The Mosquito, Best plane of WW2?
Well is it?
RIP cliff robertson btw. Will miss you Cliff.
Everything will be OK in the end, if it aint OK,it aint the end.
It was probably the best two-engined bomber of the war IMHO, but you'll get arguments even over that, I suppose. It's hard to say which is the best airplane of WWII overall - you'd have to break it down by type. Certainly you'd have to put the North American P-51 Mustang, later marks of the Supermarine Spitfire and the Vought F4U Corsair up there. The Grumman F8F Bearcat became operational during WWII, but never saw combat during that war. As for four-engine bombers, nothing came close to the Boeing B-29 Superfortress. For ground attack, Russia's Ilyushin Il-2 Shturmovik would be the pick. Overall, the most advanced airplane that did see combat was the Me-262 Schwalbe.
shareActually by the numbers, the F-6F Hellcat was by far the best fighter of the war. It shot down more planes than any other (>5200) had the best kill ratio of any plane (19:1) and was a stable, easy plane to fly.
The Mossie was a fabulous plane, but it had its drawbacks: for one- it was made of wood. That meant it burned like wood, and many pilots burned because a nearby flak burst or 20mm cannon shell exploded, setting it alight. It was crazy fast, but you had to be light on the rudder, which in these planes, meant that there would be adverse yaw. Additionally, it had a pretty high stall speed (the speed at which the wings lose lift) of 120 MPH clean and 100 MPH dirty (flaps and gear down.) That meant it had to be landed far more carefully.
Comparatively, I'd have to say the B-25 Mitchell was the better aircraft. Made from aluminum, the ship didn't burn as easily, could make up to 60 degree turns into a dead engine, and had a stall speed of 101 MPH clean and 80 MPH dirty. This, combined with the tricycle gear layout and radial (as opposed to inline) engines, made it far easier to fly, fight, and land. Lastly, as a bomber and attack bomber, it could absorb a tremendous amount of damage and still get back home with a greater payload and more munitions. The only real benefit the Mosquito offered over other 2-engine bombers was its speed.
..Joe
Well regarding the Mossie we have to categorize by 'type/role'; I figure the Mossie was second to none as a multirole twin engine aircraft-damned good recon plane, night fighter, heavy day fighter & fighter-bomber--certainly better than other great planes like the JU-88, the Pe-2 & the P-61 'Black Widow';
shareMaybe, but the B-25 did all those things as well.
Also, if you factor in the P-38 Lightning, a lot of the Mossie's shine fades just a bit: the P-38 was faster, it carried a heavier load, was an amazing night fighter (the Night Lightning) and had the benefit of being a great dive bomber as well. (I love the story of how a P-38 Squadron Commander skip-bounced a bomb through the front door of Field Marshal Günther von Kluge's headquarters in July 1944.)
Lastly, you could also factor the Jug; the P-47 Thunderbolt into the equation, except it hadn't the bomb load of these others.
Still the Mosquito was an amazing airplane.
..Joe
Of course the majority of those numbers racked up by the Hellcat were against inexperienced and much less well-trained Japanese pilots later in the war - from the "Great Marianas Turkey Shoot" onwards. (This is not to knock the performance of the plane, per se.)
You do make a great case for the B-25, I will grant you that. Well done.
The argument that the Hellcat pilots were facing inexperienced Japanese pilots doesn't wash- the Germans by D-Day 1944 were running short of pilots just as quickly- it helps explain why only 2 German planes strafed the beaches at Normandy. Think of how many were shot down in the Soviet Union, Battle of Britain, etc. While the Jap pilots were getting thin, the Germans weren't doing so well themselves. You don't hear the P-51's reputation codified in the same manner.
And how did the Japanese ranks thin in the first place? The Grumman F4-F, a plane that was far less capable than the Zero according to the book. Yet it still managed to win the fight over Guadalcanal, Coral Sea, and Midway...
Good thing it couldn't read.
..Joe
One-on-one a Zero had the upper hand vs a Wildcat, but the weave, teamwork, evened up the fight.
This will be the high point of my day; it's all downhill from here.
Once the Wildcat pilots and other U.S. flyers in P-40's developed the zoom-attack strategy, the Wildcats and other early-war fighters actually did get the upper hand over the Japanese aircraft that were superior in low-speed up-close dogfights.
If you look at the scores from the air battles, the U.S. pilots gradually obtained the upper hand over the Japanese aircraft before the advent of the new-generation fighters such as the F6F and F4U. This was due to the zoom-attack strategy first promoted by Chennault and the American volunteers in China in their assessment of the A6M Zero early in the war, and was also due to the superior teamwork and ability of the U.S. forces to change tactics rapidly and train more pilots.
My real name is Jeff
Yet it still managed to win the fight over Guadalcanal, Coral Sea, and Midway...
If the John Lundstrom books on 'The First Team' are any indication, the Zero pilots actually got 'the better' of a lot of Wildcats--I think up until Guadacanal they either downed more than they lost or were at parity. However, the long grinding fight over the Solomons slowly killed off the IJN Ace Fighter pilots; the fatigue of the daily long flight down 'The Slot' & back, combined that nasty tropical weather, illnesses & malnutrition in Rabaul, Bouganville & New Georgia all contributed to the toll.
An interesting point: In Coral Sea & Midway, many of the losses suffered by Zero Pilots seemed happen when they'd overshoot a Wildcat & end up in front of their guns.
Why can't you wretched prey creatures understand that the Universe doesn't owe you anything!?
share
I'll have to disagree with jonkennedy about the B29 Superfortress being the best of the 4 engined 'heavy' bombers. The Avro Lancaster surely has a claim to this? Granted its armoury was puny in comparison to the B29, ( 8 × .303 machine guns) but the fact she flew largely at night compensated for that. A Lancaster payload was enormous, compare the statistics in wiki, or any book concerning itself with ww2 heavy bombers. I'll have to admit to being biased here though, i'm a Brit! (and the B29 is STILL high on my list of favourite aircraft..as well as being a formidable foe, she's a beautiful aircraft to look at!)
share