This topic is in the Aircraft Projects discussion forum.  (rss)


Most successful fighter...


<<  1    2    3  >>



reply posted on 17-6-2004 @ 05:29 PM by Leopardo


id say F15 :-) it sure helped us alot throughout history lol



reply to this post:   copyright & usage 


reply posted on 18-6-2004 @ 09:18 PM by WestPoint23


The F-15 or F-14 they are both very exelent planes.



reply to this post:   copyright & usage 


reply posted on 26-6-2004 @ 11:08 PM by Paladin327


Id say the F-14 because in the early 1990s, they said it would be replaced, but wasnt and can be upgradeable, and was made to counter soviet aircraft, which most countries tha the US can easily overrun and do (Iraq) have/had soviet fighters, which is what the f-14 was designed for



reply to this post:   copyright & usage 


reply posted on 28-6-2004 @ 08:49 AM by cyberdude78


Yeah the F-14 performed very nicely against them Libiyan migs. To bad we gave some to Iran. Oh well its not like the Iranian F-14s can still fly. Also the Top Gun training you have to go through to fly one is incredibly difficult. To bad there probably gonna be out of service pretty soon I heard.



reply to this post:   copyright & usage 


reply posted on 18-5-2008 @ 02:59 AM by waynos


If we are talking 'most successful' rather than 'best' then I would say the Hawker Hurricane based on research by aviation historian and author F K Mason.

After painstakingly examining claims of RAF fighter kills throughout the entire Second World War (not just the Battle of Britain which is the oft quoted measure of the Hurricanes success) he identified 11,400 verified kills.

Of these the Hurricane accounted for a whopping 55%, Spitfires took another 33% and all other types combined accounted for 12%.

Not bad for a plane that Milch and Galland regarded as 'obsolete' in 1939!

(source; Invasion 1940 by Derek Robinson, page 126.)




[edit on 18-5-2008 by waynos]



reply to this post:   copyright & usage 


reply posted on 18-5-2008 @ 03:19 AM by _Del_


If we're to base it on kills, then wouldn't the Bf 109 have a claim to the prize?

image source: http://www.zap16.com/ILA2006/ILA06-Me109-02.jpg



I completely agree about the Hurricane being overshadowed in regards to its importance (especially when compared to its more famous counterpart).

[edit on 18-5-2008 by _Del_]



reply to this post:   copyright & usage 


reply posted on 18-5-2008 @ 03:26 AM by waynos


Yes, I was thinking that very thing when I posted. I wonder if their is similar research into the kills of the Luftwaffe? If anyone has done this for every combatant air force in WW2 that would be excellent.

I would predict the Bf 109, Zero, P-51 and Yak 9 would come out on top for each nation - but then again, without this research how many would have predicted the Spitfire for the RAF?

the total kills for the Hurricane comes out at about 6,700. I believe the Bf 109 (and possibly the P-51) would exceed that, but they were considerably 'superior' aircraft with the Hurricanes thick wings and heavy structure. I think this is what makes it more impressive than mere numbers. Along similar lines to the Russians success with the woeful P-39.





[edit on 18-5-2008 by waynos]



reply to this post:   copyright & usage 


reply posted on 18-5-2008 @ 03:32 AM by _Del_



Originally posted by waynos
I would predict the Bf 109, Zero, P-51 and Yak 9 would come out on top for each nation - but then again, without this research how many would have predicted the Spitfire for the RAF?



I'd expect the P-38 to come out on top of the P-51 -- again, not because it was a superior a/c but because it was more widely used in the Med. and Pacific theatres.

Edit: ... and now after thinking about it, am starting to think the extended service of the P-51 into the Korean conflict probably gives it the edge.

[edit on 18-5-2008 by _Del_]



reply to this post:   copyright & usage 


reply posted on 18-5-2008 @ 04:22 AM by waynos


After searching the web for a frustratingly long time I finally came up with these figures;

WW2- All theatres together-

P-51---5944 kills,
F6F---5265 kills, (never thought of that - should've known better)
P-38--3785 kills.

I will try to find figures for other types/countries



reply to this post:   copyright & usage 


reply posted on 18-5-2008 @ 04:47 AM by _Del_


reply to post by waynos



Excellent -- star for you for doing what I was too lazy to do



reply to this post:   copyright & usage 


reply posted on 18-5-2008 @ 04:37 PM by Lonestar24


Now this question is impossible to answer satisfactorily. What do we base our answer on? Victory/Loss ratios are inconslusive because they are only valid in large numbers; Sales as well because sales are as much influenced by politics as by technical aspects. All in all, no single statistic could be chosen to evaluate such a broad question; one has to look at the complete picture, above and beyond the simple performance tables.

My personal choice would be the Bf 109, a horribly uncomfortable, short ranged, very characteristic if not to say picky and unforgiving airplane that somehow still enabled the Luftwaffe to resist the enemy for a long time.

It is possibly the longest-lasting frontline fighter of the WW2 era, from 1937 into the early 60s (spanish service). It was the most-built model of any fighter, over 30.000 pieces, although there never were, on average, more than 1000 flyable aircraft in the inventory at any time in the war - and that although it took considerable less time to manufacture than many of its allied counterparts, and although the Luftwaffe had many other promising designs at hand.

And despite its shortcomings it also helped produce an unbelievable list of fighter aces - undeniably experts that in large parts resisted to fly any other aircraft and that should count for something. Hard data however is very hard to find because of lost and lacking documentation, so I don´t have any performance tables at hand.

I however have some "quoted quotes", take them for what they´re worth:


"109s kill ratio."
- According to Edward Sims' "The Fighter Pilots", the Luftwaffe claimed about 70000 victories, for the loss of 8500 pilots KIA, 2700 POW and 9100 wounded in action, for a total of ca. 20000 losses. Not knowing the real numbers, we could speculate there were another 20000 pilots who bailed out OK, that we arrive at a 70000:40000 kill ratio for the Luftwaffe, or 1.75:1. That's not bad at all considering the catastrophic finale.
- From April 1941 to November 1942, the Luftwaffe scored 1294 confirmed victories for about 200 Me 109 lost in combat. During this period, the Luftwaffe almost exclusively used the Me 109F. They identified their victims as 709 Tomahawks, 304 Hurricanes and 119 Spitfires, plus others/unidentified. That's a ratio of about 6.5:1. (location missing, but looks like North African campaign. Author suggests that these numbers should still be taken with a grain of salt, I have no clue if these are post war verified numbers or wartime claims)


[edit on 18/5/2008 by Lonestar24]



reply to this post:   copyright & usage 


reply posted on 20-5-2008 @ 06:03 PM by carcharodon


Like any other comparison we have to divide it within time periods. What would have been the F15 record on a multi year long war? would it have been decisive in winning that war?

The fact i we don't know and hopefully never will so I propose we choose one for each generation, in my opinion it seems more fair.



reply to this post:   copyright & usage 


<<  1    2    3  >>







Top Topics Right Now:



Active Topics Right Now:



ATS MIX Podcasts:











Newest Topics:
































ATS Server: www2.theabovenetwork.com
Powered by AboveTop:Board v2.3
Header data processed in 0.012 seconds
Page processed in 0.134 seconds
6 total database queries (1)









The Above Top Secret Conspiracy Community Web site is a wholly owned social content community of The Above Network, LLC.





thread