TOP 5 American FIGHTER Airplanes from WW2, which one was the best?

[@Outlier2024]

The American air war was won by the P-40, the Wildcat, and Spitfires obtained from the British. By the time the “advanced fighters” were introduced, the Axis Powers were already on the defensive.

[@tonyf.9806]

One important note missed, only 1 aircraft continued to see use and further development long after WWII, and even after Korea. That's the F-4U Corsair.

[@garyhooper1820]

Also Corsair remained in production til 1952. One is credited with a mig kill !

[@snappyaj9053]

I don’t know, official Corsair service looks to have ended by 1964, while the last Mustang was retired by the Dominican in 1984.

[@shanemallinson7644]

When the us navy see that uk navy using the f4u corsair the us navy side here f6 wildcat and the us navy start us f4u corsair on their Aircraft Carrier

[@tonyf.9806]

@@shanemallinson7644 it's because the Brits figured out how to overcome it's unique handling characteristics when it came to carrier landings, mainly the approach path and landing gear mods.

[@johannesvalterdivizzini1523]

@@snappyaj9053 So DR was flying dated aircraft---what does that prove? Who did DR engage in air combat, anyway?

[@Brommear]

Kill to loss ratio will inevitably favor later planes as the enemies were weakened and relied on less and less experienced pilots.

[@BobSmith-dk8nw]

Asking which was best is asinine. The answer is always - _"Best at what?"_ _"There are LIES, there are DAMNED LIES and then there are ... STATISTICS."_ -Mark Twain Each of these machines had different characteristics that made it better at some things than others. Each of these machines was deployed in a specific environment and that made a lot of difference in how it seemed to perform. Was the plane an early development - leading the way in areas where later aircraft could follow? Was the aircraft sent into combat early on against the enemies elite - or - did it come into use later when the enemy veterans were dead? How deadly was the aircraft to fly? How easy was the aircraft to fly? How fragile was it? What was the level of training of the pilots flying it? What were the numbers in which it was used? What were the numbers of the enemy it was going against in comparison? Did the aircraft have specific elements to it's design for a specific purpose (such as Carrier based a/c or long range bomber escort)? Which version of the aircraft are you considering? Earlier versions could be very different than later versions. All these aircraft underwent continual upgrades. Was the aircraft used post WWII? Did the aircraft have one over riding characteristic that made it highly suitable for a specific purpose despite other limitations? What was the useful load the aircraft could carry? How powerful was it's armament? What was it's armament most effective at? How fuel efficient was it? How many engines did it have - and what were the good points and bad points of that? How ergonomic (that is - easy to use) were it's control systems? Which characteristics did YOU happen to need at the moment? What were the political circumstances to the aircraft's use? Did you have any choice? . . . I'm getting tired of coming up with things. The characteristics that made a plane great at one thing might be irrelevant for another. They tried to put a tail hook on a Mustang and land it on carriers but the test pilot called it off before it killed someone. They tried to use the Spitfire on carriers as the Seafire - and it was great ... until they had to land ... the operational losses were horrible. Yet - the Spitfire was a superb interceptor and the Mustang a great Bomber Escort. One thing about P-38's. Whatever their other strengths or weaknesses - they had *_TWO_* engines. In the Pacific - they were either flying over jungle or water. If you came down in the water - you stood a chance that a Catalina might spot you. If you came down in the Jungle - you were dead. Pilots in the Pacific Theater fucking loved the P-38. _"Which was the best? The best at what?"_ .

[@jacktattis]

In Eric Browns Wings of the Navy He gives 17 pages to the Seafire More than any other plane in the book that includes the Hellcat and Corsair, and this is what he said at the end and I quote" there were undoubtedly pluses and Minuses , but the Fleet Air Arm owes the Seafire an enormous debt of gratitude, because it gave the Royal Navy's intake of young wartime fighter pilots the experience of flying the Best That There Was -an incalculable morale booster at a critical Moment in World War II"END QUOTE

[@burliesanford1863]

I believe that I would've put the P-47D Thunderbolt in the #1 spot . That's due to it's ruggedness and speed . It was a flying tank and many times brought its pilots home shot all to hell in many cases . Best of all about it in my opinion was the 8 X 50cal. machine guns and the radial engine . The Thunderbolt is reported to have brought its pilots home with even one of jugs shot off it or cylinders . 1 bullet through the radiator on any of the water cooled engine and it was all over for the P51, P38's and such . The radial engines were a better choice I believe.

[@jacktattis]

That ruggedness did not help the 2000 that were lost doing G/A

[@gregmead2967]

@@jacktattis There might have been a lot more lost without that ruggedness. Ground attack was one of the most hazardous of all types of combat flying.

[@johannesvalterdivizzini1523]

It's complicated. For one thing, as mentioned, the Mustang's leading production meant that they would, logically, have more successful engagements. Another thing which is a consideration is the type of aircraft they were engaging. A flyer who shot down 100 Stukas had a lot of kills over a slow and dated aircraft, while a fighter pilot who successfully engaged a Messerschmitt 262 had a real fight on his hands--mere numbers just don't account for that. Moreover, fighter pilots engaged bombers, so shooting one down (or a hundred) was not an equal contest, either.

[@stevennaylor4053]

One thing to concider, ,more p-47 aces survived the war than aces flying other types.

[@RaymondTroth-cf3if]

They were all good, produced in meaningful quantities and upgraded as necessary to improve either production ease or performance. However,two stand out. The P-51 made the heavy bomber campaign in the ETO feasible. Until it appeared the heavies were on their own for really deep penetrations into Occupied Europe and Germany. It brought the GAF, into combat over it's own soil. It also did excellent work in both the MTO and the PTO. The F6F truly gave the USN the ability to provide the 'Big Blue Blanket' desired for fleet protection. Building upon and improving on the F4F, the F6F was the first fighter to be able to fight the Japanese on equal terms. These aircraft were all excellent and state of the art for the time. However these two were game changers. They changed the dynamics of there theater of operation. One other thing. Both of these aircraft were produced by there original designing company. Grumman made every F6F at Bethpage, and NA made every P-51 at either Dallas or Inglewood. That's how much they were valued. Just about every other US combat aircraft had someone elso other than the original designing company involved in their production. It's great to able to look at this with hindsight,and just say the following the right specification, the right design,the right production, the right training the right deployment at the right time.

[@contumelious-8440]

You make some good points. The introduction of the F6F could be considered a game-changer and the aircraft performed well. It could be argued that by late 1943 (when the F6F was introduced) Japan had already lost their best pilots and we know they weren't training replacements well since they didn't have any experienced pilots to train them due to their doctrines. While the F6F is an astounding plane, the F4F did the workhorse load and ended with almost 7-1 K/D ratio. Was the F4F the best WW2 plane? The F6F was produced late 1943 which could be considered the end of the war. The F4U and F4F actually fought skilled enemies. The F6F shot down rookies. Which one is the best plane? Objectively it's the most modern, fastest, best armed plane. That's the F6F. It's a beast, fast, agile and deadly. Would have been nice 2 years earlier...

[@tls5669]

The P40 actually has one of the best kill to loss ratio of American planes in WW2 in American service. The F2A Buffalo has the best kill to loss ratio of all American fighters though most of those were at the hands of Finnish pilots at a staggering 26:1

[@jbrown7403]

It seems to me that the reason that the Hellcat had such a high kill ratio was because the Japanese threw so many raw and inexperienced pilots into the sky with bad aircraft the last 2 + years of the war. Most (or many) Japanese pilots were probably shot down on their first flights.

[@shannonterry4863]

The Curtiss P-40 had a better kill-loss ratio compared to all of these fighters. It served in all theaters. It served earlier than all and served through the end of the war. Give it it's due

[@richardbradley2802]

Say what you like, the Mustang was the loveliest looking US fighter of the war, the 'US Spitfire' - once it got the same engine as the Spit.

[@militaryhistoriy]

Perfect👌l like p38

[@brettbaker8357]

Idk but my favorite is the hellcat It’s just so badass

[@fredsalfa]

That is quite interesting the kill ratio. That’s looking at the effectiveness of the aircraft which is important. But looking at overall numbers is also important that’s where I think the Mustang should be Number 1

[@davidtrindle6473]

Yes, and it’s not quite fair to compare the planes primarily used in the Pacific against those primarily using Europe. After the first year of the war, the Japanese zero was no longer a dominant plane, and they were cut down in droves, giving those high kill ratiosin Europe, however, the lower kill ratios are still quite respectable as they were going up against continually updated first rate fighters generated by the Germans.

[@cwook4175]

The P-51 flew against better planes in Europe than the Japanese planes the Hellcat and Corsair flew against in the Pacific. Also the P-38 didn't get a good shake early in the war because of false early reporting on it's capabilities. It was available in 1941 I believe. If they were used in Europe early in the war who knows what would have happened. I personally love all 5 of these iconic planes.

[@richardkenan2891]

Obviously the best is the P-38, because it's the coolest looking.

[@jacktattis]

lol

[@Outlier2024]

The bubble top canopy P-47 was not in action until September 1944. The bubble top P-51D first saw action in May 1944. From the movies you would think they were in action in 1942.

[@erichammond9308]

Calling one "the best" is tough. Best long range interceptor: P-38 Best Fighter-bomber: P-47 Best long range escort fighter: P-51 Best carrier fighter: F6F Best short range fighter: F4U4 Basically in each of their specialties they were all the best.

[@jacktattis]

Different horses for different courses And I am pleased that you said top 5 US planes

[@burliesanford1863]

There's one mission where the P47 took 200 plus machine gun hits and 20 plus 20 mm Canon hits and got its pilot home . Now that's bad-ass any way you look at it. The other 4 on this list would've been shot down with just a fraction of the hits . Flying tank P47 produced 10 aces in the European theater too I do believe. They're all great planes just the 47's a cut above . Just my humble opinion.

[@erichammond9308]

@@burliesanford1863 The P-47 was a beast for sure, but could it turn with and keep up with a Bf-109 or FW-190, no. The key was meeting any opponent on your terms and best using the advantages your plane has. I'm not criticizing any of the planes I listed. They were all good, and each one beautiful in its own way too. The P-47 was in - your - face tough and aggressive looking. Football analogy - the P-47 was a D Lineman or Inside LB.

[@jacktattis]

@@burliesanford1863 Date , plane number ,where ,Squadron This action would be famous and would have been written down somewhere Just the little Hurricane had more than 10 aces in the ETO

[@burliesanford1863]

@jacktattis The best I can do is, in the 8th Air Force the top 10 aces all survived the war . This can't be said for the P51's in Europe and the P38's in the Pacifc . Source is Greg's Airplanes and Automobiles , Part 3 . Gabreski 56FG , Robert Johnson 56FG , Schilling 56 FG , Gentile 4FG , Christensen 56FG , Bob Mahurin 56FG ,Beeson 4FG , Beckham 353FG , Zemke 56FG , Johnson 56FG . There's several more P47 drivers with all of these being 8th Air Force . Enjoy my friend.

[@opatrick1961]

It could be argued that the mustang went up against Me109s and Fw190s which were superior to the the zero and other early Japanese planes. The Mustang did have the vulnerability of having its engine cooling systems, oil and coolant, in a location not shielded by the engine and cockpit armor, so yes, it was not perfect in that regard. The edge the Hellcat had over it's opponents was possibly better than the edge the mustang had over its. The planes listed here all had different strengths and weaknesses. All were used in different situations as far as overall circumstances. I have great respect for the records they have in combat. The mustang had unmatched range, the '47 was the most rugged, the lightning excelled in warmer climates, the hellcat was superb for carrier use, the Corsair was a late bloomer, but could not have reached Berlin. Three of these planes had late war versions that were even more potent to a large degree. The P51H, the P47M and N, and the later Corsairs. It's hard to pick a favorite here given all the variables. Our boys fought and died in them, and I salute the men who designed, built, and flew them in combat. All are worthy of honor.

[@vertizon3036]

I enjoy most of these videos but it drive me nuts to hear them tout the long range if the P-47 or show a picture of the Corsair while talking about the Hellcat. It doesn't take that much work to get it right and if you are going to talk like you know what you're talking about then know what you are talking about!!

[@jacktattis]

The Hellcat and Corsair was NOT in the west

[@jacktattis]

Oh and give actual instances where a P51was brought down by hitting the coolant system ?The chance of that happening was astronomical Slimmer in fact than bringing down a P47 by targeting that massive turbo/supercharger and the Ducting to the Engine

[@จักษ์นาถะพินธุ]

86 octane fuel will make every American plane being the worst plane in WW2.

[@douglasscovil3447]

seems to me that the P-51 and P-47 had lower Kill-to-Loss ratios because they were used against the Luftwaffe with its more experienced pilots.

[@annoyingbstard9407]

I’m not American but I think they’re all pretty good.

[@StephenGlencross-yg4nt]

The Mustang.

[@kryolis]

Small lies, big lies and statistics.. everybody knows why hellcats got enormous kill ratio, still great plane though. My fav is jug for one single metric- loss rate, despite heavily used in ground attacks missions.. If you want get back home you better fly jug..

[@gregmead2967]

Two big problems with this video: 1. unless you define the criteria for "best", picking a "best" fighter is no more meaningful than a beauty pageant. And 2. the aircraft in question (except perhaps for the F6F) all changed during their service significantly. The early and later aircraft had VERY different characteristics and capabilities. So to just specify the overall name of the fighter leaves out the changing abilities of the aircraft.

[@Richmond117]

Very nice video.

[@roubini74]

ALMOST all of japanese airforce are decimated by the hellcat, corsair and earlier wildcat. While in europe, Nazi airforce was joint destroy by british, soviet and american fighters. Thus aint surprise F4U, F6F and even F4F has a higher kill ratio than Mostly europe base P47, P51. It good to know P47, corsair and F6F using the same engine. making it easier for maintenance, repair and spare parts.

[@piortpiasecki3033]

Liczby są ważne, to prawda, ale nie tylko liczby świadczą o klasie samolotu. Przy całym szacunku dla samolotu Hellcat, mierzył się on z japońskim samolotem Zero. Do doskonały samolot, ale tylko na początku wojny. Późnej, nawet jego nowsze wersje, znacznie ustępowały samolotowi Hellcat. Inaczej miały się sprawy z P47 i P51. Walczyły one z wciąż rozwijanymi konstrukcjami niemieckimi, nad którymi nie miały tak wielkiej przewagi technicznej. Dlatego prezentowane przez nie liczby zestrzeleń, już tak nie imponują. Nie oznacza to jednak według mnie, że były gorsze. Powiem nawet że odwrotnie :)

[@maureencora1]

Do One on Korea F-80 Shooting Star, F-84, Thunderjet, F-86 Sabre, F-2 Banshee & F9F Panther.

[@greathistoryseries]

Thank you, very good idea, will work on it, currently working on another two videos, but will get to this one eventually. Cheers!

[@maureencora1]

@@greathistoryseries Touche' (smile)

[@kennethkubo8358]

Does the Hellcats performance against inferior pilots in the "Great Marianas Turkey Shoot" negatively affect its kill ratio?

[@greathistoryseries]

Some other comments mention that same thing. It is for sure something to consider. But same can be applied to the Luftwaffe aces (BF-109) during the first months of the war and the Eastern front initial years, the opponents (pilots and planes) were not at a similar level, but in spite of this the German aces are hailed as the best of the war with hundreds of kills. Bottom line it is hard to tell, if you go by the numbers the Hellcat comes on top.

[@fawnlliebowitz1772]

Nope

[@darrenwhiteside1619]

Not really. There were something like 370 aerial victories awarded to F6F pilots during the Battle of the Philippine Sea, which in actuality is only seven percent of the total awarded to the type throughout the entire war. Even if we subtract these victories (which is a ludicrous proposition IMHO) there would still be around 4,800 aerial claims remaining. This revised total still gives the Hellcat a commanding lead over all US WWII fighter planes but the P-51 Mustang.

[@williamcrane8236]

@@greathistoryseries Should be noted that German pilots flew till they were disabled or dead where Allied pilots rotated out. And the German pilots were shooting down ALL aircraft. Civilian transport included. Basically what we do now by establishing No Fly Zones, if you're up and you're not one of us, you're going down. They were good, but they were flying for years IF hey stayed alive.

[@JohnBruffett-tw4ul]

Awesome thanks USA 🇺🇸 from American Grandson John Robert Bruffett Junior 🇺🇸😎🌧️🌧️🌧️🌧️🌧️☕🌧️☕🌧️☕🌧️🌧️🌧️🌧️

[@karllangner1579]

Lockheed P 38 Lightning.

[@andrewfischer8564]

p 40 hawk series

[@brettbaker8357]

WW2 aircraft are my “Roman empire”

[@larryconnerjr1835]

The P -47 still doesn’t get it’s proper respect even today, the mustang was more important for bomber escort but the P-47 is right behind it in importance

[@Cuccos19]

Some correction for the P-47: 1. it did not have impressive, or more significant armor protection than any other fighter of the time. Its structural components protected the pilot mostly - big engine from the front, big supercharger from the rear. 2. it did not have an impressive range, not even with droptanks. The early ones with a single belly droptanks (D-10, I think) could fly to the Dutch-French border, than turned around leaving the bombers on their way. 3. Not every, or rather very few D models had bubble canopies. From 12 thousand something D models only 3 thousand something were bubble top. The rest 9 thousand something were "Razorback".

[@จักษ์นาถะพินธุ]

86 octane fuel will make every American plane the worst plane in WW2.

[@3v4761]

Kill ratio changes everything...but how would a hellcat or corsair fair against an Me-109....each plane was made specific for it's role....but i don't disagree with the best based on kill ratio

[@greathistoryseries]

Both Corsair and Hellcats saw little action in Europe, so they never faced the Me--109, FW-190 nor the Me-262 as the Mustangs did.

[@Jeffei-qs7kp]

@greathistoryseries The p51 was strictly an escort fighter after it finally arrived in the Pacific.

[@gertpacu3926]

OK so I have flown all the fighters in both IL-2, War Thunder and DCS and my fav by far which is easiest to fly and that suits me best was the p-38 Lightning. It takes hits, and it's fast and works best with dive attacks. Second fav was the P51D for all around greatness.

[@Vermiliontea]

The Hellcat did meet both the Bf-109 and Fw-190 at least one time. Accounts of this one incident are... sketchy. But it seems a British navigation training flight of 8 Hellcats were jumped by a composite 109 & 190 unit. In the initial pass 3 Hellcats were shot down. In the ensuing dogfight at least 3, as confirmed by records all 109s, possibly 5 German fighters were shot down, before all Germans managed to disengage. Eric Brown has commented on the hypothetical question of F6F vs Bf-109G dogfight - he test flew many versions of the 109 and the Hellcat -, saying that, taking out the pilot from the equation, the Hellcat would win. Embroiled in a dogfight, there is no maneuver that 109 can pull to either save itself or gain the upper hand. Proper tactic is hit and run, ...but don't dive to run. The best advantage the Bf 109G had would be continuous climb (it doesn't really have any speed advantage, particularly not if maneuvering). That is the tactic that should be used to gain & control position of advantage and choice to engage, ...or not. But don't hang around too long, because ultimately the Hellcat has better very high altitude performance, and as has already been said, diving is not your friend. When it comes to the F4U, Brown is not much of a help, as he hated all versions of that aircraft that he flew. He did say, rather drily, that no one has ever complained about the Corsair's performance. It was a fast plane. And particularly, while the Bf 109 would have a rather slight speed advantage on the Hellcat at its best altitude, no such thing against the Corsair. Already the F4U-1D was much faster. The various turn rates of the Corsairs were also rather good and should be comparable to the Hellcat. Where it would be less than the Hellcat is only in all the "nimble", lethal things, like leading the roll with the rudder to keep maneuvering target in the sights, lack of vices and general ease of flying, So all together, I'd suggest air combat with a Corsair should be avoided even more, in a Bf 109. Just like the Hellcat, the Corsair wasn't really in the habit of losing air combat. It was its non-combat operational losses that were disastrous. ...Before the F4U-4.

[@jacktattis]

@@Jeffei-qs7kp No the RAF used the Mustang to do everything

[@janlindtner305]

P-38 a kind of American DH 98 Mosquito, P-51 Perfect with RR / Packard Engine.

[@Jeffei-qs7kp]

How's that?

[@erichammond9308]

Only 5 Rolls Royce engines were ever installed in P-51 - the rest had Packard V-1760 engines. (There's a joke there, but it is true) 😂

[@janlindtner305]

@@erichammond9308Wasn't the Packard V-1760 a copy of the RR merlin?

[@erichammond9308]

@@janlindtner305 yes, that's the joke. The Packard wasn't just a copy, but a license built Merlin engine. They were exactly the same with 100% parts compatibility, but the fact remains that only 5 Rolls Royce built Merlin engines were ever installed in P-51s. The rest were Packard built.

[@janlindtner305]

@@erichammond9308It's not a joke! it was a practical joke and delivered to someone who likes a lot of the slack's historical delicacies. Thanks for that, because now I have a good one in the back hand 👍

[@jameslatham2655]

Which one was best? Hmmmm... every damn one of them. Just as their pilots. Indisputable!

[@paulsnell534]

In fairness the P51 faced German Jet Fighters and actually more experienced better equipped German aces. Compared to the German Fighter pilots right until the end of their repsective wars the Germans far outmatched the Japanese in skill and the equipment they were flying. So P51's were going to fair much worse as would Spitfires

[@paulsnell534]

It was a case that the Germans overskilled their pilots and over engineered their planes like typical Germans do

[@NandrajSaggoonoo]

Mustang p 51 D was the best

[@greathistoryseries]

Thank you for watching!

[@larryconnerjr1835]

Why is the p-38 even in this discussion, it wasn’t good enough for the European theater against the top German fighters but it was good enough for the Zero fighter to in the pacific because in reality the Japanese fighter had an inferior engine to all of the late war American fighters

[@dennisfarris4729]

Sad that killing one guy seems to be so important to histoians P38 was innocative and powerful. Vengeance is not noble...petty to my taste.

[@Vermiliontea]

While the operation was named "Vengeance", that was not the motivation. In war, there are those enemy operational commanders that you want to kill, and those that you don't want to kill. If you kill an incompetent enemy commander, there is a fair risk he will be replaced by a competent talent. Competent enemy commanders otoh, you do want to pick them off. This is war, not some sport. And Yamamoto was recognized as an exceptionally competent commander.

[@dennisfarris4729]

@@Vermiliontea would that that were true...

[@Brunzy1970]

New subscriber even though your voice bot made my *ears bleed* !

[@greathistoryseries]

Thank you!

[@vertizon3036]

I enjoy most of these videos but it drive me nuts to hear them tout the long range if the P-47 or show a picture of the Corsair while talking about the Hellcat. It doesn't take that much work to get it right and if you are going to talk like you know what you're talking about then know what you are talking about!

[@greathistoryseries]

Thank you for your feedback, always welcome. Could you point me to the time where this happened? Thank you again.

[@edwardpate6128]

Of course the US Navy on top! They have aviators, they are better than mere pilots!

[@jacktattis]

Dominated the Sky Really?????? The RAF/ Friends had put in their two bobs worth since Oct 1939. Battle of Britain 1940 1700/2000 enemy . Not Nov 42 P38 or April 43 P47 or Dec 43 P51B or Jun44 P51D.

[@twolak1972]

The 2 best in my opinion are the P47 T bolt which operated in Europe, defeated the luftwaffe and did the heavy lifting till the pussy assed P51 camecand took the credit. The other is the F6F hellcat. The plane that defeated the zero, replaced the POS WILDCAT and put the F4U in its place .

[@mikez3114]

Each plane had a roll to play. Yes the p47 did the heavy lifting Europe. I disagree though. The Corsair would stomp the hellcat in head to head combat. It was faster, better climb rate, better roll rate,

[@twolak1972]

@@mikez3114 Nope , hellcat was more agile , better dogfighter. The F4U is overrated. Just because pappy liked it dont make it better. If it was superior how come the hellcat had a 18.1 kill ratio and the corsair wasn't in the same universe. It also sucked against the luftwaffe 109 & 190,s.

[@mikez3114]

The Corsair would smoke the Hellcat in a dogfight. The Corsair would be able to pull on the hellcat and pull away at the same time. There is a reason the Corsair went on to serve through the 50’s and the hellcat didn’t. Because more hellcats were produced and were allowed on carriers earlier. Easy buddy. I think what you are looking for is the Hellcat was more forgiving. The Corsair in the right hands was definitely the more deadly aircraft.

[@jacktattis]

@@mikez3114 The Hellcat had a better climb rate

[@jacktattis]

@@twolak1972 The F4u1 and F6F never faced the German two in combat