Favorite WWII aircraft?

File: messerschmitt_me109_g_4_by_daniel_wales_images-d91e6v9.jpg (134KB, 1600x1067px) Image search: [Google]

134KB, 1600x1067px

https://youtu.be/aAobKbzxn50

File: De Havilland Mosquito RAF .jpg (56KB, 600x432px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 600x432px

>>33450837
Now that this one is taken ill have to stick to this.

The Franken-Spitfire.
A spitfire with a Bf-109 engine. It was better than both in every category.

File: Hdbspit_1.jpg (25KB, 600x214px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 600x214px

>>33453719

>>33453719
>a Bf-109 engine
Mind being a bit more specific?

File: images (42).jpg (43KB, 449x327px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 449x327px

>>33450690
Could have won the war if they built enough

>>33453748
twin engine aircraft don't seem too important
what Germany did not have is any heavy bomber

File: Il2_sturmovik.jpg (42KB, 650x234px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 650x234px

IL-2

File: 1d6c36362206ffbd83e095721d3a3e82.jpg (147KB, 850x587px) Image search: [Google]

147KB, 850x587px

>>33453755
Germany didn't have the fuel to support a large scale strategic bombing campaign. The DO335 however was the fastest propeller aircraft in WW2 thanks to its centreline thrust design and could have maintained German air superiority over Europe thus meaning no D-Day

File: p40-2.jpg (56KB, 1200x666px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 1200x666px

P-40

File: Curtiss-P-40M-Kittyhawk-RAAF-76Sqn-SV-K-A29-300-New-Guinea-1943-44-01.jpg (102KB, 1024x789px) Image search: [Google]

102KB, 1024x789px

>>33453879

>>33450690
I like the P1-5S

>>33453879
J U G
U
G

>>33453858
>large airframe (meaning it turns like a brick)
>2 engines means twice the fuel consumption and maintenance
>no rear visibility, very small side visibility, bad for situational awareness
>landing gear is made so that the front propeller doesn't touch the ground, which makes the lower rudder housing dangerously close to the ground during landing

The Do-335 was not a great fighter design. As a bomber-hunter or close air support, maybe it could've been okay, but certainly not an air superiority role.

File: Fw 190.jpg (675KB, 1300x892px) Image search: [Google]

675KB, 1300x892px

>>33450690

>>33453748
No

File: p-47 thunderbolt.jpg (293KB, 1914x1500px) Image search: [Google]

293KB, 1914x1500px

>>33450690
I like this one, but I see a lot of hate towards it. Why is that?

>>33453858
>was the fastest propeller aircraft in WW2 thanks to its centreline thrust design and could have maintained German air superiority


No

>>33450690
Just don't drop anything while you're flying it or you'll either never see it again, or you'll get whacked in the face with it during ACM.

File: 9gFSak0.jpg (305KB, 2400x1500px) Image search: [Google]

305KB, 2400x1500px

Too bad it never saw much combat.

>>33454201
the p-47 was nicknamed the jug not the p-40

>>33454633
It wasn't the most maneuverable aircraft and it was overshadowed by the sleeker and more glamorous P-51 and P-38. Where the Mustang and Lightning were more on the fighter end of the fighter-bomber capabilities, the Thunderbolt was definitely the more capable bomber.

>>33453748
They could have wasted double the resources of a Bf 109 on a shittier fighter design! Genius!

File: 65cd3033b849f5b8a233a3cd492ae60e.jpg (48KB, 800x456px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 800x456px

Fokker G.1 in my opinion, great design, sad it wasn't used in other nations except the Netherlands

File: notice the hiding nazi.jpg (51KB, 736x407px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 736x407px

Late Japs are nice.
>>33454832
Why is that P-51 smoking?

File: Dauntless.png (137KB, 600x400px) Image search: [Google]

137KB, 600x400px

>>33450690

>>33453879
>>33453889
Were P40s any good?

>>33455887
They were pretty good when introduced, and managed to remain decent fighters for most of the war. Post war they were CAS aircraft until the 1960s iirc.

>>33455847
The hell is that anon?

>>33450690
I love it. Always have.

File: P-40 VVS.jpg (55KB, 700x417px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 700x417px

>>33455887
They were good at the outbreak of war, but they ended up being outpaced by later aircraft, particularly in Europe. Curtiss tried to develop later models that kept up with contemporaries, but by the time those protoypes were flying there were already planes just as good in service.

The Soviets loved them though - they sat higher in the plane than on domestic fighters, they had better radios, they were rugged, and their biggest shortcoming (high altitude performance) was a non-issue on the eastern front.

Did the Soviets have any good aircraft?

I feel like all the air war stuff focuses on Britain, Germany and the UK in the European theatre. What about the Russians?

>>33455989
There was a lot of lend lease, but the Lavochkins were quite solid aircraft.

File: IMG_0146.jpg (524KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

524KB, 1920x1080px

Macchi C.205

>>33456028
For being so shit at ground and naval war, Italy made some sexy and fine planes.

>>33456028
>Macchi C.205
Too little, too late

File: IMG_0149.jpg (36KB, 538x253px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 538x253px

>>33456052

The Regia Aeronautica was really the only asset Italy had. Mussolini fucked up though. He entered the war too early before Italy could really start producing more of their advanced aircraft. If he would have waited another year, the Mediterranean air war would have been a different story.

Especially if the Fiat G.55 would have been mass produced in time. Pic related

File: yak9photographer.jpg (156KB, 1000x707px) Image search: [Google]

156KB, 1000x707px

>>33455989
There were a couple good ones they had, though a lot of it is relative. Across the board, they tended to lack high altitude performance, but that was mostly a moot point on the Eastern Front.

I'll start with Yaks first and see how much room I have for others.

>Yak-1B
First fighter they had that was really on par with the Bf 109. Yak-1s were available from the start of the war, but only in small numbers and were slightly outperformed by the Bf-109F. The Yak-1B was an improvement on it that took over production lines in October 1942 that finally gave the Soviets something mostly equal in performance to the Bf 109. The Yak-1 would also serve as the basis for all of Yakovlev's fighters until the end of the war

>Yak-7
A trainer variant of the Yak-1 that ended up seeing a lot of use as a frontline fighter. Though it wasn't anywhere close in performance to the Bf 109, it was a popular fighter with the VVS, being a general step up from the early series Yak-1s and most of the other fighters then in Soviet service. More importantly, it was sturdier and easier to produce than a Yak-1.

>Yak-9
The Yak-9 was a development of the Yak-7 that entered service in late 1942. It greatly lightened the design and made use of the Yak-1B bubble canopy, giving the Soviets for the first time something that actually outperformed the Bf 109 at low altitudes (barely). It ended up being continually upgraded through the war, remaining competitive to the end, and was the most mass-produced Soviet fighter of the war. The Yak-9U was also the best high-altitude fighter the Soviets would produce.

>Yak-3
Final development of the Yak design, shrinking and lightening the Yak-1 while incorporating the same M-107 engine that the late Yak-9s would use. The result was arguably the best low-level fighter of the war, retaining the reputation for being robust and easy to fly that Yak fighters had while being so effective that the Germans reportedly warned units to avoid the fighter.

>>33455989
The requirements at the eastern front were just speed and maneuverability, so the lack of armament, flight range and higher altitude performance makes them look bad.

File: Alexandr Matashov and Vladimir Morozov at Konigsberg airfield-r La-7.jpg (89KB, 800x571px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 800x571px

>>33456167
>Lavochkin

So Lavochkin initially had a reputation for producing arguably the worst "modern" fighter off the war - the LaGG-3. The LaGG-3 was overweight and underpowered thanks to an underperforming engine and construction techniques that caused the design to suffer when manufacturing quality wasn't perfect.

But in early 1942, Lavochkin grafted the nose of an Su-2 onto a LaGG-3 in hopes of salvaging the design. After some changes, the result was the La-5.

>La-5
The La-5 was probably the best fighter available to the Soviets when it made its debut over the Kuban in early 1943. On paper, it was on par with even the Fw 190s they were encountering at low altitudes, and it was a massive improvement over anything else the Soviets had. There were still some issues - operating the engine caused a high pilot workload, the aircraft had poor performance at altitude, and the range was very short. However, it was an excellent fighter for the theater.

>La-7
The La-7 mostly solved the issues of the La-5. The cooling system was revised, it used a more powerful engine, it shifted to an all-metal construction, minor aerodynamic improvements were made, and the new M-71 engine was used. Once it finally entered service in 1944, it finally surpassed German fighters in every aspect. Though the Yak-3 still held the advantage in horizontal maneuverability, the La-7 was superior in the arguably more important qualities of vertical maneuverability and overall speed.

One thing to note though is that across the board, Soviet aircraft tended to be lacking in ergonomics. Part of the reason nominally sub-par Lend-Lease fighters like the P-40 and P-39 were so popular with the VVS was for their cockpit ergonomics - Soviet pilots were amazed with how high they sat in the P-40, and how much they could see, and the radios they had were not only two-way sets, but they were light enough that Soviet pilots didn't feel like they needed to remove them to improve performance.

>>33455887

They were. Early P-51s without the Merlin weren't that much better than a P-40.

>>33455989
Basically all of their planes, even the bombers, were highly maneuverable and fast. But they couldn't go to high altitude, had shit for training, and lacked radios a lot.

>>33456673
>IL-2
>fast
>maneuverable
pick one

>>33456820
>basically

File: Paint me like one of your slav girls.jpg (65KB, 500x421px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 500x421px

>>33456673
>Basically all of their planes, even the bombers, were highly maneuverable and fast
No. The La-7 was the only fighter they had that was consistently faster and better climbing than Luftwaffe fighters, and they didn't have any modern fighters even on par with the Bf 109 in agility until 1943. Outside of the two notable, famous exceptions - the Pe-2 and Tu-2 - as well as their Lend-Lease A-20s, their bombers weren't fast or agile. Hell, the most produced "heavy" bombers - Il-4 - were slow and horrifically underarmed, and they remained the mainstay of Soviet long-range aviation until the end of the war.

You're talking out of your ass.

>>33453748
Can it fly backwards?

File: Grumman-Hellcat-flying.jpg (18KB, 404x303px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 404x303px

the hellcat for sure

File: 1_4.jpg (75KB, 1249x372px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 1249x372px

>>33456336
>and the new M-71 engine was used
Only one specific prototype of the La-7 ever used the M-71 engine. Otherwise, the La-7 as we know it used the Shvetsov M-82FN engine. (same engine as in the La-5FN)

>>33456167
I'd like to note that while the Yak-3 itself was a late-war fighter, the VK-107-equipped Yak-3s weren't quite operational until near the end of the war, and they were produced in limited numbers. The 'main production' Yak-3s were equipped with the M-105PF-2 engine which was less powerful but largely got the job done.

>>33458270
Ah my bad I just skimmed around for engine specifics.

File: hurrican with M-82.jpg (26KB, 506x202px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 506x202px

>>33458311
No probs, just thought I'd clarify some things.

File: is-2-thomasheintz.jpg (52KB, 813x438px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 813x438px

>>33458332
good god are there any real pics of that abortion?

>>33454633
Short range. >>33454768

>>33455887
Yes. They could fight with Zeroes at lower levels if they kept their speed up.

File: FW-190-Ash-82Example-1.jpg~original.jpg (14KB, 454x154px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 454x154px

>>33458390
I have thus far been completely unable to find any photos of it, sorry.
Apparently at some point, Soviets managed to get a hold of a Focke-Wulf Fw 190 F-8. The test flight went a wee little awry and the engine got wrecked, so they replaced its original BMW 801 engine with an ASh-82FN engine. I've also found no photos of it, and y'know, 'apparently' is a dangerous word.

>>33454929
I thought it was the king of maneuverability at high altitude

File: AG348Russia.jpg~original.jpg (71KB, 1024x585px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 1024x585px

>>33458651
On the other hand, there's this photo depicting a P-51 painted in Soviet colors. Originally operated by the RAF, it was left for the Soviets.

File: spitfire-5b-2.jpg (62KB, 1200x669px) Image search: [Google]

62KB, 1200x669px

>>33458753
Soviet Spitfires looked prettier

>>33453719
which engine?

File: Corsair.png (2MB, 1596x928px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1596x928px

>>33450690
4U?

>>33459688
its a big plane

>>33450690
Mosquito

>>33455764
>Why is that P-51 smoking?

many while in the service, pick up this vile habit.

File: Me-163 engine running.jpg (100KB, 1024x486px) Image search: [Google]

100KB, 1024x486px

>>33450690

>>33452030
What purpose would the shape of those wings serve?

>>33453748
if

>>33459688

>crashing this plane

>>33455960
I thought Soviets loved the P-39.

>>33455989
Yak-8 and Yak-9 were good. Don't know about anything else.

>>33460818
Where did I say they didn't? They ended up being the largest operator of the P-39, and even their propaganda reports that loved to downplay Lend Lease equipment talked highly of the P-39.

>>33460818
'Oh don't give me a P-39
With an engine that's mounted behind
It will tumble and roll
And make a big hole
Don't give me a P-39'

Better than our guys did anyway.

File: Jugs.png (595KB, 499x563px) Image search: [Google]

595KB, 499x563px

>>33450690

File: 3870619731_dcc3ac5ac3_b.jpg (474KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

474KB, 1024x768px

My dick can only get so hard