ORIGINAL: deatonbt
ORIGINAL: Evil_Merlin
This isn't about who had the better pilots, who could field the most aircraft, is simply about the best fighter planes.
Put two identical pilots in the Ta 152H and the P-51D and who would win in a dog fight?
Put two identical pilots in the Fw 190A and the P-47D and who would win in a dog fight?
Put two identical pilots in the P-40 and the Zero and who would win in a dog fight?
Put two identical pilots in the Bf 109G and the La-5 and who would win in a dog fight?
Evil_Merlin,
I agree with the comment discounting pilots in the equation. I do not agree with the direction of the other statements. It is not only about one on one dog fighting. Below is the criteria as mentioned in the post that started the thread. It is the criteria that I am going by when presenting my case. Fielding planes counts. The Ta 152H does not need to be in the mix because of it. Please see the other comments that I made in post #411.
ORIGINAL: Ram-bro
Consider , speed, firepower, tactics, innovation, manuverability and availability.
BUT we did do that, we took it down to just plane vs. plane. Read back and you'll see, it's in the first 2 or 3 pages. Speed, firepower, manuverability, and availability are set in the pages of history, you can't change or speculate those items. So Tactics and innovation are left,, well, we know what history says, BUT there are to many "What If's" to make anything more than a judgment call. So it comes down to plane vs. plane, with the same pilot.