>>28661462 >likely a cargo plane eh, here's the thing though, airlifts weren't that important as far as actually keeping the war going or affecting its outcome was concerned so the comparison to trucks isn't equivalent.
I would have to say the me410 and its brothers. The assault aircraft the germans were doing a good enough job not to need the jets. Or so they thought until it was too late. The way i see it. If that plane wasnt around the war would have been much different. Cant say that about any other plane by itself honestly. All the other aircraft worked in unison with other aircraft to get the job done.
>>28661783 >>28661811 All the "Bf" series planes came into service when Messerschmitt was still called Bayerische Flug. After the company changed names, you did have Messerschmitt designs carrying the "Me" designator, but "Bf" remained for the older planes.
It did depend on where you were, though. Swiss Bf 109s were designated Me 109.
>>28661426 >bf109 In service from the start to the end of the war in every theater, at every altitude and always a plane, that was competetive. There are faster, better turning or better armed planes but none that comes close to it, apart from the Spitfire.
>>28661426 BF109 without the slightest doubt. It's the single key plane of WW2.
>Hurricanes: entire life is fighting BF109 >Spitfires: entire purpose and life fighting BF109 >B17: slapping as many gunners on in hopes of stopping 109s (unsuccesfully) >P51: whole existence is because no number of machine gunners can protect B17s from BF109s and a long-range escort is needed
If the BF109 hadn't been invented, none of these would be necessary.
BF109 ended the age of biplanes soon as they were used in the Spanish civil war. It's the fighter that had the most air kills of any plane in history (and maybe until the end of time as no fighter now ever gets near the 50 or 100 mark), BF109 had the most ace pilots in history, BF109 is the most produced fighter plane in history and its effectiveness and its limits were the entirety of how the air war went in the west front and the east front, above africa and even above italy.
>>28664251 The B-17 is remembered because even though it was inferior to the B-24 on paper, it could take hits and bring its crew home. Meanwhile the B-24 was known for being a screaming metal death trap.
>>28666932 Not sure if just acting edgy, or being naive but ill bite >>agility, due to high wing loading Agility is more than just turning. Bf109s, while not on par with spitfires or yaks were still very much capable in keeping up. Most numerous post war complaint was the lack or boosted controls. >>range Solved with droptanks and the lack of having to fly across the channel >>firepower Mk108s, mg151/20 cannonpods disagree, as do propably many allied bombercrews. >>G and later were hard to fly The werent any harder to fly than other fighters with a narrow landing gear >>canopy gives very bad all round vision Solved with the erla hood and armoured glass instead of the until 43 used metal plate >>weak landing gear Granted. >besides, the KD is hugely inflated due to clubbing shitty soviet planes for two years changing goalposts. The eastern front was the far more demandking theater of war >Tempest is where shits at Too bad tempests werent as widely spread and produced. The spitfire is the only alled counterpart that saw as much service, although in smaller numbers.
In terms of actually having a strategic impact, it important to make the distinction between objectively better aircraft verses those that were fielded in relevant numbers and good enough to get the job done. Obviously if the Luftwaffe had managed to crank out about 10,000 ME 262's things probably would have gone differently for the Allies, but despite it being a superior aircraft of revolutionary design, its impact on the war was negligible. World War II was a war of supply and logistics. Aircraft such as the Tempest and, say the P38 (in the European Theater) had much less of an impact than the heavy bombers coming from America, or the Yak fighters coming from the Soviets.
its probably one of the following:
IL-2 -- Not that Im a Soviet fanboy or anything, these things got shot down all the fucking time, but the raw number produced inevitably tied up much of the German Air Force on the Eastern front, effectively bleeding them out over there by attrition.
B-17/B-24 - Same thing. We made a lot of them, and the fact we could send them into Germany proper again made a huge impact on the European air war.
P-51 - was able to escort said heavy bombers, and was used to great effect.
>>28667029 >agility is more than just turning Bf-109 was mediocre in any way. It was fast, not that agile. >solved with droptanks That's not ''solved''. >MK-108's Not that great, low projectile velocity, so hard to aim. Useful against bombers, less so against fighters. Gun pods just made it even less agile. >solved with erla hood Not really, just improved. >the EF was far more demanding No it wasn't. By what measure? Soviet Air Force was lacking until late-war, and Germans also inflated records like crazy.
Spitfire was a far better plane in all characteristics. Only thing that Bf-109 has is the fact it served long and was okay. By late war it was rather outdated. Germans had good pilots and tactics, their planes were nothing special in reality.
>>28667072 OPs question was: >In terms of actually having an effect on the air war, what was the greatest aircraft of WWII? So what plane had a greater effect on the airwar in europe, the the most built and most used? Cant the the tempest because it didnt enter service before 44. Cant be the mustang because it was shit before 43. Cant be the yak9 because was mostly outclassed until late 44.
You dont have to be a naziboo to just see the numbers and being able to compare them.
>Only thing that Bf-109 has is the fact it served long and was okay. By late war it was rather outdated. Germans had good pilots and tactics, their planes were nothing special in reality. I never said it was special. Just able to fight enemys with a reasonable chance of coming out on top across the whole war in every theater. There is no wonderweapon like that.
>>28666711 The 17 was designed before the 109 saw combat and the P-51 was a ground attack aircraft prior to the D model. P-47s spanked their asses in open combat pretty regularly, they just couldn't do long ranged escort runs, so were relegated to shorter range Ops.
>>28661426 What ever Germany flew over France before they invaded it. It really was a core concept of the Blitzkrieg tactics they used to have an airplane scout everything out ahead of time. It was pretty important because Germany wiped France out in World War 2 because of it.
>>28664118 >The outcome of the Battle of Britain determined whether or not Sealion could proceed. It was bloody important, but even with air superiority, the German 'invasion fleet' would have ended up at the bottom of the Channel. The Germans had demonstrated in Norway that they were near useless at sinking ships with aircraft. >>28664211 >irrelevant stuff like photo recon Are you taking the piss? Please tell me you're taking the piss.
>>28667194 > Just able to fight enemys with a reasonable chance of coming out on top across the whole war in every theater. There is no wonderweapon like that. Fine and at what point could you not apply that to a Spitfire?
>>28669576 >a plane that was pretty good, then ok during the BoB, then consistantly (due to upgrades) inferior then on a level with, contempory western fighters >a plane that was used long past the point at which it should have been retired The Germans kept using it because it was what they had and they couldn't replace them all with something better.
>>28669771 They used it because the maker of the plane was in bed with with RLM it's what kept the ta-152s and FW's from taking seniority.
I would go with the P-51 it allowed the US to cover the bombers all the way in Germany and had excellent characteristics minus the shit stall since it had the laminar wing which helped it. For the PTO I'd go with the hellcat or the B-29
>>28669731 Numbers. And while it saw service in the same theaters, some under other nations, they simply werent as widely spread. This isnt about which was the better plane, which is hard enough to determine as it is since we would have to agree on the when and where, but about which was the most influential in the war.
>>28669841 But B and C models arent fighter bombers, like that anon you quoted claimed. They also had feeding problems to due bad placement of the feeding belts for the machineguns
>>28669071 Who was it again giving pilots 1/4 and 1/2 kills? Remind me please, i must have forgotten.
>>28669771 >>a plane that was pretty good, then ok during the BoB, then consistantly (due to upgrades) inferior then on a level with, contempory western fighters What are you referring to?
>>28670833 >And while it saw service in the same theaters, some under other nations, they simply werent as widely spread. Spitfire was used in Western Europe, Eastern front, Africa, Asia and Australia.
>>28671027 I was referring to pure numbers outside of western europe and the mediterranian. L&L for russia were few in numbers and by the timr they arrived, russins were able to supply themselfes. I'll be honest, i dont have numbers for the PTO although i know about operations over china and infochina.
>>28670833 I am pretty sure all p-51's has bombs racks available if need be. Most planes had feeling issues at some point, hispanos were terrible early in the war since when you turned it fucked up the feed.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the shown content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows their content, archived. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content, then use the post's [Report] link! If a post is not removed within 24h contact me at firstname.lastname@example.org with the post's information.