What? No Mosquito? No Hellcat? I don't know who this guy thinks he is! I'm gonna give him a piece of my mind in his Discord server. Reeeeeeee!!! discord.com/invite/qt68efP
If your going to mention the battle of Britain you forgot to mention the hawker Hurricane just as important as the Spitfire according to many. And no Mosquito. But generally not too bad of list
R.I.P. Tho....funny name, but serious Pilot ,and deserves respect. It was said he was one of the shy, quiet guys in his squadron ,but once in the air he became a tiger. R.I.P. RICHARD IRA BONG
Really cool, if you find some significant things you can put up some nice places to rember great Britain involvement in the war. The bravery that Britain putted in the war is really outstanding.
@@Birdmaster92 France was invaded because the blitzkrieg technique works on land an was unstoppable. The English Channel saved the brits, they continued to fight against the raids of luftwaffe and eventually with the support of America they pulled the attack on D day.
@@gameplayer0534 The Blitzkrieg tactic wasnt unstoppable, during the invasion of france, the germans were not able to field heavy tanks until the maginot line was dealt with, the tanks the Germans did have access to were so small in caliber, that several of the French heavier tanks literally could not be penetrated from the front. The Main reason why France fell so swiftly was becasue the french nepotism, which got many people into higher ranks based on connections, rather than merit. The French military was superiour at the start of the war, they knew the Germans would be coming, after all France did declare the Phoney War after Germany invaded Poland. Poland fought valiantly and i have great respect for the Polish Soldiers, i would even go as far as calling them the best WW2 had to offer. But i cant muster any respect for the French or Brits, who abandoned Poland and broke their Alliance.
One thing you got slightly wrong: The Spitfire did not have a greater range than the BF109. The difference in the Battle of Britain was that the 109's were operating at their maximum ranges, far from their home bases, while the Spitfires (and Hurricanes) were operating right on top of theirs. BF109 pilots had to keep enough fuel to fly back to France, while the British and Commonwealth pilots only needed to keep the dregs of their tanks to make it back to base.
Yep, Hitler's arrogance lost him the Battle of Britain. Even the British admitted this in their 1969 movie. The Spitfire was a fine fighter though, and was easy to learn to fly, unlike the BF-109. Once German pilots became masters of the 109 though, they turned into absolute death machines.
This. When people look at stat cards only, they don't factor in any real life effects that something as simple as fuel load could have on a plane. Not to mention mental differences, such as Spitfire pilots being able to be more aggressive because if they have to ditch, they're ditching into friendly territory, whereas of German pilots had to ditch, they would be captured by the enemy. So kill numbers and Stat cards are great and all, but they should not be the end all be all of arguments about which plane was better.
@@averagefanenjoyer8696 If the Germans had managed to gain air superiority, they would have sunk each and every British ship that dared to go into the channel. The RAF well and truly saved Britain.
They had the numbers and ease of manufacture to make the bigger difference. Also, with their role being largely to attack bomber formations, while Spitfires were often saved for swatting off escorts, I'm sure many chaps on the ground would've appreciated the Hurricane's role a bit more lol
They did all the drudgery...i.e. shooting down Heinkels and Dorniers, but if it wasn't for the Spitfire, the ME-109 Emil would have not allowed them to get to the bombers. The Emil was superior in every regard to the Huricane, and if the Spitfire hadn't been there, th Hurricanes would have been butchered.
@@billrhodes5603 Tell that to the Poles of 303 sqdn. the highest scoring squadron of the Battle of Britain. They shot down bombers AND fighters and yes, they flew the all too frequently forgotten and underestimated Hurricane.
Every time someone dares mention the word 'spitfire' in a video nano seconds later someone will always pipe up 'Ah but the Hurricane shot down more etc etc. Every time , and I mean EVERY time. And then someone else will add about the Polish pilots even if the original video had nothing to do with hurricanes or the Polish pilots or even the battle of Britain. We know. They know, we ALL know. Chill dude.
At least East front was the most fair. Soviets had a low alt tactics and built many low flying Il2 to destroy german tanks. So you have many low level dancing fights. When americans attacked Germany, there were no enough pilots, not enough fuel, low numbers of new superprops and jets. Americans had much greater numbers, hellish high alt bombers and its a no go from there. Its irony that Soviets destroyed german best pilots, put the focus of germans to low level fighting... just to get high alt americans take all the "awards" thinking their P51 is the best plane of the war. Which was horseshit.
@@Čangrizavi_Cinik what's wrong with the P51D Mustang it's actually the best of both worlds has the British Merlin engine and great American construction. Also 6 50 cal machine guns.
@@Čangrizavi_Cinik No! Soviets did NOT destroy the best German pilots, Western Allies did. Of the top 100 German aces, just SIX were killed in combat with Soviet fighters. So it is your comment that is more of a "horseshit" than anything else.
@@AdmiralBlackstar My mistake, I was talking about the western allies. I guess not everyone is smart enough to infer that according to the context so I need to specifically spell that out so that there is no confusion. Thanks!
Thanks for putting the F4U Corsair on this list! Whenever great, WWII fighters are discussed, it's seldom mentioned. It's nice to see someone give this fine machine the respect it deserves.
@@Motor-City_Ben-Diesel I wouldn't recommend flying the Corsair immediately after getting your PPL; after all, 2,000 hp is a mighty big jump from 180-200 hp!
Ar-2 Dive bomber in Arcade Battles (i main AB because i only do RB with bombers) can out turn every single plane in the game and I'm not lying. I out turned a *biplane* alongside a Bf 109, a Spitfire and a Zero. That was epic
War thunder is way too unrealistic, the p-51D-30 is pretty maneuverable and able to dogfight its way from a 109 k4, contrary from what Gaijin does. War Thunder is meant as an arcade game so don;t think what war thunder makes and all of their stats are correct, a lot of the stats have been modified to keep the game "balanced."
@@ApokalyptikNM I waited months and months working my way up to that! Then never used it because every game had jets in it, looks sick as hell though :)
My grandfather flew in the p47 and the only reason he lived was due to the extreme survivability of the craft. On more than one occasion it brought him home against all odds.
Although the P-38 had a rough design start with plenty of bugs, it was so fast and guns and cannon in the nose it was a very deadly, long range fighter. I read pilots eventually learned Not to try to dogfight, but to fight like jet pilots today. Come in fast, blow away your enemy, swing way around and come at them again. Although it could be hell to jump out of safety.
@@nickmagee-brown739 I agree that American and German planes were the best in World War 2, but to be fair, the P51 Mustang used the Packard V-1650 Merlin engine that was a version based off of the British made Rolls-Royce Merlin aircraft engine. If you want to talk about an outstanding purely American made aircraft engine, one candidate for the best ever would be the Pratt & Whitney R-2800 Double Wasp that was used on the Hellcat, the Corsair, and the Thunderbolt.
Yup, I was going to say the same thing. From what I've read that was the plane they all wanted to fly when it first made the pacific scene. It destroyed the Zero.
My grandad flew the P-38 is the Pacific. He considered it the best fighter of the war especially after he got an engine shot out by a Japanese cruiser on his way to Saigon. The P-38 having two engine got him home.
I read a story about that, the pilot had 5 zeros after him with one engine out, dudes weaving slightly because he's just in firing range, feathering the prop on the bad engine and fine tuning the good one he actually out ran all 5 zeros, it was late in the war and assumed the Japanese pilots had little training, a skilled zero pilot would have been able to better set the fuel mixture and caught the barely escaping P-38
A note of interest. The last combat of two WWII aircraft was the Corsair and Mustang in '68 during the Soccer War between Honduras and El Salvador . Mustang belonged to Honduras and Corsair to El Salvador. The Corsair had the edge on this one.
So many always forget about the man flying the plane. It is more pilot vs pilot than plane vs plane. The Corsair winning that fight means nothing in terms of which is a better plane. 1968 and between two central American countries, hahhahah come get real fool.
Back in the mid to late 1980s, I managed a restaurant. We had a regular customer who flew a P-38 in the Pacific and knew Dick Bong. I can't recall that he ever had to pay for his breakfast after I found that out.
Knew an old Corsair pilot posted in the Solomans during 44-45. He admitted that he not only never even saw a Japanese plane in flight and that it frustrated him that he couldn't even get a hut to catch fire. 😀😬🥴😏
I played doubles tennis with an ex US navy pilot. He said when he went ashore at Plymouth in UK, he never had to pay for any food or drink.......the bartenders would just say....."no you're alright mate"
The Hurricane though a good bit of kit and piloted by great men, was more numerous than the Spitfire, which is why it's overall numbers seem more significant. The Spitfire was clearly the superior fighter on a one to one basis. It was just harder to produce, which is why it was less numerous.
The Hurricane was in greater numbers during the BoB than the Spitfire as it entered service before the Spit. And the Hurricane tended to go for the bombers whilst the Spit went for the Fighters. The Hurricane could dogfight the 109, but due to how it was made, it was very susceptible to fire. So the Hurricane outnumbered the Spitfire throughout the battle, and shouldered the burden of the defence against the Luftwaffe; however, because of its higher performance, the overall attrition rate of the Spitfire squadrons was lower than that of the Hurricane units, and the Spitfire units had a higher victory-to-loss ratio
The Corsair has the longest production run of any prop driven fighter that didn’t end until January of 1953. There is a good feature story in Air and Space Magazine July 2021 issue.
@@aaronsanborn4291 That doesn’t surprise me. I went on a 4 month detachment in 1973 with 2 P-3 Orions were we did operations with South American Navies and the bases we went to were like air museums.
As an American, it's extremely hard to compare these all together. Each had their own strength's and weaknesses. While the P-51 with the RR engine was my fav, it's still hard to not put the Spitfire top of my list.
It was numbers that made the Hurricane so important, especially early in the war. It was easier to build than the Spitfire, so more were built. However, it was not the better plane.
NO NO NO if you purely go of statistics of course its gonna have a higher aircraft shot down ratio first of all it was mainly used against slow flying bombers. 2nd it was slow every axis fighter out sped it. 3rd of all there were tons of them compared to the spitfires as they were way easier to produce and there were more factories making them. was the hurricane bad no but as a plane inferior. lots of spitfire and hurricane pilots said they always prayed that they would be told they would fly spitfire rather than fly the hurricane. alot of them felt the hurricane was more limited on what it could do comparatively. But should it have been on the list YES. If your gonna but the fw 109 and the bf 109 you have to include the hurricane
The best fighter of the war is an endless and impossible argument. There are too many variables and inconsistencies to compare planes that were designed for different strengths, were designed at different times, and faced varying enemy capabilities. For example, many people feel the P-47 was the greatest. It undoubtedly was a great plane, but when the US gave it to the Soviets, they found little use for it because they were fighting at lower altitudes which the Thunderbolt wasn't designed for. It would be like the Americans trying to use a Yak-3 for bomber escort. Does that make the Yak worse or better than the Thunderbolt? Of course not, it just means the planes can't be compared. Another example is the P-51 was a better escort than the P-47 because it had far better range, but if the mission involved ground attack the P-47 would likely be the better choice because it had better survivability, more firepower, and could carry more load. Which plane's better? Who knows? Also, the quality of the pilot is a huge factor in the performance of any plane, and it's impossible to say which planes were carrying the best pilots overall.
@@capitaljushman5756 As you said, depends on the mission. One note to put forth, the P38 had the longest range (Think Yamamoto). Of the top American aces, 4 flew P-38s. Last note: The P-38 with green pilots took on the aces of both theaters and held there own while learning how to fight.
If the Italians hadn't such a bad industry during the war, the sagittario would have propably been a very competitive plane, in fact some British pilots told that it was better than some spitfires during dogfights, but well, there were only 60 produced so it was kinda an event to fight one
@@ddoublegnot the sagittario we are talking about bud, you shouldn't get all your knowledge from war thunder... Speaking of the sagittario we are talking about is also in warthunder, also known as Re.2005
@@cantrell0817 the hurricane was dominant by quantity by the speed and reduced cost of manufacture and its ease of being repaired rapidly, the biggest disadvantages of the spit was the time and cost to manufacture and its inability to sustain damage and fly home as well as the hurricane.
I believe the Hurricane shot down more Luftwaffe aircraft than the Spitfire. The Spit's went for the German fighters, and the Hurries went for the bombers, so a little easier to shoot down....:)
*All the other countries holding only 1 or 2 fighters* "they're my little babies" *US over in a corner with 8 different fighters* "wait we were only supposed to make one?"
TBF a lot of more obscure aircraft were missing from the list. Britain is famous for the Spitfire, but just off the top of my head the Hurricane, Beaufighter and (my personal favourite) the Mosquito were all also worthy of mention. In particular, it's a bit silly to say the Lightning is the best because of versatility and not mention the Mosquito because it was very similar to the Lightning in many respects. But it's all tradeoffs anyway. One plane will be a better dogfighter, another will have better range or better weapons or more flexibility.
@@JohnLudlow You say the Lightning is versatile, but have you seen the amount of modifications the Mosquito had? It could be used as anti-submarine, bomber escort, anti-tank, fighter and a lot more. And to top this off it was made out of fucking PLYWOOD.
@@sampackman69 it was also modified to be used as a transport. Ferried mail or VIPs. Mark Felton did a video on it, which I'll link in an edit. It really is an incredibly versatile aircraft. Edit: here's the video as promised. ruclips.net/video/B09xMixpPFM/видео.html
The F6F Hellcat definitely should have been on this list. It wasn't until the Hellcat entered service that fighter pilots in the US Navy had a distinct advantage over the Japanese. More American fighter pilots became aces in the Hellcat than in any other type, and its 19-1 kill ratio was the highest of any US fighter.
To be fair, the Hellcat also had opportunities that types like the F4U, which had been relegated to land bases (contrary to myth, NOT because the plane was unsuitable for carrier deployment. It was a matter of logistics more than anything else) didn't. Engagements like the Marianas Turkey Shoot tend to inflate the numbers a bit.
@Jack Tangles you're mistaken. In fact, pound for pound comparison between the P-51D and F4U-4, the Corsair came out the winner. Faster, 438 vee 441, has a higher roll rate, could dive faster, carry heavier armament loads, could absorb a lot of battle damage and above all, could land on a carrier.
I think the biggest advantage the allies had was that they had such a variety of planes , they could choose the plane that was best suited for the job at hand . Japan and Germany seemed to focus on a limited number of designs , expecting them to fill multiple roles
It is actually quite vice versa. The German had so many projects that they somewhat got lost and failed to concentrate on few models. For instance, they had not only propeller planes but actually three types of thrust: piston engines (Me Bf 109, Fw 190), jet engines (Me 262, Arado 234, He 162) and rocket engines (Me 163 Komet) at hand. The biggest advantage of the Allies was not their variety of models but the sheer numbers of their planes, which made mass attacks including 1000 bombers possible.
@@goldfing5898 I can see your point but they were putting all their research into new emerging tech instead of improvement of proven designs. Just look at the fighter planes , USA built the P-36 , 38, 39 , 40 , 47 , 51 , wildcat , Corsair and hellcat . Britain made spitfire , fast and agile to combat fighters and hurricane to go after bombers. And then beaufighter , which was devastating when there was no fighter escort . The typhoon and tempest along with many designs that were not developed. I could not count how many different attack planes allies had , if there was a job then just choose the best machine for it . But the Luftwaffe had to keep plodding along with the ju87 and 88 for level bombers, diving , ground attack , anti shipping, recognizance even though it was outdated by 1939. Because there was nothing else and no designs on the way In some areas Germany had way to much diversity. I think I recall that they had something like 480 different makes and models of motor transport because none of the manufacturers would agree to work together and standardize When they took over other countries one of the first things was to turn captured firearms factories to making arms for germany . But they were not made to standard patterns so all armorers had to have stocks of each manufacturers parts I have had some German wartime production rifles and the quality was better than most peacetime products from other countries, but in the field, having kar98s , some mg42s and hopefully a pac 38 , then seeing the multitude of what was pointed the other way must have seemed very lopsided to the German infantry I think it was much the same for Luftwaffe
@@outinthesticks1035 Yes, they got bogged down especially during the last phase of the war, out of pure desperation (e.g. such crazy designs as the Bachem 349 Natter vertical take-off rocket interceptor, which was still tested during the last weeks in Feb and March 1945). But they also did some improvements to existing and proven designs, e.g. they developed the Fw 190 D (long-nose Dora) out of the Fw 190 A in late 1944, and, similar to the Spitfire, they continued to improve the Me Bf 109 (G and even K versions). Admittedly, there was a great lack of designs regarding long-range bombers. This was a misconception at the start of WW II that the blitzkrieg would not last very long. Later, they realized that they would need a long-range "Amerika-Bomber" and thought of the Horten XVIII, which was of course way too late. In addition, they were (despite of some experiments) not able to develop a nuclear bomb, as opposed to the Americans. They had Peenemünde for rocket development but no Los Alamos.
@@goldfing5898 I'm rereading the comments , and realized I'm reinforcing some of what you say . There were so many allied planes that not much could be done . I recall that the defensive strategy to deal with the jets was to stack p-51s above the bombers and fire in the direction of the jets travel so there was just so much that some would hit . I did run across the Dora , and it was a upgrade on the best platform they had , but as far as the 109 , they were reaching the limit of design. It was a contemporary of spitfire and they were both medium altitude, short range interceptors . And no amount of updates would change them to high altitude ,long range , heavy fighters . Britain saw the need and by the time of the invasion there were new planes coming off the assembly lines. USA already was thinking that way because they needed it to reach the Japanese , and I think the Brits had a advantage of technology transfer from the states allied aircraft design was not hampered by government restrictions as much , I think I recall that both the hurricane and mosquito were private ventures that raf accepted after they had Been proven When allies were in France then Germany pretty much lost the ability to strike Britain because they just didn't have planes that had the range
@@outinthesticks1035 Yes, I also consider the Fw 190 the much better design than the 109. This was the reason why in the end, the German air ministry gave priority to the Fw 190 in order to evolve a high altitude fighter. The intermediate stage was the Fw 190 D, but Kurt Tank then made the Ta 152 H out of it, which was even better. They saw that the B-17 Flying Fortress would be replaced by the B-29, operating at even higher altitudes, so there were plans for using pressure suits (as in the Gotha 229 jet) or even pressure chambers in the future, as well as ejection seats, which had been tested successfully e.g. in the He 219 Uhu. But time ran out, especially since fuel, airfields and good pilots were hardly available anymore.
The last time I was at WAFB, my wife and I met about a dozen Germans looking at different planes. One man was from the same street about 2 blocks away from where she grew up. At that time if you wanted to see some of the fighters mentioned here you had to leave the main part of the museum and go to another building.
@@fritzfiedler1807 WPAB. Has a fantastic collection of aircraft from the beginning to present day. Wright Patterson Air Force Base has a collection of aircraft that is a must see for aviation enthusiast's. My grant father and I made yearly trips for many years and at present it has evolved into much much more. The Holocaust display is outstanding, humbling, and disturbing and should never be taken for granted.
I am a P38 fan and love this fighter for its abilities and beauty. Dick Bong proved how advanced ti was and the Germans rightly feared it. BTW, I didn't realize the YAK 3 was so good.
To be far they didn't come out until the Germans were throwing janitors into their aircraft, so while an impressive record, it was against a very untrained adversary Edit: You could almost use the same argument for the mustangs impressive record too
@@jameskester7745 true. But also I think there was a French ace who said it handled better than any other plane. Even the luftwaffe told their pilots not to ever engage it below 5km
Truth be told, I love the messer. If I had to go out in a plane during the war, it wouldn't be under Goering but it'd still be in a 109. That said your inlaw was right. If you go by "What was the last prop driven plane to win a dogfight" then it was a Corsair flying for Honduras during the 100 Hour (football) War. Against P-51s. Then you have that time 1 Corsair lost (but fought like hell) against 8 god damn MiG 15s in the Korean War. With half a wing missing. You got several other instances of the Corsair just being the best god damn dogfighter & all-arounder, so it's not really an argument. It's just fact. I do like the one thing the P-38 arguably has over the Corsair... The guns. Not how many or how big they are, but where they are: All bunched together right on the nose. It'd be an exaggeration to say the lightning practically spat out a solid beam of lead.... But not much of one, either. Also I really hate how this video didn't mention the P-39 / P-61 because that was pretty much the Soviet Union's best fighter for a long, long while. And it had a 37mm cannon. On top of like 4 or 6 fiddies.
@@83j049733rfe4 very interesting of you to mention the p39. The US had no use for them because of their low altitude but the soviets loved it since low altitude was the rule in the eastern front (reason why LaGs and Yaks also performed best below 4km) and the plane was resilient, easy to maintain and could withstand the improvised runways thanks to its tricicle wheels. LaG-5 and Yaks were good and eventually got incredible but for a while the soviets made extensive use of this very misunderstood aircraft.
@Tim Beeker RE: "There is a book (A Higher Calling... a very good book) . . ." A lot of Germans, particularly those who lived through World War II, did not like the book. They considered the German pilot to have been a traitor for not shooting down the crippled American bomber. Which, I suppose, is understandable.
No no no, didnt you know that ALL Nazis were evil and couldnt do anything heroic??? This is propaganda of the highest order! Naturally im taking the piss here. Im just sick and tired of being labelled a Neo-Nazi and apologist for stating that not ALL of them were evil SOBs like Hitler...
"General Greivous’ ship, dead ahead. The one crawling with Vulture Droids." "Oh, I see it. This is going to be easy..." "This is where the fun begins!" "Flying is for droids!" "Spinning isn’t flying Anakin!!" "But it is a good trick!" "Easy, R4, nothing too fancy- WOAAAAH!!!"
The hurricane was a brilliant bullet sponge as it could take lots of damage and the turnaround time to fix damage was so fast that they could have been back fighting before the end of the day.
Fins have a vote here! Fins matter! 😉😛👍 You beat us all to it, but a properly-rigged ext tank can still make a big explosion... why did no one explore canopy-based det cord to tanks dropped from 1200-6000’? 😂
I am missing the Me 262, even if it just came into action, as it was already to late. It even laid the foundation for all currently used military air crafts
The Me 262 was obviously a huge technical advance and could do things no other plane could. But it's overall effectiveness was limited. It was known to be very difficult and dangerous to fly, compounded by the fact the pilots were insufficiently trained in flying it, and was mechanically notoriously unreliable. Also, by the time it was available, fuel availability was a huge issue for the Luftwaffe and the Me 262 was very, very thirsty and also required special runways and facilities. So in the end, it wasn't particular successful even in limited use. Perhaps just too far ahead of its time.
@@knutthompson7879 The draw backs were mostly because of the state of the German war machine at the time. The allies strategy was to shoot them on the ground or when they took off or landed. Nobody wanted to face a Me 262 in the air at full speed.
@@jonathanross149 I am sure it was terrifying to go up against something that fast. All other things being equal, they could do some damage. A lot of their general ineffectiveness WAS due to the inability of the Germans to properly train pilots and outfit and maintain the planes, not to mention produce enough of them to make a difference, no debating that. Oh and also when they wasted time and effort trying to make it a bomber instead of a fighter, a role it was really designed for.
@@jonathanross149 I wounder why xD No but seriously, I wish I saw the reaction to the very first allied when a Me 262 just swooped by like a crazy fat little be from hell. That is a reaction video I would see.
I agree with you. Pilot training, lack of fuel, maintenance, is all beside the point. If you had trained pilots in well maintained fully fueled aircraft, I don't think there's any plane on the list that could take an Me 262 one on one.
I have studied WW II for over 35 years, and I own about 30 WW II books, and just as many video documentaries. I would have to place the P-51 as the best, because it could do it all - dog fight, super range, escort, land attach. But more important than all of this, it changed the aerial was in the European theater completely, with P-51s flying over Berlin, and not just for a few minutes. I also wish to point out that all the American fighters you mentioned all flew over 400 mph, which was VERY uncommon in WW II.
Ya, but by the time the mustang gotten the Packerd (RR) engine, the Germans were putting in younger, untrained pilots, so that probably contributed to it's great record. Not that it wasn't a great plane, because it was, but Germany was also coming out with better aircraft, but no one to fly them
I’m still looking for the right movie that accurately displays the planes that were used. After the war, a lot of people don’t know that weapon engineering changed tremendously because of this worldly conflict.
So true, and that's why I would have picked it if I had to go to war for real. Not only it will bring you back alive, but it can also successfully perform any type of mission, from air to air combat to ground support. For me, it will always be the #1 fighter plane of WW2.
@@razorback20 #1 by far. No propeller plane faster than the 47 until the Jets. Take damage better. Engine almost never quit. More firepower. More range. Maneuverable up high, but not as good down low. Could outdive anyone, but had natural brake for newish pilots so would not crater it into the ground like all other fighter types. Had the required range to go to Berlin(as soon as the asshole bomber mafia allowed it to carry external fuel tanks) Flew more combat sorties than any other type and had the Fewest casualties than any other type and yet were often tasked with the MOST dangerous missions: Ground pounding. Why? Its engine and its 2000lb payload plus 8 50's. Pretty simple reason why: had 2800Hp under the hood. Almost double that of the Mustang/Spitfire(Griffin version had 2000hp at end of war) PS: Tempest if built MUCH earlier in the war would have gotten a BIG nod over the Spitfire, but UK could not make its engine run worth a damn.
derkaiser420, No it wasn’t, they built just under 14,500 Hurricanes but just over 20,000 Spitfires, just over 22,500 if you include the naval Seafire variant. In addition, the Spitfire was the only World War 2 fighter that was in production and service before 1939 and was still in full production after 1945. ,
The Hurricane wasn't really used as a fighter after the battle of Britain. It was repurposed as a ground support aircraft till being replaced by the Tempest and Typhoon
Not intended at all, to take anything away from the Spitfire. Never the less...Around 2-3rds of the fighters in the Battle of Britain were Hurricanes. For that reason alone it at least deserves a mention. Best comparative description of the two i've heard - was....."The Spitfire was like a fast agile sports car. - It could slice through the sky like a hot knife through butter". While the Hurricane was - "like a solid old pick up truck. It could take a pounding in battle, and still come back for more". Squadrons and pilots learnt to fly each type to their strengths.
@@mrjockt Those were produced after the battle of Britain. The hurricane was by far the most produced during the BOB and there were relatively few spitfires at the time.
The impact that the P-38 made is probably as interesting as the plane itself. Pilots and commanders recognized early on the shortcomings during dogfights, so they pioneered the squadron/formation tactics that can still be seen today
While the P-38 was no doubt a good aircraft the DH Mosquito is a forgotten and very very under-rated aircraft. Fulfilling so many roles, and doing all of them exceptionally well, played a major part in WW2. Some of my late Father's friends who flew the Mosquito (and the Tetse) loved the plane as it could take an immense amount of damage and still fly. With such a variety of variants (Photo-reconnaissance, Bomber, Fighter, Night Fighter, Strike Fighter Bomber, Trainer, Torpedo Bomber, Target Tug, and highball), it was surely, in my opinion, the most versatile aircraft of WW2 and deserves a place in aviation history and inclusion in your list.
IMHO, the Mosquito was the best allied aircraft of the war and possibly the best of any combatant nation in WWII. But, except for the night fighter versions, it wasn’t really a fighter and much as I would like to see it in this list, it doesn’t really belong here.
I'm not a fighter pilot expert but I am an amature military historian. My father was a B-17 pilot and was shot down on July 26, 1943 on his third mission after a bombing raid over Hanover, Germany. Five of his crew were killed and the other five survived and were all captured. My dad spent the rest of the war in Stalag Luff III and Stalag VII A when he was freed by the lead units of Patton's 3rd Army in April 1945. In early 1943, the 8th Army Air Corps were still flying unescorted missions and facing tremendous German fighter and flak to and from their missions. Losses were heavy. During the war, the bombers lost 60,000 crews killed or taken prisoner. The following is an account from a German fighter pilot’s summary perspective describing the difficulty attacking a B‐17 formation. “A B‐17 formation, dubbed a "Pulk" (herd) by the Germans, was an unnerving sight for the novice German fighter pilots. With a combined closing speed of 500 mph both sides had only seconds to make their fire count. Barreling in at 200 yards per second a fighter pilot might have time for only a half‐second burst before taking evasive action.” And the following is a quote from a highly experienced German fighter pilot ACE on the same subject. "Fips" Phillips, was a 200+ Eastern Front Ace. While in command of JG 1 defending against American bombers over northern Germany he offered this personal perspective: "Against 20 Russians trying to shoot you down or even 20 Spitfires, it can be exciting, even fun. But curve in towards 40 fortresses and all your past sins flash before your eyes." Nevertheless, the German pilots were fierce in the defense of their homeland. Between flak and fighters, Germans shot down over 4,000 B‐17’s during the war. I fought in the Vietnam War for a year 1968-69. I lost a lot of good Marines, but during the Vietnam War we had 68,000 killed. The bomber crews lost 60,000 in less than four years. It's not known exactly how many German fighters were shot down by the American bombers because many of the claims were reported by two or more of the bombers for the same German aircraft or exaggerated because gunners thought they had shot down an aircraft when in reality, they were seldom confirmed. However, one of my uncles who flew fighters in the Korean War was the first double ACE for a jet fighter pilot. He was famous for his book on fighter tactics called "No Guts, No Glory" that in close dog fights today is still relevant. He retired from the Air Force as a Major General and he died on the 4th hole of his golf club at the age of 91. He was a true gentleman in that he never drank, didn't smoke, and never cursed. He was the happiest and most satisfied individual I've ever known. I miss him and my parents who were the best parents any kid could hope to have had. I'm 77 now and I can tell you that the US and the world is far worse today than they were during the Cold War in the 50's and early 60's. I wish the younger people today could see how much better live was back then. Of course we had major problems as well such as segregation, but crime, poverty, drugs, and human misery wasn't as dramatic as it is today. California in those days was an idyllic state and today it is not much better than the center of human misery and despair. NYC was safe and a great place to visit. Today, it isn't safe and crime is rampant as is homelessness and an immigration crisis caused by a moron of a President we have today. The list goes on. We are more divisive today than ever before in my life time. I digress.
@@thethirdman225 I agree , though some variants are pretty comparable to the P-38 which did make the list .... If I had the choice of flying any WW2 plane in WW2 it would be a Mozzie.
You forget to mention how heavy the P-38 had to be in order to fly. It had a roughly 16 to 1 lift to drag ratio. The design was so effective that the plane could not fly without being extremely heavy.
@@Baulder13 as that if it wasn’t heavy, the plane would be lifted so high into the air it couldn’t fly. This love had to be heavy in order to stay in the air. I studied this as a glider design back in high school for aerospace pre engineering
@@nigelvestrand4252 oh man thats an interesting fact thanks. Basically it had to trade range and speed by adding weight just to not shoot straight up into the stratosphere lol.
@@Baulder13 you got to remember it was used in the pacific a lot and it shot down admiral Yamamoto. So it had range and with two engines it was quite fast at 443 mph and had a range of 1,305 miles without drop tanks. Considering the P-51 only flew at 437 mph but was probably cheaper to make and was first flew a year later.
@@Baulder13 not to mention that Richard Bong 40 victories, Thomas McGuire 38 victories and Charles H MacDonald 27 victories were America’s top aces. They all got them in the P-38.
@@friedyzostas9998 You're right, no body actually got near them! Remind me, Fried Yzoshitas, how Japan's Imperial Empire is getting on nowadays? All thanks to the Zero of course.
STOP THE CAP, the P-38 while was not the most successful or best fighter of WW-2. Spitfire, BF-109, FW-190, La-7, Yak-3, P-51, F-6F, F-4U, Ki-84 Frank, N1k George, A6M Zero, Macchi-205 you could make a case for any of these! So isn't talked about for Example the Spitfire and BF-109 served from the first day until the last. Yet were always competitive with newer designs... the Zero had an unheard of Dominance early in the war, it's drop off in kill ratio was due more loss of experienced pilots, then obsolescence. Italian fighters tend to be completely overlooked although the Macchi Mc. 202 & 205 were at least as good as the fighters they faced. I could go on for ever lol but the point is this a very difficult question would probably require a whole series of videos to even begin to properly answer. In the end it was and will always be the Pilot who makes the greatest difference!
I must disagree. The Hurricane was already obsolete by 1940 - it shot down more planes than the Spitfire because the 'Spit' was new and there were precious few of them. The Hurricane was outclassed by the German ME109 in pretty much every way. When you're outclassed so badly - the wise thing is adopt Claire Chenault's tactics [ US Flying Tigers in China ] - get an altitude advantage , make one high speed attack and hope you hit something , then use your dive speed to get the hell outta Dodge. The Flying Tigers had the same problem Flying the obsolete P-40 against the fast agile Mitsubishi Zero - dogfighting with a superior aircraft is suicide - your only winning hand is ambush tactics. When the fearsome F6F Hellcat was introduced it was the Japanese who were now outclassed in every way , and they resorted to the exact same thing. Make one high speed diving attack and get Yo ass outta there !
@@charlesmartel8112 The title of the clip was "Which country had the most effective fighter". If the Hurricane shot down more planes than the Spitfire why does that not make it "effective". My understanding is that RAF tactics called for the Hurricanes to go after German bombers while the Spitfires went after the German fighters. They were both effective and both helped the RAF won the Battle of Britain.
@@salemengineer2130 You have a good point there - against a Hurricane a bomber is the proverbial 'sitting duck' and no mistake. I forgot the RAF used this very clever tactic. Thanks for that. [ not a Hurricane fan obviously - I think it was a dog but dogs often do good work ]
Jets need not apply otherwise me262, Typhoon was 1) A dog, 2) horribly unreliable, 3) Tempest barely flew in WWII(Dead sexy airplane btw), 4) Mosquito was not a fighter, and night fighter claims are beyond ludicrous as zero corroboration and everyone lied by at least 2X and closer to 4X in night ops where one sees a plane for less than a quarter of a second while firing, 5) Hurricane was obsolete in 1940 like the P40, yet were used anyways and 6) This guy purposefully picked his #1 aircraft to purposefully be the worst on the list at everything, thus cleverly avoiding majority of fans of certain aircraft. As for my personal Opinion: P47. Ugly, but had lowest loss rate, even though flew highest number of combat missions in all theatres of the war, was tasked with ground pounding as well due to its 2300hp to 2800hp damage eating radial engine and could do everything well and to top it off, was very fast. Certainly not a sexy ride, but if living while delivering more bombs/rockets/ammo than any other fighter is your criteria... If you want acrobatics at an airshow, take a Spitfire as your ride of choice. Suggest the Spit VIII with its 2000hp Griffin and light airframe before they changed it***Edit: maybe that was the Spit XII?***. Can't take damage, but damn do you have a sexy nimble tweety bird down low to REALLY impress the ladies.
@@w8stral EVERYONE over-reported kill figures, not only night fighter pilots, everyone did, oddly enough by 2-4 times. Any serious historian who studies air warfare during WWII could tell you that. Typhoon was horribly unreliable to start with, though most of the kinks had been worked out. As for a dog, no worse than some other large, fast aircraft, the P-47 was not exactly nimble either. Agree the Hurricane was if not obsolete by 1940 it was certainly outdated. Which was why it was pulled as a frontline fighter after the Battle of Britain and mostly converted to the Ground Attack role, in which it was actually very successful. More rugged than the Spitfire and a far more stable gun and rocket platform. Did the job well until better aircraft came along. Personally I would have gone for the Westland Whirlwind had they managed to manufacture its engines in enough quantities and figured out the last few glitches. Rolls Royce though were so busy with the Merline they were not able to put the work into the Peregrine to really make it shine, and that killed a very capable fighter.
@@w8stral the reason the P-47 had the lowest loss rate was because most of its missions were ground attack where the only thing shooting you would be an occasional wirbelwind or ostwind which in reality were bad. That meant it would have incredibly low losses, and when it was used as an escort the Germans were clever. They would just wait until the p-47 had to return back to base before attacking the bombers meaning the p-47 while flying many combat, missions would be in danger of being shot at a lot less than most other aircraft. Also the spitfire was remarkably tough. Only slightly weaker than a Mustang and a reasonable amount more so than a bf-190.
Jacob Kingsford arrogant brits the p47 was well known to fight 109s and 190s and take severe damage and win. The p47 was used as a ground attacker later and a escort first.
@@jesspayne5548 it was only used as an escort because it was pretty much the only plane that could carry a sufficiently large add on fuel tank to make the most of journey. The way beat most bf 109 sand FW 190 s was by diving on them because due to its higher weight it could accelerate much faster but once that dive was up it is pretty much lost most of its energy to make maneuvers and was less maneuverable to start with so once it was found out that was how P-47 beat the German fighters, they would quickly swerve to avoid the diving p-47 and pick it off once it was slow as it started to climb back up. so while this gave the p-47 slight advantage early on it was fairly easy to counter and once the tactic was created the Germans would win most of the dogfights against it.
The P-38 doesn’t get credit it deserves, it help turn the tide in the pacific theater. Beautiful bird, incredible sound one of the best birds ever made. Not sure who’s prettier Corsair, Mustang or the Lightning
well the answer is Spitfire, but sure ;-) Mustang for me, although there's a certain brutality to the F6F and F8F. I'm OK with the gull wings on the Corsair but the spinner feels like it needs a cap (which would ruin the cooling, of course)
ME 262 was awful. The engines had terrible durability and weren't reliable at all. It was a massively innovative design, but that innovation came at the cost of it's reliability
the 262 came into the fight way too late to make much of a difference, not to mention as with many german war implements it was too hard to produce. It was definitely innovative and a great plane, but for every one they could produce britain could pump out 10 spitfires and america could pump out 10 mustangs or lightnings
The Grumman F6F Hellcat deserves to be on the list. It had a 19:1 kill ratio. Italy's Macchi C.202 Folgore was another good-quality fighter which deserves to be on the list.
This. I will never ever respect american planes of WW2, but they got to have best tactics in the end. In Europe high alt bombers are not to be and in the east even less so. But what european theatre had was great mid alt fighter galore dance which also produced most 100+ kills aces. By the time americans get to fight Luftwaffe it was not "fair match" at all with usually with 109K trying hard to climb towards super high bombers who came in great numbers, lost all of their ammo, just to fight even higher american p51 who always had numerical advantage. Was P51 very successful? Yes. Do i think 1 vs 1 German and Soviet fighters were better during ww2. Hell yes.
@@Čangrizavi_Cinik A lot of those 100+ aces started in the Spanish Civl War. A big difference between the Germans and Americans was the German pilots stayed on the front lines, whereas the Americans would pull their pilots to train the newer ones. Plus there was a big difference in claiming a plane shot down. The Americans counted any plane that was shot down as a kill. The germans didn't count their planes shot down unless the pilot was killed.
Damn I loved the tempest my granddad flew a spitfire and was a Ace no joke his name was Carl Davies, and he said, one plane he said he would’ve loved to fly was the rugged tank the tempest or was it the typhoon
Fun fact: During the war, when the allies started to run into German 262s, the P-47 was actually considered at one point to be turned into a turbojet powered fighter to help combat the 262s, called the Republic P-47 (Turbobolt)
When the P-38 Lightning got to Europe the Luftwaffe used it as a target drone, so it was used to harass shipping in the Mediterranean where it did well. The roll rate of the P-38 was too low, so it couldn't turn fast enough.. The only way to assess effectiveness is the kill rate, it's the Hurricane. Whilst the Spitfires were chasing Bf109, the Hurries were downing the bombers, and later used for very effective ground attack.
I'd have to say I love the Hellcat. It ruled the skies in the Pacific and was more than a match for any on the list. It could carry bombs, rockets, fuel tanks and radar by the end.
The Hellcat was too slow to tangle with leading late-war designs. It was built mainly as a Zero-killer that would fit on the rather cramped aircraft carriers of the time. As the Zero was even slower and not upgraded like most of the other WWII aircraft, the F6F did not have to be exceptionally fast. The F4U was much faster with the same engine as the Hellcat, as was the F8F. The Hellcat saw more action mainly because the F4U took a long time to pass its carrier qualifications - and it took the British to sort that. The IJN started the war with the best aircraft in the Pacific but were totally eclipsed by the Allies rather quickly in both quantity and quality. The USA being protected by vast oceans making it virtually impossible to attack had the luxury of entering the war unprepared and having a couple of years to get fully mobilized.
Mossie deserves mention for sure. It was a multirole aircraft that could do recce work, pathfinders, fighter, fighter bomber, and ground attack roles with molens nose cannon often sent to take out u boats. Check u tube for "tseste" squadron and what kind of ground damage that variant could do. And as side note it was used in canada in the 60s for photogrammetric survey because it was so stable flying low over the ground. Didn't hurt that being made of wood made it harder for german radar harder to pick up. Original variant had no guns it was hitting "around" 400 mph with the twin merlins. Germans tried to copy it with thier moskito but when main factory that made glue for wood was smashed they could not replicate that glue and the planes started splitting apart. (Hurricane proved great as a tank buster in north africa after b.o.b.)
The Mossie was the unknown factor, it had radar, it was undetectable, it flew at night and bombed the crap out of Hitler... and to think it could have been built before the W war2 and they could have had hundreds of thousands of them ending the war without the US, one bad choice, pushing the spitfire which was a complete lemon initially and some say didn't get much better, and was not as safe and not as easy to fly as the hurricane.... someone was getting paid to prop that stupid machine up, Im betting. And for those who dont know the Hurricane was voted as the best plane by the pilots, not the spitfire. The Mossie was a hidden unknown plane, as were the missions, and only those who flew them knew what they did, you can ask them and they have stuff on You tube, but not for long.
His accuracy leaves MUCH to be desired. For instance the idiot called the Spitfire a low altitude aircraft...... A very few select versions were made for low altitude work. Majority were for medium altitude and it was ok at High, and a few versions were excellent...
Fun facts: 1) The Grumman F6F Hellcat, which shot down more axis planes than any other Allied naval aircraft, is not on this list. 2) The Hellcat shot down 5160 Japanese aircraft, the second place Allied plane in the Pacific/China-Burma theater only shot down 2140 Japanese planes. 3) In the Battle of the Marianas, on June 11, 1944, Hellcats shot down 70 Japanese aircraft. Six days later on June 19th, they shot down another 354 enemy planes in "The Great Marianas Turkey Shoot". In two days, the F6F destroyed 25% of what it took the P-38 (1700 Japanese planes) the entire conflict in the Pacific to do. 4) Contrary to what many sources claim, the P-38 Lightning did not shoot down more Japanese aircraft in WWII than any other American or Allied aircraft. The numbers do not support that statement. The P-38 with 1,857 victories in Pacific/China/Burma theaters came in third place behind the F6F Hellcat with 5,160 and the F4U Corsair with 2,140. It is accurate to state that the P-38 did shoot down more Japanese aircraft than any other USAAF plane with 1,857, with the P-40 running a close second at 1,633.5.
The Hawker Tempest was an absolute beast. Luftwaffe pilots were scared of it especially at low level. The Me 262 has to be up there me too, it was pretty much a fighter from the future at that point in time. Great choices though, love the P38 a non-clichéd choice and mount of America's top aces in ww2. Also beautiful, fast and ahead of its time.
Maybe green ones, experten knew how to deal with it hans dortenmann shot down 4 tempests with his dora 9 he was the biggest fw190 d9 ace , theres is a very interesting tale about a dogfight between a tempest and a ta 152 the pilot was willy reschke he shot down the tempest
@@noteimportax6477 That dogfight with the ta 152 was fake. The story changed 3 times and there is no way to confirm. What we can confirm is that the ta 152 had serious problems and half remained grounded at all times. The ta 152 is a coulda been fighter not to mention it was slower than a p 40 on the deck. It was not manuverable and it was only faster than most american fighters heading north of 25,000ft.
A fuel tank made out of compressed paper at that. Sorry, the Spitfire was the best overall fighter of WWII. BTW, as early as October of 1942 the Zero was seen to be a wasting asset; the great pilots were all pretty much killed off in the carrier battles.
@@Easy-Eight not exactly, the spit is incredibly manoeuvrable, but slow. And the controls were weird, when you take speed it goes up as hell and turns froms right to left when speed changes, we could say it's unstable !
@@I.JG7.Frenchie Well in '42 the BF109 & FW190s were the best aircraft in the world. Training & tactics are worth more than + or "-" of 20 MPH in aircraft. Germany & Japan blow it in '43. The German fritter way their air force over Africa, Italy, and Russia. Japan wastes their good pilots in the South Pacific area over Aug of '42 to mid-1943. Personally I think the best allied fighter of '39 to '44 was the Spitfire for the allies in Europe and the Yak in '44 onward . In the Pacific it was the F4F Wildcat until mid '43 then it was the reign of the Hellcat. Why? They could take off from carriers.
@@Easy-Eight the early spitfires were limited by their Carburetors. The Zero by its lack of Armor. The Spitfire and the BF109 where very evenly matched. The Zero crushed all Opposition until the Us Pilots gained experience with its weaknesses and changed their tactics. No one could turn with the zero Throughout the war.
Yeah sorry but no the hurricane was actually not a good plane, it’s range was very low, the engine was prone to over heating very easily, the .30 cals were weak compared to what most planes they fought had (the 20MM cannons on most of the BF-109’s) and the were easy targets for the German fighters.... that is the reason that they started making as many Spitfire planes as possible because the spitfires had longer range more gun and starting at the Spitfire Mk. 2 they started adding 20MM cannons and they had better engines that lasted longer and had a better cooling system than the Hurricane... so sorry but if I had to go with a British fighter plane I would go with the Spitfires... The reason I know all this stuff is from looking up information in books, documents, and films. I have also seen a hurricane and Spitfire side by side and knew the Spitfire was better cuz it had higher speed I also know the speed because I’ve flown a Spitfire along side a hurricane and was told to fly at a max of 350 MPH because the hurricane would over heat trying to keep up with the Spitfire.
Gamer fan 844 the P-38 lightning is an American twin engine fighter/attacker it’s NOT British and the early variants of the P-38 were not very fast... the later versions of the P-38 were super props so they could go faster! And also.... how did u come up with the idea that American and British planes are from the same country cuz I’m pretty sure this was about the British Hawker Hurricane and not the American Planes that led u to choosing a P-38? And also the only reason the P-38 was powerful and had a bit of more fire power wasn’t from the weapons themselves... it was due to the fact the the guns were Nose mounted cuz the P-38 had 1x 20 MM cannon and 4x .50 Cal Machine guns which is less fire power than the Zeros, the Bf-109’s, and the Spitfires that had 2x 20MM cannons and 6x .50 cals with variable range... even most of the bomber had more firepower
Baz Bazdad the hurricane IV had 2x 40 MM anti-tank cannons not normal 40 MM cannons and I don’t care if your older than my dad. Because one of my Uncles has also flown in most of the fighters that the British used and confirmed that the hurricanes were slow and the engines on almost all of the hurricanes STILL over heated very easily. And if you think I was born around your 40’s what not. You don’t even know if I was or wasn’t. Now goodbye cuz it’s bloody 1:20 AM and I’m trying to watch TV without some guy like you still going back and forth about how the stupid hurricane is so good even though the Germans could legit just slow down a tiny bit and shoot a few HE shells into the fuel tank or engine and win that fight even more of a higher chance against the hurricane Mk. IV which traded all guns for 2 40 MM Anti-Tank guns that made the plane even more slower and hard to turn and they had really low Ammo about 20x-35x shells in total. Now goodbye permanently cuz I’m not coming back to this chat to argue with a person that thinks a slow plane with low range is best plane for the British.
I am also a big fan of the hurricane as a cheaply produced workhorse, and it’s sexy (but dangerous cousin), the typhoon. I think the Hellcat and Mosquito are worth mentioning too. There were such distinct phases of the war, so it’s fascinating to see the zero as a front runner in the early phases, only to be surpassed by the suite of American fighters later in the war.
Years ago, I had the pleasure of attending an air show in San Marcos Texas. I will never forget the demo of a P 38. Came in low very fast, went straight up and never stalled. God, what a plane.
@Hoa Tattis Indeed ! Gregs Automobiles and Airplanes . He makes some extraordinary claims for the P 47 T Bolt He states that it had the highest diving speed of any fighter , as well as the highest mach number WW 2. When i challenged his claim, in that i said Eric Winkle Brown wouldn't agree , he became very venomous towards mr Brown . The problem with Greg is that he lets his P 47 bias get the better of him . Greg with a very large pinch of salt .
Well the guy did say FIGHTER but there was an actual fighter that was much faster, the me 262. The fact that it's not top of the list, hell it's not even mentioned is very peculiar to say the least.
Im sad you forgot the poor mosquito as it was a more versatile aircraft and gave the highest kill ace for Britain.The existence of the mosi pissed of herman goering. Also the spitfire saw very little use in the battle of britain it was mostly hurricanes doing the fight as the spitfire was just being put into service. So my pick would be the mosi but it wasnt there:(
The Mosquito was never considered a fighter. She was just a little too big, massed too much. Now, if you ask what the best light bomber in the war was, the Mosquito wins hands down.
Unironically, that's metal as fuck. Other nations just whine and cry when they got no ammo. Japan straight up transform into the ammo. Now that's admirable.
Given the ability to mass produce it, I think you have to give the Merlin powered Mustang the award for most dominant aircraft. The Germans could not match it at scale.
Actually the P47 had better stats that the mustang. It was faster and more maneuverable at high altitudes. It also had a higher kill ratio that the P51... Not to mention it raised hell with the German ground forces. And it could take one hell of beating and still bring their pilots home in one piece...
@@stewartbeckman7909 All good points, but the P-51 was most often tasked with escorting bombers deep into enemy territory where it had to fight the Luftwaffe's top aircraft on their own territory, so as usual it's always a bit of apples and oranges when making direct comparisons.
The Merlin was crap is was small and used 100 to 30 octanes cuz darn thing was weak. The bf109 and zero used 87 for the entire war and still made power!
Gotta hand it to those early airframes that stayed relevant throughout the war like the Bf 109, Spittfire, Hurrican. As a naval fighter i vote for Hellcat who was an evolution of the Wildcat. The Zero was probably obsolete as early as 1943. Of course the Me 262 should also be on the list as the first operational jet fighter in history.
The 262 was the first operational fighter to see combat, but the American P-59 Airacomet was in service with the USAAC as early as June 1943, despite it not being used in combat due to the price of each plane, being about 3 times as much as a Mustang
@@ElDoggo141 i don’t think the price had anything to do with it concidering the US huge war economy at the time. It was more likely the US goverment wanted to build tried and true planes to cut production time and mass produce as jets where new tech that hadn’t been proven yet. The germans gamled on superior tech like jets in order to tip the balance of the war. Obviously it didn’t work out for them.
@@ElDoggo141 The P59 Airacomet's performance was totally inferior to the Me 262 (and the British Meteor.) It was essentially an experimental aircraft. Powered by early, low-powered British-designed engines, it was never used in combat because the USAAF found its performance so bad, not due to its cost.
same engine but p51 flew pants off a spitfire and in this piece a yakovlev 3 with licensed hisso was better than p51 seems hard to believe was it that good and the hisso which had to be dated .
My gramps [ French officer ] was a test pilot in North Africa during the war. He didn't get to fly terribly many different planes , but one day I asked him which he liked the best. Without hesitation he answered - "The British Spitfire"
Origins of p51 sent to Europe to the British they loved it but for the engine threw one of theirs in it the rest is history .What if they chose Bristol Centaurus.
@@charlesmartel8112 spitfire was great plane in it's days but when fw190 came ,p51, hawker typhoon,it was showing it's age as a design just like hurricane.
P-39 Airacobra was even heavier armed fighter plane: it had 37mm gun and 4 50cals. Even though manufactured in USA rare plane in the U.S. airforce but via lend-lease the Soviets had significant number of them in the latter part of WW2.
The Me262 was obviously the best fighter plane built during WWII. The allies were shit scared of it when it came about but was too late to do too much.
@@MickR0sco i guess you never heard the tale of the US redtails. They engaged them with the p51 and won all their dogfights against them. The ME was an important development in aviation but it was built on very very very tight tolerances which are fine on paper until the production facilities are facing mass shortages in alloys, workers, engineers, designers, and maintenance crews to work on them. It was like the stg 44 or fg42 of ww2 planes. Excellent technology but way more of a hassle than what is true efficiency. The fg42 was also built and designed on tolerances so tight that the most successful missioned they were used in were the ones they did not even get used. Same goes for the ME
@@Rytoast99 I'm not interested in the details of manufacturing and stuff. What I mean is exactly that, on paper. It was hands down the most capable fighter aircraft of WWII on paper and when they had the means to maintain them.
7:16 You added a brazilian P-47 picture "Senta a Pua!", love this channel, always acknowledging other countries contribution in full videos or slightly
Tell me how good the Mustang is after you lose an engine. The Hurricane while important was second rate and while it is not exactly how it got there the Hellcat was design to out Zero the Zero and that was not the future of fighter planes.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_World_War_II_flying_aces#Table most top allied aces flew a p39, and most of those pilots had vastly more claimed kills than they were credited for, if we go by claimed kills, p39 wins by a landslide, even though it was one of the least produced planes of the war. and as far as i can tell, nobody has published either total kills attributed to the p39, or its kill/loss ratio, unlike pretty much every other plane. sounds to me like american and russia don't want to admit their ties during the war, otherwise this aircraft would be more famous than the spitfire. regardless of conspiracy theories, p39 is a fantastic plane, and easily beats the p38 in every regard but range.
@@ラリックス7 Which is why elsewhere I have stated my opinion that the P-38 is the best WWII fighter of the planes available in time and numbers to affect the outcome of the war.
unfortunately the p-51's had to have a LOT of maintenance on them to keep them running properly. Due to mold casting problems in manufacturing the front 2 cylinders always leaked oil into the powerstoke and would flood the engine with oil mid flight.
It wasn't so much what was mounted to the aircraft as it was how it was mounted. Fighters with wing mounted guns have the guns not facing straight forward but have them tilted in just a bit, which gives an intersection of projectile trajectories forward of the aircraft. Ideally you would fire at a specific range where the trajectories intersected (the sweetspot) to have all guns hitting your target. Since the P38's guns were all mounted close together in the nose, the entire projectile trajectory was the sweetspot. So if a P38 was going head on with an FW190, there is a brief second or two where the P38 was being hit by all the FW190's guns and prior/after that at best half the guns. But the FW190 will be getting hit by all the P38's guns all of the time (This is of course assuming that both pilots are experienced enough to aim properly and keep on target).
In my limted opinion I think the P 38 was the best overall plane of WW2 it could do everthing from bombing too air combat plus it had greater range than other fighter bomber planes.
in terms of early-stage war, the zero was the best fighter ever. its amazing maneuverability was the key to its deadlyness, destroying aircraft left and right. according to my parents, who's japanese, told me how apparently the allied forces only managed to make planes to counter the zeros because of a certain zero that was captured by the americans, who took it to the labs and found the plane's weakness. as y'all should probably know, the wings of the japanese fighter were extremely fragile, and also, i think, had fuel in it. so a little shot on that wing, and zeros will pretty much stop existing. so, americans were like: "aim for the wings". but you know, this information from my japanese parents, take it with a grain of salt.
one of the other problems was that the zeros didn't use hydraulic control lines. So one of the easiest ways to get the kill was to get up high and let the zero chase you striaght down then pull up. All of the increased airflow over the control surfaces prevented the pilots from being able to pull out of the dive. That and if the zero's rolled upside down the engines would starve of oil and lockup preventing them from restarting the engines mid flight. But all that was discovered once the allies got their hands on one.
@@bamarshmallow1 He also left one important fact: The only reason the Zero could go fast and maneuver so well is it had little to no armor. Thus it would not take any kind of punishment. If you got a good shot at it, they were easy to knock down when hit.
@@davidr6447 yep. At the start of the pacific theater Japan had some of thr best trained pilots in the world though. Which made them that much more formidable. Dosent matter if they don't have armor if you can't get a sight on them
America found out the Japanese Zeros did not have armor to protect their pilots, nor did they have self sealing fuel tanks in the wings...once they knew that it was all over...get a couple 50 cal. incendiary rounds in the wing tanks and watch it burn.
@@bamarshmallow1 Studying the captured Zero did no so much aid in the design of new aircraft, but was critical in developing tactics for the existing fighters.
Agreed, especially when considering the allied advantage of fuel quality in the late war. Still 'Doras' were said to be more than a match for the allies.
There are some countries that had good planes, but aren't as well known for building aircraft. The Romanian IAR 80 was quite good, and the late entry Swedish Saab 21 was another gem.
I went on a hunting trip with a p-38 pilot that flew during WW2. He passed away last year in 2020. The one time I met him he was constantly telling stories of his missions it was one of the coolest conversations Iv ever had
The Spitfire was considered superior tho, and there were tons of other British aircraft, and aircraft from all nations, not mentioned here. That way that video would've taken a decade to make and at least half a year to watch. lmao
I’d say it’s a tough call probably a tie between the Mustang and the lightning. The P 38 was a handful for pilots to fly they could get good at it but it took time the Mustang was easy to fly right from the beginning and very versatile also
What? No Mosquito? No Hellcat? I don't know who this guy thinks he is! I'm gonna give him a piece of my mind in his Discord server. Reeeeeeee!!! discord.com/invite/qt68efP
If your going to mention the battle of Britain you forgot to mention the hawker Hurricane just as important as the Spitfire according to many. And no Mosquito.
But generally not too bad of list
dont forget the wildcat and the buffalo
also the important ones like mosquito or hawker and hellcat
Wasn’t the hellcat torpedo bomber or just a bomber in general?
@@mechsgtpuma938
Mosquitos weren't effective because they constantly get shot down by bug spray.
@@grantgarrett3947 Nah it was just one of the most important fighters of the war, and arguably the most important fighter of the pacific theater
My grandpa destroyed 40 nazi aircraft during ww2...
He was the worst mechanic in the Luftwaffe .
I just saw this comment from the other vids
@@ValBoon997 It's an old joke, yes. But still going strong lol
First time I've seen it.. So thanks for a cheap laugh 😅😂
Good thing he is or else the nazis might won
Da doom, phssst. That's a drummer doing a punchline drum lick.
Imagine getting your blood line ended by a man named Dick Bong
I've smoked out of a dick bong. It was awkward.
Probably best to just admit “daddy was shot down over ___. He got struck by Lightning. The P38 kind, dear. Now hush up & run along.”
He did not live up to his name.. or so the ladies say
R.I.P. Tho....funny name, but serious Pilot ,and deserves respect. It was said he was one of the shy, quiet guys in his squadron ,but once in the air he became a tiger.
R.I.P. RICHARD IRA BONG
Old Dick Bongs never die. They just Dick away.
A British person here, during the war my farm had a runway for the P-47 thunderbolt, thought I would share this piece of info lol.
Really cool, if you find some significant things you can put up some nice places to rember great Britain involvement in the war. The bravery that Britain putted in the war is really outstanding.
Do u still have it?
@@gameplayer0534 I mean, did they really though? They betrayed their ally Poland and ran away ASAP as France was invaded.
@@Birdmaster92 France was invaded because the blitzkrieg technique works on land an was unstoppable. The English Channel saved the brits, they continued to fight against the raids of luftwaffe and eventually with the support of America they pulled the attack on D day.
@@gameplayer0534 The Blitzkrieg tactic wasnt unstoppable, during the invasion of france, the germans were not able to field heavy tanks until the maginot line was dealt with, the tanks the Germans did have access to were so small in caliber, that several of the French heavier tanks literally could not be penetrated from the front. The Main reason why France fell so swiftly was becasue the french nepotism, which got many people into higher ranks based on connections, rather than merit. The French military was superiour at the start of the war, they knew the Germans would be coming, after all France did declare the Phoney War after Germany invaded Poland. Poland fought valiantly and i have great respect for the Polish Soldiers, i would even go as far as calling them the best WW2 had to offer. But i cant muster any respect for the French or Brits, who abandoned Poland and broke their Alliance.
One thing you got slightly wrong: The Spitfire did not have a greater range than the BF109. The difference in the Battle of Britain was that the 109's were operating at their maximum ranges, far from their home bases, while the Spitfires (and Hurricanes) were operating right on top of theirs. BF109 pilots had to keep enough fuel to fly back to France, while the British and Commonwealth pilots only needed to keep the dregs of their tanks to make it back to base.
Yep, Hitler's arrogance lost him the Battle of Britain. Even the British admitted this in their 1969 movie. The Spitfire was a fine fighter though, and was easy to learn to fly, unlike the BF-109. Once German pilots became masters of the 109 though, they turned into absolute death machines.
This. When people look at stat cards only, they don't factor in any real life effects that something as simple as fuel load could have on a plane. Not to mention mental differences, such as Spitfire pilots being able to be more aggressive because if they have to ditch, they're ditching into friendly territory, whereas of German pilots had to ditch, they would be captured by the enemy.
So kill numbers and Stat cards are great and all, but they should not be the end all be all of arguments about which plane was better.
Even if Hitler had won the air battle, a naval invasion would have been impossible with Britain's gigantic navy.
Agree- the home ground advantage for Britain meant downed pilots could be rescued and return to action
@@averagefanenjoyer8696 If the Germans had managed to gain air superiority, they would have sunk each and every British ship that dared to go into the channel. The RAF well and truly saved Britain.
there were 24 versions of the spitfire in total. But I think the hurricane also deserved a spot on this list.
For sure. For every spitfire there were 10 hurricanes, and they were very effective at what they did.
Agreed. The Spitfire rightfully gets a lot of credit in the Battle Of Britain but the Hurricane gets ignored a lot. Sad, because it was excellent.
I seen one at a airshow.. INCREDIBLE
The Hurricane was a Tank in the air. It could get all shot up and still kick ass.
@@tjrich9349 seen one at a air show it was CRAZY
Actually the Hawker Hurricane was the real hero of the Battle of Britain.
They had the numbers and ease of manufacture to make the bigger difference. Also, with their role being largely to attack bomber formations, while Spitfires were often saved for swatting off escorts, I'm sure many chaps on the ground would've appreciated the Hurricane's role a bit more lol
They did all the drudgery...i.e. shooting down Heinkels and Dorniers, but if it wasn't for the Spitfire, the ME-109 Emil would have not allowed them to get to the bombers. The Emil was superior in every regard to the Huricane, and if the Spitfire hadn't been there, th Hurricanes would have been butchered.
@@billrhodes5603 Tell that to the Poles of 303 sqdn. the highest scoring squadron of the Battle of Britain. They shot down bombers AND fighters and yes, they flew the all too frequently forgotten and underestimated Hurricane.
@@TheRunereaper I was going to add; "And flown by Polish pilots"
Every time someone dares mention the word 'spitfire' in a video nano seconds later someone will always pipe up 'Ah but the Hurricane shot down more etc etc. Every time , and I mean EVERY time. And then someone else will add about the Polish pilots even if the original video had nothing to do with hurricanes or the Polish pilots or even the battle of Britain. We know. They know, we ALL know. Chill dude.
Later in the war, when the Germans had lost all their experienced pilots, kill ratios (such as against the Yak) can be a little misleading.
At least East front was the most fair. Soviets had a low alt tactics and built many low flying Il2 to destroy german tanks. So you have many low level dancing fights. When americans attacked Germany, there were no enough pilots, not enough fuel, low numbers of new superprops and jets. Americans had much greater numbers, hellish high alt bombers and its a no go from there. Its irony that Soviets destroyed german best pilots, put the focus of germans to low level fighting... just to get high alt americans take all the "awards" thinking their P51 is the best plane of the war. Which was horseshit.
@@Čangrizavi_Cinik what's wrong with the P51D Mustang it's actually the best of both worlds has the British Merlin engine and great American construction. Also 6 50 cal machine guns.
@@Čangrizavi_Cinik No! Soviets did NOT destroy the best German pilots, Western Allies did. Of the top 100 German aces, just SIX were killed in combat with Soviet fighters. So it is your comment that is more of a "horseshit" than anything else.
@@ayadav77 The Soviets were Allies. Get your facts straight.
@@AdmiralBlackstar My mistake, I was talking about the western allies. I guess not everyone is smart enough to infer that according to the context so I need to specifically spell that out so that there is no confusion. Thanks!
Thanks for putting the F4U Corsair on this list! Whenever great, WWII fighters are discussed, it's seldom mentioned. It's nice to see someone give this fine machine the respect it deserves.
Rates more of a mention than the Hellcat does. Yet the Hellcat shot down about five times as many aircraft.
I think it’s one of the coolest looking planes ever made. I want to get my pilots license one day and buy one.
@@Motor-City_Ben-Diesel I wouldn't recommend flying the Corsair immediately after getting your PPL; after all, 2,000 hp is a mighty big jump from 180-200 hp!
Had the best kill loss ratio of any us aircraft iirc. Superior to the f6f for sure.
And a great for CAS
"P38 best fighter."
...
Admiral Yamamoto has left the chat.
🤣🤣 nice
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣LOL
Very good!
I have returned!
Yup
Geet: *describing every plane as fast and agile*
War thunder players: "Are you sure about that?"
Especially American planes lmao
Ar-2 Dive bomber in Arcade Battles (i main AB because i only do RB with bombers) can out turn every single plane in the game and I'm not lying. I out turned a *biplane* alongside a Bf 109, a Spitfire and a Zero. That was epic
in war thunder im using the Whirlwind p.9 for British soon ill have the Spitfire F mk 24 6.7BR
War thunder is way too unrealistic, the p-51D-30 is pretty maneuverable and able to dogfight its way from a 109 k4, contrary from what Gaijin does. War Thunder is meant as an arcade game so don;t think what war thunder makes and all of their stats are correct, a lot of the stats have been modified to keep the game "balanced."
@@ApokalyptikNM I waited months and months working my way up to that! Then never used it because every game had jets in it, looks sick as hell though :)
My grandfather flew in the p47 and the only reason he lived was due to the extreme survivability of the craft. On more than one occasion it brought him home against all odds.
Although the P-38 had a rough design start with plenty of bugs, it was so fast and guns and cannon in the nose it was a very deadly, long range fighter. I read pilots eventually learned Not to try to dogfight, but to fight like jet pilots today. Come in fast, blow away your enemy, swing way around and come at them again. Although it could be hell to jump out of safety.
“Two planes, one pilot”.
Sounds dirty
UwU, Airplane-sama your pushing to hard... KYAAH
Duckling Chief no
@@ducklingchief8289 no
Duckling Chief no
69 likes nice
The Hellcat was credited with 5223 kills, more than any other Allied naval aircraft. It deserves a spot on this Top 10 list.
That was my first thought too.
Best planes were American and German. The P51 was amazing, best aerodynamics and a beast of an American engine. Best allied engine of the war.
@@nickmagee-brown739 I agree that American and German planes were the best in World War 2, but to be fair, the P51 Mustang used the Packard V-1650 Merlin engine that was a version based off of the British made Rolls-Royce Merlin aircraft engine. If you want to talk about an outstanding purely American made aircraft engine, one candidate for the best ever would be the Pratt & Whitney R-2800 Double Wasp that was used on the Hellcat, the Corsair, and the Thunderbolt.
Yup, I was going to say the same thing. From what I've read that was the plane they all wanted to fly when it first made the pacific scene. It destroyed the Zero.
@@nickmagee-brown739 that may be true but the Spitfire was the best looking!
My grandad flew the P-38 is the Pacific. He considered it the best fighter of the war especially after he got an engine shot out by a Japanese cruiser on his way to Saigon. The P-38 having two engine got him home.
Cool bro
What was he doing going to Saigon may I ask?
if a ww2 plane crashed, it must have been really fucked up.
I read a story about that, the pilot had 5 zeros after him with one engine out, dudes weaving slightly because he's just in firing range, feathering the prop on the bad engine and fine tuning the good one he actually out ran all 5 zeros, it was late in the war and assumed the Japanese pilots had little training, a skilled zero pilot would have been able to better set the fuel mixture and caught the barely escaping P-38
German fighter pilots considered the P38 and the P47 a joke, both planes performed purely in Europe
A note of interest. The last combat of two WWII aircraft was the Corsair and Mustang in '68 during the Soccer War between Honduras and El Salvador . Mustang belonged to Honduras and Corsair to El Salvador. The Corsair had the edge on this one.
So many always forget about the man flying the plane. It is more pilot vs pilot than plane vs plane. The Corsair winning that fight means nothing in terms of which is a better plane. 1968 and between two central American countries, hahhahah come get real fool.
Back in the mid to late 1980s, I managed a restaurant. We had a regular customer who flew a P-38 in the Pacific and knew Dick Bong. I can't recall that he ever had to pay for his breakfast after I found that out.
Oh man lucky you
Knew an old Corsair pilot posted in the Solomans during 44-45. He admitted that he not only never even saw a Japanese plane in flight and that it frustrated him that he couldn't even get a hut to catch fire. 😀😬🥴😏
I played doubles tennis with an ex US navy pilot. He said when he went ashore at Plymouth in UK, he never had to pay for any food or drink.......the bartenders would just say....."no you're alright mate"
The 2nd bast Ace pilot for the US, Thomas McGuire, also flew the P-38!
Sounds like my uncle, he taught Chuck Yeager to fly. He was a convincing liar, fooled many barmen.
Hurricane actually played a more significant role in the Battle of Britain. Also as said before, no Mosquito!
The Hurricane though a good bit of kit and piloted by great men, was more numerous than the Spitfire, which is why it's overall numbers seem more significant. The Spitfire was clearly the superior fighter on a one to one basis. It was just harder to produce, which is why it was less numerous.
The Hurricane was in greater numbers during the BoB than the Spitfire as it entered service before the Spit. And the Hurricane tended to go for the bombers whilst the Spit went for the Fighters. The Hurricane could dogfight the 109, but due to how it was made, it was very susceptible to fire. So the Hurricane outnumbered the Spitfire throughout the battle, and shouldered the burden of the defence against the Luftwaffe; however, because of its higher performance, the overall attrition rate of the Spitfire squadrons was lower than that of the Hurricane units, and the Spitfire units had a higher victory-to-loss ratio
Mosquito doesn’t get the love it deserves. (From an American).
@@BattleSloths more of a fighter bomber. One of the best aircraft of the war.
@@fatboy19831 Exactly. Such a unique design as well. Always admired it.
That shot of the F4U flying close support for US Marines is outstanding.
Corsair is such a beautiful bird
The Corsair has the longest production run of any prop driven fighter that didn’t end until January of 1953. There is a good feature story in Air and Space Magazine July 2021 issue.
@@Chris_at_Home it and the Mustang faced off in Central America in the last all propeller driven air combat war....
@@aaronsanborn4291 That doesn’t surprise me. I went on a 4 month detachment in 1973 with 2 P-3 Orions were we did operations with South American Navies and the bases we went to were like air museums.
hey rabit guy why am I seeing you everywhere?
As an American, it's extremely hard to compare these all together. Each had their own strength's and weaknesses. While the P-51 with the RR engine was my fav, it's still hard to not put the Spitfire top of my list.
The Hurricane shot down more enemy aircraft than the Spitfire, how could you leave it off.
It was numbers that made the Hurricane so important, especially early in the war. It was easier to build than the Spitfire, so more were built. However, it was not the better plane.
NO NO NO if you purely go of statistics of course its gonna have a higher aircraft shot down ratio first of all it was mainly used against slow flying bombers. 2nd it was slow every axis fighter out sped it. 3rd of all there were tons of them compared to the spitfires as they were way easier to produce and there were more factories making them. was the hurricane bad no but as a plane inferior. lots of spitfire and hurricane pilots said they always prayed that they would be told they would fly spitfire rather than fly the hurricane. alot of them felt the hurricane was more limited on what it could do comparatively. But should it have been on the list YES. If your gonna but the fw 109 and the bf 109 you have to include the hurricane
@@critical1645 Also, the production of the Hurricane ceased part way through the war. It was really a plane whose time had passed.
@@critical1645 But during the battle of Britain, where the hurricane was most influential, the spitfire was also slower than most bf 109.
dave harbour yes everyone thinks the spitfire won the battle of British but it didn’t
That "bomb" under the P-47 Thunderbolt you show was a drop tank. Bombs have rear fins; drop tanks don't.
I agree. it says everything about the "expertise" of jokers on youtube (like this channel )!
And then there’s the Pe-8 and it’s oil drum shaped car of a bomb
What's a dog tank
@@fluto6997 its somewhere to put your pooh bag.
@@fluto6997 drop tank is where extra fuel is held to increase range
The best fighter of the war is an endless and impossible argument. There are too many variables and inconsistencies to compare planes that were designed for different strengths, were designed at different times, and faced varying enemy capabilities.
For example, many people feel the P-47 was the greatest. It undoubtedly was a great plane, but when the US gave it to the Soviets, they found little use for it because they were fighting at lower altitudes which the Thunderbolt wasn't designed for. It would be like the Americans trying to use a Yak-3 for bomber escort. Does that make the Yak worse or better than the Thunderbolt? Of course not, it just means the planes can't be compared.
Another example is the P-51 was a better escort than the P-47 because it had far better range, but if the mission involved ground attack the P-47 would likely be the better choice because it had better survivability, more firepower, and could carry more load. Which plane's better? Who knows?
Also, the quality of the pilot is a huge factor in the performance of any plane, and it's impossible to say which planes were carrying the best pilots overall.
Theres no way you make this list without the Grumman F6F Hellcat.
apples and oranges, man
The zero was the best all around at the start of the war
'The best fighter of the war is an endless and impossible argument'. Agreed so the video wanders off that topic.
@@capitaljushman5756 As you said, depends on the mission. One note to put forth, the P38 had the longest range (Think Yamamoto). Of the top American aces, 4 flew P-38s. Last note: The P-38 with green pilots took on the aces of both theaters and held there own while learning how to fight.
If the Italians hadn't such a bad industry during the war, the sagittario would have propably been a very competitive plane, in fact some British pilots told that it was better than some spitfires during dogfights, but well, there were only 60 produced so it was kinda an event to fight one
They are always extra and grand when they produce something amazing
Its a early jet, i dont think it should be compared to prop planes.
@@ddoubleg He's talking about the other Sagittario. The one with a prop and was actually made during the war.
Also the G55 centauro
@@ddoublegnot the sagittario we are talking about bud, you shouldn't get all your knowledge from war thunder... Speaking of the sagittario we are talking about is also in warthunder, also known as Re.2005
This list is incomplete without the Hurricane; the workhorse of the RAF.
Hurricane was indeed a workhorse but obsolete by mid-war.
@@cantrell0817 the hurricane was dominant by quantity by the speed and reduced cost of manufacture and its ease of being repaired rapidly, the biggest disadvantages of the spit was the time and cost to manufacture and its inability to sustain damage and fly home as well as the hurricane.
@@theant9821 Just because it's relatively simple doesn't make it one of the best.
I believe the Hurricane shot down more Luftwaffe aircraft than the Spitfire.
The Spit's went for the German fighters, and the Hurries went for the bombers, so a little easier to shoot down....:)
The video is titled 'best' not 'biggest work horse'… granted, he left the late war fighters off the list, but that is a different issue.
*All the other countries holding only 1 or 2 fighters* "they're my little babies" *US over in a corner with 8 different fighters* "wait we were only supposed to make one?"
Same applies to German Tanks production
TBF a lot of more obscure aircraft were missing from the list. Britain is famous for the Spitfire, but just off the top of my head the Hurricane, Beaufighter and (my personal favourite) the Mosquito were all also worthy of mention.
In particular, it's a bit silly to say the Lightning is the best because of versatility and not mention the Mosquito because it was very similar to the Lightning in many respects.
But it's all tradeoffs anyway. One plane will be a better dogfighter, another will have better range or better weapons or more flexibility.
Unlike other countries like britain or germany, the US did not make 24 variants of one plane
@@JohnLudlow You say the Lightning is versatile, but have you seen the amount of modifications the Mosquito had? It could be used as anti-submarine, bomber escort, anti-tank, fighter and a lot more.
And to top this off it was made out of fucking PLYWOOD.
@@sampackman69 it was also modified to be used as a transport. Ferried mail or VIPs. Mark Felton did a video on it, which I'll link in an edit. It really is an incredibly versatile aircraft.
Edit: here's the video as promised. ruclips.net/video/B09xMixpPFM/видео.html
The F6F Hellcat definitely should have been on this list. It wasn't until the Hellcat entered service that fighter pilots in the US Navy had a distinct advantage over the Japanese. More American fighter pilots became aces in the Hellcat than in any other type, and its 19-1 kill ratio was the highest of any US fighter.
Agree 100%
To be fair, the Hellcat also had opportunities that types like the F4U, which had been relegated to land bases (contrary to myth, NOT because the plane was unsuitable for carrier deployment. It was a matter of logistics more than anything else) didn't. Engagements like the Marianas Turkey Shoot tend to inflate the numbers a bit.
Thing was literally a flying Tank..one tough Fighter..That and the Corsair kicked the Japanese asses
@@mmaaphilliates 100%
@Jack Tangles you're mistaken. In fact, pound for pound comparison between the P-51D and F4U-4, the Corsair came out the winner. Faster, 438 vee 441, has a higher roll rate, could dive faster, carry heavier armament loads, could absorb a lot of battle damage and above all, could land on a carrier.
I think the biggest advantage the allies had was that they had such a variety of planes , they could choose the plane that was best suited for the job at hand . Japan and Germany seemed to focus on a limited number of designs , expecting them to fill multiple roles
It is actually quite vice versa. The German had so many projects that they somewhat got lost and failed to concentrate on few models. For instance, they had not only propeller planes but actually three types of thrust: piston engines (Me Bf 109, Fw 190), jet engines (Me 262, Arado 234, He 162) and rocket engines (Me 163 Komet) at hand. The biggest advantage of the Allies was not their variety of models but the sheer numbers of their planes, which made mass attacks including 1000 bombers possible.
@@goldfing5898 I can see your point but they were putting all their research into new emerging tech instead of improvement of proven designs. Just look at the fighter planes , USA built the P-36 , 38, 39 , 40 , 47 , 51 , wildcat , Corsair and hellcat . Britain made spitfire , fast and agile to combat fighters and hurricane to go after bombers. And then beaufighter , which was devastating when there was no fighter escort . The typhoon and tempest along with many designs that were not developed.
I could not count how many different attack planes allies had , if there was a job then just choose the best machine for it . But the Luftwaffe had to keep plodding along with the ju87 and 88 for level bombers, diving , ground attack , anti shipping, recognizance even though it was outdated by 1939. Because there was nothing else and no designs on the way
In some areas Germany had way to much diversity. I think I recall that they had something like 480 different makes and models of motor transport because none of the manufacturers would agree to work together and standardize
When they took over other countries one of the first things was to turn captured firearms factories to making arms for germany . But they were not made to standard patterns so all armorers had to have stocks of each manufacturers parts
I have had some German wartime production rifles and the quality was better than most peacetime products from other countries, but in the field, having kar98s , some mg42s and hopefully a pac 38 , then seeing the multitude of what was pointed the other way must have seemed very lopsided to the German infantry
I think it was much the same for Luftwaffe
@@outinthesticks1035 Yes, they got bogged down especially during the last phase of the war, out of pure desperation (e.g. such crazy designs as the Bachem 349 Natter vertical take-off rocket interceptor, which was still tested during the last weeks in Feb and March 1945). But they also did some improvements to existing and proven designs, e.g. they developed the Fw 190 D (long-nose Dora) out of the Fw 190 A in late 1944, and, similar to the Spitfire, they continued to improve the Me Bf 109 (G and even K versions).
Admittedly, there was a great lack of designs regarding long-range bombers. This was a misconception at the start of WW II that the blitzkrieg would not last very long. Later, they realized that they would need a long-range "Amerika-Bomber" and thought of the Horten XVIII, which was of course way too late. In addition, they were (despite of some experiments) not able to develop a nuclear bomb, as opposed to the Americans. They had Peenemünde for rocket development but no Los Alamos.
@@goldfing5898 I'm rereading the comments , and realized I'm reinforcing some of what you say . There were so many allied planes that not much could be done . I recall that the defensive strategy to deal with the jets was to stack p-51s above the bombers and fire in the direction of the jets travel so there was just so much that some would hit .
I did run across the Dora , and it was a upgrade on the best platform they had , but as far as the 109 , they were reaching the limit of design. It was a contemporary of spitfire and they were both medium altitude, short range interceptors . And no amount of updates would change them to high altitude ,long range , heavy fighters . Britain saw the need and by the time of the invasion there were new planes coming off the assembly lines. USA already was thinking that way because they needed it to reach the Japanese , and I think the Brits had a advantage of technology transfer from the states
allied aircraft design was not hampered by government restrictions as much , I think I recall that both the hurricane and mosquito were private ventures that raf accepted after they had Been proven
When allies were in France then Germany pretty much lost the ability to strike Britain because they just didn't have planes that had the range
@@outinthesticks1035 Yes, I also consider the Fw 190 the much better design than the 109. This was the reason why in the end, the German air ministry gave priority to the Fw 190 in order to evolve a high altitude fighter. The intermediate stage was the Fw 190 D, but Kurt Tank then made the Ta 152 H out of it, which was even better. They saw that the B-17 Flying Fortress would be replaced by the B-29, operating at even higher altitudes, so there were plans for using pressure suits (as in the Gotha 229 jet) or even pressure chambers in the future, as well as ejection seats, which had been tested successfully e.g. in the He 219 Uhu. But time ran out, especially since fuel, airfields and good pilots were hardly available anymore.
Fun fact: Everytime a p47 pilot fires a burst of rounds the wingman could see the plane vibrating because of the 8 machine guns
dont forget the 37mm cannon
AmericanIdiot
Name checks out.
A-10's Grandpa
Hardcore!
@@AmericanIdiot7659 The P-47 didn't have a cannon? The Aircobra had a 37 mm cannon.
Question: Where is Geetsly’s?
Answer: getting new fine additions to his collection.
Miles Kerr same
If you want to see most of these planes in person, I suggest the United States Air Force museum in Dayton, Ohio, USA.....
The last time I was at WAFB, my wife and I met about a dozen Germans looking at different planes. One man was from the same street about 2 blocks away from where she grew up. At that time if you wanted to see some of the fighters mentioned here you had to leave the main part of the museum and go to another building.
@@fritzfiedler1807 WPAB. Has a fantastic collection of aircraft from the beginning to present day. Wright Patterson Air Force Base has a collection of aircraft that is a must see for aviation enthusiast's. My grant father and I made yearly trips for many years and at present it has evolved into much much more. The Holocaust display is outstanding, humbling, and disturbing and should never be taken for granted.
best trip i took in a long time any body that can please treat your self go
Maybe when the world chills out a bit I'll make the trip ;)
Justin Last Don’t diss Dayton like that, man
I am a P38 fan and love this fighter for its abilities and beauty. Dick Bong proved how advanced ti was and the Germans rightly feared it. BTW, I didn't realize the YAK 3 was so good.
To be far they didn't come out until the Germans were throwing janitors into their aircraft, so while an impressive record, it was against a very untrained adversary Edit: You could almost use the same argument for the mustangs impressive record too
@@jameskester7745 true. But also I think there was a French ace who said it handled better than any other plane. Even the luftwaffe told their pilots not to ever engage it below 5km
My father in law was carrier based during WW2 and the Korean war, he swore by the Corsair and spoke highly of the P38.
Truth be told, I love the messer. If I had to go out in a plane during the war, it wouldn't be under Goering but it'd still be in a 109.
That said your inlaw was right. If you go by "What was the last prop driven plane to win a dogfight" then it was a Corsair flying for Honduras during the 100 Hour (football) War. Against P-51s.
Then you have that time 1 Corsair lost (but fought like hell) against 8 god damn MiG 15s in the Korean War. With half a wing missing.
You got several other instances of the Corsair just being the best god damn dogfighter & all-arounder, so it's not really an argument. It's just fact.
I do like the one thing the P-38 arguably has over the Corsair... The guns. Not how many or how big they are, but where they are: All bunched together right on the nose.
It'd be an exaggeration to say the lightning practically spat out a solid beam of lead.... But not much of one, either.
Also I really hate how this video didn't mention the P-39 / P-61 because that was pretty much the Soviet Union's best fighter for a long, long while.
And it had a 37mm cannon. On top of like 4 or 6 fiddies.
@@83j049733rfe4 very interesting of you to mention the p39. The US had no use for them because of their low altitude but the soviets loved it since low altitude was the rule in the eastern front (reason why LaGs and Yaks also performed best below 4km) and the plane was resilient, easy to maintain and could withstand the improvised runways thanks to its tricicle wheels.
LaG-5 and Yaks were good and eventually got incredible but for a while the soviets made extensive use of this very misunderstood aircraft.
Ensign eliminator...!
11:05 look up the story of this man sparing a B-17. It’s an emotional one.
I know.....and I want more people to know.
Yarnhub (a documentary RUclipsr) made a video about it
@Tim Beeker
RE: "There is a book (A Higher Calling... a very good book) . . ."
A lot of Germans, particularly those who lived through World War II, did not like the book. They considered the German pilot to have been a traitor for not shooting down the crippled American bomber. Which, I suppose, is understandable.
I heard the story… it’s arguably the greatest story of all WWII
No no no, didnt you know that ALL Nazis were evil and couldnt do anything heroic??? This is propaganda of the highest order!
Naturally im taking the piss here. Im just sick and tired of being labelled a Neo-Nazi and apologist for stating that not ALL of them were evil SOBs like Hitler...
"General Greivous’ ship, dead ahead. The one crawling with Vulture Droids."
"Oh, I see it. This is going to be easy..."
"This is where the fun begins!"
"Flying is for droids!"
"Spinning isn’t flying Anakin!!"
"But it is a good trick!"
"Easy, R4, nothing too fancy- WOAAAAH!!!"
Bruh..., nice
The hurricane was a brilliant bullet sponge as it could take lots of damage and the turnaround time to fix damage was so fast that they could have been back fighting before the end of the day.
Cannon shells (20mm), provided they didn't hit the frame could pass straight through a Hurricane without detonating
No, it was more vulnerable tha the Spitfire, being slower and had worse performance in almost every fighter metric.
7:07 - That's an external fuel tank you're pointing at, but...
Lel this is not totally accurate
I think he said 2,500 thinking that was just the bomb itself when I'm pretty sure it stated (and im guessing he got this of wikipedia) total bomb load
I was going to type the same thing but you beat me to it.
Fins have a vote here! Fins matter! 😉😛👍
You beat us all to it, but a properly-rigged ext tank can still make a big explosion... why did no one explore canopy-based det cord to tanks dropped from 1200-6000’? 😂
Yeah.. I was gonna say that doesn’t look like a bomb
Which Country had the Most Effective Tank in World War 2?
New Zealand: Bob Semple Tank
Nope the Sherman most versatile and ubiquitous tank of WW2 used on every single front from Russia to the Pacific
Agreed. Never lost a battle and none were lost to enemy action. Superb.
@@USS_Grey_Ghost It was a joke....
Our Lord and savior
Bob semple
It’s the bob semple cult
I am missing the Me 262, even if it just came into action, as it was already to late.
It even laid the foundation for all currently used military air crafts
The Me 262 was obviously a huge technical advance and could do things no other plane could. But it's overall effectiveness was limited. It was known to be very difficult and dangerous to fly, compounded by the fact the pilots were insufficiently trained in flying it, and was mechanically notoriously unreliable. Also, by the time it was available, fuel availability was a huge issue for the Luftwaffe and the Me 262 was very, very thirsty and also required special runways and facilities. So in the end, it wasn't particular successful even in limited use. Perhaps just too far ahead of its time.
@@knutthompson7879 The draw backs were mostly because of the state of the German war machine at the time. The allies strategy was to shoot them on the ground or when they took off or landed. Nobody wanted to face a Me 262 in the air at full speed.
@@jonathanross149 I am sure it was terrifying to go up against something that fast. All other things being equal, they could do some damage. A lot of their general ineffectiveness WAS due to the inability of the Germans to properly train pilots and outfit and maintain the planes, not to mention produce enough of them to make a difference, no debating that. Oh and also when they wasted time and effort trying to make it a bomber instead of a fighter, a role it was really designed for.
@@jonathanross149 I wounder why xD No but seriously, I wish I saw the reaction to the very first allied when a Me 262 just swooped by like a crazy fat little be from hell. That is a reaction video I would see.
I agree with you. Pilot training, lack of fuel, maintenance, is all beside the point. If you had trained pilots in well maintained fully fueled aircraft, I don't think there's any plane on the list that could take an Me 262 one on one.
I have studied WW II for over 35 years, and I own about 30 WW II books, and just as many video documentaries. I would have to place the P-51 as the best, because it could do it all - dog fight, super range, escort, land attach. But more important than all of this, it changed the aerial was in the European theater completely, with P-51s flying over Berlin, and not just for a few minutes. I also wish to point out that all the American fighters you mentioned all flew over 400 mph, which was VERY uncommon in WW II.
Ya, but by the time the mustang gotten the Packerd (RR) engine, the Germans were putting in younger, untrained pilots, so that probably contributed to it's great record. Not that it wasn't a great plane, because it was, but Germany was also coming out with better aircraft, but no one to fly them
I’m still looking for the right movie that accurately displays the planes that were used. After the war, a lot of people don’t know that weapon engineering changed tremendously because of this worldly conflict.
I have a soft spot for the Corsair due to Black Sheep Squadron!
I have red such sentence.
"If you want to send picture to your sweetheart, sit in Mustang cockpit. If you want to survive war in air take Thunderbolt.
So true, and that's why I would have picked it if I had to go to war for real. Not only it will bring you back alive, but it can also successfully perform any type of mission, from air to air combat to ground support. For me, it will always be the #1 fighter plane of WW2.
@@razorback20 #1 by far. No propeller plane faster than the 47 until the Jets. Take damage better. Engine almost never quit. More firepower. More range. Maneuverable up high, but not as good down low. Could outdive anyone, but had natural brake for newish pilots so would not crater it into the ground like all other fighter types. Had the required range to go to Berlin(as soon as the asshole bomber mafia allowed it to carry external fuel tanks) Flew more combat sorties than any other type and had the Fewest casualties than any other type and yet were often tasked with the MOST dangerous missions: Ground pounding. Why? Its engine and its 2000lb payload plus 8 50's. Pretty simple reason why: had 2800Hp under the hood. Almost double that of the Mustang/Spitfire(Griffin version had 2000hp at end of war) PS: Tempest if built MUCH earlier in the war would have gotten a BIG nod over the Spitfire, but UK could not make its engine run worth a damn.
There's a reason the A-10 is officially named "Thunderbolt II" ["Warthog" is just an affectionate nickname!]
I always heard it; "If you want to survive war in the air, take a Hellcat."
Yeah. The Mustang is probably the sexiest fighter of WWII.
Guys watch a video of a Fw 190 fly-by. The motor sound is terrifying and beautiful at the same time.
Na sounds like ur nan
Occasional Onion you actually thought that was funny?
@@Ic12348 Dude like that was so funny. Like I'm just so lmao right now.
Ngl the Rolls Royce Merlin engine, used in most of the RAFs planes, most notably the Spitfire, sounds fucking amazing
nothing against the 262...
No mention of the the British Hurricane? Most people do not realize that it was produced more than the Spitfire.
derkaiser420, No it wasn’t, they built just under 14,500 Hurricanes but just over 20,000 Spitfires, just over 22,500 if you include the naval Seafire variant. In addition, the Spitfire was the only World War 2 fighter that was in production and service before 1939 and was still in full production after 1945.
,
The Hurricane wasn't really used as a fighter after the battle of Britain. It was repurposed as a ground support aircraft till being replaced by the Tempest and Typhoon
Not intended at all, to take anything away from the Spitfire. Never the less...Around 2-3rds of the fighters in the Battle of Britain were Hurricanes. For that reason alone it at least deserves a mention. Best comparative description of the two i've heard - was....."The Spitfire was like a fast agile sports car. - It could slice through the sky like a hot knife through butter". While the Hurricane was - "like a solid old pick up truck. It could take a pounding in battle, and still come back for more". Squadrons and pilots learnt to fly each type to their strengths.
@@mrjockt Those were produced after the battle of Britain. The hurricane was by far the most produced during the BOB and there were relatively few spitfires at the time.
@@mrjockt Bf 109 was produced before 1939 and after 1945
The impact that the P-38 made is probably as interesting as the plane itself. Pilots and commanders recognized early on the shortcomings during dogfights, so they pioneered the squadron/formation tactics that can still be seen today
"Two planes, one pilot" I have seen enough hentai to know the meaning
Imperialist
I'll have to stop you there.
Is that anything like two girls one cup?
Not enough tentacles
What does it mean though
While the P-38 was no doubt a good aircraft the DH Mosquito is a forgotten and very very under-rated aircraft. Fulfilling so many roles, and doing all of them exceptionally well, played a major part in WW2. Some of my late Father's friends who flew the Mosquito (and the Tetse) loved the plane as it could take an immense amount of damage and still fly. With such a variety of variants (Photo-reconnaissance, Bomber, Fighter, Night Fighter, Strike Fighter Bomber, Trainer, Torpedo Bomber, Target Tug, and highball), it was surely, in my opinion, the most versatile aircraft of WW2 and deserves a place in aviation history and inclusion in your list.
IMHO, the Mosquito was the best allied aircraft of the war and possibly the best of any combatant nation in WWII.
But, except for the night fighter versions, it wasn’t really a fighter and much as I would like to see it in this list, it doesn’t really belong here.
I'm not a fighter pilot expert but I am an amature military historian. My father was a B-17 pilot and was shot down on July 26, 1943 on his third mission after a bombing raid over Hanover, Germany. Five of his crew were killed and the other five survived and were all captured. My dad spent the rest of the war in Stalag Luff III and Stalag VII A when he was freed by the lead units of Patton's 3rd Army in April 1945.
In early 1943, the 8th Army Air Corps were still flying unescorted missions and facing tremendous German fighter and flak to and from their missions. Losses were heavy. During the war, the bombers lost 60,000 crews killed or taken prisoner.
The following is an account from a German fighter pilot’s summary perspective describing the difficulty attacking a B‐17 formation.
“A B‐17 formation, dubbed a "Pulk" (herd) by the Germans, was an unnerving sight for the novice German fighter pilots. With a combined closing speed of 500 mph both sides had only seconds to make their fire count. Barreling in at 200 yards per second a fighter pilot might have time for only a half‐second burst before taking evasive action.”
And the following is a quote from a highly experienced German fighter pilot ACE on the same subject.
"Fips" Phillips, was a 200+ Eastern Front Ace. While in command of JG 1 defending against American bombers over northern Germany he offered this personal perspective:
"Against 20 Russians trying to shoot you down or even 20 Spitfires, it can be exciting, even fun. But curve in towards 40 fortresses and all your past sins flash before your eyes."
Nevertheless, the German pilots were fierce in the defense of their homeland. Between flak and fighters, Germans shot down over 4,000 B‐17’s during the war.
I fought in the Vietnam War for a year 1968-69. I lost a lot of good Marines, but during the Vietnam War we had 68,000 killed. The bomber crews lost 60,000 in less than four years.
It's not known exactly how many German fighters were shot down by the American bombers because many of the claims were reported by two or more of the bombers for the same German aircraft or exaggerated because gunners thought they had shot down an aircraft when in reality, they were seldom confirmed.
However, one of my uncles who flew fighters in the Korean War was the first double ACE for a jet fighter pilot. He was famous for his book on fighter tactics called "No Guts, No Glory" that in close dog fights today is still relevant. He retired from the Air Force as a Major General and he died on the 4th hole of his golf club at the age of 91. He was a true gentleman in that he never drank, didn't smoke, and never cursed. He was the happiest and most satisfied individual I've ever known. I miss him and my parents who were the best parents any kid could hope to have had.
I'm 77 now and I can tell you that the US and the world is far worse today than they were during the Cold War in the 50's and early 60's. I wish the younger people today could see how much better live was back then. Of course we had major problems as well such as segregation, but crime, poverty, drugs, and human misery wasn't as dramatic as it is today. California in those days was an idyllic state and today it is not much better than the center of human misery and despair. NYC was safe and a great place to visit. Today, it isn't safe and crime is rampant as is homelessness and an immigration crisis caused by a moron of a President we have today. The list goes on. We are more divisive today than ever before in my life time.
I digress.
I think there truly is a case to be made for the Mosquito being the best plane of the War. It could do anyhting and do it well.
@@thethirdman225 I agree , though some variants are pretty comparable to the P-38 which did make the list .... If I had the choice of flying any WW2 plane in WW2 it would be a Mozzie.
You forget to mention how heavy the P-38 had to be in order to fly. It had a roughly 16 to 1 lift to drag ratio. The design was so effective that the plane could not fly without being extremely heavy.
Hey Nigel, just curious what you mean by this? Was it so powerful that if it was too light it'd be uncontrollable/rip itself apart?
@@Baulder13 as that if it wasn’t heavy, the plane would be lifted so high into the air it couldn’t fly. This love had to be heavy in order to stay in the air. I studied this as a glider design back in high school for aerospace pre engineering
@@nigelvestrand4252 oh man thats an interesting fact thanks. Basically it had to trade range and speed by adding weight just to not shoot straight up into the stratosphere lol.
@@Baulder13 you got to remember it was used in the pacific a lot and it shot down admiral Yamamoto. So it had range and with two engines it was quite fast at 443 mph and had a range of 1,305 miles without drop tanks. Considering the P-51 only flew at 437 mph but was probably cheaper to make and was first flew a year later.
@@Baulder13 not to mention that Richard Bong 40 victories, Thomas McGuire 38 victories and Charles H MacDonald 27 victories were America’s top aces. They all got them in the P-38.
A6M Zero:
+5 Agility
+5 Range
+5 Climb rate
- 100% Armor.
@Juan Taco Then why doesn't anyone talk about them, except Mexicans?
Tinderbox
@@duggiebader1798 If you manage to land a hit on them, that is. Good luck with that!
@@friedyzostas9998
You're right, no body actually got near them! Remind me, Fried Yzoshitas, how Japan's Imperial Empire is getting on nowadays? All thanks to the Zero of course.
@@duggiebader1798 In comparison to America, Japan didn't became a joke country, despite the creation of anime.
I feel like polish pilots don’t get enough credit for how good they flew spitfires even after the fall of Poland
Polish squadrons were more known to fly hurricanes though
One Pole in particular was pretty good at cracking an early Enigma machine, too.
STOP THE CAP, the P-38 while was not the most successful or best fighter of WW-2. Spitfire, BF-109, FW-190, La-7, Yak-3, P-51, F-6F, F-4U, Ki-84 Frank, N1k George, A6M Zero, Macchi-205 you could make a case for any of these! So isn't talked about for Example the Spitfire and BF-109 served from the first day until the last. Yet were always competitive with newer designs... the Zero had an unheard of Dominance early in the war, it's drop off in kill ratio was due more loss of experienced pilots, then obsolescence. Italian fighters tend to be completely overlooked although the Macchi Mc. 202 & 205 were at least as good as the fighters they faced. I could go on for ever lol but the point is this a very difficult question would probably require a whole series of videos to even begin to properly answer. In the end it was and will always be the Pilot who makes the greatest difference!
The British Hurricane should be on the list... And probably the Hellcat too.
yeah think damage finnish airforce did with their hurricanes probably their most advanced fighter ,gives you some idea how good their pilots were.
I must disagree. The Hurricane was already obsolete by 1940 - it shot down more planes than the Spitfire because the 'Spit' was new and there were precious few of them.
The Hurricane was outclassed by the German ME109 in pretty much every way. When you're outclassed so badly - the wise thing is adopt Claire Chenault's tactics [ US Flying Tigers in China ] - get an altitude advantage , make one high speed attack and hope you hit something , then use your dive speed to get the hell outta Dodge.
The Flying Tigers had the same problem Flying the obsolete P-40 against the fast agile Mitsubishi Zero - dogfighting with a superior aircraft is suicide - your only winning hand is ambush tactics.
When the fearsome F6F Hellcat was introduced it was the Japanese who were now outclassed in every way , and they resorted to the exact same thing.
Make one high speed diving attack and get Yo ass outta there !
@@charlesmartel8112 The title of the clip was "Which country had the most effective fighter". If the Hurricane shot down more planes than the Spitfire why does that not make it "effective". My understanding is that RAF tactics called for the Hurricanes to go after German bombers while the Spitfires went after the German fighters. They were both effective and both helped the RAF won the Battle of Britain.
@@salemengineer2130 You have a good point there - against a Hurricane a bomber is the proverbial 'sitting duck' and no mistake. I forgot the RAF used this very clever tactic. Thanks for that. [ not a Hurricane fan obviously - I think it was a dog but dogs often do good work ]
The Hellcat had the firepower but its speed could be compared to a slug
Only one British aircraft? Where's the Mosquito, Hurricane, Typhoon, Meteor or tempest
Jets need not apply otherwise me262, Typhoon was 1) A dog, 2) horribly unreliable, 3) Tempest barely flew in WWII(Dead sexy airplane btw), 4) Mosquito was not a fighter, and night fighter claims are beyond ludicrous as zero corroboration and everyone lied by at least 2X and closer to 4X in night ops where one sees a plane for less than a quarter of a second while firing, 5) Hurricane was obsolete in 1940 like the P40, yet were used anyways and 6) This guy purposefully picked his #1 aircraft to purposefully be the worst on the list at everything, thus cleverly avoiding majority of fans of certain aircraft. As for my personal Opinion: P47. Ugly, but had lowest loss rate, even though flew highest number of combat missions in all theatres of the war, was tasked with ground pounding as well due to its 2300hp to 2800hp damage eating radial engine and could do everything well and to top it off, was very fast. Certainly not a sexy ride, but if living while delivering more bombs/rockets/ammo than any other fighter is your criteria... If you want acrobatics at an airshow, take a Spitfire as your ride of choice. Suggest the Spit VIII with its 2000hp Griffin and light airframe before they changed it***Edit: maybe that was the Spit XII?***. Can't take damage, but damn do you have a sexy nimble tweety bird down low to REALLY impress the ladies.
@@w8stral EVERYONE over-reported kill figures, not only night fighter pilots, everyone did, oddly enough by 2-4 times. Any serious historian who studies air warfare during WWII could tell you that.
Typhoon was horribly unreliable to start with, though most of the kinks had been worked out. As for a dog, no worse than some other large, fast aircraft, the P-47 was not exactly nimble either.
Agree the Hurricane was if not obsolete by 1940 it was certainly outdated. Which was why it was pulled as a frontline fighter after the Battle of Britain and mostly converted to the Ground Attack role, in which it was actually very successful. More rugged than the Spitfire and a far more stable gun and rocket platform. Did the job well until better aircraft came along.
Personally I would have gone for the Westland Whirlwind had they managed to manufacture its engines in enough quantities and figured out the last few glitches. Rolls Royce though were so busy with the Merline they were not able to put the work into the Peregrine to really make it shine, and that killed a very capable fighter.
@@w8stral the reason the P-47 had the lowest loss rate was because most of its missions were ground attack where the only thing shooting you would be an occasional wirbelwind or ostwind which in reality were bad. That meant it would have incredibly low losses, and when it was used as an escort the Germans were clever. They would just wait until the p-47 had to return back to base before attacking the bombers meaning the p-47 while flying many combat, missions would be in danger of being shot at a lot less than most other aircraft.
Also the spitfire was remarkably tough. Only slightly weaker than a Mustang and a reasonable amount more so than a bf-190.
Jacob Kingsford arrogant brits the p47 was well known to fight 109s and 190s and take severe damage and win. The p47 was used as a ground attacker later and a escort first.
@@jesspayne5548 it was only used as an escort because it was pretty much the only plane that could carry a sufficiently large add on fuel tank to make the most of journey. The way beat most bf 109 sand FW 190 s was by diving on them because due to its higher weight it could accelerate much faster but once that dive was up it is pretty much lost most of its energy to make maneuvers and was less maneuverable to start with so once it was found out that was how P-47 beat the German fighters, they would quickly swerve to avoid the diving p-47 and pick it off once it was slow as it started to climb back up. so while this gave the p-47 slight advantage early on it was fairly easy to counter and once the tactic was created the Germans would win most of the dogfights against it.
The P-38 doesn’t get credit it deserves, it help turn the tide in the pacific theater. Beautiful bird, incredible sound one of the best birds ever made. Not sure who’s prettier Corsair, Mustang or the Lightning
well the answer is Spitfire, but sure ;-) Mustang for me, although there's a certain brutality to the F6F and F8F. I'm OK with the gull wings on the Corsair but the spinner feels like it needs a cap (which would ruin the cooling, of course)
The Corsair is my favorite. The Hellcat, Hurricane, Tempest, and Me-262 are worth consideration.
ME 262 was awful.
The engines had terrible durability and weren't reliable at all.
It was a massively innovative design, but that innovation came at the cost of it's reliability
I’m pretty sure p-51s at that time in the war didn’t have any trouble combating the 262
the 262 came into the fight way too late to make much of a difference, not to mention as with many german war implements it was too hard to produce. It was definitely innovative and a great plane, but for every one they could produce britain could pump out 10 spitfires and america could pump out 10 mustangs or lightnings
RoninTXBR549 The Corsair was a beast. It was also, in my opinion, right up there with the Spitfire in terms of best looking fighter as well.
The Grumman F6F Hellcat deserves to be on the list. It had a 19:1 kill ratio. Italy's Macchi C.202 Folgore was another good-quality fighter which deserves to be on the list.
YES!!
So make a list!
Italy didn't even get a plane on the list, it deserves a spot
It wasn't just the plane but the tactic that evolved and the quality of pilots as the war went on .
Watch the video...thats literally the first thing he said
This. I will never ever respect american planes of WW2, but they got to have best tactics in the end. In Europe high alt bombers are not to be and in the east even less so. But what european theatre had was great mid alt fighter galore dance which also produced most 100+ kills aces. By the time americans get to fight Luftwaffe it was not "fair match" at all with usually with 109K trying hard to climb towards super high bombers who came in great numbers, lost all of their ammo, just to fight even higher american p51 who always had numerical advantage. Was P51 very successful? Yes. Do i think 1 vs 1 German and Soviet fighters were better during ww2. Hell yes.
@@Čangrizavi_Cinik 100 kills aces fought a lot of antique bi-planes & unprepared pilots.
@@Čangrizavi_Cinik A lot of those 100+ aces started in the Spanish Civl War. A big difference between the Germans and Americans was the German pilots stayed on the front lines, whereas the Americans would pull their pilots to train the newer ones. Plus there was a big difference in claiming a plane shot down. The Americans counted any plane that was shot down as a kill. The germans didn't count their planes shot down unless the pilot was killed.
you forgot the hurricane and the macchi folgore both seen as true hunters in the skies of ww2
I've missed the Tempest there, a beauty and a beast.
And feared more by me 262 pilots than mustang !
And what an engine it had. Just amazing!
Damn I loved the tempest my granddad flew a spitfire and was a Ace no joke his name was Carl Davies, and he said, one plane he said he would’ve loved to fly was the rugged tank the tempest or was it the typhoon
What about the Seafury swell??
@@adamconroy2146 Too late for the show :D
Fun fact: During the war, when the allies started to run into German 262s, the P-47 was actually considered at one point to be turned into a turbojet powered fighter to help combat the 262s, called the Republic P-47 (Turbobolt)
Then it would have been another plane that would have been both fitted with either jet engines or piston engines like the Saab 21 and Saab 21R
@@Groza_Dallocort probably, but sadly, we will never know now.
Would work like yak-15 I guess
When the P-38 Lightning got to Europe the Luftwaffe used it as a target drone, so it was used to harass shipping in the Mediterranean where it did well. The roll rate of the P-38 was too low, so it couldn't turn fast enough..
The only way to assess effectiveness is the kill rate, it's the Hurricane. Whilst the Spitfires were chasing Bf109, the Hurries were downing the bombers, and later used for very effective ground attack.
Well done, mate! Great vid!
I'd have to say I love the Hellcat. It ruled the skies in the Pacific and was more than a match for any on the list. It could carry bombs, rockets, fuel tanks and radar by the end.
Cant believe it was not even mentioned. Only second to the P51 for kills and not by much at all.
It could carry torpedoes aswell
Corsairr gets no love
Was looking for someone to mention the hellcat it was an incredible fighter
The Hellcat was too slow to tangle with leading late-war designs. It was built mainly as a Zero-killer that would fit on the rather cramped aircraft carriers of the time. As the Zero was even slower and not upgraded like most of the other WWII aircraft, the F6F did not have to be exceptionally fast. The F4U was much faster with the same engine as the Hellcat, as was the F8F. The Hellcat saw more action mainly because the F4U took a long time to pass its carrier qualifications - and it took the British to sort that. The IJN started the war with the best aircraft in the Pacific but were totally eclipsed by the Allies rather quickly in both quantity and quality. The USA being protected by vast oceans making it virtually impossible to attack had the luxury of entering the war unprepared and having a couple of years to get fully mobilized.
The mosquito and Hurricane are missing from this list.
11 and twelve!
Mossie deserves mention for sure. It was a multirole aircraft that could do recce work, pathfinders, fighter, fighter bomber, and ground attack roles with molens nose cannon often sent to take out u boats. Check u tube for "tseste" squadron and what kind of ground damage that variant could do. And as side note it was used in canada in the 60s for photogrammetric survey because it was so stable flying low over the ground. Didn't hurt that being made of wood made it harder for german radar harder to pick up. Original variant had no guns it was hitting "around" 400 mph with the twin merlins. Germans tried to copy it with thier moskito but when main factory that made glue for wood was smashed they could not replicate that glue and the planes started splitting apart. (Hurricane proved great as a tank buster in north africa after b.o.b.)
@@timsmith8590 After the war they installed a 96mm 32pound shell autocannon for testing It worked in flight And They made way for the jet age
The Mossie was the unknown factor, it had radar, it was undetectable, it flew at night and bombed the crap out of Hitler... and to think it could have been built before the W war2 and they could have had hundreds of thousands of them ending the war without the US, one bad choice, pushing the spitfire which was a complete lemon initially and some say didn't get much better, and was not as safe and not as easy to fly as the hurricane.... someone was getting paid to prop that stupid machine up, Im betting. And for those who dont know the Hurricane was voted as the best plane by the pilots, not the spitfire. The Mossie was a hidden unknown plane, as were the missions, and only those who flew them knew what they did, you can ask them and they have stuff on You tube, but not for long.
Mosie was a multi-role, not a fighter
Your channel is underrated 😔
I know right
Hugely.
Thanks, friend! I couldn't agree more ;)
Right? Awesome channel!
His accuracy leaves MUCH to be desired. For instance the idiot called the Spitfire a low altitude aircraft...... A very few select versions were made for low altitude work. Majority were for medium altitude and it was ok at High, and a few versions were excellent...
Fun facts:
1) The Grumman F6F Hellcat, which shot down more axis planes than any other Allied naval aircraft, is not on this list.
2) The Hellcat shot down 5160 Japanese aircraft, the second place Allied plane in the Pacific/China-Burma theater only shot down 2140 Japanese planes.
3) In the Battle of the Marianas, on June 11, 1944, Hellcats shot down 70 Japanese aircraft. Six days later on June 19th, they shot down another 354 enemy planes in "The Great Marianas Turkey Shoot". In two days, the F6F destroyed 25% of what it took the P-38 (1700 Japanese planes) the entire conflict in the Pacific to do.
4) Contrary to what many sources claim, the P-38 Lightning did not shoot down more Japanese aircraft in WWII than any other American or Allied aircraft. The numbers do not support that statement. The P-38 with 1,857 victories in Pacific/China/Burma theaters came in third place behind the F6F Hellcat with 5,160 and the F4U Corsair with 2,140. It is accurate to state that the P-38 did shoot down more Japanese aircraft than any other USAAF plane with 1,857, with the P-40 running a close second at 1,633.5.
The Hawker Tempest was an absolute beast. Luftwaffe pilots were scared of it especially at low level. The Me 262 has to be up there me too, it was pretty much a fighter from the future at that point in time. Great choices though, love the P38 a non-clichéd choice and mount of America's top aces in ww2. Also beautiful, fast and ahead of its time.
Maybe green ones, experten knew how to deal with it hans dortenmann shot down 4 tempests with his dora 9 he was the biggest fw190 d9 ace , theres is a very interesting tale about a dogfight between a tempest and a ta 152 the pilot was willy reschke he shot down the tempest
@@noteimportax6477 That dogfight with the ta 152 was fake. The story changed 3 times and there is no way to confirm. What we can confirm is that the ta 152 had serious problems and half remained grounded at all times. The ta 152 is a coulda been fighter not to mention it was slower than a p 40 on the deck. It was not manuverable and it was only faster than most american fighters heading north of 25,000ft.
@@noteimportax6477 qqqq41
7:07
That ain't a bomb.
It's an external fuel tank.
A fuel tank made out of compressed paper at that. Sorry, the Spitfire was the best overall fighter of WWII. BTW, as early as October of 1942 the Zero was seen to be a wasting asset; the great pilots were all pretty much killed off in the carrier battles.
@@Easy-Eight not exactly, the spit is incredibly manoeuvrable, but slow. And the controls were weird, when you take speed it goes up as hell and turns froms right to left when speed changes, we could say it's unstable !
@@I.JG7.Frenchie Well in '42 the BF109 & FW190s were the best aircraft in the world. Training & tactics are worth more than + or "-" of 20 MPH in aircraft. Germany & Japan blow it in '43. The German fritter way their air force over Africa, Italy, and Russia. Japan wastes their good pilots in the South Pacific area over Aug of '42 to mid-1943. Personally I think the best allied fighter of '39 to '44 was the Spitfire for the allies in Europe and the Yak in '44 onward . In the Pacific it was the F4F Wildcat until mid '43 then it was the reign of the Hellcat. Why? They could take off from carriers.
@@Easy-Eight the early spitfires were limited by their Carburetors. The Zero by its lack of Armor. The Spitfire and the BF109 where very evenly matched. The Zero crushed all Opposition until the Us Pilots gained experience with its weaknesses and changed their tactics. No one could turn with the zero Throughout the war.
Being a Welshman I must say I gotta give it to the Japanese they did have the best fighters
The hawker hurricane was clearly the best. Armed as like a spitfire, tough as a yak 3 and easier to make and repair than most rivals
I think the issue was it used wood in its frame which would limit future upgrades, but I'm no expert.
Yeah sorry but no the hurricane was actually not a good plane, it’s range was very low, the engine was prone to over heating very easily, the .30 cals were weak compared to what most planes they fought had (the 20MM cannons on most of the BF-109’s) and the were easy targets for the German fighters.... that is the reason that they started making as many Spitfire planes as possible because the spitfires had longer range more gun and starting at the Spitfire Mk. 2 they started adding 20MM cannons and they had better engines that lasted longer and had a better cooling system than the Hurricane... so sorry but if I had to go with a British fighter plane I would go with the Spitfires... The reason I know all this stuff is from looking up information in books, documents, and films. I have also seen a hurricane and Spitfire side by side and knew the Spitfire was better cuz it had higher speed I also know the speed because I’ve flown a Spitfire along side a hurricane and was told to fly at a max of 350 MPH because the hurricane would over heat trying to keep up with the Spitfire.
No it the p38 lighting. it faster and have more fire power.
Gamer fan 844 the P-38 lightning is an American twin engine fighter/attacker it’s NOT British and the early variants of the P-38 were not very fast... the later versions of the P-38 were super props so they could go faster! And also.... how did u come up with the idea that American and British planes are from the same country cuz I’m pretty sure this was about the British Hawker Hurricane and not the American Planes that led u to choosing a P-38? And also the only reason the P-38 was powerful and had a bit of more fire power wasn’t from the weapons themselves... it was due to the fact the the guns were Nose mounted cuz the P-38 had 1x 20 MM cannon and 4x .50 Cal Machine guns which is less fire power than the Zeros, the Bf-109’s, and the Spitfires that had 2x 20MM cannons and 6x .50 cals with variable range... even most of the bomber had more firepower
Baz Bazdad the hurricane IV had 2x 40 MM anti-tank cannons not normal 40 MM cannons and I don’t care if your older than my dad. Because one of my Uncles has also flown in most of the fighters that the British used and confirmed that the hurricanes were slow and the engines on almost all of the hurricanes STILL over heated very easily. And if you think I was born around your 40’s what not. You don’t even know if I was or wasn’t. Now goodbye cuz it’s bloody 1:20 AM and I’m trying to watch TV without some guy like you still going back and forth about how the stupid hurricane is so good even though the Germans could legit just slow down a tiny bit and shoot a few HE shells into the fuel tank or engine and win that fight even more of a higher chance against the hurricane Mk. IV which traded all guns for 2 40 MM Anti-Tank guns that made the plane even more slower and hard to turn and they had really low Ammo about 20x-35x shells in total. Now goodbye permanently cuz I’m not coming back to this chat to argue with a person that thinks a slow plane with low range is best plane for the British.
I am also a big fan of the hurricane as a cheaply produced workhorse, and it’s sexy (but dangerous cousin), the typhoon.
I think the Hellcat and Mosquito are worth mentioning too.
There were such distinct phases of the war, so it’s fascinating to see the zero as a front runner in the early phases, only to be surpassed by the suite of American fighters later in the war.
Years ago, I had the pleasure of attending an air show in San Marcos Texas. I will never forget the demo of a P 38. Came in low very fast, went straight up and never stalled. God, what a plane.
I saw a P 38 fly at an air show here in South Carolina; might have been the very same P 38. I was surprised by how quiet it was.
@Hoa Tattis gregs claims i have to take with a large pinch of salt .
@Hoa Tattis Indeed ! Gregs Automobiles and Airplanes .
He makes some extraordinary claims for the P 47 T Bolt
He states that it had the highest diving speed of any fighter , as well as the highest mach number WW 2.
When i challenged his claim, in that i said Eric Winkle Brown wouldn't agree , he became very venomous towards mr Brown .
The problem with Greg is that he lets his P 47 bias get the better of him .
Greg with a very large pinch of salt .
@Hoa Tattis The highest mach number reached by a Tempest 5 . O.87
@Hoa Tattis Mach 83 for what ?
The Mosquito was the first true multi role combat aircraft, excelling in all roles. It has to be the number one.
Including carrier borne.
@@politenessman3901 - And fast as all get out!
Stealthy too, as it's wooden frame was very difficult for RADAR to detect.
The version of the Mosquito with the 6 pounder gun was WWII's A10.
Well the guy did say FIGHTER but there was an actual fighter that was much faster, the me 262. The fact that it's not top of the list, hell it's not even mentioned is very peculiar to say the least.
Im sad you forgot the poor mosquito as it was a more versatile aircraft and gave the highest kill ace for Britain.The existence of the mosi pissed of herman goering. Also the spitfire saw very little use in the battle of britain it was mostly hurricanes doing the fight as the spitfire was just being put into service. So my pick would be the mosi but it wasnt there:(
The mosquito also utilized a similar design to the lightning, im surprised he didn’t talk more about hurricanes and mosquitoes in this video
Mosquito was a light bomber
The Mosquito was never considered a fighter. She was just a little too big, massed too much.
Now, if you ask what the best light bomber in the war was, the Mosquito wins hands down.
@@kozaamovies1779 Mosquito was a fighter bomber.
Would not put it in Fighter.
Could do it but not desined for it.
The one big missing has to be the Hurricane
Japan had the most effective planes when they run out of ammunition
Lol
Remember if you run out of ammo, *you are the ammo*
@@rrfly_7577 no ammo = *best ammo*
Unironically, that's metal as fuck. Other nations just whine and cry when they got no ammo. Japan straight up transform into the ammo. Now that's admirable.
If you get shot down you become a bomb
Given the ability to mass produce it, I think you have to give the Merlin powered Mustang the award for most dominant aircraft. The Germans could not match it at scale.
Actually the P47 had better stats that the mustang. It was faster and more maneuverable at high altitudes. It also had a higher kill ratio that the P51... Not to mention it raised hell with the German ground forces. And it could take one hell of beating and still bring their pilots home in one piece...
@@stewartbeckman7909 Yes, you make a good argument for that.
@@stewartbeckman7909 All good points, but the P-51 was most often tasked with escorting bombers deep into enemy territory where it had to fight the Luftwaffe's top aircraft on their own territory, so as usual it's always a bit of apples and oranges when making direct comparisons.
The Merlin was crap is was small and used 100 to 30 octanes cuz darn thing was weak. The bf109 and zero used 87 for the entire war and still made power!
Gotta hand it to those early airframes that stayed relevant throughout the war like the Bf 109, Spittfire, Hurrican. As a naval fighter i vote for Hellcat who was an evolution of the Wildcat. The Zero was probably obsolete as early as 1943.
Of course the Me 262 should also be on the list as the first operational jet fighter in history.
The Hellcat was most definitely not an evolution of the Wildcat. They look similar on the outside...very different on the inside.
The 262 was the first operational fighter to see combat, but the American P-59 Airacomet was in service with the USAAC as early as June 1943, despite it not being used in combat due to the price of each plane, being about 3 times as much as a Mustang
@@ElDoggo141 i don’t think the price had anything to do with it concidering the US huge war economy at the time. It was more likely the US goverment wanted to build tried and true planes to cut production time and mass produce as jets where new tech that hadn’t been proven yet. The germans gamled on superior tech like jets in order to tip the balance of the war. Obviously it didn’t work out for them.
@@ElDoggo141 The P59 Airacomet's performance was totally inferior to the Me 262 (and the British Meteor.) It was essentially an experimental aircraft. Powered by early, low-powered British-designed engines, it was never used in combat because the USAAF found its performance so bad, not due to its cost.
The patriotism I feel when learning my nation's #1 ace is named "Dick Bong" is unrivaled
How about the Grumman Hellcat? 19:1 kill ratio or something like that
most off the American planes he said weren't good fighter or weren't fighters at all aha
Spitfire for me, its beautiful wings and that engine sound.
same engine but p51 flew pants off a spitfire and in this piece a yakovlev 3 with licensed hisso was better than p51 seems hard to believe was it that good and the hisso which had to be dated .
My gramps [ French officer ] was a test pilot in North Africa during the war. He didn't get to fly terribly many different planes , but one day I asked him which he liked the best.
Without hesitation he answered - "The British Spitfire"
Well p51 has same sound both have Merlin's
Origins of p51 sent to Europe to the British they loved it but for the engine threw one of theirs in it the rest is history .What if they chose Bristol Centaurus.
@@charlesmartel8112 spitfire was great plane in it's days but when fw190 came ,p51, hawker typhoon,it was showing it's age as a design just like hurricane.
What helped the P38 be the most feared fighter- Four .50-in. machine guns; one 20-mm cannon.
And no problem with wing mounted gun convergence.
The Mosquito Fighter carried 4 x 20mm cannon and 4 x .303 Browning Machine guns or 6 x 60mm rockets.
@@derekambler And made of plywood...
@@bryonscheer2759 but that wasnt a negative, helped to keep it light , and was actually very strong and easy to repair.
P-39 Airacobra was even heavier armed fighter plane: it had 37mm gun and 4 50cals. Even though manufactured in USA rare plane in the U.S. airforce but via lend-lease the Soviets had significant number of them in the latter part of WW2.
The Me262 was obviously the best fighter plane built during WWII. The allies were shit scared of it when it came about but was too late to do too much.
@James Stripling I know but on a level playing field, 1 vs 1 nothing could beat them in WWII. Anything can shoot down a plane taking off...
You’re comparing a jet to fighter planes.
@@lejenddairy exactly lol. Still a WWII fighter/interceptor. If both planes were flown properly it would beat any prop plane of WWII
@@MickR0sco i guess you never heard the tale of the US redtails. They engaged them with the p51 and won all their dogfights against them. The ME was an important development in aviation but it was built on very very very tight tolerances which are fine on paper until the production facilities are facing mass shortages in alloys, workers, engineers, designers, and maintenance crews to work on them. It was like the stg 44 or fg42 of ww2 planes. Excellent technology but way more of a hassle than what is true efficiency. The fg42 was also built and designed on tolerances so tight that the most successful missioned they were used in were the ones they did not even get used. Same goes for the ME
@@Rytoast99 I'm not interested in the details of manufacturing and stuff. What I mean is exactly that, on paper. It was hands down the most capable fighter aircraft of WWII on paper and when they had the means to maintain them.
11:03 he was the one that was 1 away from getting the knights cross but spared a heavily damaged B-17, he died in 2009
knight
True
I think he would still deserve a American medal as appreciation.
And if you want to hear a more specific version of that story just look up “When a BF-109 spared a stricken B-17”
I remember reading about that somewhere.
"designed by ET while he was on ketamine" was very relatable
Hmm, are you claiming a direct bloodline with E.T.? If for, I can understand being depressed and needing the Ketamine!
The Flying pancake is The Funniest Name for a Fighter Planes! XD
This thing is the scariest aircraft to face, because it makes your stomache growl. XD
7:16 You added a brazilian P-47 picture "Senta a Pua!", love this channel, always acknowledging other countries contribution in full videos or slightly
I think the Hurricane should have had a mention, very versatile, could take loads of punishment and helped win the BoB! 😃
The Hurricane and Hellcat deserve a mention. I'd give the 'best' title to the P-51. Cheers
Tell me how good the Mustang is after you lose an engine.
The Hurricane while important was second rate and while it is not exactly how it got there the Hellcat was design to out Zero the Zero and that was not the future of fighter planes.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_World_War_II_flying_aces#Table
most top allied aces flew a p39, and most of those pilots had vastly more claimed kills than they were credited for, if we go by claimed kills, p39 wins by a landslide, even though it was one of the least produced planes of the war. and as far as i can tell, nobody has published either total kills attributed to the p39, or its kill/loss ratio, unlike pretty much every other plane.
sounds to me like american and russia don't want to admit their ties during the war, otherwise this aircraft would be more famous than the spitfire. regardless of conspiracy theories, p39 is a fantastic plane, and easily beats the p38 in every regard but range.
@@calvingreene90 well there's a case of this,but having two engines is better
@@ラリックス7
Which is why elsewhere I have stated my opinion that the P-38 is the best WWII fighter of the planes available in time and numbers to affect the outcome of the war.
unfortunately the p-51's had to have a LOT of maintenance on them to keep them running properly. Due to mold casting problems in manufacturing the front 2 cylinders always leaked oil into the powerstoke and would flood the engine with oil mid flight.
"avoid fighting the P38 on" of course it was suicide, with it's quad .50 and 20mm cannon
Thats not much compared to other planes :/
The fw-190 had 4 mm cannons and 2 13mm machineguns
It wasn't so much what was mounted to the aircraft as it was how it was mounted. Fighters with wing mounted guns have the guns not facing straight forward but have them tilted in just a bit, which gives an intersection of projectile trajectories forward of the aircraft. Ideally you would fire at a specific range where the trajectories intersected (the sweetspot) to have all guns hitting your target. Since the P38's guns were all mounted close together in the nose, the entire projectile trajectory was the sweetspot.
So if a P38 was going head on with an FW190, there is a brief second or two where the P38 was being hit by all the FW190's guns and prior/after that at best half the guns. But the FW190 will be getting hit by all the P38's guns all of the time (This is of course assuming that both pilots are experienced enough to aim properly and keep on target).
In my limted opinion I think the P 38 was the best overall plane of WW2 it could do everthing from bombing too air combat plus it had greater range than other fighter bomber planes.
Haha mosquitos centremounted 4 .303 and 4 20mm go
Brtdakabirtdakabirtdaka
in terms of early-stage war, the zero was the best fighter ever. its amazing maneuverability was the key to its deadlyness, destroying aircraft left and right. according to my parents, who's japanese, told me how apparently the allied forces only managed to make planes to counter the zeros because of a certain zero that was captured by the americans, who took it to the labs and found the plane's weakness. as y'all should probably know, the wings of the japanese fighter were extremely fragile, and also, i think, had fuel in it. so a little shot on that wing, and zeros will pretty much stop existing. so, americans were like: "aim for the wings". but you know, this information from my japanese parents, take it with a grain of salt.
one of the other problems was that the zeros didn't use hydraulic control lines. So one of the easiest ways to get the kill was to get up high and let the zero chase you striaght down then pull up. All of the increased airflow over the control surfaces prevented the pilots from being able to pull out of the dive. That and if the zero's rolled upside down the engines would starve of oil and lockup preventing them from restarting the engines mid flight. But all that was discovered once the allies got their hands on one.
@@bamarshmallow1 He also left one important fact: The only reason the Zero could go fast and maneuver so well is it had little to no armor. Thus it would not take any kind of punishment. If you got a good shot at it, they were easy to knock down when hit.
@@davidr6447 yep. At the start of the pacific theater Japan had some of thr best trained pilots in the world though. Which made them that much more formidable. Dosent matter if they don't have armor if you can't get a sight on them
America found out the Japanese Zeros did not have armor to protect their pilots, nor did they have self sealing fuel tanks in the wings...once they knew that it was all over...get a couple 50 cal. incendiary rounds in the wing tanks and watch it burn.
@@bamarshmallow1 Studying the captured Zero did no so much aid in the design of new aircraft, but was critical in developing tactics for the existing fighters.
I like that Australia (0:26) is depicted as a kangaroo
I think the FW 190D was the best all-around fighter when piloted by an experienced pilot
Agreed, especially when considering the allied advantage of fuel quality in the late war. Still 'Doras' were said to be more than a match for the allies.
Speaking from personal experience guys ?
Altitude and speed were lightning advantages
5 bladed prop, Griffon engined late war Spitfires. Simply the Best Pure Fighter plane. This Brit Bad Boy shot down MIG 15 jets in Korea!
I agree with the fw190 but it came out too late, if that had been at the Battle of Britain or bomber escort over the uk ?
3:29
RUclips won't be happy with that symbol in the back of the plane
@@theredwesternraptor4209 agreed
Ssshhhhhh dont let youtube know
Super Jeff hahah
Super Jeff get the manager p89s ready for combat
There are some countries that had good planes, but aren't as well known for building aircraft. The Romanian IAR 80 was quite good, and the late entry Swedish Saab 21 was another gem.
The flying pancake, designed by ET while on ketamine, LOL
It was a narrow focus. Supremely narrow, even. And DoD aka the War Dept didn’t sign off. I find that lack of war planning quite disturbing mate. 😂
I went on a hunting trip with a p-38 pilot that flew during WW2. He passed away last year in 2020. The one time I met him he was constantly telling stories of his missions it was one of the coolest conversations Iv ever had
You forgot about the British Hurricane Fighter that was also used in the Battle of Britain.
The Spitfire was considered superior tho, and there were tons of other British aircraft, and aircraft from all nations, not mentioned here. That way that video would've taken a decade to make and at least half a year to watch. lmao
I’d say it’s a tough call probably a tie between the Mustang and the lightning. The P 38 was a handful for pilots to fly they could get good at it but it took time the Mustang was easy to fly right from the beginning and very versatile also
for me its the P-51 Mustang even tho its a old plane I would love to be in one and own one