PDA

View Full Version : Best aircraft



Mike8686
06-29-2004, 02:29 PM
Hey guys, in your opinion which is he best allied aircraft and why, and which is the best axis aircraft and why (Fighters only), also which is the most manueverable axis fighter?

Mike8686
06-29-2004, 02:29 PM
Hey guys, in your opinion which is he best allied aircraft and why, and which is the best axis aircraft and why (Fighters only), also which is the most manueverable axis fighter?

eXtra_Corrosiv
06-29-2004, 02:33 PM
most maneuverable axis fighter is mig29, best allied fighter is f-14 tomcat.

Athlon 3200+ / 2x512 corsair c2pt 3200LL / radeon X800 Pro / Audigy 2 ZS / WinXP / Saitek X45

BombTaxi
06-29-2004, 02:36 PM
IMHO, the best Axis fighter is the Fw190A-series. Fast, tough and blessed with enormous firepower...everything you need in a fighter.

As to Allied crates... I dony often fly 'em, but when I do, I often choose a Hurricane or the Buffalo. They're only good for the early war, but have good firepower and durability. Bit slow though!

Tully__
06-29-2004, 02:41 PM
Most manouvreable Axis would nearly have to be either the Fiat CR.42 or the J8A.

Best is a real poser as it depends what you're using them for. For instance, the P-51 was an excellent long range, high altitude escort fighter but it was way outclassed for the low altitude tactical air superiority role filled so well by the Yak3's and the La7's. Similar constraints apply when deciding on the best Axis fighter. The Me262 is not suitable for some of the roles filled well by the Bf109 and vice versa.

=================================================


http://members.optusnet.com.au/tully_78th/sig.jpg

IL2 Forums Moderator
Forum Terms of Use (http://www.ubi.com/US/Info/TermsOfUse.htm)
Tully's X-45 profile (SST drivers) (http://members.optusnet.com.au/tully_78th/fb.zip)

Salut
Tully

Rebel_Yell_21
06-29-2004, 02:41 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by eXtra_Corrosiv:
most maneuverable axis fighter is mig29, best allied fighter is f-14 tomcat.

Athlon 3200+ / 2x512 corsair c2pt 3200LL / radeon X800 Pro / Audigy 2 ZS / WinXP / Saitek X45<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Wrong in every way. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/88.gif

http://www.303rdbga.com/art-ferris-fortress-S.jpg

Chuck_Older
06-29-2004, 02:43 PM
In Forgotten battles, or in the Real World that I trudge through every stinking day?

*****************************
The hillsides ring with, "Free the People",
Or can I hear the echoes from the days of '39?
~ Clash

DeBaer.534
06-29-2004, 02:45 PM
this thread will come down to every fighter being the best.
IMHO its not the plane but the pilot.
the best plane for me is the plane i can handle the best (FW190 A-6/A-8/A-9)

eXtra_Corrosiv
06-29-2004, 03:08 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Rebel_Yell_21:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by eXtra_Corrosiv:
most maneuverable axis fighter is mig29, best allied fighter is f-14 tomcat.

Athlon 3200+ / 2x512 corsair c2pt 3200LL / radeon X800 Pro / Audigy 2 ZS / WinXP / Saitek X45<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

negative.

what'a a better allied fighter that actually flies with a military? no raptors please...

as for axis I was at a loss because everything german in lomac just winds up as a smoking crater whenit meets my su-33.

f-14 rules the skies. fear the phoenix

Wrong in every way. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/88.gif

http://www.303rdbga.com/art-ferris-fortress-S.jpg <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Athlon 3200+ / 2x512 corsair c2pt 3200LL / radeon X800 Pro / Audigy 2 ZS / WinXP / Saitek X45

Vladimir_No2
06-29-2004, 04:07 PM
NO! not another "which is best" thread. The pain, the pain...make it stop!

http://img78.photobucket.com/albums/v255/vladimir_no2/polishsig.jpg
Der Spaziergang uber Warshau

HART_dreyer
06-29-2004, 04:17 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by BombTaxi:
IMHO, the best Axis fighter is the Fw190A-series. Fast, tough and blessed with enormous firepower...everything you need in a fighter.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

In a man-o-vs-mano situation that A4 is totally helpless versus a LA-5F or even a P-40.

Regards,
dreyer
the dreyer vs. Hartmann game! (http://www.dreyermachine.com/il2/)
"Above us, there is nothing above but the stars... above us."

Mike8686
06-29-2004, 04:43 PM
I should've specified, when I said bes I meant as in best dogfigher. Also, what is the difference between the FW-190 A series and the FW-190 Ds, and lastly, I've never played a gme with this level of realism and I'm loving it, however I realize I stall VERY easily and so I use my joystick very carefuly and gently, I just wanted to know, is this how I should be flying or is there something I'm missing? I'm assuming that how easly an airfract stalls when you pull on the J-stick depends on how manueverable it is (I guess).

Gibbage1
06-29-2004, 04:59 PM
I think the best allied fighter was the P-38. It did everything, and more http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif Best Axis was 190A series for the same reason.

Both were not as nimble as say a Yak or 109, but they got the job done better then any other aircraft on all its other virtues. Range, durability, loadout, sirvivability, how many rolls it coult take, and how many it played in the war. Between the two (Fw-190 and P-38) I think the P-38 has the edge because it had more range, more survivability, more payload, and in some cases it was faster and more manuverable. P-38 represents the new era of aircraft like the Mig 29 and F-15/14. Bigger, two engines, and lots of capability. Not like the small and sleek hotrods like the Yak and 109 that had limited rolls.

But thats just MY openion. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

"Most P-39's were sent to the Russians - so I guess that was an American secret weapon against our Russian allies."

Stan Wood, P-38 pilot who also flew the P-39.

Gibbage1
06-29-2004, 05:01 PM
The A series is radial were the D series is inline. The major differances is weight and firepower. The A series is heaver and had more firepower then the D. Also the A series is tougher and more damage resistant were the D series is more manuverable and I think faster. I like the A series were I think the D series is a desperate attempt from a desperate country http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Mike8686:
I should've specified, when I said bes I meant as in best dogfigher. Also, what is the difference between the FW-190 A series and the FW-190 Ds, and lastly, I've never played a gme with this level of realism and I'm loving it, however I realize I stall VERY easily and so I use my joystick very carefuly and gently, I just wanted to know, is this how I should be flying or is there something I'm missing? I'm assuming that how easly an airfract stalls when you pull on the J-stick depends on how manueverable it is (I guess).<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

"Most P-39's were sent to the Russians - so I guess that was an American secret weapon against our Russian allies."

Stan Wood, P-38 pilot who also flew the P-39.

faustnik
06-29-2004, 05:08 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Gibbage1:
The A series is radial were the D series is inline. The major differances is weight and firepower. The A series is heaver and had more firepower then the D. Also the A series is tougher and more damage resistant were the D series is more manuverable and I think faster. I like the A series were I think the D series is a desperate attempt from a desperate country http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

190D's were heavier.

And P-47s were much tougher than P-38's! http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

http://pages.sbcglobal.net/mdegnan/_images/FaustSig
www.7Jg77.com (http://www.7jg77.com) is recruiting
CWoS FB forum. More Cheese, Less Whine. (http://www.acompletewasteofspace.com/forum/viewforum.php?f=31)

Gibbage1
06-29-2004, 05:22 PM
Really? I did not know that. I assumed they were lighter going to the inline engine and removing the outer wing guns. Interesting. I also assumed that they were more nimble due to the loss in weight. Was that assumption also incorrect?

As for the P-47. Ya. It was tougher, but the P-38 had more redundancy http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by faustnik:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Gibbage1:
The A series is radial were the D series is inline. The major differances is weight and firepower. The A series is heaver and had more firepower then the D. Also the A series is tougher and more damage resistant were the D series is more manuverable and I think faster. I like the A series were I think the D series is a desperate attempt from a desperate country http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

190D's were heavier.

And P-47s were much tougher than P-38's! http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

http://pages.sbcglobal.net/mdegnan/_images/FaustSig
_http://www.7jg77.com is recruiting_
_http://www.acompletewasteofspace.com/forum/viewforum.php?f=31_<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

"Most P-39's were sent to the Russians - so I guess that was an American secret weapon against our Russian allies."

Stan Wood, P-38 pilot who also flew the P-39.

Magister__Ludi
06-29-2004, 05:46 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Gibbage1:
Really? I did not know that. I assumed they were lighter going to the inline engine and removing the outer wing guns. Interesting. I also assumed that they were more nimble due to the loss in weight. Was that assumption also incorrect?

As for the P-47. Ya. It was tougher, but the P-38 had more redundancy http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by faustnik:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Gibbage1:
The A series is radial were the D series is inline. The major differances is weight and firepower. The A series is heaver and had more firepower then the D. Also the A series is tougher and more damage resistant were the D series is more manuverable and I think faster. I like the A series were I think the D series is a desperate attempt from a desperate country http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

190D's were heavier.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


Fw-190A-8 and Fw-190D-9 had basically the same loaded weight, around 4300 kg, though A series powerplant, BMW-801, was 400kg heavier than D series Jumo-213 and A series had a couple of cannons more (180 kg - outer cannons + ammo)!

Although (less than) 100kg were taken by the lengthen tail of the D series the rest of aprox 500kg were taken by the cowling armor, made of 4mm thick steel. 4mm steel might not seem much but considering that more than 90% of the hits were at deflection smaller than 20 degrees, most of the hits simply bounced of the cowling. Those that did not bounce were becoming too slow to penetrate the engine, after they pierced the cowling.

In comparison A series had only the first 2 engine cowling rings armored (over the oil tank and coolers). D series used an enormous cowling armor, half the weight of Il2 armor! (and it did protect the engine only, not the crew or fuel tanks like in Il2s case). That's why Dora was very difficult to shot down. It's important to note that ground attack Stabs used Doras not Antons as their aircraft. Rudel himself flew the plane.

And Gib, D series had nothing to do with disperation, just with cold wartime planning. RLM requested that Fw should accept both BMW-801 and Jumo-213 as powerplants, in case one of them would become unavailable the Fw-190's production will continue with the other one. A and D series were complementary, meant to be produced at the same time. In fact Dora was available for production from the summer of '43, but there were little need for it at that time.

[This message was edited by Magister__Ludi on Tue June 29 2004 at 04:54 PM.]

Gibbage1
06-29-2004, 05:54 PM
Interesting. Thanks for that. In IL2 I find the D's engine to be more vulnerable then the A, but not as weak as the 109's engine.

Do you know if they used the same type of cowel armor on the He-111? Maybe thats why that Jumo is so armored.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Magister__Ludi:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Gibbage1:
Really? I did not know that. I assumed they were lighter going to the inline engine and removing the outer wing guns. Interesting. I also assumed that they were more nimble due to the loss in weight. Was that assumption also incorrect?

As for the P-47. Ya. It was tougher, but the P-38 had more redundancy http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by faustnik:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Gibbage1:
The A series is radial were the D series is inline. The major differances is weight and firepower. The A series is heaver and had more firepower then the D. Also the A series is tougher and more damage resistant were the D series is more manuverable and I think faster. I like the A series were I think the D series is a desperate attempt from a desperate country http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

190D's were heavier.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


Fw-190A-8 and Fw-190D-9 had basically the same loaded weight, around 4300 kg, though A series powerplant, BMW-801, was 400kg heavier than D series Jumo-213 and A series had a couple of cannons more (180 kg - outer cannons + ammo)!

Although (less than) 100kg were taken by the lengthen tail of the D series the rest of aprox 500kg were taken by the cowling armor, made of 4mm thick steel. 4mm steel might not seem much but considering that more than 90% of the hits were at deflection smaller than 20 degrees, most of the hits simply bounced of the cowling. Those that did not bounce were becoming too slow to penetrate the engine, after they pierced the cowling.

In comparison A series had only the first 2 engine cowling rings armored (over the oil tank and coolers). D series used an enormous cowling armor, half the weight of Il2 armor! (and it did protect the engine only, not the crew or fuel tanks like in Il2s case). That's why Dora was very difficult to shot down. It's important to note that ground attack Stabs used Doras not Antons as their aircraft. Rudel himself flew the plane.

And Gib, D series had nothing to do with disperation, just with cold wartime planning. RLM requested that Fw should accept both BMW-801 and Jumo-213 as powerplants, in case one of them would become unavailable the Fw-190 will continue with the other one. A and D series were complementary, meant to be produced at the same time. In fact Dora was available for production from the summer of '43, but there were little need for it at that time.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

"Most P-39's were sent to the Russians - so I guess that was an American secret weapon against our Russian allies."

Stan Wood, P-38 pilot who also flew the P-39.

Magister__Ludi
06-29-2004, 07:00 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Gibbage1:
Interesting. Thanks for that. In IL2 I find the D's engine to be more vulnerable then the A, but not as weak as the 109's engine.

Do you know if they used the same type of cowel armor on the He-111? Maybe thats why that Jumo is so armored.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


True in AEP, D series are more vulnerable than A series. It's of course incorrect, but at least Dora takes more than 1 shot before going down. There are tons of other mistakes I'd like to see corrected before this one.

And yes, He-111 used armored cowlings, if tough fighter oposition was expected. Otherwise no, because it diminished the payload. Stuka had armored cowlings by default, about Ju-88 I'm not sure if they were default or installed if needed (they surely had the option though).

As you can see the most important warplanes powered by Junkers V engines received armored cowlings. This was something specific to Junkers, I'm not aware of any DB powered bombers to use armored cowlings (like Do-217 or He-177). In fact beside the 4 aircraft mentioned earlier, only Il2 and Hs129 used armored cowlings. I might miss one or two planes, but certainly armored cowlings were the exception not the norm, they were just too heavy.

Magister__Ludi
06-29-2004, 07:22 PM
My favorite http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-happy.gif Imagine these at an airshow!

http://www.photodump.com/direct/dan_oprea/D9pic_25wc.jpg

tttiger
06-29-2004, 07:41 PM
Geeze, Mike, you've only been registered one day and you're able to come up with such a brilliant and original topic that no one ever posted before. Very impressive http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

He's trolling (again) and look who's snapping at the bait http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

ttt

"I want the one that kills the best with the least amount of risk to me"

-- Chuck Yeager describing "The Best Airplane."

DONB3397
06-29-2004, 07:58 PM
It seems we've been in and out of this subject a dozen times, and the preferences don't seem to change. Most go with the a/c they have the best luck flying, and before long we get to the charts.

But what did the pilots who flew several different aircraft during WWII say? For the allies, the 4th FG flew Spitfires, P-47Ds, and all variants of the P-51. Blakeslee, Godfrey, Goodson, Beeson and Gentile all preferred the Merlin-powered Mustang. It was not the fastest, or most manueverable, or heaviest in firepower...but it was, they said, easy to fly and superior in a dogfight at all levels to LW aircraft.

Goodson: "Most experts now agree that the P-51 was the most successful in WW II. Those of us who flew Spitfires, Thunderbolts and Mustangs loved the Spit for its manoeuvrability... but when the defensive war was over and it was time to carry the war to the enemy, the Spit was overtaken by events. The P-51 could catch up with the Me109 straight and level, and in a dive, and it could hold its own in a dogfight where I would say the best pilot would win; but most important, it had superior performance from 30,000 feet down to the deck, and 750 miles from its base."

It was vulnerable, of course, with its liquid-cooled engine when it fought most of its big battles over enemy territory. And it didn't have the firepower of a P-47 or P-38. On balance, I think, the Mustang would get my vote.

In FB dogfights, on the other hand, you should probably fly the plane that works with your setup and gives you the best results. Personally, I like Fw190A-8s and the Mark IXe. Go figure.

http://img78.photobucket.com/albums/v243/DONB3397/SpitSig01b.jpg
"And now I see with eye serene/The very pulse of the machine;
A being breathing thoughtful breath,/A Traveller between life and death." -- Wordsworth

Fw-190D-9
06-29-2004, 09:18 PM
Relly depoends on what you want to do, and in the end your taste.

IMOP, for straight take off dogfighting. Allies, would probibly be the Spitfire. Over all the very good interceptor. For the Axis I would have to go with the Fw-190 nasty all around, and getting in to details I would have to go with the Dora series.

For long range missions, escort and other wise, its a split with the allies for me. Either the P-51 or the P-38 would be great choices. For the Axis, the Zero.

For bomber busting. P-47 for the Allies, nothing else they had could take a huge amount of punishment and keep going. For the Axis, agian the Fw-190. I'd agian take the Dora series if the bombers were high.

For High speed interception. For the Allies I would choose the Tempest, Any griffon powered Spitfires, or the P-47M. For the Axis, the Me-262, or Ki-84.

Bombing, for the allies, either the P-38 (Two engines) or the P-47. For the Axis, the Fw-190.

Mike8686
06-30-2004, 05:38 AM
"I realize I stall VERY easily and so I use my joystick very carefuly and gently, I just wanted to know, is this how I should be flying or is there something I'm missing? I'm assuming that how easly an airfract stalls when you pull on the J-stick depends on how manueverable it is (I guess)."&lt;------I wanna know about that, am I learning this sim correctly?

Atomic_Marten
06-30-2004, 06:00 AM
Lemme join this nice thread. IMO in IL-2 best allied A/C (overall) goes to LA7/Yak3(P). Because of armament(Yak has better than LA7 IMO), speed and maneoeverability. My second pick would be Spitfire than Mustang.

Best axis in IL-2.... Bf109F4. Second G10. Most maneuverable are biplanes of course J8A, CR.42. Than G.50. Other than that, my vote goes again to Bf109F4. It is slower than Gustav G2, but more manouverable. If u like Japanese A/C's than Ki84(better than all above axis planes).

In real life I don't have a clue. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/blink.gif