top ten

[Hern07]

There is a show on the Military Channel tonight at 2100 (local time) rating the top ten fighters of all times. Might be interesting. :d

[Rami]

I already have it on TiVo. :d

Hern07...did you get the files I sent you?

[bearcat241]

Pssst :kilroy:....I can tell you the winner for a dollar :d

[Hern07]

....and back at ya. Thanks.

[Corsair Freak]

Hi Hern,

If this show is anything like the other "top ten" shows produced by the Discovery Channel then you can be sure that if any WWII aircraft are included they'll be from the ETO.

Jagd, feel free to delete this...

I really hate how the ETO over shadows all the other theatres in WWII. In my opinion, it is complete disrespect for the sacrifice of all of the soldiers, sailors, and airmen who did not fight in the ETO.

Just the other a day I saw book titled something to the effect "Fighter aircraft of World War II" and of course, guess which aircraft were illuatrated on the cover? P-51, Spitfire, and the ME-109.

The majority of television shows, movies, and books are all about the ETO. What about the MTO? EF? PTO? It's even obvious in the flight simming community.

Sorry for going OT on your thread Hern, but this topic really bothers me. :banghead:

CF

P.S. don't even get me started on Korea. :costumes:

[Hern07]

Corsair F., don't sweat it. I've just finished watching it, and, before I even read your post, I was wondering why they omitted the Zero.

[Talon]

Well CF most everything I've done has been PTO or CBI.Right now CFS2 is more ETO but there has been alot done in the PTO over the years also.It seems to go back and forth.There are only a few people that do missions and campaigns for the community now.Maybe someone will do a campaign or mission set for the PTO.Seems only Jerm is doing anything for the PTO though.

I have only done missions for my own enjoyment and for some friends over the last year plus been playing around with the DCG for fun.


Talon

[Jagdflieger]

I watched the show tonight and enjoyed it, but I can't help but wonder if it would have been more relevent had they made it a top ten for each decade of flight. I think that it would have made a good series with the top 10 named from WW I, SCW, WWII, Korea, Vietnam, Desert Storm and the current Global War on Terrorism.

Oh yeah, I guess you could even have a PTO, MTO and ETO top 10 for the big one.:costumes:

[bobhegf]

Iam working on missions for Guadalcanal. I have new scenery for Henderson Field as well asTulagi.I am up to the 10th of Sept so far.I plan to carrie them to from Aug 20th to Oct. 11th. 1942.This is when VMF 121 releaved VMF 223 and 224.Between the two squadrons there were only 8 flyable fighters. VF5 had adout 11 but that was it.That was out of 50 fighters that had flown into Henderson.:d

[Jaxon]

I ahven`t seen it. But how do you want to compare?

The only chance is check the fighters performance to its oppponent at the time.

The Fokker E.I was such a candidate. The Zero was one as well early in the war. That any fighter can`t perform with later developments, is another issue.

The Bf 109 is a good example, because it was built during the whole war. While the earlier birds were a good overall concept fighter, the later ones weren`t. The overall design was the same, but the power increased dramatically. The wing design was not developed for these higher speeds and the later types lacked manouverability. They were more or less helpless straight-flying fast ships. That`s why they armed them so heavily: One hit strategy - and not a dogfighter, like the earlier Emil.

The P-51D on the other hands, was built to perform at these high speeds and had a fitting wing design - and thus was manouverable at these speeds.

[bearcat241]

I ahven`t seen it. But how do you want to compare?

The only chance is check the fighters performance to its oppponent at the time.

They use a five point grading system:

Fear factor
Innovation
Production cost
Firepower
Service length

When you take this simplistic approach you don't have to bother about direct comparisons between contemporary opponents. Just pull everything from the broader historical time line, throw them against these five criteria and see who gets the best overall marks.

[hewman100]

These sort of programmes are on to a loser before they even start because everyones 'Top Ten' is going to be slightly different anyway. As said, "fighters" is way too broad a canvas.

[PSULLYKEYS]

and as BC said ...too simplistic a criteria.....fear factor as 1/5 of the grade??? :costumes: You've got to be kidding!!

[Hern07]

I dunno, I was sorta disappointed. I think neither the F4 Phantom or the Harrier belonged on the list, and I thought either the Fokker DR1 or DVII should have been on it. If I'm not mistaken, more Bf 109's were produced than any other fighter and it fought in three wars and yet it didn't make the cut. The Spitfire should have ranked higher. But you know what they say about opinions....everybody has one. Maybe this would have been better discussed around a table with a few brews in hand. :ernae:

[mississippi]

I thank the 1 plane need to be the F$U Corairs it is the bast plan in WW2 . :costumes: :d .

PS Corairs Freak you for got about one of my fav show's of all time BAE Bae Black sheep