US185Damiani

SO lets try to add some choices in here and I don't want to hear the usual The Mustang was the best of the best, because it is your favorite airplane LOL I want to hear your thought out reasoning behind your choice! ;-)

Scar

My Feedback: (3)

Arguably, the drop tank was responsible for Mustangs reaching Berlin. The drop tank was developed, with low drag numbers (and before the USAAF ban on external tanks was lifted) at the behest of Lt. Ben Kelsey, by the boys at Lockheed. For the P-38, which served with distinction throughout the war.

The XP-38 travelled cross country in 1938 at 400 Mph, at 20,000 ft, when the other available fighters had a ceiling of 14,000 ft and much lower speeds. The P-38 effectively raised the bar for subsequent fighters.

The P-38 was on the job in 1941, in England via Bolero in 1942, and fighting throughout the war (albeit only one Lightning group stayed in the UK), so one cannot dismiss the importance of the P-38's contribution to the ETO.

Ergo, if one had to choose just one (thank goodness the USAAF didn't have to make that choice) I would choose the one that was available in 1941. The P-38.

Dave Olson

kram51

My Feedback: (3)

Okay, I'll bite. My choice is the Hurricane with the Spitfire being a very close second. While the Spitfire was more of a purebred fighter it wasn't available in sufficient numbers at the start of the war and thru the Battle of Britain. The Hurricane did yeoman's work in those critical early days of the war, partnered with the Spitfire, that bought the Allies time to regroup and counter with more potent designs later on. Realizing that Germany would have certainly invaded Great Britain if the Hurri's and Spits had failed to hold them off, thereby denying the Allies a base in Europe to begin a counter offensive from, I can't see how any other plane affected the outcome of the war more than these two. Again, I choose the Hurricane based on sheer numbers available at the most critical juncture of the war. The Spitfire is a very close second.

Mark

skier

I second the P-38. Besides what Dave Olson said, the P-38 was very versitile. Many different versions were made. Designs were made for skis, floats, missles, a night fighter version, and many others. [link=http://p-38online.com/overview.html]Here is a description of a bunch of different models[/link]

ttmr

Im going to have to say the P-51 because it allowed the escored bombing of targets deep in Germany. But it you realy want to get into it, it was a British order for p-40's that lead to the production of the Mustang. Or you could say the p-38 for the reasons listed above, however I feel that it had more of an impact on the pacific theater personaly (the death of Admeral Yamoto most notably) You could also say the Spit or 'Cane because they won the BOB. The P-47 was an ecellent airplane but as far as impact I feel that it is near the botom of the list, However In a close suport role it was unbeatable. The other aircraft again were very good and despite my fondness for the Typhoon I feel it is a little out of place on a list regarding impact on the whole war. In the end Im voting for the P-51 because of its range and the fact that it had the speed to shoot down ANY German aircraft, even the jets. In the end it boils down to a matter of opinion, personaly I'd like to see some more reasons for votes.

Falcon Jet

The P-51, whether anyone likes it or not, was the FIRST fighter to escort bomber groups all the way to, and from the target!. Once the Luftwaffe was decimated, the P-51's began ground attacks deep in the heart of Germany, attacking targets of opportunity at will. Although all of the other fighters listed contributed greatly to the outcome, the P-51, hands down, was the best fighter of the war. "ttmr" is correct in the fact that if the British had not requested P-40's from the United States, the Mustang would never have been born.

My opinion,
Chris.

Falcon Jet

By the way, the Tuskegee Airman, flying the P-51, never lost a single bomber to enemy fighters in WWII during any of their escort missions. They are the only fighter group during the war that holds that distinction. That's a very proud record, but yet they still had to use "colored" bathrooms, water fountains, etc, etc. What's up with that? I'm so glad that crap is done and over with. As far as the Tuskegee Airman go, I salute you all. I know this has nothing to do with the poll, just thought I'd share this with everyone.

Chris.

David Cutler

Rent then DVD 'Battle Of Britain'. That'll give you a good idea!

-David C.

F4u5

My Feedback: (81)

P-47 was the most versatile and best at multiple missions. Plus it was overly rugged. My vote for the P-47, even tho the F4U is my love.....tear.

Helijet

Hmmm...if you talk with any of the bomber pilots that flew. They would say that they won the war. Destroying production facilities alllowed the allies to eventually break through and maintain air supremecy.

David Cutler

That's a good point. You could say it was Lancasters and B17s that won the war in the air.

-David C.

Mustang51

My Feedback: (25)

Yea...right Chris... It doesn't have anything to do with this poll. This is about the aircraft themselves, not the men who flew them, or racism. The merits of the "TA" although notable(and remarkable) in the history of American air power, should be taken up in another thread, as it has been done before.

Herman Goering even said on two occasions (not exact quotes):

"Give me Mustangs and I will win the air war over Europe"
and,
"When I saw Mustangs over Berlin, I knew the war was over".
Obviously, I am partial to the P51. Every airplane in every countries arsenal was at some point "the best", until it was "out done" by some other nations "best".
BUT!!! and that's a BIG "BUT"!
The P51 Mustang was THE aircraft (with external tanks) that was able to get the bombers to Berlin and back.
An argument can be made for just about every fighter in the ETO that it changed the war, and justifiably so. But the fact remains., without the range of the Mustang, the bombers (we) were loosing the air war. The attrition rate of B17s (as well as others)was staggering. Between flak and enemy fighters, 17s, 24s, etc. were being lost in the dozens each mission, to the extent that Allied command was on the verge of giving up on day light bombing.
Round the clock bombing of Germany was crucial(for many reasons) in winning the war in Europe, the Americans knew it. The British continued their night time campaign with fewer losses, but also with lesser results. The only way to effectively bomb, is if you can see your target.
Along comes our baby...the Mustang. Yes boys, the Mustang. Being able to protect the bombers in and out of the target area made the difference. Allied bomber losses decreased, enemy fighter losses increased.
The war of attrition was reversed by the little fighter.
The Hurricane saved Britain. The Thunderbolt was the work horse for ground support. Both were indispensable, but it was the Mustang that truly changed the course of the air war in Europe.

-Mustang51

Falcon Jet

Your absolutely right Mustang51, I agree with you wholeheartidly about the Mustang and it's role during WWII. The Mustang paved the way and opened up doors for the Allies to gain air supremacy over Europe. I'm with you 100%. My comment about the Tuskegee Airman was just that, a comment. I made it clear that it had nothing to do with this poll. I was just sharing history, like it or not.

Chris.

Mustang51

My Feedback: (25)

The P-38 although an incredable airplane, was not a fighter. It was actualy designed as an interceptor to engage incomming enemy bombers.
I just started reading a book called "Fork-Tailed Devil" by Martin Caidin. If you guys have an interest in the 38, then you must read this book. It is hands down the best book I have read on any airplane.

-Mustang51

Radcliffe

If not for the C-47 ( DC-3 ) supplies and paratroopers and gliders could not have won the war for us. Rad

kram51

My Feedback: (3)

Seems to me that in order for the Mustangs (which I love), P-47's (I also adore) and even C-47's to win the war they needed England as a base to win the war from. My point is there would have been no great bomber formations for those guys to protect, no German airfields to strafe, and no parachute drops in the summer of 1944 IF the Battle of Britain had been lost. As for the European theater this was the most important air battle fought in the war. All the subsequent victories are a direct result of the Germans NOT invading Great Britain in 1941 or 42.
Were there better fighters at the time of the BoB? Yes, they were mostly German. Better tactics, better intelligence, better radar, and most not to be discounted, these guys were fighting for their homeland. They knew what would surely be next if they failed in stopping the Luftwaffe. Those bomber missions would've been significantly different if they were being flown out of Iceland or Greenland! I agree that the Mustang performed a role, in mass quantity, that no other fighter of the day could do. What if's don't count. What was is what matters most. BUT, I digress, that is another poll! The importance of the Hurricane and Spitfire cannot be discounted because of better equipment that came along only after these two machines stalled the German war machine long enough for the others to even make a difference.

Mark

ttmr

Ah yess I notice the missing bombers myself, and if you want to take that route then there is another reason to vote for the mustang. It alowed the bombers to be much more effective over the long flights.

F4U Killer

Since your going to bring the Buffs into this discussion.
I had read or heard on a TV show, that if the Allies would have concentrated on Bombing one Target to total destruction IE the Barring Factory's. The war would have been finished in Month's rather than Year's.

But they would hit a Target one day then go somewhere else for a period then come back to try and finish.

Oosiksmith

My Feedback: (1)

Hmmmmmm. There are a lot of opinions on this subject, and everyone has thier favorite plane. My thoughts are also that the P-51 was the best all-around fighter, but there were plenty of other great planes available too. The P-51 just happened to be the right plane at the right time, in the right numbers...with pilots who were trained just right. However, as a serious student of military aviation history, I want to point out that American and British doctrine was far better, as time progressed, than the doctrine used by Luftewaffe aviators. While German fighter pilots viewed flying ground attack missions as a punishment, American and British pilots were given free reign to attack ground targets; this had a huge impact on what is truly most important to an army: logistics! True, the Germans also had dedicated ground attack aircraft and ground attack variants of their popular fighters, but they never embraced the mission nor understood its importance until it was too late. This was due, in large part, to the "snobbish attitude" many of the Luftewaffe pilots had towards ground attack and interdiction missions.
However, another important factor was simply the numbers game. Remember, the world's leading ace of all time was a German with 352 aerial kills. These pilots were in sustained combat over a series of years with no relief. Most American fighter pilots in Europe rarely saw German planes. Even the great Chuck Yeager, who became an ace on ONE MISSION only saw German planes on five of his missions. Only five. The problem for the Germans, however, was they couldn't keep up with the shear numbers of planes we sent at them. Despite producing tens of thousands of planes, the Germans couldn't keep up with Allied production. Also, as experienced pilots in the Axis started to wane, the number of experienced pilots on the Allied side started to grow exponentially. Its hard to keep up a war of attrition when you have many enemies with apparently limitless resources and personnel.
However, facts speak for themselves. Most of the great American aces in the ETO flew the incredible P-47. What does that say about the P-51? Hmmmm, come to think of it, according to the official USAF history, the B-17s of the Mighty Eighth Air Force downed more planes than all the rest of the USAAF planes combined. Thats right. Hard to believe but true. If any of you doubt this, pay a visit to the repository at the USAF Academy in Colorado Springs where the archives for the Combined Bomber Offensive and part of the 8th AF are kept. You can read for yourselves the first-hand accounts of the missions as the aircrews recorded them after each mission. Sobering. As I recall, some of the documents had blood on them. Amazing.
I think its foolhardy to try and minimize the contribution of any branch of service, of any Allied nation, or of any single machine. They all had a role to play, and many paid a great sacrifice. I love all these planes, be they Spitfire, Zero, Mustang, Lightning, Focke-Wulfe, Liberator, Messershcmitt, Flying Fortress, Mitchell, Tony, Swallow, Hurricane, or whatever. Since I can't afford a real one, I (we) celebrate thier memory and sacrifice by helping to keep this part of aviation history alive through our hobby. I toast all the planes, pilots, aircrews, planners and maintainers who contributed to the overall effort. Many guys have gotten thier PhDs deliberating these points and I am unable to simplify the answer to this question in my mind to a point where I can finalize an answer. They were all great, in thier own way.

That being said, the P-51 was the best plane. Wait, I like FW-190s a lot too. Er, I once helped rebuild a P-40 recovered in the Aleutians, it was neat and contributed too. Wait, what was the question again?

Falcon Jet

I agree with you Mark,

Had the Germans gained air supremacy during the Battle of Britain, the Germans would have invaded Britain and probably won. German U-boats already had Britain on their knees at this point. What would of been the outcome of WWII had it not been for the Spitfires and Hurricanes to prevent Germany from gaining air supremecy? Yes, they did play a major and vital role and pre-empted the end of the war, but the war continued. I'm not discounting their role at all. Winston Churchill said it best when he said "Never in the field of human conflict, was so much owed by so many, to so few".

Chris.

dragoonpvw

My Feedback: (7)

Probably the spitfire,
the hurricane was a more available fighter in the BoB but it was used mainly against bombers, the spitfire was used to protect the hurricane, it was fighter cover. Galland said of the hurricane " it was a nice plane to shoot down". The Germans fighters had a much greater respect for the spit. If the BoB had not been won then the mustang and the p47 would likely never have been involved in the european theatre, in fact the mustang would not have been invented. The BoB was the turning point in the war and Britains stand was bolstered by the Hurri and the Spit, Bombers were working and the russians were starting to resist too, but at that time had litttle effect on the outcome. All the other aircraft mentioned had varying effects on the date of the german defeat but not so much as these two on the possibility of it.
good luck
Paul

F4U Killer

http://www.worldwar2pilots.com/01-Sl...omepagenew.htm

For those of you interested in a interesting story. Read the Log of this Squadron. It will take you a few Hr's. Or do like I did read a few sections a night.

Mustang51

My Feedback: (25)

But with out air supremacy, you can't concentrate on one target. Even with air supremacy, why would you commit your forces to one target? The enemy would see what your up to and either concentrate their flak batteries and fighters in that area to protect, or keep moving the factory once it was discovered.
The simple fact remains. Up until the long range escort, the bombers were not effective, they were being lost in high numbers, and the ground war(as well as the air war) continued to favor Germany. Only after Mustangs entered the war were the bombers able to get where they needed to be during the day to destroy the factories and production plants. Only until these assets were eliminated or crippled was the ground war able to swing to the Allies favor.
Yes, the bombers played a major roll in the war.
Yes, the transports played a major roll in the war.
Yes, the 38, 40, Spitfire, Hurricane(hell, even that piece of garbage the P-39), all played major rolls in the war.
But the simple fact of the matter is that we would not have been able to get a foot hold on the continent if it were'nt for Air supremacy... all courtecy of the P 51 Mustang.

-Mustang51

David Cutler

Just as interesting a question is which engine was responsible for the most air effectiveness in the war.

Considering the Merlin was used in Spitfires, Lancasters, Wellingtons, Sterlings, Mustangs, Hurricanes, Mosquitos and even, believe it or not before the war in Messerschmitt 109s at one point, it has to be a contender!

-David C.

Oryx

What about the IL-2, and the Yaks and Lavochkins? Germany's defeat was due to more than just strategic bombing...

In my opinion the allied victory in WWII was the ultimate in team efforts. While the Western allies were pounding the heartland from the air and pushing from the South in North Africa and the mediteranian, the Soviets were slowly eating up the Wehrmacht from the East. Maybe the Luftwaffe would have been able to achieve and maintain air superiority if it had to fight on only one of these fronts, but by being assaulted from all sides, and then by very different types of air fighting, its defeat was inevitable, and by 1945 they didn't hold air superiority anywhere anymore.

I think it is a bit unfair attributing the victory in the air to one side, or even worse, to one fighter. What would the Soviets have done with a long-range fighter such as the P-51? They didn't need range, they needed a fighter that could protect its own tactical bombers and defend from those of the enemy and their escorts, which was all happening close to the front lines and usually at low level. High altitude performance, so valued by strategic bomber escorts, was virtually useless for their type of air war (see the eventual end of production of the Mig-3). Similarly, the original job of the Spitfire was point defence and not escort, which it did admirably during the Battle of Britain - once again incredible range would not have made much of a difference when defending from the German bomber raids during the Blitz.

It seems to me that calling the P-51 or P-47 the most important fighters of the war is usually done based on their range, and based on the assumption that strategic bombing (and therefore the need for the bombers to get through) was the sole reason the war was won...

I think a strong case can be made for the P-47, P-51, Spitfire, Hurricane, C-47, B-17, Lancaster, IL-2, Yak-series, La-5/7, Pe-2 and probably many others, and it would be impossible to disprove that any of those were instrumental in the eventual defeat of Germany. To choose one as the "most important", you would first have to prove that tactical bombing, strategic bombing, fighter superiority, a flexible air transport service or whatever else was the most important feature in winning the air war, which once again is a debate that can go on forever. That is why these discussions keep popping up on forums such as these - more than 50 years later it is still not clear what single aspect was it that won the war in Europe, and that is because no single aspect can rreally stand on its own...