 10:18:03 PM
You mean like this?

least the Hunter had to be shot down the f104 managed it all on its own, in fact I think it killed more pilots that were lost to enemy action

 

you do seem to be using different standards when assessing planes

 
Quote    Reply

oldbutnotwise       7/9/2013 3:01:40 AM
now you are being stupid, the F104 had a deserved rep for killing its pilots (it was even nicknamed  the Widowmaker) yes all miltary jets have accidents including new generation F16/18 etc that does not prove or disprove anything.
 
To compare the odd incident to a known trend is being dishonest, it seems you are dillibrately misrepresenting the Hunter (not as badly as Shooter and anything British but heading that way)
 
You find a report of a 30y/o jet that crashed and yet you think this matches brand new F104s crashing?
 
have not found a single site that says the Hunter was inferior to its competitors?
 
Quote    Reply



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics