The 10 Deadliest Planes of WWII | WW II Aircraft | WW 2 Fighter Planes
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 29 май 2024
- The 10 Deadliest Planes of WWII | WW II Aircraft | WW 2 Fighter Planes - Today we'll show you The 10 Deadliest Planes of WWII. Below The 10 Deadliest WW2 Planes ( wwii planes ,ww2 planes,wwii,planes,wwii planes,ww2 airplanes,ww2 aircraft,wwii aircraft,ww2 fighter planes ).
00:00 Intro
00:13 Junkers Ju 87 Stuka
00:58 Republic P-47D Thunderbolt
01:53 P-51 Mustang
03:34 Lockheed P-38 Lightning
04:10 Messerschmitt Bf 109
04:45 Supermarine Spitfire
05:34 Vought F4U Corsair
06:28 Nakajima B5N
07:06 Mitsubishi A6M Zero
07:56 B-29 Superfortress
Subscribe Now :
/ @military-tv
Facebook: / usmilitarynewsvideos
Instagram: / militaryvideos_
Twitter: 
Авто/Мото
Pretty pathetic. As soon as the mispronunciations started, it was clear this was not well researched. Odd choices too, no Mosquito, no FW190, no Me 262, no Lancaster, and of course nothing Russian. Try again!
Merrserschmidts? Yeah, I heard that too.
And the B-29 had a 2000 lb bomb load? Oops, dropped a decimal point there.
What no f6f Hellcat it’s kill ratio was 19 to 1 the highest of any fighter in ww2
Thomas Smith Hey I’m one of those yanks but then again I’m not all that educated either......so never mind
@Thomas Smith You should learn how to write before you call people uneducated.
Let me get this right, the B29 could only carry the same bomb load as a Corsair? It was the Hurricane that won the Battle of Britain, helped by the Spitfire. The most successful fighter squadron during that time was 303 squadron, flying Hurricanes. No mention (of what could arguably be the most versatile aircraft and the fastest in it's class) the De Havilland Mosquito; 35 variants.
HiOn NO the B29 had a bomb load of 20,000# at a range of 3500 miles, dumb announcer missed a zero in the tonnage !!!
And the Mosquito could fly faster and longer with the same Bomb Load as the B-17 . Which the US Air force lost 100,000 men flying unescorted missions
@@Rusty_Gold85 The B-17 could carry up to 9600 lbs internally (6 x 1600 lb bombs). Some of the B-17s could carry a 4,000 lb bomb under each wing. The B-17 was used to test the Disney bomb (a rocket powered penetrating bomb developed by the UK) against sub pens and bunkers late in the war which was carried under its wings.
@@Rusty_Gold85 There you go with lies !!! The USAAF bomber command had about 250,000 airmen and support in Europe and had a loss of about 25,000 compared to the RAF with 120,000 in theater and lost 56,000 men. RAF and USAAF figures so quit the grandstand lying and shut up !!!
@@Rusty_Gold85 About 3700 B-17s were shot down. With a crew of 10, that amounts to about 37,000 men. About 3900 Lancasters were shot down although they had a smaller crew. The B-17 dropped around 640,000 tons of bombs, the Lancaster around 602,000 and the Mosquito around 25,000.
I Think It's Safe To Say That Most Of The Comments Are More Accurate Than The Video. Using An Acronym From The Period Depicted, This Is SNAFU!
Also FUBAR
Why Are Every One Of The Words In Your Comment Capitalized?
@@gunchbandit4422 Yo G.B., 'Sup? A More Correct Sentence Would Have Been, Why Is Every Word In Your Comment Capitalized?
What about the British de Havilland mosquito one of the best planes of World War II
Yep, no mosquito?? Massive omission,.. no lancaster?? I guess its an american video...
The wooden wonder
Easy to make fast multi purpose fighter bomber took massive damage compared to many other planes
The most versatile and single most useful aircraft of WW2, only the Ju 88 comes close. Certainly not the P 38 failed in Europe, failed as a nightfighter and as PR. Only good for long range intercepts and shooting down unarmoured lightly built poorly piloted Japanese aircraft. Twin tailed devil was made up by the press German fighter pilots loved to shoot them down why it was withdrawn from the European Theatre
soaringtractor You are well know on RUclips for being completely irrational about the P 38 so I am not getting into a debate with you
It has one drawback, the RAF didn't have enough of them
IMHO the Mosquito TSE TSE, was one of the most lethal war plane of WW2, the Wooden Wonder could carry 4,000 pounds of bombs, 12 rockets, 57mm anti tank auto loading cannon (6 pounds), 4 X 7.7mm machine guns, even cameras for reconnaissance missions, the first plane to bomb Berlin, and it did it on a daily basis (Berlin Express), surgical precision bomber, 3,000 feet per minute of climb rate, ceiling at 38,000 feet at 425 mph, convoy destroyer, fighter plane, and nicknamed the U-boat killer or the nightmare of the SS , hunted V1 in the air, then destroyed V-1 launching sites in europe, it was the "navy Seal" of WW2 aviation, collecting all the special assignments and the MIF....The plane was driving Hermann Göring (Luftwaffe commander) crazy, turned the tide of the war, saved Britain...then the P51D nailed the coffin and sealed the faith of Germany. In my opinion the Mosquito should be number-2, they were master in the air, the Luftwaffe could not touch them, too fast, they started bombing Germany causing major slowdowns and havoc on the military production in germany.... and the P51D Mustang should be number-1, the B-29 were sitting ducks if the Mustangs were not there to protect them, and the P51D destroyed the Luftwaffe, opening the skies for all the bombers...and where is the Hellcat ???... Had to come back for the Hellcat, while all planes in the pacific were getting their butt kicked by the "Zero" (A6M) drivers, then came the Hellcat(F6F) replacing the Wildcats (F4F), the Zero Drivers had a simple technique to shoot down Wildcats, and confused the Hellcat for Wildcats, and all the Zero Drivers paid for that, the Hellcat turned the tide in the Pacific. So 2 of the 3 planes that changed the war, were total mistakes, a wooden plane that everybody laughed at at the beginning (Mosquito), and a plane nobody wanted, especially the US (Mustang) until a British pilot and a Canadian mechanics fitted a Mustang with the mighty Merlin engine....and the rest is history!
The list is bollocks. P51D number 1. What about the B 17? Mosquito had it all.
@@kopfjager9431 I hear you, there were thousand of B17, but their impact could not be really felt until the P51D Mustangs destroyed the Luftwaffe or escorted the bombers... and by the way the Mosquito was the first plane to bomb Berlin and Germany, they were bombing, then scraping runs, it was called the Berlin Express route, when they had no more ammo, they would come back, if a german plane went after them, they would just put the pedal to the metal, and hasta la vista ME109....
Well there's no doubting what you think of that list. I have yet to read any positive response. It's actually quite offensive that someone had the nerve to write this and think it was ok. We probably all have our preferences. In England in 1940 we had the Westland Whirlwind armed with 4 x 20mm cannon and could carry 2x 250lb bombs. It was actually faster than the Spitfire. Unfortunately it was powered by Rolls Royce Peregrines. These engines very quickly went out of production ( and the Whirlwind) because of the demand for the Merlin. You may already know this in which case l 've wasted both your and my time! And yes the Mossie was just amazing and carried the same bomb load as the B17.
@@johndavey72 You did not waste my time, it's the pleasure of reading knowledgeable people that counts, I have pleasure of getting knowledge as much as giving it, it's a shame that people that wrote history, skipped very important parts of it, I did not know about the Rolls Royce Peregrines and the Whirlwind, I can understand that designers wanted the Merlin because it was so reliable and economical to run, and maybe some politics also. I know a few things about the Brits in the war, Hurricanes and Spitfires might have won the battle of Britain, it's the Mosquito that saved Britain, the best weapon the Brits had was their attitude, the Mustang destroyed the Luftwaffe because a Brit pilot and a Canadian mechanics modified a plane only good for scraping runs, put a Merlin engine in it, and made the Air Superiority Warbird, and also that if I was a German ME-109 pilot, I would like it better to have a Hurricane or a Spitfire in a dog fight with me, than having a Mosquito TSE TSE on my tail, because he would have been faster, more maneuverable, faster climb rate, higher ceiling, more autonomy, and the worst was it's firepower, with 4 Browning 7.7 mm, and one cannon, not a standard 20mm canon, it was a 57mm anti tank cannon, it was killing destroyers, u-boats....imagine firing at a poor ME-108...ouf!!!!!!
I do agree with that observation...
Completely missed Lancaster, Hurricane and Mosquito, FW190, HE111.
3 of those are Bombers
@@Heathcoatman ye
Also the Focke-Wulf Fw 190 should have been included … a real badass fighter.
yea, this list is so fail it's not even amusing. It was a bad idea to begin with.
@@Heathcoatman as is the B29, and yet, here we are. There's so many missing from this list, and it's unclear on what grounds the list has been assembled and ranked.
And no F6F Hellcat, with the best kill to loss ratio of any american fighter plane.
Thank you. 19:1 and no aircraft ever hit that mark since anywhere in the world! Sounds like the deadliest aircraft to me. now remember that the b-19, b-24, and the b-29 were bombers, so one would try to argue that point
And the first who can counter the legendery A6M ZEROS OR ZEKE.
@@wilmontsmith1621 Not dismissing the Hellcat's excellent record, but the F-15's kill ratio stands at 104:0.
@@JonMartinYXD The F-15 did not participate in WWII. HOWEVER... that does NOT mean that its not a good fighter. Both the Hellcat and F-15 are both very impressive planes.
@@stephenroberts4895 Obviously the F-15 didn't participate in WW2. However check the comment I was replying to: "... no aircraft ever hit that mark *since* ...".
When it failed to mention the Mosquito, I knew this was crap
@menckencynic mosquito was a very good fighter, its Britains p38 but just built Anglo. Which isnt usually a good thing but it was a good plane.
@menckencynic Apples and oranges. The Mosquito was a multi role aircraft - tactical bomber, pathfinder, day or night fighter, fighter-bomber, intruder, maritime strike and photo reconnaissance. The 'hot' versions topped out at 436 mph
Who cares what @menckencynic says....
@menckencynic So unconcerned you had to hit the keyboard... warrior.
@@sholdrodcrit
P 38? you mean the unreliable poor performing and deadly to its own pilots.
The Mosquito like the Beaufighter, Halifax, Lancaster, Spitfire and Tempest were very good, unlike many second rate US aircraft.
4:11 those damn "Mercercmits"
Just as well that they only had enough fuel for 10 minutes of battle.
I had to rewind and play it back... he actually said the B-29 had a 2,000 pound bomb load.
Even p51 can do that,just give the p51 a bomb sight and it now its a very very small b29
I caught that also.
16 000 pounds
Yeah I heard that too. This is a fighter / ground attack aircraft not heavy bomber capacity. Think a digit at least is missing
@@johnshallenberger9013 Nope !!!! 20,000 at 3500 miles !!! USAF facts
He lost my attention when he said "point 50 caliber."
???? point 50 would be (.50 inch) as a caliber.
When he mispronounced junkers and then said the Stuka was a fighter.... you made it farther than I did.
@@brentsmith9966 the stuka was slow as hell lol
And the inconsistent description of the armament -- the Mustang had ".50 caliber" guns, while the Spitfire had "12.7mm" guns, even though they were the same gun. Use millimeters or inches, but be consistent about it.
Yep the "Point 50 caliber" shot me down too. Amateur video
The Corsair wasn't called "Whistling Death" because of its engine noise. It was because of the sound of the air passing through the oil coolers in the wing root...
I always thought the Beaufighter was called The Whistling Death because of the quite sleeve valve Motors.
Was a quite sleeve valve maybe quiet sleeve valve
@@dessullivan668 Apparently it’s called the “Whispering Death” rather than whistling death
@@casual_boredom7195 Correct the Japanese referred to the Beaufighter as Whispering Death. The Australian made mark had fire power of 20mm cannons and 50 cal m/g's.
the japanese referred to the bristol beaufighter as whispering death bacause of the quieter engines .
The Mosquito, so fast that it flew unarmed to start with and later became the best ground attack aircraft of the war. The Hurricane, shot down more enemy aircraft than the Spitfire. The Typhoon, one of the best low level ground attack aircraft. The FW190, so good it was called the butcher bird by allied airmen. And i would have put the Fairey Swordfish ahead of the Nakajima by virtue of the fact that it was an open cockpit biplane that managed to cripple the Bismarck and sink the Italian fleet at Taranto. Your list is like saying the best modern military aircraft and leaving the A10 Warthog off.
I was thinking the same, but most American airplane on this list!
Not American though, is it.
Well said
Goring said "If it wasn't for the Mosquito id have hived a other two year's ", it was the fastest plane in the world when developed, had the same bomb capacity of the b17, manoeuvred like a fighter, was made from easy available and workable wood, and took the fight directly to the ss, and gestapo . Not a mention . So bias,
@@grahamwestwood5910 exactly , the Americans , like all super powers write the narrative and damn every other country , we did the same during our empire days, it's now the American Empire distorting history and world achievements , only education can give you a balanced argument , not some silly biased RUclips vid...the new gutter press
Hey it was the hawker hurricane that won the Battle of Britain,
Rocco Spano the hurricane was a bit slower than the spitfire, and it was not so manuveral, due to this the hurricanes went after the bombers while the spitfires took out the fighters. I don’t know why the spitfire gets all the glory for the hurricane was a real warhorse, but they are both beautiful aircraft. If it wasn’t for those two aircraft and the men that flew them, this country would have been over run by the nazi
If that were in order the list is crazy, Hellcat was more successful than Corsair, though Corsairs were used into the 50s and was a more modern design. The Zero was slightly better than the US planes the first year of the war but was a target after that and was the reason the US had 10 or 20-1 kill ratios after the first year. Stuka was a plane from the 30s and a slow target if there was any fighter in the area, if a pilot had a choice of WW2 dive bombers to fight in, it probably would come in last.
The Spitfire is the most overrated aircraft of WWII. In 1940 the Hurricane although slower, was more manoeuvrable, could sustain more damage, was easier to repair and had stronger wings allowing the eight .303 browning machine guns to be concentrated into to shorter groupings on each wing. By 1941 the Mustang was outperforming the current variant in altitude, manoeuvrability, speed and range. In 1942 the Mosquito again was out performing the latest Spitfire variant. In 1944 the Typhoon provided air cover for Overlord, until the British could build an airfield in France, as the Spitfire did not have the range. In 1944-5 Tempest and Meteors were also used as V1 interceptors, with more success. In the Pacific most of the Seafires ( Mk 1 Spitfires fitted with deck landing hooks) provided to the FAA ended up being ditched and replaced with Corsairs donated by the USN, because the RN had more operational carriers.
So during most of the War the Spitfire (in all of its 24 variants) did not match up to many other contemporary Allied aircraft.
myko freder the Stuka isn’t that bad a choice as it arguably won the battle of France even if it became outdated quickly
@@nicholasburns729 The Mk XIV Griffon engined Spitfire was used successfully on anti-Diver (V1) patrols. I think it would be quite a challenge to name other WWII fighters that started and finished the war, using almost the same airframe, but housing an engine of twice the power of the original, 3 times the firepower, twice the weight, much greater range, almost 50% higher speed, and significantly higher service ceiling.
That's not to say that other aircraft didn't match, or exceed, its performance, but for a fighter to remain in frontline service in this environment for that length of time I think is remarkable.
You know that being loud doesn’t make you right. The Stuka was a viable aircraft right to the end of the war. It was one hell of a tank buster on the eastern front with a 40 mm cannon slung underneath. Some of these Stuka pilots were brought over after the war and their wealth of knowledge was used many years later in the design of the A10.
I came to post the same exact thing Tom... thank you. 👍🏾
Actually, the Panzerknacker used 37mm guns.
Flying a Lockheed P-38G, Major William Leverette was credited with seven Stukas during the mission to cover a Royal Navy force. When American P-38s covering a British naval force in the Aegean Sea encountered a group of attacking German Ju-87s, a massacre ensued.
You’ve concentrated on the planes but you’ve forgotten to mention “ The Rolls Royce Merlin Engine “ .
Alan Wareham
The Mustang wouldn’t been the plane it turned out to be without the Merlin.
No mention of the Hurricane or Mosquitoes?
Alan Wareham - Yes, without the Merlin replacing the Allison engine in the Mustang, it would not have been able to go toe-to-toe with Me109s and Fw190s.
@@petersmith6794 - If it wasn't the Rolls it would have been replaced with some American innovation, the Allison was getting replaced no matter what, the Rolls wasn't great but it was good enough
@@steveTGO
USA had nothing else that could replace the Allison, they had to turn to Britain. Just imagine trying to stick a P & W on the front of the P 51, that would have been a real disaster.
One of the most important Allied "weapons" of World War Two.. The Merlin engine.
Should have titled this "Some planes Americans have heard of" because it is hardly a list of the deadliest planes of WW2 and it also contains a lot misinformation.
The Hurricane shot down more German planes than the Spitfire. Some hot rodded Spitfires were indeed used against the V1, but mostly it was Tempest and jet-powered Gloster Meteors. The Soviet Ilyushin 2 was better than the Ju87. To claim that the Zero was the plane flown by Japanese kamikazes is just plain silly. They used a heck of a lot more types, including the Ohka flying bomb specifically designed for this purpose.
And kid, a small aside, mispronouncing German or Russian words is bad enough, but mispronouncing Corsair is really bad. Take a few extra minutes and look up how to pronounce things.
also jericho trumpets where small whistles mounted to bombs. the sirens of the stuka where known as lärmgerät wich just means noisemaker.
also v1 is a cruise missile.
YEP, YEP...agree!
It is true that hurricanes shot down more than the spitfire but that is an irrelevant stat as the truth behind that is hurricanes wer free to engage the slow easy bombers while the spitfire took on the best of the luftwaffe had to offer
@Irobert1115HD Mounted to the fixed landing gear spars on JU87
Who wrote this? It is so unbelievably factually incorrect it’s like it was made up as they went along.
No FW-190....and how can you place the Zero above the Corsair???
Don S only an idiot can
I knew this was going to be garbage as soon as they said the Stuka became obsolete and was withdrawn. The Stuka was never withdrawn.
More like an after thought than factual info...grins
Donald Trump.
Nobody ever mentions the plane that shot down more enemy aircraft than any other-the Grumman Hellcat
4th among the top five in reality. Above it: Me109 (20k plus shot down), FW190 (10k plus shot down), P51 (5k plus shot down) and then came the F6...impressive in that it did shoot down more than Spitfire, Corsair, P40 and Zero and also, that it was a rugged and a comparatively easy aircraft to handle.
Dear gawd; someone let an American teenager have access to Hollywood's fictional archives.
It's not really, a shit ton of planes the us made and most of them were very successful, did not mention the f6f or p51.
Of course many other fighters from different countries deserve to be on the list
@@sholdrodcrit every ww2 era American aircraft has a shit turn time compared to any other country’s aircraft. So stop glorifying American aircraft so much
@@BobaJae.05 and yet they still handled well, I wonder why. Mr war thunder player? No one is overglorifing the US
No Hurricane. B-17, Avro Lancaster, Me 262, de Havilland Mosquito, FW 190 just to name a few that should have been on this list.
You left out the P-61 Black widow..
NO List !!!!
@@jasonanalco542 the P-61 was almost irrelevant in the war.
If you was assigned in B17 you're most likely dead during mission
No mention of the Soviet I-16.
Not a lot of research done for this vid, too many lethal aircraft left out.
yup... and you lived though it....
No kidding
It was a list of 10. Make a list of 100.
Time to read books.
You did not mention any of the Soviet fighters--and it was the HURRICANE that won the Battle of Britain--helped by the Spitfire.
Mike Banks No knocking the hurricane, it was a fine all around craft however if the RAF could of replaced them all with Spitfires they would have in a heartbeat. As far as Soviet craft are concerned the Yaks and Lavochkins were good but inferior at high altitude. Like with everything on the East
Front the Russians made absolute best with what they had.
Hurricane was WAY deadlier....
Admiral LongStash Then the Spit? No way. The RAF didn't have enough Spitfires to go around so the Hurricane had way bigger numbers.
@@manuelgallego3196 number of kills in the battle of Britain tell the tale... sure, Spit is the better plane, no question. Being deadly is about absolute numbers.
Admiral LongStash Once again we're talking about the deadliest plane not the most efficient fighter group. Kill rate takes in a number of variables and tactical and strategic advantages and disadvantages. Give me a P47 and I can take out your tanks sink your shipping and be a threat to your finest fighter group given a comparable proficiency. Also the 47 possessed a high intimidation factor,it looked like a beast.
I believe in the "Battle of Britain" the Hawker Hurricane scored more victories, and that not too few pilots preferred it to the Spitfire.
True, but you also have to consider that the Hurricanes were downing bombers, while Spitfires were assigned to fight the ME 109 escorts... one would assume killing a bomber might have been a bit easier than a ME 109 ?
@@tonyioannoni4951 There were more Hurricanes in the BoB and they also shot down Messerschmitts. However I have read in at least two books that Hurricanes shot down more enemy aircraft than any other British fighter - and the claim was not limited to the Battle of Britain - although it might have been a mistatement. However realizing that Hurricanes came out sooner, were built at a more rapid pace, were more easily repaired and that the Spitfire was retained in England for about a year or so to protect against a German invasion while the Hurricane was sent off to battle in Africa and far East so maybe the Hurricane was in more battles and shot down more aircraft than the Spitfire. From what I can gather the Spitfire is credited with about 7000 victories, but I have no data on the Hurricane.
@@danzervos7606 To be 100% honest, I just love a story of a good underdog, and a plane no body wanted, but was used in all aspects of a war with big success is the Mosquito, but on the same plane we need to be 100% honest about all the planes, and to find out which was really the best, you have to take into account the number of planes built, the number of versions, the number of kills, the types of kills, the number of sorties, the number of time the plane was in confrontations with the enemy, the amount of planes that were shot down, once you have all the info, then maybe you can calculate the efficiency of an air-frame, some accounts state the Hurricanes shot down 55% of kills and Spitfires 45%, some even say they had 60% of the total kills, like in the Battle of Britain, Hurricanes were assigned the bombers, and the Spitfires had to fend off the ME109, but in the count a bomber is 1 plane like a fighter, but it must be way easier to shoot down a bomber than a fighter, so nobody's right, and nobody's wrong, but it's fun to exchange ideas....😉
@@tonyioannoni4951 You seem to be missing my question. Did the Hurricane shoot down more aircraft than the Spitfire over the course of the whole war? I have seen this in two books stated "The Hurricane shot down more aircraft than any other UK aircraft." Is this true or a misstated. Maybe it should have been qualified as for the Battle of Britain, but it wasn't.
@@danzervos7606 OK so here is my (cold computer analyst) answer, nobody is really right, the kills were attributed to pilots, not air-frame, as the Hurricane was put into service one year before the Spitfire, tons of hurricanes pilotes switched to Spitfires, Hurricanes were built in good numbers, 14,533, but they built 20,351 Spitfires, so when a pilot switched, his total numbers of kills followed him not the air-frame, British pilots used to switch pretty often, as to what plane was available on that day's mission, even P-51 Mustangs are not 100% accurate as pilots from P-40 Tomahawks that migrated to P-51 carried their kills with them, and finally that is why everybody has a different way of making their point, and write books about that, if you want the absolute truth about that, you will need the raw data for each sortie, pilot-plane flown-kills, give me the data and I will gladly compute it for you...and also the fact that 25% to 30% unconfirmed facts-kills from the opposite camp makes this really no good at all, how can you have such discrepancies ??? And if you want to be purist about this, the model is also very important, as an example all the P-51 were not successful, all the variant prior to the Merlin engine were scrapping planes....I could go on and on....
When your pronunciation is that lame, you know this whole video is put together by someone who didn't care if it was correct.
No crap! Cringeworthy right from the start. "Junk-ers."
At least they didn't have some dumb broad reading the script.
Tom Last Yep. Only reason I stayed around was to look at the planes..
No FW 190
Nice list, but feels a bit random rather than a real “top x list”
P-47 range limitations were mainly due to the unavailability of sufficiently large drop tanks.
The man kept misspronouncing the names of the planes.
The mustang was a failure till the British put a Merlin in it
P-51 was actually faster than the contemporary spitfire in its allison engine variant, before the Merlin was installed
It was an excellent ground attack and dive bomber prior to the Merlin.
Speed means nothing if you have a supposed fighter that can't get above 18,000 feet to intercept bombers flying at 20-20,000 feet. Mark 1 Spitfires and Hurricanes were fighting at 20-22,000 feet before the first P-51 flew and failed to get above 16,000'.
John Forrester. The Mustang wasn't a failure per se. It's just that it's designers - working to a USAAF directive even though it was being built for the British - didn't think that if would have to get above 15,000'. Supercharged engines were only going to be installed in bombers which wouldn't need a fighter escort as their armament would protect them. This was of course a foolish notion which was found out the hard way when the B-17s and B-24s were cut to ribbons in the first daylight campaign. Not until early 1944 when the D model P-51 powered by the superlative Merlin became available with it's drop tanks and additional fuselage tank were the bombers protected. Both the fighter version of the Spitfire nor the P-47 had the range to escort bombers to the big city, beyond and back.
Wilbur sorearse Tractor will be along shortly with his bullshits, duuuuhhs and shit mouths.
Warwick Tregurtha, that's a good analysis. I would add that the b and c models of the Mustang were the ones that were first used to go all the way with the bombers. They didn't have the bubble canopies but the British Malcom hood made them about as good without sacrificing speed. It's my understanding that the B and C's were about 5 mph faster than the later D's and only had 4 Brownings.
What no love for the F6F? The highest number of kills in the Pacific!
Yesss 19.1 baby. I cant believe he put the japanesse torpedo bomber on that list
I am glad you managed to slip the Spitfire in there somewhere. I was beginning to think this was another "only America fought in the war video". What about the Mosquito and the Beaufort or "Whistling Death" and the Fokker Wulf 190.
There are just so many legendary aircraft in ww2 that you would need an extended list for them, the US produced a ton of variants and they were pretty damn good. But yea where's the mosquito?
Did you mean Beaufighter?
@@dongorrie1828 yes quite correct.
Focke Wolf, Fokker is/was a Dutch aircraft manufacturer
@@Hattonbank I hate to be this person, but you misspelled wulf.
Mosquito? 4000lb bomb load at 400mph. Lancaster? Could carry 22,000lb Grand Slam bombs.
Without those two planes this list has no credibility.
Maybe. But the Mosquito had speed and low radar signature. Also multirole and employed a utilised workforce, wood workers.
But Drew the Lanc had 4 engines not two so it surely it could carry more ordinance.
Harry Plummer the biggest load the Lancaster could carry was a single 22,000ib bomb and to carry that bomb they had to remove most of its guns and some other things just so it could get lift
@@falkeholz1459
A bigger bomb load by far than the B 17. The Lancaster could normally carry up to 14,000 lbs. The B 17 when they put 9,000 lbs on it for a mission to Berlin could barely take off and the mission was aborted.
“Mersersmitt”? And as another said, “point fifty climber “. Then there was the “Coorsair”. He managed to get the Japanese names right though. However, I’ll bet he doesn’t know that the name of the B-29 that dropped the bomb on Nagasaki, was spelled “Bock’s Car”, and not “Box Car”.
Glad he hadn't demonstrated his astonishing skills of reading Russian(words, acronyms and shortenings) and pronouncing it. I think that blood rivers from my ears is the least evil that can happen due to that.
I am a brilliant speller. Yet, to my fervid exasperation, I fear that I have perfected the technique to produce typographical errors.
Our heavenly Father calls us not to judge one another.
The Ju-87 Stuka remained combat operational until the end of the war. You must have gotten confused in researching the Stuka. Granted, it fell prey to the advances of allied fighters but the Luftwaffe continued to recognize its immense value in the ground attack and tank killer roles.
The Sturzkampfflugzeug was a lucky wannabe like the mad, bitter ideologue Adolf Hitler and his bellicose Brown Shirts kicking unarmed civilian shopkeeps.
Exactly correct and its value was not lost to the history books, neither were the experiences of its pilots, all of which re-surfaced in the form of the Warthog, among others.
The Short Sunderland flying boat carried bombs, mines and depth charges, and had a galley to cook food for the crew of 10 on a 14 hour mission. They had 16 machine guns in 3 powered turrets plus side guns and wing mounted guns. They had 20 mm cannons.
A Short Sunderland was attacked by eight JU-88s. Six of them never made it back. The Sunderland had to be ditched near the beach on the way back.
The Luftwaffe issued an order that the Short Sunderland was not to be attacked.
Two Short Sunderlands in a tight "box formation" (opposite corners of a square) were believed to be invincible.
We're two Short Sunderlands truly invincible?
My heart will always go out to whoever served in WWII. Especially the ones who flew the planes and lost their lives at land or sea. Rest In Peace to all of the ladies and gentlemen who served in the war. ❤️
RAF bomber command lost about 60,000 of the 125,000 that served, US lost about 25,000 of the 200,000 that served !!!
@@wilburfinnigan2142 yeah it’s sad!
The Royal Navy Fleet Air Arm was first to use the Corsair in combat, and helped iron out one or two 'issues' - it did indeed become a great and rugged carrier fighter.
They were the first to successfully land one on a carrier, the USMC was the first to use it in combat though .
@@michaelmckinnon7314 The Brits were first to put in service from a carrier, the USN landed them on carriers first and did not like the visibility and the bounce of the landing gear, both were modified and the landing was a circular approach rather than straight in !!! Get your facts straight !!!
BULL CRAP !!! US Marines used it as a land plane first before the Brits !!
@@wilburfinnigan2142 Yes indeed but it was a DUD in the west The USAAF already had better planes
Funny; I've never heard of a "merserschmidt."
Me bf 109, Me 262
Hehe, hey this was closer to the real pronounciation than usual (meschersmitt) 🤪
@@wobc1872 ur right
But still missing the FW190 in this lineup ...
@@wobc1872 your not wrong there
Thanks Tony, his stories of the Arctic conveys and the sinking of the Turpitz were fascinating...but always told with humour, if you can believe it. He refused to be defined by the war and spoke with sorrow about those that didn’t make it on either side. It was only after his death that we found out he was awarded the DFC twice....a kind, intelligent and funny gentleman from a previous age.
Also.. TBD dauntless sank more ships than other plane.. and the F6 Helcat mentioned in other comments down the most Japanese aircraft and best kill ratio.
The PBY is the most under rated aircraft.. with numerous sub kills, and as a result of scouting missions.. lead to many at sea victories
No the Stringbag sank and average 50000 tons of shipping from 1941 to 1943A figure not equalled in WW2
When showing the Zero, the plane shown was a Hollywood mockup of a T-6 Trainer.
Grinz...
本物の映像欲しかったな。
The Zero was a spent force after 1943 and could not match the heavy US fighters in the Pacific.
@@johnklatt3522 There are a handful of real Zeros flying today, one of which still has the original Japanese engine, the rest use Pratt+Whitney engines.
@@johnklatt3522 The Zero with the original Nakajima Sekae engine is owned by the Planes Of Fame Museum and I got to see it fly at an airshow about 3 years ago. I think it's on display in Pearl Harbor now though?
You've missed out the most deadly of them all, the 'Tetse Mosquito fitted with a Molins 57mm cannon which struck so much fear into German naval boats they had to have an escort as German fighters would target them first, also you forgot to mention the allied aircraft Me262 pilots feared even more than the Mustang was the Hawker Tempest which was also responsible for shooting down V1 bombs they were found more suitable than Spitfires for this dangerous job.
Tempests, Mosquito and Spitfires were used successfully for shooting down V 1's, the Spitfire also had a good record against Me 262's.
@@barrierodliffe4155 And dummy Barfie fails to recognize the P51 Mustang was credited with 120 Me262's and the P47 was credited with 25, i have seen 10 credited to the tempest and NONE to the short legged shitfire that could not get to Berlin to where the Me262 were located. Thats 155 of the less than 200 Me262 that were EVER put in service !!!! Facts of history less the hype , lies, and just BS !!!
I had read this about the Hawker Tempest hunting the V-1.
Incidentally, is the correct des- ignation "V1" or "V-1"? Also, what was the weapon's official full name, please?
@@wilburfinnigan2142 , historical ac- curacy, certainly. Civility is of key importance, too. Otherwise, we insidiously, inexorably become quite like our adversary.
And sneering at the renowned Supermarine Spitfire? Seriously? These were staving off the Luft- waffe alone whilst Charles Lind- bergh, Father Coughlin (sp?), and their Nazi sympa- thisers, and in Congress, the Know Nothings, the head-in-the-sand isolation- ists, et al., wilfully refused to see what was coming.
We in the USA owe a debt of gratitude to every single one of them whilst our forebears and predecessors dithered and delayed, or even colluded.
@@wilburfinnigan2142 Would that be the P51 with the Merlin engine? Cracking fighter aircraft that, one of my favourites of all time.
Mercer Schmidt? Sound's like cheap beer.
I’m an American but, where’s the Russian IL- 2?
yeah they forgot about the russian planes.
And there was also a YAK fighter too...do not remember the designation though...
@Suzanne LeBizarre Yak, Mig, LA, Lagg all Russian planes with various models. IL and PE were typically bombers.
@@RealmCenter40 they are probably refering to the yak 3 those where also used by the fench. They where very manrouvable and agile. Many still fly today.
The russians are always forgotten until the MIG came around, funny in WW2 the P-39 was used by the Soviet Air Force, and was the plane with most kills at one point, but they also had the YAK-9 that became their platform of choice, and take a look at that plane, it has looks of different other planes...the YAK-3 ressembles a Spitfire, and the YAK-9 looks like a mix of P-39 Airacobra and Hurricane?!?!?!?
A waste of time. Glad I just "fast forwarded" to the start of each aircraft. Even then my 2 minutes was 2 minutes too many.
I didn't even get that far before reading these comments...
Well that's 10 minutes and 35 seconds of my life I will never get back. No Mosquito, no Lancaster, no FW190, no Liberator, no Flying Fortress. The bombers alone would have wreaked more carnage than all the planes in this list put together
Mustang was fitted with the Rolls Royce engine because the American fitted engine was underpowered. It took the Merlin, to make the mustang the fighter it became
Richard Thomas That "underpowered Allison Mustang was faster than the then CURRENT shitfire MK V by 40 MPH....underpowered????? Allison actually made MORE power under 20,000 ft than the then current Merlin 20 series, as in case you were ignorant of was also a SINGLE stage supercharged engine !!! DUUUUHH!!!!!!!
@@wilburfinnigan2142 dAHHHH wE WANTED A FIGHTER NOT A LOW LEVEL PIECE OF POOP.
As usual no mention of the Mosquito as Goring said every time he saw one he turned green with envy faster than a Spitfire.
Faster than a Spitfire for a short time but in 1943 the Spitfire Mk XIV did 447 mph and more in 1944.
I really like the "Texan" zero, just saying......
333www3
...🤩👨🏾🚀🏟🏟🏟🏟🏟🥝🥝🍅🥝🥝🍏🍅🍎🍎🍉
本物が欲しかったな。
An AT-6 that DEFECTED, to the CAF?! Yup, same guys that Crashed my Uncle's post-war B-26..
Yeah.......they look so nice flying in formation in the beginning of the film "Tora Tora Tora"
B-29, 2000 pound bomb load? The atomic bombs weighted at least 9000 pounds.
William Huff - You are certainly on the button to question 2.000lbs as being the bomb capacity for a B-29! - Heck the B17 and the bomber variant of the twin engine Mosquito could cart a 4,000lb bomb at least as far as Berlin or the Ruhr.
The dummy mis read his notes the B29 carried 20,000# for 3600 miles !!!
JU87 was also used in Tank Busting role on Russian front was still in service at end of WW2
This video needed input from someone who knows WW2 aircraft instead of- whoever put this together
What an oddball list missing some of the deadlier aircraft, rife with inaccuracies and horrible pronunciations.
@menckencynic It's not being a prig. If you're a RUclips video maker and want your videos to be taken seriously, do them right - including being detailed enough to pronounce the names of the things you're pontificating on correctly, or don't do it all. Otherwise you're videos come off half-ass and unprofessional, as this one does.
He pronounced it Junkers when it should be youngkers
(Pronunciation only, not the name)
I remember the P-38 having 30 mm cannon.
Pity nothing about the mosquito, beaufighter, Lancaster, hurricane, etc. Those were truly fantastic aircraft for their time, especially the " wood" construction of the mosquito.
Yep and the mosquito was deadly, they raided most German targets like hitting enemy HQs somewhere in Norway or in France or even destroy railway yards in Normandy close to D-Day. Very deadly and they can also attack very low. One of our best aircraft our RAF ever have during the war.
Knew that...B17 (4 engine bomber), B26 (2 engine light bomber/attack), B25 another 2 engine light attack/strafing bomber)....an uncle was a B26 pilot, got shot down over Africa early in the war...Rommel's group...was wounded - flak in the kidneys but did survive to return home, start a family and a business...
My vote for the very best fighter in ww2 is the FW ta152 It came late in the war, so amatuer readers of history haven't heard much about it. It could do everything and the reports were it could fly higher, and faster than any other fighter and was a joy to handle. In fighter aircraft, the ride is only as good as the rider. The Luftwaffe had many of the very best "riders" Of the 18 ta152s' deployed only two were lost in the skys' dominated by the high volume of Allied fighters
SPOT ON; ALSO THE FW-190'S 4-20 MM CANNON AND 2-7.92 MM MACHINE GUNS WERE CONSIDERED BY ARMAMENTS EXPERTS TO BE THE EQUIVALENT FIREPOWER OF 17-.50 CAL. MACHINE GUNS.
As for the Mustang; I wish you had explained the evolution from the Packard engine to the British h engine with fuel injection
I believe the b24 Lancaster was a great aid in the win of United States and the downfall of the the greatly disturbed hilter and his killing machine my dad was a tailgunner in the Lancaster and. His crew flew 33 missions and came back sometimes badly damaged but that unbeovaly flying machine always brought them home what a plane he was awarded with two metals and I am here because of that great plane the ShoronD what a plane what crew
@@charliebrown8844 Do you mean the Lanc, or the B24 Liberator...?
@@johncunningham6928 I assume there's a comma missing between them
Timothy Get you chit together !!! The first engine in the Mustang was the ALLISON !!!! DUUUUHHH !!!! And the Mustang NEVER used a British engine with fuel injection !!!! They used the Packard, made in AMERICA version merlin with a Bendix PRESSURE carb, NOT fuel injection !!! GEEEEESSSEEEE DUUUUUHHHHH !!!!!!
@@wilburfinnigan2142 this is true. The Packard V-1650 Merlin was based on the Rolls-Royce Merlin, but was mass produced in America, with higher quality assembly & tighter production tolerances. The engine that was ultimately used in the Mustang was American through and through.
And any notion that the P-51 was "crap" before the Merlin is utterly false. It was a very fine, ahead of its time airframe. It just needed a better engine for the high-altitude missions in the ETO.
Many many years ago read an article in aviation week magazine explaining how a certain amount of P-51 mustangs where built for recon in the Vietnam war. Was said to be much lighter and more fun to fly than ever.
The Mosquito is a contender for the title of finest piston-engined aeroplane ever made... (I declare an interest; my father was a Mossie navigator during and for some time after WWII).
Where are the Soviet planes??? IL-2, La-7, Mig-3, Pe-2, Yak-3 and Yak-9....Where????
You are absolutely right, but in general soviet successes were played down, most of the times, and here, you have to agree that "Spitfire" is way more sexier than "YAK-3" even if these planes were comparable, as "Mosquito" also is not very sexy for a plane name, but a plane name that says it spits fire....that is sexy....Marqueting sells everything, but you also have to agree that your politicians at the time did not "participate" in the war, more competed with the allies, and that did not serve them well in the eyes of the allied block....
Save for the very limited ME 262 I say the deadliest fighter was the P47. Excellent in multipurpose fast and powerful, formidable and tough. Could hold 2500 lbs. of bombs with 8 50 cal. machine guns.
Jack Tangles Keep in mind this video is entitled the 10 deadliest planes, not the 10 best fighters. The P47 was a supremely magnificent fighter AND a beast of a fighter bomber. Tough enough to challenge at extreme low level bombing runs. 2500 payload capacity. 8 big guns. Still could be a huge worry to anything that flies. The spit. The legend of all fighters. I'll let you and the P51 fans argue about the best fighter along with the Fockwe Wolfe d folk.
Jack Tangles By the end of WW2 the U.S.A F. unlike the RAF was a complete leviathan. P47 was much more ubiquitous. Manufactured en mass. Low level infantry support is a very dangerous mission. However the 47 was extremely tough. Tankbusting,close support bombing AND dogfighting. Wermacht infantry found the P47 a scourge as did the Luftwaffe. Spit. no doubt a better fighter but not by much. The 47 a much better low level bomber. In a conflict U.S.A.F. 47s would have crushed Spits as they could be produced in much. higher numbers. Of course one on with equal pilots the spit has an edge. Put it to you this way. If I have 1000 47s and you 1000 Spits I say I win. I take out your tanks and stifle your ground movement and with equal pilot skill fight the hell out of the Spitfire.
@@manuelgallego3196 P47s was nothing compared to the Tempests and Typhoons, why you comparing the p47 to a Spitfire anyway when they were fighters for totally different roles?
Every time I heard "point fifty cal" I winced a little.
As a learner, i would like you to explain the difference between point, dot and period. All of them have no separate name in my first language.
@@worldoftancraft It depends on use. A period comes at the end of a sentence, a dot would be used to separate two pieces of information, like within a website name or IP address, while point is typically used for a decimal measurement, like 100 point 3. Three names for the same symbol, all based on use case. It's a crazy language.
@@jaredkennedy6576 sincerely thank you.
Range was never a problem for the P-47D. That is a popular myth that covers the intrigues that went on behind the scenes in order to get North American the juicy contract for the "European market".
It’s not pronounced junkers it’s pronounced yunkers
It’s not Stuka, it’s shtuka
You're apparently not a German. I am. Its pronounced Junkers. Sturzkampfbomber is the full meaning of Stuka.
@@davidradtke5166 very well ok but the information that was in the comment I got from google translate
“Mershershimt BF-109”
Sounds like crap
8:30 what is a 12 point 50 caliber machine gun?
10. Messerschmidt me262
09. Boeing B17G Flying Fortress
08. Illjushin IL-2
07. Grumman F6F Hellcat
06. Messerschmidt BF 109
05. Supermarine Spitfire
04. Chance Vought Corsair
03. Mitsubishi Am zero
02. Focke Wulf Fw 190
01. North American P51 Mustang
Absolutely ridiculous top 10...don’t waste your time
06:45 Nakajima B5N 'claimed a 90% hit rate on enemy targets' - wow! maybe that's true, but sounds very high! Is that 90% of missions flown by a Squadron would hit a target, or that when each plane attacked they typically hit the target 90% of the time?
I didn't think bombs and torpedoes where that accurate, particularly in combat, and the only gun is rear facing for defence. Just asking... 😎
Japan had the best Torpedo technology compared to most of the combatants. They had a high hit rate and detonation rate compared to the US where flying a torpedo bomber was a suicide mission and not in an honorable way. Although torpedo bombers were the reason we won at midway used as a distraction for the lost Divr bombers
@@crownregis yer, we got that. But as I said, 90% sounds really high.
Mercer Schmitt? You gotta be kidding me. Also the Spitfire was not leaps and bounds ahead of the BF109, it only had a faster turning circle. The Bf 109 had larger guns, a higher ceiling, and a slightly better engine. The real game changer was British radar technology.
This list is so wrong, I think there was hardly any research done, one of the best planes were so far back in the list.
No Mosquito or Beaufighter and what about the Russian IL - 2. I thought the ME262 was also in a class of its own. Ahhh well nice footage though.
russian il-2 was used as a all purpose aircraft, pretty much as the thunderbolt was, also the il-2 was the most produced aircraft of ww2 with over 33,000 produced. the me-262 was the first jet intercepter
ME262 too little too late. Thank goodness.
@@wilmontsmith1621
The IL 2 was not much of a fighter, mind you the P 47 wasn't so good either.
The Me 262 was a poor fighter.
Where is the P 40 Flying Tiger?
Choosing the B-29, one could argue that you should also have chosen the most versatile of the allied heavy bombers, the Avro Lancaster.
Ok s the 29 was a bit of a widow maker with underpowered engines that caught fire. 🔥
@@jordanulery524 I wonder what the comparative body count was between the two craft? I know that the B29s started some pretty serious fire storms on Japanese cities, as well as the two atomic bombs. But, we don't know what criteria the poster of this video was using, if any. This is my chief complaint about this video. If it had a coherent and consistent set of criteria, than all the arguments would be about the legitimacy of the criteria rather than which aircraft were included or excluded.
@@butlerproman yes; then there are two other cities bombed by a B29. 😳
@@jordanulery524 Under powered ???? 3,000 HP ??? only early ones had fire problems as the cowls were too tight not enough air flow to cool and that was fixed early on !!! It was an engine rushed to production for the B29 due to war and never fully developed til into the war !!!
Planes that should've been added:
- 'Me-262'. The first jet aircraft to ever enter production.
- 'il-2'. A russian Strike aircraft. The most produced military aircraft.
- 'B-17 Flying Fortress'. Helped the allies win the war.
- 'Avro Lancaster'. Carried the heaviest load of any other aircraft in WW2.
- '(Focke Wulf) Fw-190'.It focused on firepower instead of manoeuvrability but it was still decent. It fought alongside the Messerschmitt bf-109, engaging allied aircraft and even intercepting B-17's and B-24's.
- 'Twin P-51 Mustang' . This aircraft was, just like the name says, made up of 2 P-51's put together. The aircraft could carry a devastating 14 machine guns (if you count gun pods). It even served post-war as a interceptor. Although this aircraft isn't very iconic its definetely an interesting aircraft. The crew consisted of 2 pilots. The 2 pilots could swap controls mid-flight, letting them rest for a bit.
BUT the Twin Mustang was too late for WWII DUUUUUHHH !!!!!!!
@@wilburfinnigan2142 omg yeah how did i not realize that lmao
What about the ignominious f6f hellcat?
I was all about the Army Air Force growing up as a kid...knew nothing about the Navy until the "Midway Battle" when they sunk 4 Japanese carriers!
The Torpedo planes were decimated, but then, when all the guns wer concentrated at sea lever the dive bombers struck...
i want to just say a few things. first are you putting on that voice and can you correct your German pronunciation? and I feel like bias in at play because you put loads of American planes in but other country's also made very deadly planes too. also you said the zero had better flight distance at the beginning of the war. do you mean at the beginning of the war or halfway through when America officially joined?
Lol, that burned!
Possibly one of the worst videos I've ever seen on this topic, certainly made my top ten.
Grumman F6F Hellcat has the highest kill ratio of any aircraft since and up to this day, 19:1, while the Chance-Vought F4U Corsair had a 11:1 kill ratio. And what happened to the Focke-Wulf FW-190?
I wonder if he avoided the FW190 just so he didn't have to attempt pronouncing it
iT DID NOT FIGHT THE lUFTWAFFE SO WAS AN ALSO RAN
What about the Mosquito? More range than a Spit faster than a Spit could carry a bomb load close to a lance. By far the most versatile fighter bomber reconnaissance plane in the war. Goerring used to say that when he heard the twin Merlins of the Mosquito he used to turn green with envy.
NO version of the mosquito was faster than a shitfire !!!! Few late Mosquito's could top 400 MPH look at the test reports and quit spewing BS !!!!
The Spitfire took over P/R in the west for two reasons 1. It could go higher and 2. It used only one engine
Also where the AVRO Lancaster?
That was the British mainstay...found out about that much later than the American Bombers...and do remember the story of the B-17 bomber and the crew of the Memphis Belle...saw that movie when I was but a youngster growing up...
Your telling me the Kate from Japan was more deadly than a b-29? Or b-24 or b-25
De Haviland Mosquito should be first. But for some reason, it's not featured here.
Also the Focke Wolf fw190 is also omitted.
The stuka was only deadly when it could fly with no enemy fighters around
It was an effective ground support plane which was it's job. He does admit that it was obsolete early in the war though.
@@samuelhowie4543 you are correct it was flying artillery
Mmmmm, you are missing the fighter the same Germans evaluated as the one "impressively better than the other german opponents" having propelled propulsion, the powerful Fiat G55 Centauro.
I think this is very biased as there was so many other deadly planes and its unfair to include mostly American planes for the allies.
Only 5 american aircraft, slipping, would have thought the b17, p40, b25, b26 and the hellcat could have been slipped in to make it more representative
As far as the US is concerned, what 5 WWII aircraft contributed most to the winning of the war?
My list;
5. US Navy Dauntless Dive Bomber. Was instrumental in winning the Battle of Midway which turned the tide of the war in the Pacific forever.
4. US Navy F6F Hellcat. Gained a fantastic kill ratio against its Japanese counterparts and helped clear the skies of the Zero and others.
3. USAF P-51 Mustang. The only American fighter plane at the time that had the range to finally take our bombers to Berlin and back. Sealed the doom of the Luftwaffe.
2. USAF B-17. Devastated Nazi manufacturing and also helped to destroy their infrastructure.
1. USAF B-29. Only US bomber capable of delivering the two Atomic Bombs dropped on Japan. By doing so the Japanese ended the war thus saving God knows how many US and Japanese casualties.
Those are my personal picks. How about yours, what you think?
Well at least you aced your "Melodramatic Voice" classes!
This list totally missed the target.
The real reason P47's were replaced by P51's for bomber escort had very little to do with range and everything to do with the much greater cost of the P47 over the much less costly P51. Then there's also the fact that a guy with a BB gun could take down a P-51 - one little hole in the coolant lines and you've just lost another Mustang to ground fire.
Funny I thought it had more to do with testing at The Royal Aircraft Establishment in Farnborough by Cdr Eric Brown (Its in his autobiography).
And one little 20mm round in the Turbo and Piping and it was goodbye P47
The mosquito is without argument the finest plane of it's generation. There was nothing it could not do and it was FAST! To not have it on this list at number one is a crime..
Quite a few of the critical comments are on-target. As for US Navy fighters, the F4U was an excellent plane, fast and versatile enough to continue in service through the Korean War in the early 1950s, but it was NOT the "deadliest" or "most successful" US Navy fighter of World War II. Grumman's F6F compiled a 19:1 kill ratio, and accounted for about 80% of the Japanese planes shot down in aerial combat during the war in the Pacific.
The P-38 Lightning was no slouch either...Show down Yamamoto...
@Suzanne LeBizarre There is a great documentary about Charles Lindbergh going to the Pacific theater with a theory on how to seriously extend the P-38s range (which he was correct about). Completely caught the Japanese off guard.
Where's the Hurricane and Typhoon ...overly biased vid ...
Hurricane, yes, but Typhoon doesn't belong on the list. It had a nasty habit of losing it's tail.
@@MeBallerman not ideal losing a tail, but the hurricane was a great all rounder, cheaper to build and a forgotten hero of the battle of Britain all because it didn't have the spitfire lines , much like life , if you look the part you must be able to do the job, but very rarely true 🤷
The main problem with the P-47 was that it was an expensive gas guzzler. It's range was fine, with drop tanks, but it was the AAF brass that made it out to be insufficient, to cover up their mistake of thinking the bombers could defend themselves.
The P47 actually had an adequate range for bomber escorts. The problem was US officers commanding the daylight bombing refused to use fuel drop tanks. When they could no longer hide the need for fighter escorts they used range of P47 as the excuse.
Come on... Not only wrong but a woman knows more WW2 aviation engineering than you...
Kurt Tank's Focke Wulf 190... I like the A4 version, circa the end of the Battle of Britain... I never flew it but I know people who did and also one who flew against it and we all agree it was the best: roll was second fastest of the war, second to another 190 by the way.
And another plane I didn't get to fly... The IL-2 Sturmovick, the real plane that won the war (not the P51B/D)... Same success than the Ju-87 but for the last part of the war, more technology/armor/weapons... I think it was at Kursk and other main tank battles.
Neither one you mention, wonder why because these are obviously amongst the top 3 planes. Ironically some of the ones you mentioned I did flew or was a passenger/engineer... Just to let you know I am not biased by experience. All are part of history, and also part of engineering prowess: a sign or flag or emblem can't make an object bad or good... It's design and performance is what does.
They were very good until they came up against the P47.
Many mistakes in this video,for instance the B-29 had a 20,000 pnd max bomb load capasity,not a wimpy 2,000 pnds , LOL.
Biggest thing I noticed was deadliest does not include many aircraft that literally owned their theaters
Just a little more info on the three Gloster Gladiators that defended Malta during WW2, these were obsolete biplanes that over a period of 11 days managed to shoot down 25 Italian fighters and Bombers. So I will stick to my guns and say that obsolete string bag aircraft may still be counted in the list of great aircraft.