WWII Fighter

[naval_aviator_2040]

well chew on this then, in a classic "turning" fight with a Japanese Zero both planes would have died because the Zero was just too maneuverable. But in a climbing fight, the Corsair had the advantage because it could climb and dive much faster. Now, admittedly the P-51 was good in a dive but even with the new Rolls Royce Engine it would not be able to outclimb a Zero, so it would be dead in that fight. Then compare that with the German planes. Yes, the P-51 had an excellent record against the germans but if you study the british history, they were using the Corsair in North Africa with almost the same efficiency. So overall the F4U was able to succeed in both theaters where the mustang would only have been successful in one.

[Blaze]

But the P-51 WAS successful in the Japanese theater! It was used quite extensively there. They just had to learn a different way to fly it. Once they realized they didn't have to hammer down and lead zeros, but rather catch them with just a couple rounds.

Also, though P-51's and Corsairs never met in dogfights themselves, the 51's were FAR more manuverable, while still able to take some hits. The 51's would have outfought the Corsairs in a direct fight.

[naval_aviator_2040]

the corsair's would have done the same thing against the P-51's that they did against the Zero amd out climb them then come down from the top. the P-51's Rolls Royce had a max HP of about 1800 hp while the Corsair's Vaught-Sikorsky engine did around 2200hp in the same conditions. and since horsepower is the biggest factor in climbing ability there's no way that the P-51 could have outclimbed the Corsair. It wouldn't have been as easy as taking out a zero that way but it would still be an advantage.

[Skorpion]

Has anyone thought that it's simply because the Zero is a really sucky plane to try and fly?
I tried using it. 3 missions, 3 crashes, 3 3-month long stretches in hospital, according to the game.

[Zero_Point]

I likes these'ns.

http://www.daveswarbirds.com/usplanes/a ... apjack.htm
http://www.wpafb.af.mil/museum/research/p79.htm

Shame they were cancelled...

[Blaze]

Hehehe... read all about them, Zero. I believe they were canceled for a reason, and it wasn't cause they look goofy.

[Bigity]

[quote="Makh";p="482261"]Only two choice ? and two America plane ??

The P-51 ? You mean that copy of the British NA-73X with that crappy Allison engine ? Without the British Merlin engine in it, I would not vote for the P-51 Mustang.

Lavochkin La-7 1944, THAT IS A FIGHTER !

But I agree with Skorpion for the German FW-190, it is very nice too.

I would be curious to see what option you would put in a WWII "Best fighter/bomber".[/quote]

Or an IL-2.

[Keaton]

Mustang. 'Cause you can paint teeth on it, and it is, and always will be, the most badass fighter ever.

[Zero_Point]

[quote="Blaze";p="484525"]Hehehe... read all about them, Zero. I believe they were canceled for a reason, and it wasn't cause they look goofy.[/quote]


Meh, the Flying Flap-jack was only cancelled because jet technology was taking over. But, a prop-driven airplane going 600MPH? With near vertical take-off? Why would you cancel something like that?

And, there really wasn't anything wrong with Jack Northrop's flying-wing fighter design, it's just the right technology wasn't there at the time. The problem with flying wings is that when you stall, it doesn't rotate like a normal plane would, but it tumbles, flipping end over end. Only reason the B-2 does so well is because it won't let you stall it.

[Spongiform]

The Corsair has a cooler name.