Planes

[David603]

Originally Posted by yanks12025

The P-38 is the second greatest war plane of WW2 behind the P-51 mustang.

Purely if you want the best dogfighters, a late model Corsair or a Spitfire XIV would walk all over either of those planes, and the Corsair had a pretty good range too. Even the older Merlin engined Spitfires like the VIII, IX and XVI could outclass either plane in a dogfight, even if the P51 is faster by around 30mph. The later Russian fighters like the Yak 3 and La7 would be all over a P38 and more than a match for a P51 once the fight slowed down slightly.

The P38 was withdrawn from Europe because it could not hold its own against the Bf109 and Fw190, and sent to the Pacific where its speed advantage over the slow Japanese fighters allowed safe use of BnZ tactics all day long and ensured a good kill/death ratio.

Edit: I see a lot of other people have also responded to this post. Should have checked the next page of posts before I replied.

[manintrees]

It's blowing my mind that none of you have mentioned the P-47 Thunderbolt or the ass-whoopin' F6F Hellcat from the PTO.
Both of these planes have insane kill ratios and are well known for their effectivness versus the FW 190's/Me 109's and the Zeroes respectively.

[David603]

Originally Posted by manintrees

It's blowing my mind that none of you have mentioned the P-47 Thunderbolt or the ass-whoopin' F6F Hellcat from the PTO.
Both of these planes have insane kill ratios and are well known for their effectivness versus the FW 190's/Me 109's and the Zeroes respectively.

P47 is quite good, but only at high altitude and it suffered from having the manoeuvrability of a barge, and the F6F worked well against Zeros but would be too slow to see effective use in Europe.

If I'm flying a Bf109 in Il2 1946 and I see a P47, the only part of the combat I'm worried about is getting past the 8 .50cals if the pilot tries a head on pass. Once I'm past these the only way a P47 is going to survive is either having a pilot far better than me or by using its weight to dive for the deck, and if I can spare the time and don't have to fight anyone else I will get him when he starts to climb back up to altitude again.

The F6F was certainly a good plane in its place and time, but it isn't even a contender for best fighter.

[manintrees]

Originally Posted by David603

P47 is quite good, but only at high altitude and it suffered from having the manoeuvrability of a barge, and the F6F worked well against Zeros but would be too slow to see effective use in Europe.

If I'm flying a Bf109 in Il2 1946 and I see a P47, the only part of the combat I'm worried about is getting past the 8 .50cals if the pilot tries a head on pass. Once I'm past these the only way a P47 is going to survive is either having a pilot far better than me or by using its weight to dive for the deck, and if I can spare the time and don't have to fight anyone else I will get him when he starts to climb back up to altitude again.

That's interesting. Thanks for the post. I have much to learn about the planes of ww2 and it seems like this will be a great place to do it.

Also, this forum has an alarming lack of douchebags

[mondo]

Originally Posted by David603

P47 is quite good, but only at high altitude and it suffered from having the manoeuvrability of a barge, and the F6F worked well against Zeros but would be too slow to see effective use in Europe.

The P47 had a pretty good roll rate. Its extremely agile in a rolling scissors.

[David603]

Originally Posted by mondo

The P47 had a pretty good roll rate. Its extremely agile in a rolling scissors.

If you get into the scissors flying a P47 with me in a Bf109 I will let you slow down, then break out and leave you struggling to regain energy, and don't even think about anything dependent on rolling abilities against a Fw190.

[mondo]

I'll let you slow yourself down and break off If I didn't immediately have the advantage by the 2nd pass.

At 25,000ft or in a high speed rolling scissors? Any P47D would be able to gain its energy back easily and certainly out zoom a mid to late 109G (possibly even a K4) at that height. Not to mention at high speed the elevator response on a 109G would let it down horribly if it tried to follow a sharp zoom. Any 190, even the D9 has problems up high too. At an escort height of 25 to 30,000ft even a 190A9 or D9 is at a distinct disadvantage with the P47D. There is a quite a high chance that a 190 would just stall out at that height in a rolling scissors if not be left behind due to its power band being crap at that height.

At low speeds + low altitude I'd agree but then you have to fly to the planes best heights and abilities and down and low isn't the P47's forteit. 7 years of online IL2 has taught me that!

[David603]

I guess its not entirely related to real life fighting, but when flying in Il2 I tend to fight lower down than the P47s peak altitude, which has probably biased me to a certain extent against the Thunderbolt. I like light, powerful fighters with a good climb rate and decent firepower, which usually means a Bf109 for me although the Spitfire XIV has become a firm favourite of mine since the mod for it came out.

If I'm trying to kill B17s or B24s with a fighter, which is about the only place you are likely to go up against P47s in their element, I will almost always be flying a late model Bf109 with the centreline 30mm cannon and no gun pods. The Mk108 isn't really a gun for dogfighting, but over time I've become quite proficient at hitting fighters with it, and even one hit will ruin the day of any enemy fighter pilot. It helps to set the gun for long range, around 800-1000m, because not only does this mean you can shoot bombers from outside the effective range of return fire, but the upwards angle of the gun helps correct the low muzzle velocity which usually makes shells go behind where you would be aiming to pull a deflection shot on a fighter.

In their favour, P47s are one of the few aircraft that can survive a 30mm round without having to be very lucky, but even they will often be crippled by it.

[Soviet Ace]

Originally Posted by manintrees

It's blowing my mind that none of you have mentioned the P-47 Thunderbolt or the ass-whoopin' F6F Hellcat from the PTO.
Both of these planes have insane kill ratios and are well known for their effectivness versus the FW 190's/Me 109's and the Zeroes respectively.

Obviously the P47 is call the "Jug" not because of the way it looks. The plan was a monstrosity! It often, like the P38, fell victim to both Me-109's and FW-109's. Many USAAF Pilots said that they disliked the P-47, and when the P-51 came into action, they all were jumping for a try. The P-47 fell victim in two VERY important categories.

1. Slow climb rate.

2. Turning was a problem.

What it did excel in was: 1. Diving (That thing fell like a stone) and 2. Armament, and Weaponry.

So against the Me-109 and FW-190, the P47 was a very eaten up plane, unless it was flown by a fairly good pilot (ie Gabby Gabreski).

[manintrees]

Originally Posted by Soviet Ace

Obviously the P47 is call the "Jug" not because of the way it looks. The plan was a monstrosity! It often, like the P38, fell victim to both Me-109's and FW-109's. Many USAAF Pilots said that they disliked the P-47, and when the P-51 came into action, they all were jumping for a try. The P-47 fell victim in two VERY important categories.

1. Slow climb rate.

2. Turning was a problem.

What it did excel in was: 1. Diving (That thing fell like a stone) and 2. Armament, and Weaponry.

So against the Me-109 and FW-190, the P47 was a very eaten up plane, unless it was flown by a fairly good pilot (ie Gabby Gabreski).

My knowledge of the P-47 is entirely from the book "Thunderbolt" so I may only know the good stuff. Regarding the nickname "Jug", it apparently is from the way it looks. The pilots named it that as it looked like a milk jug.