A reader of our site asked us how US Pacific fighters would fare against the Luftwaffe’s finest – the Messerschmitt Bf 109 and Focke-Wulf Fw 190. Curious to know more we asked HushKit contributor Edward Ward to consider the matter. 

The interesting thing about the F4F, F6F and F4U is that we do have a tantalising hint of their efficacy against late Luftwaffe fighters as all three were used by the Fleet Air Arm in Europe. Sadly (in a way) the Corsair never met a German fighter in combat but both the Grummans did and the results were positive. Oddly, despite never actually engaging in air-to-air combat over Europe, a Corsair was captured by the Luftwaffe and extensively tested by them. The results for the Grummans were more interesting. Surprisingly the first American-built aircraft to score a kill in British service was a Wildcat (then named a Martlet) when two Martlet Is of 804 sqn Fleet Air Arm shot down a Junkers 88 on Christmas Day 1940. Later Martlets operated in the Western Desert in a shore based role. Finding out detailed information abut this period is difficult. About the best I can manage is that they operated in “ground attack and escort missions” so one would have thought they would have met the Luftwaffe however I can only find records for one FIAT G.50 and four Ju 88s shot down. More research needed. There is an Osprey ‘Aircraft of the Aces’ volume on Royal Navy aces of WWII that would I suspect give an excellent account of this period but alas I don’t own it… All this occurred before the US had even entered the war.

This is what Eric Brown had to say about the Martlet/Wildcat and its chances against the Luftwaffe. It is worth noting that although more famous as a test pilot, Eric Brown had flown the Martlet in combat from escort carriers against Fw 200 Condors.
Martlet II Versus Messerschmitt Bf 109F

The Wildcat, although faster and more manoeuvrable than the Sea Hurricane, was still some 60mph slower than the German fighter. The lower the altitude the less the odds favoured the Me109F. The Wildcat also had a heavier punch to deliver.

Verdict: As a dogfighter the Wildcat was superior to the Me 109F, but the initiative always lay with the German because of superior performance. At low altitudes the Me109F had the edge over the Wildcat, but not by much.

Martlet IV Versus Focke-Wulf 19A-4 and A-4/U8: The only superiority that could be claimed by the Wildcat was its ability to outturn the German fighter, but turning doesn’t win battles. In every other department the Fw 190 was in command. Even in the fighter-bomber role the German faced minimal danger, and he could always jettison his bombs in an emergency to defend himself.
Verdict: The superiority of the Fw 190A-4 and A-4/U8 was so comprehensive that the Wildcat had little or no chance to do anything more than perhaps harry the German enough to make him jettison his bombs prematurely.

However by the time the Wildcat VI was on the scene (1944) his assessment was rather less rosy: “Wildcat VI Versus Messerschmitt 109G-6: The agile little Wildcat could outmanoeuvre the latest version of the Me 109, but the performance differential had widened and the German could run rings around the Wildcat. If the Me 109G-6 was tempted to mix it in a dogfight, the Wildcat had a better than even chance of success.Verdict: The Wildcat was no real match for the Me 109G-6, but the German could not afford to take liberties with his angry little opponent.”

Wildcat VI Versus Fw 190

The formidable Fw 190 held all the advantages in this contest, and there was really no way out of the dilemma for the Wildcat. Even in a turning circle it could not evade the German fighter for the first 120 degrees, and that was more than enough time for the powerful armament of the Fw 190 to take effect.

Verdict: The Wildcat had little chance of surviving single combat with the Fw 190. Its only hope lay in overwhelming the German by force of numbers.

Ultimately most RN Martlets and Wildcats saw service on escort carriers, far from German fighters. However, despite its apparent performance shortfall, In March 1945, Wildcats shot down four Messerschmitt Bf 109Gs over Norway. These were the FAA’s last victories with Wildcats.

With regard to the Hellcat, only the Royal Navy actually flew it in combat against Luftwaffe fighters. US Hellcats did see service over Europe when they operated off USS Tulagi during Operation Dragoon (the invasion of Southern France) in August 1944. During Dragoon, USN Hellcats shot down eight German aircraft but all were bombers or transports. A year or so earlier, four British Hellcats were bounced by a mixture of Fw 190s and Bf 109Gs off the Norwegian coast. One Hellcat was lost but the other three each claimed the destruction of one German fighter each. Hardly much to go on but the Hellcat came out on top in that action at least.

If I were to speculate on what would have happened had the two later Navy aircraft been deployed in numbers in Europe I suspect a similar situation as that which developed with the P-47 and P-51 would have developed, the Hellcat is slower than the Corsair (and very much slower than either a Thunderbolt or a Mustang) but is a very forgiving aircraft and also insanely rugged (a proportionately much greater number of F6Fs survived being hit by flak for example than did F4Us) and thus it would seem likely that the Hellcat would be employed more as a fighter bomber rather than a straight air-to-air fighter. If intercepted the Hellcats exceptional manoeuvrability (it could follow the A6M Zero through most manoeuvres, and that aircraft may well have been the most agile of the war) would have proved difficult to deal with for both German fighters but they would have been able to break off at will.

The F4U was a rather different prospect, with a significantly better performance than the Hellcat it is likely that any service it might have given against the Luftwaffe would have been impressive. There are caveats however – the afore-mentioned Eric Brown said he would prefer the Hellcat in a dogfight, however during the second world war pilots in every nation (except maybe Japan) were desperately trying to avoid dogfighting wherever possible and use dive and zoom climb tactics. This would have favoured the Corsair which excelled in the vertical plane. Whether it would have done as well as it did against the Japanese is unlikely however. The Luftwaffe, although a shadow of its former self by 1945 was still a dangerous foe and did not suffer the same technological disparity (in general) as did the late war Japanese fighters compared to their principal American adversaries. It is possible of course that it may not have fared so well, the P-39 Airacobra was generally regarded as unsatisfactory in the Pacific theatre yet was extremely successful against the Germans over the Eastern Front (of US built fighters only the P-51 would score more air to air kills) However, we do have at least a glimpse of what might have transpired in reality as the US tested the Fw 190 against the F4U and F6F and the results are here. It is worth noting however that the Focke Wulf in this case was an early model and not indicative of the models that the Corsair and Hellcat would have actually met in combat had they been committed to the European theatre.

In short, what would actually have transpired is anyone’s guess. The American fighters were formidable but then, so were the German aircraft. It may have depended a great deal on when they were committed. Corsairs fist flew into combat in August 1942, at that point the Luftwaffe was still probably the most powerful, best trained, most experienced and arguably best equipped Air Force in the world. Any fighter thrown at them at that time would have suffered. Had the Luftwaffe of early 1945 been their foe though it would have been a different story as most of the veterans were either dead or wounded, there was precious little fuel for operations and the training programme had collapsed.

All of which is a long-winded way of saying it’s pretty much anyone’s guess what would have actually happened.

— Edward Ward

 

Dear aviation aficionado,

This site is in danger due to a lack of funding, if you enjoyed this article and wish to donate you may do it here. 

You love planes. We love planes. Save the Hush-Kit blog! Our site is absolutely free and we have no advertisements. 

Jim Smith had significant technical roles in the development of the UK’s leading military aviation programmes. From ASRAAM and Nimrod, to the JSF and Eurofighter Typhoon. We asked his opinion on what we can learn from the Dornier Do 31. 

As with the Royal Air Force, in the early 1960s, the Luftwaffe became concerned about the vulnerability of aircraft operating from large air bases.  The British developed and eventually deployed the Harrier; the Germans, in a frenzy of innovation, developed and flew, but did not put into service, two potentially supersonic VTOL fast-jets, and a VTOL transport, the Do 31E. They also experimented with a zero-length launch system for the Starfighter, the ZELL.

The two fast-jets were the VFW VAK 191, which was intended as a strike aircraft with a limited supersonic dash capability, and the EWR VJ 101C, which was a Mach 1.8-capable VTOL interceptor. The Do 31, as a production aircraft, was envisaged as supplying tactical logistic support to the fast jets, itself using as forward operating bases the airstrips on which the ZELL Starfighters were expected to land using arrester gear.

The events at the start of the Six Day War between Israel and Egypt in 1967 showed that the concern about the vulnerability of aircraft on the ground at airbases was somewhat justified. Israel essentially destroyed the capability of the Egyptian Air Force in strikes against their airbases in the first hours of the conflict. At that time, the aircraft discussed here were all in development.

Do 31E Configuration

The Dornier 31E3 shown in the heading photo was the first, and to date, the only jet VTOL transport aircraft to fly, doing so in the E3 version in July 1967. In December of that year, the aircraft successfully completed transition from vertical take-off to forward flight, and the reverse transition to vertical landing. To do this, it operated with no less than 10 engines, two 15,000lb thrust Pegasus engines in the mid-span nacelles, and a further 4 Rolls-Royce RB 162-4D lift engines in each wing tip pod, each providing a further 4,400lb thrust. Total thrust was an impressive 65,200lb, providing some margin for hot-gas re-ingestion and suckdown effects at the maximum take-off weight of 60,600lb (Data from Janes All the World’s Aircraft 1966-67).

Payload capability was 36 fully equipped troops, or ‘two or three’ Jeeps, or palleted freight, up to a maximum of 11,000lb, and a range of 1100 miles was expected with maximum payload.

The Problems

Given the quite impressive technical achievements of the design, you may wonder why the Do 31 appears in this list. The real problem with this aircraft, and indeed the associated EWR VJ101C and VFW VAK 191B, was with the totally unachievable operating concept. It turns out that airbases (and aircraft carriers) provide really useful capabilities supporting tactical aircraft.

Without some form of operating base, maintenance, spares, fuel, accommodation, mission preparation, and protection and shelter of aircrew and maintenance personnel become major logistic problems.

When you add to this the impact on cost and complexity, weight and drag, of carrying around 10 engines, only 2 of which are used in forward flight, it becomes clear that the Dornier 31E was really up against it, both operationally and technically.

The Eventual Solution

What was the resolution, beyond cancelling all the related projects? Well, once the difficulty of operating without airbase infrastructure had been considered, the answer was to effectively protect the airbases with capable surface-to-air defences, and to protect the aircraft and support infrastructure with appropriate hardened shelters. This enabled conventional solutions to be found to the tactical requirements of most air forces, noting, however, the extremely effective use of carrier-borne (or forward-based) Harriers in support of operations by the US Marines, RAF and a number of Navies.

The tactical and logistic support of forward air operations, it turns out, can be well supported by another aircraft which was in development at the time – the Fiat G222. This has now been developed into today’s C-27 Spartan, which offers similar payload-range performance to the Dornier 31E, albeit with STOL rather than VTOL capability, at a fraction of the cost, risk and complexity of a production Do 31.

Was it worth the effort

Was the Do-31 (and for that matter, the other related projects) worth the effort? Well, all three aircraft explored the difficult VSTOL regimes, with quite challenging requirements. There is no doubt that German Industry gained significantly in understanding computer-assisted control of some advanced and challenging designs.  This may well have helped the Industry play its part in the later development of the Tornado and Eurofighter.

That said, no operational system eventuated, mainly, I suggest, because technical progress had run ahead of operational analysis, resulting in flawed requirements.

You love planes. We love planes. Save the Hush-Kit blog!

Donate here. 

Our site is absolutely free and we have no advertisements. Those who donate are:

A. More sexually attractive*

B. More intelligent*

C. Know more about aircraft*

Donate here. 

In order to carry on we need donations— even £8 a month could do a lot of good. If you don’t wish to donate but would like to help us, then sharing our articles is the way! Thank you for your time you lovely aviation expert. 

* There is no scientific evidence for these claims.

Jim Smith had significant  roles in the development of the UK’s leading military aviation programmes. His latest book is available here.

Want to see more stories like this: Follow my vapour trail on Twitter: @Hush_kit

Have a look at How to kill a Raptor, An Idiot’s Guide to Chinese Flankers, the 10 worst British military aircraft, The 10 worst French aircraft,  Su-35 versus Typhoon, 10 Best fighters of World War II , top WVR and BVR fighters of today, an interview with a Super Hornet pilot and a Pacifist’s Guide to Warplanes. Was the Spitfire overrated? Want something more bizarre? The Top Ten fictional aircraft is a fascinating read, as is The Strange Story and The Planet Satellite. The Fashion Versus Aircraft Camo is also a real cracker. Those interested in the Cold Way should read A pilot’s guide to flying and fighting in the Lightning. Those feeling less belligerent may enjoy A pilot’s farewell to the Airbus A340. Looking for something more humorous? Have a look at this F-35 satire and ‘Werner Herzog’s Guide to pusher bi-planes or the Ten most boring aircraft. In the mood for something more offensive? Try the NSFW 10 best looking American airplanes, or the same but for Canadians. 

We asked Hush-Kit followers to vote on the which aircraft were the most beautiful. Surprisingly, their voting choices were not completely insane. 

Round 1 

Widebody booty

Boeing Dreamliner 787 Dreamliner

Versus

Airbus A350 XWB 

With its sharky tail, sawtooth engine nacelles and slimmer body we expected the Dreamliner to walk this, but the results were tighter than the elbows of EasyJet passengers. Both aircraft have lovely noses, with the A350 having a more distinctive cockpit windows, like a fast train wearing goggles. Wingwise the Dreamliner has the edge, with its lovely raked back tips and flappy flexibility.

Results

Round 2

European Middleweight clash 

Eurofighter Typhoon 

versus

Dassault Rafale 

The Matt & Luke of the fighter world, the Typhoon and Rafale are very similar yet provoke more rows than almost any other two types. The Typhoon suffers from a plasticy look, a fussy boxy intake and a lack of curves, the Rafale a dorky 60s refuelling probe and what looks like a catering-size box of clingfilm strapped onto its fin. Clearly, this had to go to Rafale, because despite Typhoon’s noble canopy, lovely nose and decent proportions, the French aircraft is far prettier. Rafale TF-102-esque forward fuselage and kidney intakes are an absolute treat of delicious Henry Moore curves, the canards are a small and perky detail set neatly close to the not overly large wing. The overall design is compact with some lovely detail features such as the gold flash cockpit and serrated stealthy panel edges. The unusual jet nozzles are rather bland but overall the Rafale is a beautiful aircraft, something reflected in readers’ votes.

Round 3

Fourth Gen Heavyweights 

McDonnell Douglas F-15 Eagle

Versus

Sukhoi T-10 ‘Flanker’ series 

Bill Sweetman noted that the the ‘Flanker’ “..looks incomparably bad-ass, as if God designed a pterodactyl to go Mach 2.” and our readers generally agreed. The Eagle is beautiful too, but more butch than elegant (with its undercarriage out the F-15 does look very awkward).

Round 4

Supersonic airliners 

Tupolev Tu-144

Versus

Aérospatiale/BAC Concorde

A poetic swan or Darth Vader’s weekend runaround? Come on!

You may enjoy these articles:

Interview with USAF spy pilot here

Top Combat Aircraft of 2030, The Ultimate World War I Fighters, Saab Draken: Swedish Stealth fighter?, Flying and fighting in the MiG-27: Interview with a MiG pilot, Project Tempest: Musings on Britain’s new superfighter project, Top 10 carrier fighters 2018, Ten most important fighter aircraft guns

The Hush-Kit Book of Warplanes will feature the finest cuts from Hush-Kit along with exclusive new articles, explosive photography and gorgeous bespoke illustrations. Order The Hush-Kit Book of Warplanes here

In World War II, aerial photo reconnaissance was scientific — a rigorous and methodical observation of the enemy’s strength. The Photo Reconnaissance Spitfire became the chief Allied tool of this undertaking, alongside the de Havilland Mosquito. Allied aerial reconnaissance gave the Manhattan Project and Bletchley Park a run for their war-winning money for its scale and cleverness. Within this effort, the Supermarine Spitfire excelled as an intelligence-gathering machine whose pilots had a secretive, heroic job performed alone over enemy territory.

The Spitfire, born as a fighter, roared into this new role with alacrity. Before even the Battle of Britain it was serving the PR mission with aplomb. Cameras, with lenses wider than our heads, displaced guns. This brought extra capacity for missions eventually to Norwegian fjords, radar sites in occupied France, German industrial cities. Never glamorous in appearance, the P.R. Spits wore mostly grey-blue or dull pink paint schemes, like something from our stealthy era.

Pride of the Kriegsmarine, the battleship Bismarck, was spotted readying for her fatal high seas debut by a P.R. Spitfire pilot. The very last Royal Air Force operational flight by a Spitfire utilised a P.R. Version, in 1954! All the milestone editions of the Spitfire included camera-equipped versions. The P.R. Mark XI, in the very middle of the Spitfire line, is a wonderful thing. Look for camera ports, pointy fin and rudder and an enlargement to the underside of the nose for the bigger engine oil tank needed on those long, cold flights that helped win a war.

The Hush-Kit Book of Warplanes is a gorgeous heavily-illustrated – and often irreverent – coffee-table book covering the history of military aviation from 1914 – the present. Volume 2 is now crowd fund-raising through advanced pre-orders here.

Stephen Caulfield is a civilian employee of the Salvation Army “stationed” on the frontlines of North American consumer insanity in a modern recycling plant where he finds the occasional Spitfire.

—

Reading this for free? That’s fine with us. But if you are to help — say the price of a coffee once a month — then please do. Donate here to keep us going. Donations are all that keeps us going and keeps us independent and free to say what we like.