This video was an excellent one. And I can respect where you put what fighter plane. Maybe you can expand this particular segment more into bombers. Or maybe you can do fighter planes from the Great War. Just a suggestion from me.
My father was a F6 F Hellcat pilot with 7 kills. And often said that the Zero was a unarmored cigarette lighter. One hit to the fuel tanks and it would burn. Were the Hellcat could take a lot of punishment and get home. I do have a picture of him with his Hellcat that shows 3 cylinders blown off and a hole in the wing the size of his head.
The F6F and P-47 could take more damage and fly home than almost any aircraft used by any country in the war, in big part due to the air-cooled radial engines. Stories abound of Hellcats and Thunderbolts returning with multiple cylinders shot out. Of the F6F, Eugene Valencia, one of the Navy's top aces, quipped: "I love this airplane so much, that if it could cook, I'd marry it."
There was a comical story I heard in a Japanese interview, there was a mechanic that was prepping a Zero, they started the engine and he was checking the engine while it was idling, the exhaust backfired and his oil stained shirt caught fire, he threw off his shirt and it landed on the wing and the whole plane went up xD
I'd argue its hans-Joachim marseille. While there were many soviet pilots many of them were not trained as well as allied pilots meanwhile Hans-Joachim marseille was fighting in north africa with jg 27 his nickname both sides gave him was "the star of africa". He took down 3 enemy aces within a day, he had a total of 158 confirmed aerial victories.
That has been said by so many people that it is false. Just about everyone who has heard of the Battle of Britain knows that the Hurricane deserves its share of the glory.
I may note here, that the Germans had a very strict way of counting areal kills. I think that they probably had the hardest way for a pilot to get a kill to his name than all other nations... If they didn't have a fellow pilot actually seeing the kill, it wasn't counted. So, actually, some pilots maybe have had a lot more to their credit.
Yes, and Luftwaffe pilots couldn’t share kills either. If a kill claimed by two or more pilots couldn’t be resolved in favour of one, nobody was awarded a claim.
Well done, bravo. I learned this especially after reading "JG26" by a Texas author who met most of the Jadgeschwader pilots. Their system was the best in the world. The Germans wanted to maintain the highest integrity of claims vs. victory awards. Basically, if there was any doubt they would NOT award a victory. A lot of pilots had additional kills & probable kills that were denied, especially if their wingman did not see plane go down. Many times the wingman would get shot down and therefore no witness = no victory.
Also... during the Battle of Britain... if an Axis pilot was shot down, he was pretty much guaranteed POW status. Whereas a British pilot who successfully bailed out over Britain or in the Channel could be back at his airfield within hours. The Germans had very little time left fir combat fuel wise... having to break off the fight quickly in order to make it back to their airfields. British pilots knew this and too advantage of it.
It was proven in the battle of Britten that German kill numbers were blown out of reality as were the brits. The re were claims of 5 times the number of Aircraft lost on a given day!
The Luftwaffe were hopelessly outnumbered from early 1944 onwards. They had far fewer planes and pilots and they had to fly many sorties daily. There was no a tour of duty and you went home. Because of the sheer weight of numbers stacked against the Luftwaffe it explains why so many of their high scoring aces were killed.
Yeah there was no 40 missions and you went home on easy street, german pilots flew on and on the entire war. No , your service is over now crap in germany, when the war is over your service to your country is fulfilled.
@@mylanmiller9656 Man you are ignorant, read The blond knight of germany about Hartmann, Galland , priller, Barkhorn, Marsaille , Novotney , Rall, These 7 had more kills than all the american aces of WW2.
@@mylanmiller9656 Your response has no relevance to my comment whatsoever. Of course the Luftwaffe, in their dwindling numbers, were attacking the bombers. That was their job. The reason they got shot out the sky is they were hopelessly outnumbered. And yes the Mustang was arguably the best fighter plane of ww2. Read Galland's book, " The First and the Last".
Several of the German pilots that flew the Me 109 , had prior combat experience in the Spanish Civil war , which ALSO gave them a fighting edge at the beginning of WW2
Not to mention that many Bf 109s are basically different planes built for different reasons or what not. The F model is essentially a whole new airplane in comparison to the E model, the only thing they share is an inverted V and the mid part of the tail section because even the canopy is different. The argument vs F,G,K is a littler more difficult but the E model and at model are completely different airplanes. So based on how the german’s oddly labeled things that contributes incredibly to the high number. If the Soviets were allotted that the Yak 1, Yak 3, Yak 7, and Yak 9 would all be considered the same plane. lol at the difference between La 5 and La 7. It begs the question why didn’t the Bf 109 F just not get the Me 209 name, and the G-K models the Me 309 name? They are essentially more different from eachother than La 5FN and La 7 are from eachother. Same goes to the Fw 190A vs the D. There as much different as Lagg3 and La 5 are to eachother.
@@barrymccokiner7559 their leader , and the fact that he had a habit of having some of his best armament designers , Air Force included ( sometimes for wasting valuable state funds ), sent to the gulag , or worse .
The real advantage the 109 had was, it encountered poor Quality adversary's during the start of the war in Poland & France as well as in Russia. The impressive number is the one the P51 has remember it was not used until 1943 that is 4 years into the war! Compared to the Mustang the Spitfire is lame it had a 4 year head start!
Agreed. If the P47 had served this role longer, it would have likely racked up a higher count. And the P47s role as a fighter often gets overshadowed by P51.
@Lugman Hakim The P47 and P38 along with the Spitfire were on scene years before the P51B/C/D. And up thru December 1943, NONE of these fighters were able to achieve air superiority over the Luftwaffe. The increasing unsustainable losses to USAAF bombers caused the suspension of daylight bombing after the disastrous bombing campaigns of October 1943, so the Luftwaffe fighter pilot pool was obviously extremely capable, effective and deadly at the end of 1943. The P51B/C was available in large enough numbers by March 1944 to provide effective fighter cover. The historical record is crystal clear. Through December 1943, the Luftwaffe fighters were so effective that daylight bombing was suspended after October, 1943. During the D-Day landings, June 6, 1944, the Luftwaffe was virtually invisible, and provided no threat at all. The P51B/C is the reason that Luftwaffe effectiveness went from "Extremely Deadly" to "No threat" inside of 6 months.
Yer not wrong, but...It's important to remember a certain scandal that was ongoing in the west during the early years of the war. You see, it's not that the P-47 or the P-38's couldn't escort the bombers all the way- from beginning of the war to the end, it's that they were kept from being able to by the scandal of the proper-sized drop tanks not being made for them. The P-47's especially- the Lightnings had other problems-SHOULD have been able to go all the way to Berlin from day one. It's a crime and literally, a scandal- you can look it up. If the -47's had been able to stay with the bombers from day one it would have been a different story.
@@63DW89A little fuel, you can't hardly defend everywhere. By the end of 1944, few German targets had any serious defense showing by the LW. Some notable exceptions, sure! FWIW, The first FULL US Raid, for the deeper part of the mission where the P-51s escorted.....Each US bomber formation had relays of EIGHT, yes EIGHT fighters. 6 March 1944. 672 Bombers, 69 losses (FLAK and Fighter) However, I just read an online story re Maj Hayes 357th FG with 33 Mustangs arriving together. They had overshot the link-up and had turned back, arriving behind the Germans as they formed-up ahead of the bomber stream.
The P-40 remained in production for most of the war and was #3 in production numbers. The P-40 and P-47 had great success as ground attack fighter-bombers.
And yet, this discussion is about fighters, not fighter bombers. P-40pilots were only successful when they outnumbered the enemy and had top cover. The USAAF had acquired about 600 Spitfires for that purpose, inlcuding Spit IX's in the MTO and ETO.
@@bobsakamanos4469 Spitfires were pieces of crap when compared to the P-40. The P-40 could take more punishment plus was much simpler and faster to repair. The Soviets didn't care for the Spitfires either and used theirs to escort passenger aircraft flying in the rear.
@@billwilson-es5yn LOL, well the P-40s had to take more punishment didn't it, with it's less than stellar performance. You don't seem to realize the flaws of the Allison engine and the fact that these fighters (Spit , P-40) had the same vital points; ie fuel, oil, coolant systems, and of course pilot, so manouverability meant survival. As for the Soviets, do some homework on that, Bill. As for production numbers, that has little to do with this discussion on performance.
Thanks so much for watching guys. I did my best to use quality sources here. I can't guarantee these numbers are perfect but I think they are very good estimates! Please consider subscribing and supporting me on Patreon. www.Patreon.com/TJ3History
The F6F hellcat had the most kills around five thousand two hundred twenty three enemy planes down. Around two hundred seventy hellcats were lost 305 pilots reached ace status while flying the F6F. Robert Duncan was the first pilot to shoot down a zero with the new plane. Hamilton mcwhorter was the first Hellcat ace in history. The history channel has a episode called A6M Zero vs F6F hellcat it was posted 6 months ago.
I was actually hoping to see the P-38 on the list, it's why I clicked the video. Thank you for giving it an honorable mention rather than just leaving it out entirely! My Grandfather flew one, he flew recon oddly enough, but normally these terrifying planes had enough firepower to sink ships. There was a point where he had to fly home with one engine shot out.
My dad graduated 1st in his class P 38 photo recon.I still have some of his photos. When he got to the S.W. Pacific there were to few missions and planes so instead of waiting for a random mission he transferred to a B 25 Mitchell unit. He flew the J model with 8 50 cal machine guns in the nose .Skip bombed, staffed and one of the 1st units to use napalm. On route to 21st mission control tower broke radio silence and instructed all aircraft to dump all ordinances in the ocean and return to base , WW II was over. (P.S. At debriefing they were told about the Atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki )
As mentioned in the video about B-17 Pilot Charlie Brown & ME 109 Ace Franz Sigler, Franz mentioned he went through a total of 17 ME109’s during his time in WWII. When the Female news anchor asked Charlie if they feared the 109, he stated “No, we respected it!”
FINALLY someone gives the P-40 some love!! DEF 1 of the most underrated & underappreciated aircraft of WWII early on. It's success w/the Cactus Air Force & Flying Tigers is legendary!! 😉👍✌️
The P 40 got a bad rap early in the war because allied Pilots were using them wrong! Any body that got into a low speed turning fight with a Zero was going to lose! Once the Pilots found the weakness of the Zero they turned the table on them. even a F6F couldn't turn with a Zero at low speed.
@@mylanmiller9656 100% correct. Since the P-40 was primarily used in the earliest yrs of the war, allied forces were still assessing the type of aircraft the axis powers were deploying...part of the reason the BF-109 was so successful.
@@craigbenn8671 You're right. I meant to refer to the 'Flying Tiger's', who used P-40 Warhawk's more clandestinely in China, whereas the 'Cactus Air Force' had it's biggest operations supporting the invasion of Guadalcanal. Thx for the correction. 😉
When comparing Allied aircraft to those of the German Axis, it is always forgotten that the Allied aircraft's successes also depended on having access to better fuel. Because of this, they could use engines that were superior to the German engines. Had the Germans had access to similar fuel, things would certainly have looked different.
What a lot of people don't realize is when there are videos like this that list planes that had the most of, or were the best at whatever, they don't realize that it doesn't mean these planes were better than planes that didn't make the list. In some cases, it's because the planes were in service longer, and /or they were produced in larger numbers. The BF-109 is the perfect example of this. It was in service for the entire war, and it was produced in larger numbers than any other WWII fighter. It certainly wasn't the best fighter of the war, but it ranks the highest in many categories simply because it was in service for so long, and it was available in such large numbers...
I think the creator addresses this point very adequately and anyone getting butthurt about this or that plane not being on the list or in the wrong position is a bit of an idiot. War is hell, just be grateful the right team (mostly) won.
I knew it would be the 109 because it was in the war long with greater numbers. Also by mid 1944 the allied pilots were having a hard time finding a German plane still flying with fuel ,while the remaining German planes with fuel had tens of thousands of allied planes to choose from.
Re. kill count inflation, I understood that the Germans had (at least in WWI) much more rigorous confirmation standards than the Allies. Was this true in WWII as well? Also, the book "Horrido! - Fighter Aces of the Luftwaffe" makes some strong points of logic for the high kill counts with regard to lengthy combat time and increased skill with lengthy survival and victories. It includes some tables that show that even the highest-scoring Luftwaffe aces took time to reach the levels that Bong (40), our highest scoring ace, and others reached--after which they "took off" in numbers, as it were. We tended to take our high-scoring pilots out of the line of battle while the Germans left theirs in--hence the high scores. Horrido! is an extraordinary book and even astonishing when describing aspects of the Eastern Front battles. It's well worth getting!
Note: P-47s had a ceiling of 42,000 ft. Even a Mustang couldn't compete with a Thunderbolt at 30,000 ft., which is what they were originally designed for. P-47s were really in their element at 25,000 ft & above. They started making kills on the Luftwaffe when they still had the skinny-bladed props. When they got the Paddle-Bladed props, that changed everything. It was akin to putting a Posi unit under a car. Range Capability was hampered by Hap Arnold's idea that none of his fighters should have drop tanks hanging on them. Yes, Hap was wrong on that one. The Maintenance people almost got Drop Tanks on their own. Funny, the P-47 N was used in the Pacific to escort B-29s from Iwo to Japan & back. AND, just look at the U. S. Ace list in the E.T.O., What were most of the top 10 flying? Aaah, yes, P-47s.
The P-47 was a great plane, but it was also a lot more expensive than the P-51 on account of being a lot bigger and having an 18-cylinder engine with a turbosupercharger (as they were called at the time) that needed a lot of ducting vs the P-51's V12. In 1944, the P-51 was about $51k while the P-47 was about $85k. Of course, saving money is pointless if the cheaper option doesn't do the job well enough, but the P-51 was plenty good enough to do what it was tasked with doing. Interestingly, the jet-powered P-80 was already cheaper than the P-47 in 1945.
@@lunatickoala Мустанг последней модификации -- это самый красивый поршневой самолет, а Тандерболт -- это самая быстрая летающая бочка с винтом в истории авиации... )))
It should be noted much of the success of the P-51 Mustang was due to the addition of the Rolls Royce Merlin engine, also built under licence by the US as the Packard V-1650 Merlin.
...and the laminar flow wing which allowed for the inclusion of 2 95 gallon fuel tanks, giving it its superior range, and 4 .30 cal machine guns and two .50 cals. It really was an amazing aircraft, especially the numbers that were turning up.
@@alastair9446 the allison powered mustangs underperformed. This aircraft came into its own when they decided to strap a supercharged Merlin on the nose. A legend was born
@@funkybassguy68 If you put a underpowered engine in any plane it is going to underpreform. You can put a Merlin in a Spitfire or Hurricane but they not going to fly to Berlin and back and have the same high speed. Being able to escort bombers to Berlin was the Mustangs real power. Remeber the Mustang key strength was its long range and high speed that other fighters could not match even with the same einge.
What is impressive here is your command of the language. I revisit this video from time to time to hear your description of the aircraft that dominated the skies.
Thank you so much for your honesty and disclaimers in order to properly frame this information. Perhaps it would be interesting to look at the fighters that had the highest kill counts just for the last 12 months of each conflict? That is of course be assuming that those are the most technologically advanced at the end of World War II. But also I would bet that narrowing down the information to just that would be extremely difficult.
I actually made that comment before I finished watching the video. I was very impressed at the end that you really did a great job of trying to be accurate and as complete as you could with your video. It’s really great!
The Spitfire MK V and MK IX/MK VIII are essentially different planes aswell due to not only the different engine but different wings among different improvements, the engine cowl is also very different, different propeller, etc. Not to mention the supercharger system and carburetor difference. More different than Yak 1B and Yak 9.
You could also argue this difference for the 109, 190, P-51, etc. They all went through major design changes. That's why the F6F stands out to me on this list; the most combat victories with the least amount of variants. I believe it also has the highest kill to loss ratio on this list.
Even variations in the Mk V Spit were tremendous. With the RR 55M, the LF Spit V could outclimb anything at 4370 fpm at its crit alt. The Spit IX was even better, over 5000 fpm depending on the fuel, alt, etc. As for range, the IX and VIII had much more internal fuel, so longer combat range.
I would like to see lists for the best fighter-v-fighter kill ratio and/or the highest average kill per fighter. The former being a mono-e-mono list removing easier targets like bombers and scouts. The latter would remove the numbers produced skew. I have a feeling the ME-262 would score high on both lists although the P-51 held its own even when outclassed by the MiG-15 in Korea.
Me 262s struggled to shoot down allied fighters as soon as thd allied pilots figured out how easy it was to turn inside the 262. That's why they were used primarily against bombers. P51s shot down significantly more 262s than were shot down by 262s.
@@darrylleeroberts Mustangs were credited with 120 Me262's destroyed and the P47 with 25, and a B17 tail gunner got one and the Brits were credited with only 10, for a total of 156 of the less than 200 that ever made it to combat !!! !
The german design of the Me262 was flawed. Without speed brakes, its closing speed on its targets was far too fast and the pilot had very little time to take the shot.
Agreed. The Fw 190 entered service in 1941, while the P-51 only entered service in 1944. So the Fw 190 fought for far longer than the P-51. For that reason alone, logic dictates that the Fw 190 has more victories than the P-51.
The mustang should,nt even be on here, the 47 broke the luftwaffe but AMERICA'S PRETTY BOY got credit. A INSULT TO ALL THE 47 PILOTS WHO FOUGHT AND DIED PROTECTING THE BOMBERS. PERHAPS IT WAS BECAUSE THE TUSKEGEE AIRMAN FLEW THEM THAT THEY WERE NOT INCLUDED.
You list two different tallies for the P51 so I was wondering: was the 3800 figure minus the Pacific theater numbers? The P47s of the 56th Fighter Group of the 8th AAF actually had the total record of more kills than any other fighter group in the 8th so the P47s honorable mention was well deserved if the 5900 figure for the P51 was the total.. You didn't quote a count for the F6F so I have to assume it passed the 3700 quoted for the P47.. The P38's turbocharger gave pilots fits in the high altitude bomber escort mission in Europe but in the Pacific Pilots Major Richard Bong and Major Tom McGuire became the top two American aces in the rangy well armed fighter. So it's good that it got a mention even though they didn't.. The Ki 43 "Oscar" operated by the IJA might've had more kill claims than the A6M "Zero/Zeke" operated by the IJN although verification would be mission improbable for several reasons, one being they operated against China which probably hasn't preserved records of their losses although the British in Burma probably did. Another is that they were often mistaken as Zekes by Allied pilots. I would expect they'd make the list in any case.
I also like to say that the P51 lost it’s advantage against the FW190 after the Germans start using the same type of fuel. It made them equally. Same with the later versions of the Spitfire such as the Super Marine version.
Read Calum E. Douglas’s book ‘The Secret Horsepower Race’, in which he explains the technical reasons why this wasn’t true. Secondly, the P-51 and the 190 almost never met on equal terms.
THE BF ME 109 simply had the numbers in the air on all fronts the Luftwaffe were engaged. It was the most produced fighter in service. However as fuel and adequately trained pilots became scarce it lost its edge in the final stages of the war. The inadequate response by the Luftwaffe after D day in France is telling of the tactical decline of the Luftwaffe from 1944 to the end of the war in Europe .
@@mylanmiller9656 It’s kinda like the Spitfire and the Hurricane, the Hurricane did most of the heavy lifting during the Battle of Britain but the Spit got all the glory!!
@@paddy7812 just like the 47 doing all the grunt work, escort, ground support, knocking out bridges and convoys while the little proma donna shoots down a few scared to death kids and is lauded the best fighter of WW2. WHAT A CROCK OF SHIT. P47 ALL THE WAY.
Great contribution, thank you so much! An important point regarding the role of the glamorous and potent Spitfire. Those who have previously studied the Battle of Britain have most often come to the conclusion that, although the Spitfire was an integral part of the Royal Air Force's defense of Britain, it was ultimately the workhorse Hawker Hurricane that won the battle. The Hurricane fares about the same as the B-24, which was perceived to be overshadowed by the B-17 ("medium") bombers. While the B-24 was more modern and capable than the B-17, the Hurricane was not at the height of the Supermarine product as a fighter. No offense, that doesn't change the super-interesting post at all.
@@TJ3 same for the P-47 doing most of the work beating down the cream of the LW in the West. The P-51 was largely NOT facing the "A" team. Sure some good pilots left in the LW for the Mustang but the average newer German pilot was not well trained due to constant fuel shortages. Not an apologist, but facts are facts. To test this, Who won WW2? Easy answer. Those who had Fuel or Access to fuel; US, USSR, and the British Empire!
@@68RatVette The historical record does not support your statement ".... the P-47 doing most of the work beating down the cream of the LW in the West. The P-51 was largely NOT facing the "A" team. .." The P47 and P38 along with the Spitfire were on scene YEARS before the P51B/C. And up thru December 1943, NONE of these fighters were able to achieve air superiority over the Luftwaffe. The increasing unsustainable losses to USAAF bombers finally caused the suspension of daylight bombing after the disastrous bombing campaigns of September and October 1943. Obviously the Luftwaffe fighter pilot pool was EXTREMELY capable, effective and deadly up through the end of 1943. The historical record is crystal clear. Up through October 1943, the Luftwaffe fighters were so deadly and effective against USAAF bombers that daylight bombing was suspended for the rest of 1943. However, only 6 months later, during the D-Day landings, June 6, 1944, the Luftwaffe was virtually invisible, and provided no threat at all. The P51B/C is the reason that Luftwaffe effectiveness went from "Extremely Deadly" to "No threat" inside of 6 months. Also, because the P51B/C was not available in large enough numbers to provide effective long range escort until after February 1944, the incredible fact is that the P51B/C actually neutralized Luftwaffe effectiveness in the 3 months of March, April and May of 1944. The actual historical record proves this fact beyond any doubt.
Bernhard, I don't think one can say that the Hurricane won the BoB, although it did contribute the most victories due to being the majority fighter type in 1939-40 - the ratio being about 1.8:1 H v S in service. The Hurricane was essentially a stop gap until the Spitfire, which entered service later and could not be produced as quickly, during the that period, became the premier RAF fighter type. Without the Hurricane or the Spitfire, the Luftwaffe would have won and so it was a combined effort. The Hurricane quickly became obsolete as an interceptor, but was still in service at the end of WW2, being a very versatile aircraft and leading the way as a fighter bomber with 4 x20mm cannons and bombs or rockets. The Spitfire image did result in it being more widely recognised in the media, it's true, but then again, I suppose that race horses get more plaudits than heavy horses, even though the latter do good work - that's life ;-).
I'm a P-51D Mustang man all the way...when you watch the videos on TH-cam of the men that flew them in WW2 they act like them things were awesome & was no joke & were very Proud to fly them...plus to me there most beautiful WW2 fighter I ever seen.
Top 5 - Bit of an apples v oranges v melons v lemons v strawberries comparison. The A/C arrived at different times, with different levels of improvements, against different opponents, in different target rich environments, in different theatres and different scenarios. An impossible comparison. 9:15. The turn radius of the Spit was vastly inferior to the Zero and the Spit suffered accordingly. Never slow speed dogfight a Zero unless you are in a Zero. If you are not in a Zero, speed and altitude are your friends. Numbers of kills for the Me 109 are skewed because all models are considered the same A/C, whilst the Russian La and MiG models were considered different A/C.
Pilot skill and tactics vs aircraft capabilities. The later P-40 pilots claimed to successfully dogfight zeros using the yo-yo tactic, the Spit could do the same with victory depending on the speed of manouvering. Yes comparing apples to trucks methinks.
The 109 was in service for a long time, the First and last were so different they were totally a different aircraft! the changes made to gain speed killed the maneuverability, Just like what happened to the Spit!
@@oswaldoramosferrusola5235 Corsair .....11:1 kill ratio, during WW2 , was used in the Korean war, (and shot down a Mig 15) First Indochina War, Suez Crisis, Algerian War, and the final action it saw was in 1969's"Football War" F4u was in active military service from 1942 to 1979 (USA retired it in 1953) seemed to be effective enough for the US to keep it in a fighter role up to 1953....well after the Mustang, Hellcat, Thunderbolt and P38(my all time favorite, next to the ME262) were retired
The Corsair is generally credited with around 2100 kills for American pilots. It was also used by other countries but at that stage of the war, their adversaries were depleted.
@@oswaldoramosferrusola5235 Literally what Rick Gehring said. Had it been rolled out into service in large numbers earlier in the war I have no doubt it would have eclipsed several of the planes on this list as far as kill/death ratio and total kills.
@@danzervos7606 Yeah like I said to the other guy if they would have started using them in mas earlier in the war it's numbers would have been significantly higher.
If you were to count all the Russian Yak variant (Yak-1, 3, 7, 9) kills, which is really not that much different from Spitfire variants (Mk, I, II, V, IX, XIV, etc.) or Bf-109 variants (E, F, G, K), I wonder if the Yak would make the list - since most of the German/European war took place on the Eastern front?
@@Bread-zv7ky I think that is highly debatable. It can be argued that the Soviets/Russians just used a different 'variant naming convention' than other WWII participants. As a further example of this, take the Lavochkin 5 and 7 (La-5 and La-7), These are clearly variants of the same fighter - NOT new models altogether.
Could I suggest a kill to loss ratio, or a kills per plane in service ratio as a better metric to analyse? Love your videos btw, esp the use of war thunder for the visuals, you pick interesting stories and tell them we'll, keep it up!
One of the reasons for the BF 109's kill count was that for the first couple years of the war the Russian front was the Russian version of the "Great Marianas Turkey Shoot." With Russian pilots who barely knew how to take off and land flying inferior aircraft being thrown wholesale into the meat grinder.
That's a true statement, and I was a bit shocked to learn from the books "The German Aces Speak I & II" that most russian fighters didn't even have gunsights, but a cross taped onto the windshield. Sometimes they stole American gunsights from scrapped Lend-Lease a/c. Another factor was the Russian AF organization. German pilots knew that if they took out the leader the rest were just simple prey and fleeing and disorganized. It truly was a "turkey shoot" as you said. It was so ridiculous that "the fat one" questioned the honesty of his pilots. Eric Hartman described how he followed a Russian plane back to his home base and found a very happy hunting ground that he kept secret to himself. His fellow flyers were wondering WTF he was doing to get so many kills. He had found a Russian airbase in a particular area that offered tons of easy kills for him! He eventually spilled the beans and let his fellow pilots join in on the fun. The "Red Banner" Russian pilots were VERY good, but the rest were rather simple-minded and disorganized. Yes, it was a "Marianas Turkey Shoot" scenario, like you pointed out - as different from the Western Front as night and day.
The ME109 shot down the most airplanes in WW-2. German Major Eric Hartman alone shot down more planes than all the allies aces in the European theater.
@yo yo Ya well the Russians under the USSR make lots of claims. I just looked at official US military recorded compiled for the official records for WW-2. It says the Me109 was the most produced fighter of WW-2 with over 33.000 manufacturers during its production. Spain built them Into the 1970s and that number isn't even counted. Go read a book.
JG 52 will remain a legend, in all times. Even considering the overclaiming their score is to damn high. I enjoyed the picture of "Bubi" Hartmman. Great content!
The 109 also had far more targets to shoot down than allied aircraft with tens of thousands of UASF and RAF bombers descending on Germany day and night.
This is a very important statistical fact that seems to get omitted whenever these so called 'lists' get compiled. In so doing actual comparison gets 'skewered' .
The Germans always fought against a superior number. However, your description refers to the final phase of the war. When the Allied terrorist bombers attacked with up to 2,000 aircraft. The Germans usually only took off a handful of pilots because there were simply not enough left. Up to a hundred pilots pounced on every German pilot. These operations were pure suicide squads. But they knew that every bomber shot down saved the lives of perhaps hundreds of civilians. For this reason, the Luftwaffe never had any problems finding volunteers for these hopeless missions. The top aces of the Germans mostly survived only because of their great experience in hundreds of dogfights and because they had the better planes. Most experts flew the Me 262 at the end of the war.
Something else it should be noted is that the bf-109 kill count includes bombers especially unescorted bombers. The Mustang in particular fought Fighters primarily.
@@juliusdream2683 my point is still valid the Messerschmitt 109 primarily shot down unescorted bombers. With equal Pilots one-on-one against the Mustang the Messerschmitt 109 loses.
@@markjordan348 The vast majority of Bf 109 kills were single-engined fighters and attack planes (IL-2) on the Eastern front. Late war 109s were the equal of the P-51, the K-4 probably even superior. The P-51 could out-dive the 109,but the latter could out-climb the US fighter. One on one, it mainly came down to the pilot, and here the americans had the overall edge from mid-44, as lack of fuel severely hampered Luftwaffe training.
not surprised about the 109==not only did it serve during the entire war but it's earlier models also saw combat in the Spanish Civil War==a real 'first to last' weapon like the Spitfire.
There weren't many parts interchangeable between the first and last BF109s. The Soviets had the opposite approach where comparatively minor alterations led to new model designations.
Being an amateur aviation historian with much research into WW2 I would amend this list to the following approximate numbers. 1.Bf109 25,000 to 30,000. 2. FW190 15,OOO to 20,000. 3. Lavochkin LaGG-3, La5 and La-7 series 10,000 to 15,000. Yak 1, Yak 3, Yak 7 and Yak 9 series 10,000 to 15,000. 4. Spitfire 6,000 to 9,000. 5. P-51 5,000 to 6,000. However, several other contenders in the 5,000 to 6,000 range would include the F6f Hellcat, Ki43 Hayabusa, Zero, and unexpectedly the P-39 which some reports indicate had great low level success on the Eastern Front. Soviets scored many more victories in the P-39 than US pilots because they flew many more sorties at low level where it excelled. Also surprisingly some evidence shows the Ki43 Hayabusa (JAAF equivalent to the Zero) had more kills than the Zero, many in southeast Asia. I'm puzzled why the Lavochkin and Yakovlev fighters were left off the list. No question they scored more kills than the Mustang or Hellcat.
Air Superiority relies on many, many factors, some of which the author of this vid acknowleges at the beginning. Good job. #1 factor: whether you can outnumber your enemy. As Stalin said, "quantity has a quality of its own; and can you feed the battle of attrition (sadly) better than the enemy. Other factors: Command & Control / radar / intel, strategies, tactics, leadership, environmental conditions, battle space target rich or not, pilot individual training, Squadron/Wing training (teamwork), supply chain, engineering/maintenance & mods/ tech development (eg gunsights, engine mods, etc), access to strategic materials/metals/oil, etc. Now consider all that and also apply it to the enemy forces.
Hey man I think the Fw 190 kill count is far off and there is no way the Spitfire got more kills than the Fw 190 which fought against the Soviets, British and American Fighter and bombers. I hope you can correct and show how underrated the Fw 190 really is.
The 190 kill count was the most difficult to find. I think it could be higher than 8k or 10k potentially, but any higher than that is a stretch considering only 15-21k were built (depending on which model you refer to).
@@TJ3 Yes but JG54 alone claimed around 5.000 kills flying the 190 (out of their ~9.600) so even assuming it's inflated I think that the 190 probably surpassed the 10.000 kill mark. It's the plane with the most kills in a day (18) and in a mission (13) too, due to its splendid armament and ammo reserve.
If you took timing, logistics, quantity and quality control issues out of the equation in a hypothetical scenario I would bet the HE-162 would have been a massive success.
the ME262 was another one if Hitler didn't demand it be redesigned as a fighter bomber , it would of entered in late 42 instead of early-mid 44...would of made a major impact on the war.....I don't think it would of changed the final out come...might prolonged the European war to early 46, maybe late Dec-45 either way once the American war machine hit it's production stride it became a war of who had more toys to play with.
@@rickgehring7507 That story that Hitler delayed the entry of the Me-262 is mostly incorrect. What delayed the deployment of the jet was the delay in producing a reliable engine using the non-strategic metals the Germans had available. Even then a Jumo lasted only about 20 hours in service. Hitler was desperate to get a fighter that could get through to attack the coming invasion fleet where the Allies controlled the airspace. The jet appeared to offer the solution - but they just could not get the engines ready in time. Hanging bombs on the jet was trivial, didn't delay the deployment of jet fighters and at worst added a delay of a month. Messerschmidt always intended to make the jet into a fighter bomber. This story of Hitler's meddling comes from Galland's book where he kind of excuses the Luftwaffe loss.
@@danzervos7606 Thanks for writing that for me. The reason I picked the HE-162 was due to its size, inherent instability (noted as a huge asset by experienced pilots from the allied men who flew it), simplicity and armament. The 2x20mm cannons in a plane that size with its performance would have been devastating.
Yeah they just made far too many strategic blunders. They were certainly in a great spot at the beginning. Their leaders were just too dumb oftentimes.
IF germany had saw the massive advantage the Me 262 gave them early on and had the perfected version on the hands of it's great aces when the 8th only had 4 bomber groups flying daylight raids its possible Germany would have knocked the U.S air force out of europe. Imagine if you will the schwienfurt/regandsburg raids facing 300 262,s Instead of 109,s and 190 focke wulfs.With no escort instead of the 60 bombers lost it would have been 200 .The 4 30mm cannons in the 262,s nose were capable of downing a heavy bomber with one accurate burst.
Germany lost the war when they couldn't finish off Britten, From there on they forced them self's to Fight 3 fronts. This was there biggest reason for defeat. They needed to finish one war before they started a second and a third!
I'm surprised that the mustang made the list due to its late arrival. I also would have guessed the hurricane had more victories then the spitfirers due to their targets ( bombers v fighters)
when Curtis LeMay commanded the USAAF 6th Air Force , the Mustang was unleashed on the Luftwaffe , rather than just escorting the bombers , which ( added to its superior range over the P 47 Thunderbolt , vastly added to its kill numbers
The Hurricane had more aerial victories than the Spitfire in the Battle of Britain in 1940. But after the Battle of Britain, the Spitfire gradually became the primary RAF fighter, while the Hurricane was increasingly relegated to the fighter bomber role. So over the course of the entire war, the Spitfire had far more aerial victories than the Hurricane.
The germans seem to have pumped out a lot aircarft in 1944 with total war. My guess pilots rushed into planes with no experience flying up to bombers where the Mustangs waited for them having a height and speed advantage. The Bf-109 focused on the bombers and Mustangs just line up from behind.
@@dovidell The germans captured and tested a FAA Corsair and told their pilots to avoid at all costs after testing against 109 and 190.The Brits used them for top cover and suffered no losses as no Germans came up to fight.
@@dovidell The Corsair actually shot down a Mustang back in 1969😱! It was the “Football Wars” in Central America between I think it was El Salvador and Honduras!
Considering that the JG squads were based very close to the combat zones and could possibly make several sorties a day in a sky dense with enemies. Add that to the experienced pilots and it’s easy to believe the higher number of kills.
I believe I've read that more German fighters were lost in combat with Russians on the eastern front, than in any other theatre and Russia is the Luftwaffes greatest graveyard. As such I am surprised no Russian model even got an honorable mention. Yak 3? La-5?
I don't really believe that, bombers preharps, but not fighters. 1941-1942 we all know what happened in the skies over Russia, 109s vs I-16, Lagg-3, P-39 etc, the Jagdwaffe barely took losses. In first half of 1943 most of the Jagdwaffe was grounded to save fuel for Operation Citadel. In the early stages of Kursk Jagdwaffe had the upper hand until they ran out of fuel again. Then by late Summer most of the jagdwaffe was transfered to the West, leaving only JG 52 in the East. From mid 43 to mid 44 we know much of the Jagdwaffe was destroyed in the defense of the Reich, and from mid 44 onwards it was a slaughter in the skies on the Western Front. It would only make sense to conclude more German fighters were lost in combat on the Western front since more Jagdwaffe units was deployed there from mid 1943 onwards.
На восточный фронт пришлось примерно четверть всех самолето-вылетов Люфтваффе в 1941-45 годах. Возможно, что в первой половине 1943 года ВВС Германии перебросили больше сил против СССР, но после начала массированных налетов "Летающих крепостей" на территорию Третьего Рейха большую часть истребителей пришлось вернуть на Запад. Что касается оценки результативности истребителей, то есть только два точных и объективных показателя: количество побед деленное на количество боевых вылетов и еще раз деленное на количество боевых потерь конкретного самолета. По этому показателю один из лучших истребителей союзников -- P-39 Аэрокобра, но только под управлением советских пилотов, западные на нем летать не любили (для них он был слишком сложным -- "валким" и трудно выводимым из штопора).
The Spitfire also serverd also until the end of the war. And since 1943,the americans were sending, their airplanes in bulk to Europe, and the difference in numbers were abysmal, makes the role of the bf 109 and fw 190,even more remarkable. PS : and If the fw 190 insted , of took severel rolls in The war, and put him only, as an intercepter fighter, his tally would be much superior, than most allied fighters., because He was far superior than the bf 109. PS : And in mine opinion the Fw 190 was the Best piston fighter of the war. My opinion. One ex, in Dieppe the first time the FW 190 was deploy, the Spitfires Just run for their lifes, how superior the FW 190 was.
They just upgraded the Spitfire to deal with the FW190. No use upgrading till you have seen the opposition you are up against. I'm sure the FW190s were upgraded when they dealt with the new Spitfires.
@@jelkel25 the FW 190 had 7 diferent variantes, operating at any Time. Fighter, close support, bomber, air recon, photo recon, etc Thats how versetable and sucecfull the FW 190 was.
Once the Spitfire Mk IX, (and later VIII, XIV) arrived, the FW190 was outclassed in many regards. Still it had the best roll rate and was easier to fly than the 109. .
Key factor here is length of service, numbers produced and theatres served in. Eastern front probably was key advantage of Bf 109 over the Spit. Worth remembering Spit was also best PR aircraft of the war and was still competitive at end of the war unlike the later Bf 109 which were overpowered for the smaller airframe wrecking the handling - so Spit could be further developed. Spit XIV was actually superior to P51D in all aspects except range which was pretty remarkable for an airframe at least 5 years older.
Well said, the contention that the 109 was still a top fighter flies in the face of reality which was that the likes of the Spitfire XIV and Tempest were markedly superior.
@@patm8622 absolutely Winkle Brown when he tested a late 109G stated “ He was not impressed” he much preferred the 190 albeit until the later D-9 onwards it lacked high altitude performance hence the 109 being kept in production particularly for USAF bomber stream intercepts as the in,y alternative till the 262.
The Luftwaffe counted aircraft destroyed on the ground as a 'kill', so ascertaining the most successful is complicated. I have also read that the Corsair shot down over 5,000 aircraft while only losing 189 to enemy action, so should that not put it ahead of the Hellcat?
No the Corsair pilots in WW2 claimed 2,140 victories, not 5,000. It was definitely an excellent fighter but didn't see combat until February 1943. It probably would have achieved many more victories if they had solved the cockpit visibility and bouncy landing on carriers issue earlier. Look up F4U Corsair on wikipedea, it has a good summary of its operational history.
When it comes to Spitfires I expect they occupy a niche all of their own since the earl B.O.B Mks up to the Mk 9 which Johnnie Johnson said was his favourite, up to the late war XIV's with the Griffon engine.
Power to weight ratio is the most important factor in dogfighting. The 109 had the best power to weight ratio throughout the war. The spitfire was a close second. The reason is because of the landing gear, both the spitfire and the 109 had the hinge points in the fuselage, the smartest place to them.
The Thunderbolt weight almost twice as much but was faster then the 109 in leave flight. Two reason it had 2,200 hp and a 4 bladed prop with a 10 ft diameter.
@@shawns0762 That came in very late in lower numbers. I read a book called "Luftwaffe Fighter Aces" By Mike Spike. It tells the story from German pilot in a 109G trying to lose a Thunderbolt in a vertical climb and his 109 stalled in the climb and the p-47 over shot him in the 90 vertical climb chase.
Biggest thing to note here is that shooting down a clumsy, giant, lumbering bomber, dive bomber, scout plane, or transport/cargo/utility plane counted equally as an aerial victory as downing an enemy fighter in a dogfight. As such, the Bf 109 was not only used throughout the duration of the war, it was used in every single fighter combat mission role. It was used in escort missions for light, medium, and heavy bombers, it was used in scouting, patrols, and defensive bomber interceptions. This included downing huge numbers of bomber squadrons that went without fighter escort for Russia and the US in disastrous daytime bombing campaigns. Compare to the Spitfire for example, which was primarily a dedicated defensive fighter interceptor. During the Battle of Berlin, the Spitfires would hunt down and draw away enemy fighter planes (therefore, dogfighting other enemy fighters), while the Hurricanes were used to intercept and attack German bombers. While the Hurricanes did dogfight and Spitfire shot down bombers, it wasn't their primary goal to do so.
I once sat in a Spanish-version of the Bf-109,{--Merlin engine} and I couldn't believe how TIGHT the cockpit sides were! And to look through the bullet-proof windscreen, was like looking through a space the size of a post-card! The BF-109 airframe was built after the war, in Czechloslovakia, where the Czechs used Junkers Jumo bomber engines to power it, which was called the Avia Av-199. The IDF had its 1st air victory over an Egyptian Spitfire, with an Avia 199.
They the reason for the tight cockpit as far as I remember was to stop pilots from getting bounced around when doing acrobatic maneuvers I can't remember what the reasoning behind the small windshield was
A better research of a top 5 pick would be a fighter at its peak development . A comparison in a fighter planes capability in speed , maneuverability and fire power.
It helps for this list if a nation mainly uses one aircraft and keeps modifying that same airframe instead of having many different planes. Now do one of what planes got shot down the most.
Quite amazing the ME-BF 109 Gets the most kills. Great aircraft. One of the best flat out fighters.I thought P-51D would have a high count. But it did come along later than other Allied aircraft. Or the Corsair. I thought they had been a great interceptor,fighter.
The F4U came around the same time as the Hellcat, but was rejected for carrier based ops until after the war, this reduced the number actively involved to much to get the kill count for this list.
I think that the sheer number of types has a lot to do with the kill counts. Germany didn't produce that many different types. They just produced a boat load of a couple of types.
Biggest reason for the Bf109's incredible total kill number was that early/mid of the war their primary targets were allied bombers flying daylight formation. Without long range fighter escort they were sitting ducks.
Some sources even say the Fw 190 made 10.000 kills, but the Fighting in the Air was so chaotic, that not every plane was counted, some were counted twice and sometimes a Pilot believed he shot down a plane, but it just sank 1000 feet. Only in the Battle of Kursk Salient probably 500-1000 planes were downed by the Fw 190
The FW 190 was a great fighter, but a lot of those kills were against Allied bombers, before the escort planes were able to escort them all the way to the target. Same for the ME Bf109. Good plane, but many kills against unescorted bombers and early bombers with fewer turrets at that. The Spitfire also got a lot of kills against bombers during the Battle of Britain. The Mustang was arguably the best anti-fighter propeller plane built. And the Me 262 was the most deadly fighter of the war beyond any doubt.
I think a lot of it had to do with the skill of the pilot. We had great fighters very fast ones P 51 mustang’s over 437 miles per hour, but the spitfire was a great plains, so was the Messerschmidt. I enjoyed your video very much. You have a great channel. I watch a lot of it appreciate your videos. Thanks so much.😀😆👍🏼👍🏼
If you have a lot of slow moving targets to shoot at, your numbers will be higher. Thousand and thousands of B17 and B24 bombers were shot down over several years of daylight bombing raids. It is easy to have the highest tally if you have the highest number of target opportunities. The BF-109 got for no other particular reason than it had a lot of slow flying bombers as targets.
Not to poke holes, but the P51 B carried 4 wing mounted .50 caliber MG's. The P51 D mounted six. I forget which version originally mounted six, I know the A36 Apache, had 6, 4 wing mounted and two beneath the engine if memory serves. I think they were mixed .30 and .50. Otherwise a great video!
Personally I think the Defiant and Typhoon should of had a mention.... What those two, and the Hurricane contributed during the Battle of Britain and beyond was what many today owe their freedom too.... Thankfully the brave RAF pilots and (gunners) fought with such courage and grit and put a stop to Operation Sealion...
Get confidence and control as a man today, go to www.GetRoman.com/TJ3 today, and if you’re prescribed, get $15 off your first month of ED treatment!
First
To see
Î should say the Hellcat, 19/1.
This video was an excellent one. And I can respect where you put what fighter plane. Maybe you can expand this particular segment more into bombers. Or maybe you can do fighter planes from the Great War. Just a suggestion from me.
@BekGrou PRIMUS What are you even talking about
My father was a F6 F Hellcat pilot with 7 kills. And often said that the Zero was a unarmored cigarette lighter. One hit to the fuel tanks and it would burn. Were the Hellcat could take a lot of punishment and get home. I do have a picture of him with his Hellcat that shows 3 cylinders blown off and a hole in the wing the size of his head.
Your dad wasn't just a pilot. He was a WW2 Fighter Ace ;-))...
The F6F and P-47 could take more damage and fly home than almost any aircraft used by any country in the war, in big part due to the air-cooled radial engines. Stories abound of Hellcats and Thunderbolts returning with multiple cylinders shot out.
Of the F6F, Eugene Valencia, one of the Navy's top aces, quipped:
"I love this airplane so much, that if it could cook, I'd marry it."
Im sorry if its personal . But can i ask for his name ?
There was a comical story I heard in a Japanese interview, there was a mechanic that was prepping a Zero, they started the engine and he was checking the engine while it was idling, the exhaust backfired and his oil stained shirt caught fire, he threw off his shirt and it landed on the wing and the whole plane went up xD
@@SUPRAMIKE18 are you sure that wasn't a Hurricane?
The greatest air ace of all time, Erich Hartmann, flew a Me 109, so I support the list!
I'd argue its hans-Joachim marseille. While there were many soviet pilots many of them were not trained as well as allied pilots meanwhile Hans-Joachim marseille was fighting in north africa with jg 27 his nickname both sides gave him was "the star of africa". He took down 3 enemy aces within a day, he had a total of 158 confirmed aerial victories.
The Hurricane was the main fighter during the battle of Britain, but the spitfire got the glory.
Ha,ha the Me109 take the glory!
That has been said by so many people that it is false. Just about everyone who has heard of the Battle of Britain knows that the Hurricane deserves its share of the glory.
I may note here, that the Germans had a very strict way of counting areal kills. I think that they probably had the hardest way for a pilot to get a kill to his name than all other nations... If they didn't have a fellow pilot actually seeing the kill, it wasn't counted. So, actually, some pilots maybe have had a lot more to their credit.
Yes, and Luftwaffe pilots couldn’t share kills either. If a kill claimed by two or more pilots couldn’t be resolved in favour of one, nobody was awarded a claim.
The Germans called it victories ✌
Well done, bravo. I learned this especially after reading "JG26" by a Texas author who met most of the Jadgeschwader pilots. Their system was the best in the world. The Germans wanted to maintain the highest integrity of claims vs. victory awards. Basically, if there was any doubt they would NOT award a victory. A lot of pilots had additional kills & probable kills that were denied, especially if their wingman did not see plane go down. Many times the wingman would get shot down and therefore no witness = no victory.
Also... during the Battle of Britain... if an Axis pilot was shot down, he was pretty much guaranteed POW status. Whereas a British pilot who successfully bailed out over Britain or in the Channel could be back at his airfield within hours.
The Germans had very little time left fir combat fuel wise... having to break off the fight quickly in order to make it back to their airfields. British pilots knew this and too advantage of it.
It was proven in the battle of Britten that German kill numbers were blown out of reality as were the brits. The re were claims of 5 times the number of Aircraft lost on a given day!
The Luftwaffe were hopelessly outnumbered from early 1944 onwards. They had far fewer planes and pilots and they had to fly many sorties daily. There was no a tour of duty and you went home. Because of the sheer weight of numbers stacked against the Luftwaffe it explains why so many of their high scoring aces were killed.
They flew until they died or became medically unfit for duty.
Yeah there was no 40 missions and you went home on easy street, german pilots flew on and on the entire war. No , your service is over now crap in germany, when the war is over your service to your country is fulfilled.
You are full of crap they were still shooting down bombers like they were fly's right up to the time the Mustang was turned loose on them!
@@mylanmiller9656 Man you are ignorant, read The blond knight of germany about Hartmann, Galland , priller, Barkhorn, Marsaille , Novotney , Rall, These 7 had more kills than all the american aces of WW2.
@@mylanmiller9656 Your response has no relevance to my comment whatsoever.
Of course the Luftwaffe, in their dwindling numbers, were attacking the bombers. That was their job. The reason they got shot out the sky is they were hopelessly outnumbered. And yes the Mustang was arguably the best fighter plane of ww2. Read Galland's book, " The First and the Last".
Several of the German pilots that flew the Me 109 , had prior combat experience in the Spanish Civil war , which ALSO gave them a fighting edge at the beginning of WW2
So did the Russians. What was their excuse for being so rubbish?
Not to mention that many Bf 109s are basically different planes built for different reasons or what not. The F model is essentially a whole new airplane in comparison to the E model, the only thing they share is an inverted V and the mid part of the tail section because even the canopy is different.
The argument vs F,G,K is a littler more difficult but the E model and at model are completely different airplanes. So based on how the german’s oddly labeled things that contributes incredibly to the high number.
If the Soviets were allotted that the Yak 1, Yak 3, Yak 7, and Yak 9 would all be considered the same plane. lol at the difference between La 5 and La 7. It begs the question why didn’t the Bf 109 F just not get the Me 209 name, and the G-K models the Me 309 name? They are essentially more different from eachother than La 5FN and La 7 are from eachother.
Same goes to the Fw 190A vs the D. There as much different as Lagg3 and La 5 are to eachother.
@@barrymccokiner7559 their leader , and the fact that he had a habit of having some of his best armament designers , Air Force included ( sometimes for wasting valuable state funds ), sent to the gulag , or worse .
@@barrymccokiner7559 they just sux
The real advantage the 109 had was, it encountered poor Quality adversary's during the start of the war in Poland & France as well as in Russia. The impressive number is the one the P51 has remember it was not used until 1943 that is 4 years into the war! Compared to the Mustang the Spitfire is lame it had a 4 year head start!
Before P51 Mustang came, P47 Thunderbolt had done lots of the work of reducing Luftwaffe's trained fighter pilot pool
Agreed. If the P47 had served this role longer, it would have likely racked up a higher count. And the P47s role as a fighter often gets overshadowed by P51.
@Lugman Hakim The P47 and P38 along with the Spitfire were on scene years before the P51B/C/D. And up thru December 1943, NONE of these fighters were able to achieve air superiority over the Luftwaffe. The increasing unsustainable losses to USAAF bombers caused the suspension of daylight bombing after the disastrous bombing campaigns of October 1943, so the Luftwaffe fighter pilot pool was obviously extremely capable, effective and deadly at the end of 1943. The P51B/C was available in large enough numbers by March 1944 to provide effective fighter cover.
The historical record is crystal clear. Through December 1943, the Luftwaffe fighters were so effective that daylight bombing was suspended after October, 1943. During the D-Day landings, June 6, 1944, the Luftwaffe was virtually invisible, and provided no threat at all. The P51B/C is the reason that Luftwaffe effectiveness went from "Extremely Deadly" to "No threat" inside of 6 months.
Erich Hartmann: "Hold my beer boys!"
Yer not wrong, but...It's important to remember a certain scandal that was ongoing in the west during the early years of the war. You see, it's not that the P-47 or the P-38's couldn't escort the bombers all the way- from beginning of the war to the end, it's that they were kept from being able to by the scandal of the proper-sized drop tanks not being made for them. The P-47's especially- the Lightnings had other problems-SHOULD have been able to go all the way to Berlin from day one. It's a crime and literally, a scandal- you can look it up. If the -47's had been able to stay with the bombers from day one it would have been a different story.
@@63DW89A little fuel, you can't hardly defend everywhere. By the end of 1944, few German targets had any serious defense showing by the LW. Some notable exceptions, sure!
FWIW, The first FULL US Raid, for the deeper part of the mission where the P-51s escorted.....Each US bomber formation had relays of EIGHT, yes EIGHT fighters.
6 March 1944. 672 Bombers, 69 losses (FLAK and Fighter)
However, I just read an online story re Maj Hayes 357th FG with 33 Mustangs arriving together. They had overshot the link-up and had turned back, arriving behind the Germans as they formed-up ahead of the bomber stream.
My Dad's Uncle was responsible for downing 35 Nazi fighter planes. Worst Luftwaffe mechanic EVER.
😅😂🤣...classic Dad joke!
The P-40 remained in production for most of the war and was #3 in production numbers. The P-40 and P-47 had great success as ground attack fighter-bombers.
And yet, this discussion is about fighters, not fighter bombers. P-40pilots were only successful when they outnumbered the enemy and had top cover. The USAAF had acquired about 600 Spitfires for that purpose, inlcuding Spit IX's in the MTO and ETO.
P40 was already obsolete in1940. It never meet the standards of the spitfire or the bf 109
@@bobsakamanos4469 Spitfires were pieces of crap when compared to the P-40. The P-40 could take more punishment plus was much simpler and faster to repair. The Soviets didn't care for the Spitfires either and used theirs to escort passenger aircraft flying in the rear.
@@billwilson-es5yn LOL, well the P-40s had to take more punishment didn't it, with it's less than stellar performance. You don't seem to realize the flaws of the Allison engine and the fact that these fighters (Spit , P-40) had the same vital points; ie fuel, oil, coolant systems, and of course pilot, so manouverability meant survival. As for the Soviets, do some homework on that, Bill. As for production numbers, that has little to do with this discussion on performance.
Thanks so much for watching guys. I did my best to use quality sources here. I can't guarantee these numbers are perfect but I think they are very good estimates! Please consider subscribing and supporting me on Patreon. www.Patreon.com/TJ3History
Welcome
No worries, your content is and always will be best
The F6F hellcat had the most kills around five thousand two hundred twenty three enemy planes down. Around two hundred seventy hellcats were lost 305 pilots reached ace status while flying the F6F. Robert Duncan was the first pilot to shoot down a zero with the new plane. Hamilton mcwhorter was the first Hellcat ace in history.
The history channel has a episode called A6M Zero vs F6F hellcat it was posted 6 months ago.
@@tyleringle268 ok what about p51
@@tyleringle268 thats a lot of info
I was actually hoping to see the P-38 on the list, it's why I clicked the video. Thank you for giving it an honorable mention rather than just leaving it out entirely! My Grandfather flew one, he flew recon oddly enough, but normally these terrifying planes had enough firepower to sink ships. There was a point where he had to fly home with one engine shot out.
My dad graduated 1st in his class P 38 photo recon.I still have some of his photos. When he got to the S.W. Pacific there were to few missions and planes so instead of waiting for a random mission he transferred to a B 25 Mitchell unit. He flew the J model with 8 50 cal machine guns in the nose .Skip bombed, staffed and one of the 1st units to use napalm. On route to 21st mission control tower broke radio silence and instructed all aircraft to dump all ordinances in the ocean and return to base , WW II was over. (P.S. At debriefing they were told about the Atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki )
Firepower? You want to see firepower. Check the Beaufighter. It was said of the Beaufighter that it had the firepower of a 6” cruiser.
Incredible graphics, beautifully presented! Congrats!
As mentioned in the video about B-17 Pilot Charlie Brown & ME 109 Ace Franz Sigler, Franz mentioned he went through a total of 17 ME109’s during his time in WWII. When the Female news anchor asked Charlie if they feared the 109, he stated “No, we respected it!”
The smoothest gun camera shooting ( most accurate ) that I’ve seen was the FW 190 against B-17s
Most of the gun camera footage I've seen that's stable involves Bf 110s shooting down B-17s
Hurricanes too
FINALLY someone gives the P-40 some love!! DEF 1 of the most underrated & underappreciated aircraft of WWII early on. It's success w/the Cactus Air Force & Flying Tigers is legendary!! 😉👍✌️
The P-40 didn't fly with the Cactus Air Force which had F4F Wildcats and some P-400s (which were a P-39 variant).
The P 40 got a bad rap early in the war because allied Pilots were using them wrong! Any body that got into a low speed turning fight with a Zero was going to lose! Once the Pilots found the weakness of the Zero they turned the table on them. even a F6F couldn't turn with a Zero at low speed.
@@mylanmiller9656 100% correct. Since the P-40 was primarily used in the earliest yrs of the war, allied forces were still assessing the type of aircraft the axis powers were deploying...part of the reason the BF-109 was so successful.
@@craigbenn8671 You're right. I meant to refer to the 'Flying Tiger's', who used P-40 Warhawk's more clandestinely in China, whereas the 'Cactus Air Force' had it's biggest operations supporting the invasion of Guadalcanal. Thx for the correction. 😉
The Cactus Air Force never had P-40s assigned to it, at all.
Without a doubt, the Me 262 was the highest scoring jet fighter of WW2
When comparing Allied aircraft to those of the German Axis, it is always forgotten that the Allied aircraft's successes also depended on having access to better fuel. Because of this, they could use engines that were superior to the German engines. Had the Germans had access to similar fuel, things would certainly have looked different.
Yes, 100 octane whilst Germans was only 87.
@@BradBrassman Not really that important. 10 000 fighters are always better then 300
@@samuelgordino not always a big deal 4000 aircraft didn't have an advantage in the battle of Britten, again 600.
No Germans had methanol injection too combat lower boost pressure
Maybe the Germans made up for it by having bigger engines displacement. And the methanol and water mix boosted there engines too be about equal.
Great job TJ, as always. Thank you.
Thank you!
What a lot of people don't realize is when there are videos like this that list planes that had the most of, or were the best at whatever, they don't realize that it doesn't mean these planes were better than planes that didn't make the list. In some cases, it's because the planes were in service longer, and /or they were produced in larger numbers. The BF-109 is the perfect example of this. It was in service for the entire war, and it was produced in larger numbers than any other WWII fighter. It certainly wasn't the best fighter of the war, but it ranks the highest in many categories simply because it was in service for so long, and it was available in such large numbers...
Correct, numbers of aircraft are critical for air superiority and especially in a war of attrition.
I think the creator addresses this point very adequately and anyone getting butthurt about this or that plane not being on the list or in the wrong position is a bit of an idiot. War is hell, just be grateful the right team (mostly) won.
I knew it would be the 109 because it was in the war long with greater numbers.
Also by mid 1944 the allied pilots were having a hard time finding a German plane still flying with fuel ,while the remaining German planes with fuel had tens of thousands of allied planes to choose from.
I still marvel at how fast engine technologies progressed by 1945.
Re. kill count inflation, I understood that the Germans had (at least in WWI) much more rigorous confirmation standards than the Allies. Was this true in WWII as well? Also, the book "Horrido! - Fighter Aces of the Luftwaffe" makes some strong points of logic for the high kill counts with regard to lengthy combat time and increased skill with lengthy survival and victories. It includes some tables that show that even the highest-scoring Luftwaffe aces took time to reach the levels that Bong (40), our highest scoring ace, and others reached--after which they "took off" in numbers, as it were. We tended to take our high-scoring pilots out of the line of battle while the Germans left theirs in--hence the high scores. Horrido! is an extraordinary book and even astonishing when describing aspects of the Eastern Front battles. It's well worth getting!
Note: P-47s had a ceiling of 42,000 ft. Even a Mustang couldn't compete with a Thunderbolt at 30,000 ft., which is what they were originally designed for. P-47s were really in their element at 25,000 ft & above.
They started making kills on the Luftwaffe when they still had the skinny-bladed props. When they got the Paddle-Bladed props, that changed everything. It was akin to putting a Posi unit under a car.
Range Capability was hampered by Hap Arnold's idea that none of his fighters should have drop tanks hanging on them. Yes, Hap was wrong on that one. The Maintenance people almost got Drop Tanks on their own.
Funny, the P-47 N was used in the Pacific to escort B-29s from Iwo to Japan & back. AND, just look at the U. S. Ace list in the E.T.O., What were most of the top 10 flying? Aaah, yes, P-47s.
The P-47 was a great plane, but it was also a lot more expensive than the P-51 on account of being a lot bigger and having an 18-cylinder engine with a turbosupercharger (as they were called at the time) that needed a lot of ducting vs the P-51's V12. In 1944, the P-51 was about $51k while the P-47 was about $85k. Of course, saving money is pointless if the cheaper option doesn't do the job well enough, but the P-51 was plenty good enough to do what it was tasked with doing. Interestingly, the jet-powered P-80 was already cheaper than the P-47 in 1945.
@@lunatickoala Мустанг последней модификации -- это самый красивый поршневой самолет, а Тандерболт -- это самая быстрая летающая бочка с винтом в истории авиации... )))
Mustang improved tremendously with installation of British Rolls Royce Merlin Engine out of the amazing Spitfire 👏 !
It should be noted much of the success of the P-51 Mustang was due to the addition of the Rolls Royce Merlin engine, also built under licence by the US as the Packard V-1650 Merlin.
The key success of P-51 was its aerodynamic design. YOu can put a Merlin in any aircraft but you won't get the preformance of a P-51.
...and the laminar flow wing which allowed for the inclusion of 2 95 gallon fuel tanks, giving it its superior range, and 4 .30 cal machine guns and two .50 cals. It really was an amazing aircraft, especially the numbers that were turning up.
Every fighter has an engine..... lmao
@@alastair9446 the allison powered mustangs underperformed. This aircraft came into its own when they decided to strap a supercharged Merlin on the nose. A legend was born
@@funkybassguy68 If you put a underpowered engine in any plane it is going to underpreform. You can put a Merlin in a Spitfire or Hurricane but they not going to fly to Berlin and back and have the same high speed. Being able to escort bombers to Berlin was the Mustangs real power. Remeber the Mustang key strength was its long range and high speed that other fighters could not match even with the same einge.
What is impressive here is your command of the language. I revisit this video from time to time to hear your description of the aircraft that dominated the skies.
And the top 100 Luftwaffe aces destroyed 15,000 allied aircraft.
Thank you so much for your honesty and disclaimers in order to properly frame this information. Perhaps it would be interesting to look at the fighters that had the highest kill counts just for the last 12 months of each conflict? That is of course be assuming that those are the most technologically advanced at the end of World War II. But also I would bet that narrowing down the information to just that would be extremely difficult.
I actually made that comment before I finished watching the video. I was very impressed at the end that you really did a great job of trying to be accurate and as complete as you could with your video. It’s really great!
The Spitfire MK V and MK IX/MK VIII are essentially different planes aswell due to not only the different engine but different wings among different improvements, the engine cowl is also very different, different propeller, etc. Not to mention the supercharger system and carburetor difference. More different than Yak 1B and Yak 9.
You could also argue this difference for the 109, 190, P-51, etc. They all went through major design changes. That's why the F6F stands out to me on this list; the most combat victories with the least amount of variants. I believe it also has the highest kill to loss ratio on this list.
@@stephennapp8241 Interesting points about the F6F.
Johnny-come-lately, mid 1943 IIRC. Superb engine and plenty of good fuel
Even variations in the Mk V Spit were tremendous. With the RR 55M, the LF Spit V could outclimb anything at 4370 fpm at its crit alt. The Spit IX was even better, over 5000 fpm depending on the fuel, alt, etc. As for range, the IX and VIII had much more internal fuel, so longer combat range.
Amazing job dude...!!!!.greetings from Lima-Perú...!!!
Thanks!
I would like to see lists for the best fighter-v-fighter kill ratio and/or the highest average kill per fighter. The former being a mono-e-mono list removing easier targets like bombers and scouts. The latter would remove the numbers produced skew. I have a feeling the ME-262 would score high on both lists although the P-51 held its own even when outclassed by the MiG-15 in Korea.
Me 262s struggled to shoot down allied fighters as soon as thd allied pilots figured out how easy it was to turn inside the 262. That's why they were used primarily against bombers. P51s shot down significantly more 262s than were shot down by 262s.
@@darrylleeroberts Mustangs were credited with 120 Me262's destroyed and the P47 with 25, and a B17 tail gunner got one and the Brits were credited with only 10, for a total of 156 of the less than 200 that ever made it to combat !!! !
The german design of the Me262 was flawed. Without speed brakes, its closing speed on its targets was far too fast and the pilot had very little time to take the shot.
Thanks for the video TJ
I don’t think the FW-190 has less kills than the P-51 Mustang, just basing it off how dominant the FW-190 was from 41’-43’.
Agreed. The Fw 190 entered service in 1941, while the P-51 only entered service in 1944. So the Fw 190 fought for far longer than the P-51. For that reason alone, logic dictates that the Fw 190 has more victories than the P-51.
Look at the production number of planes and tanks of Germany, 1944 massive increase with total war.
The mustang should,nt even be on here, the 47 broke the luftwaffe but AMERICA'S PRETTY BOY got credit. A INSULT TO ALL THE 47 PILOTS WHO FOUGHT AND DIED PROTECTING THE BOMBERS. PERHAPS IT WAS BECAUSE THE TUSKEGEE AIRMAN FLEW THEM THAT THEY WERE NOT INCLUDED.
Tim, no idea were you got the idea the P-51 entered service in 44. The P-51a/ Mustang I entered service with the USAAF & RAF in 42.
@@patm8622 try fall of 43. I never said 44.
The FW 190 was introduced on the channel front in the Summer of 1941. It wasn't introduced on the Eastern Front until 1942.
You list two different tallies for the P51 so I was wondering: was the 3800 figure minus the Pacific theater numbers? The P47s of the 56th Fighter Group of the 8th AAF actually had the total record of more kills than any other fighter group in the 8th so the P47s honorable mention was well deserved if the 5900 figure for the P51 was the total.. You didn't quote a count for the F6F so I have to assume it passed the 3700 quoted for the P47..
The P38's turbocharger gave pilots fits in the high altitude bomber escort mission in Europe but in the Pacific Pilots Major Richard Bong and Major Tom McGuire became the top two American aces in the rangy well armed fighter. So it's good that it got a mention even though they didn't..
The Ki 43 "Oscar" operated by the IJA might've had more kill claims than the A6M "Zero/Zeke" operated by the IJN although verification would be mission improbable for several reasons, one being they operated against China which probably hasn't preserved records of their losses although the British in Burma probably did. Another is that they were often mistaken as Zekes by Allied pilots. I would expect they'd make the list in any case.
I also like to say that the P51 lost it’s advantage against the FW190 after the Germans start using the same type of fuel. It made them equally. Same with the later versions of the Spitfire such as the Super Marine version.
Read Calum E. Douglas’s book ‘The Secret Horsepower Race’, in which he explains the technical reasons why this wasn’t true. Secondly, the P-51 and the 190 almost never met on equal terms.
THE BF ME 109 simply had the numbers in the air on all fronts the Luftwaffe were engaged. It was the most produced fighter in service. However as fuel and adequately trained pilots became scarce it lost its edge in the final stages of the war. The inadequate response by the Luftwaffe after D day in France is telling of the tactical decline of the Luftwaffe from 1944 to the end of the war in Europe .
Not too mention they faced an overwhelming superiority than 8-1
The FW-190 is by far the most underrated Fighter plane of WW2.
By who, no body I ever talked under rated the 190
@@mylanmiller9656 It’s kinda like the Spitfire and the Hurricane, the Hurricane did most of the heavy lifting during the Battle of Britain but the Spit got all the glory!!
Yup. It was every bit the equal to anything the U,S and British had.
@@paddy7812 just like the 47 doing all the grunt work, escort, ground support, knocking out bridges and convoys while the little proma donna shoots down a few scared to death kids and is lauded the best fighter of WW2. WHAT A CROCK OF SHIT. P47 ALL THE WAY.
@@twolak1972 Damn straight!! German hated them!!! They called the P-47 “Luft Panzer’s”!! Flying tanks! My translation might not be accurate!
Great contribution, thank you so much! An important point regarding the role of the glamorous and potent Spitfire. Those who have previously studied the Battle of Britain have most often come to the conclusion that, although the Spitfire was an integral part of the Royal Air Force's defense of Britain, it was ultimately the workhorse Hawker Hurricane that won the battle. The Hurricane fares about the same as the B-24, which was perceived to be overshadowed by the B-17 ("medium") bombers. While the B-24 was more modern and capable than the B-17, the Hurricane was not at the height of the Supermarine product as a fighter. No offense, that doesn't change the super-interesting post at all.
Agreed! Hurricane did the work and the Spitfire received a heavier share of the glory in the Battle of Britain.
@@TJ3 same for the P-47 doing most of the work beating down the cream of the LW in the West. The P-51 was largely NOT facing the "A" team. Sure some good pilots left in the LW for the Mustang but the average newer German pilot was not well trained due to constant fuel shortages. Not an apologist, but facts are facts. To test this,
Who won WW2?
Easy answer. Those who had Fuel or Access to fuel; US, USSR, and the British Empire!
@@68RatVette The historical record does not support your statement ".... the P-47 doing most of the work beating down the cream of the LW in the West. The P-51 was largely NOT facing the "A" team. .."
The P47 and P38 along with the Spitfire were on scene YEARS before the P51B/C. And up thru December 1943, NONE of these fighters were able to achieve air superiority over the Luftwaffe. The increasing unsustainable losses to USAAF bombers finally caused the suspension of daylight bombing after the disastrous bombing campaigns of September and October 1943. Obviously the Luftwaffe fighter pilot pool was EXTREMELY capable, effective and deadly up through the end of 1943.
The historical record is crystal clear. Up through October 1943, the Luftwaffe fighters were so deadly and effective against USAAF bombers that daylight bombing was suspended for the rest of 1943. However, only 6 months later, during the D-Day landings, June 6, 1944, the Luftwaffe was virtually invisible, and provided no threat at all. The P51B/C is the reason that Luftwaffe effectiveness went from "Extremely Deadly" to "No threat" inside of 6 months.
Also, because the P51B/C was not available in large enough numbers to provide effective long range escort until after February 1944, the incredible fact is that the P51B/C actually neutralized Luftwaffe effectiveness in the 3 months of March, April and May of 1944. The actual historical record proves this fact beyond any doubt.
Bernhard, I don't think one can say that the Hurricane won the BoB, although it did contribute the most victories due to being the majority fighter type in 1939-40 - the ratio being about 1.8:1 H v S in service. The Hurricane was essentially a stop gap until the Spitfire, which entered service later and could not be produced as quickly, during the that period, became the premier RAF fighter type. Without the Hurricane or the Spitfire, the Luftwaffe would have won and so it was a combined effort. The Hurricane quickly became obsolete as an interceptor, but was still in service at the end of WW2, being a very versatile aircraft and leading the way as a fighter bomber with 4 x20mm cannons and bombs or rockets. The Spitfire image did result in it being more widely recognised in the media, it's true, but then again, I suppose that race horses get more plaudits than heavy horses, even though the latter do good work - that's life ;-).
@@jamesgraham7297 Have nothing to oppose your comment and note that you share my point of view. Thank you, James.
I'm a P-51D Mustang man all the way...when you watch the videos on TH-cam of the men that flew them in WW2 they act like them things were awesome & was no joke & were very Proud to fly them...plus to me there most beautiful WW2 fighter I ever seen.
Top 5 - Bit of an apples v oranges v melons v lemons v strawberries comparison. The A/C arrived at different times, with different levels of improvements, against different opponents, in different target rich environments, in different theatres and different scenarios. An impossible comparison.
9:15. The turn radius of the Spit was vastly inferior to the Zero and the Spit suffered accordingly. Never slow speed dogfight a Zero unless you are in a Zero. If you are not in a Zero, speed and altitude are your friends.
Numbers of kills for the Me 109 are skewed because all models are considered the same A/C, whilst the Russian La and MiG models were considered different A/C.
Pilot skill and tactics vs aircraft capabilities. The later P-40 pilots claimed to successfully dogfight zeros using the yo-yo tactic, the Spit could do the same with victory depending on the speed of manouvering. Yes comparing apples to trucks methinks.
Well said.
I must give you a tip of the hat for the 109 it was the longest serving fighter of that time. From the spanish civil war to the end of WW2 .
The 109 was in service for a long time, the First and last were so different they were totally a different aircraft! the changes made to gain speed killed the maneuverability, Just like what happened to the Spit!
I know it's probably not on the list but the F4U Corsair was easily one of the top 5 fighter planes of the war. Whistling Death....
We are not talking about favorite planes but about effective fighters!
@@oswaldoramosferrusola5235 Corsair .....11:1 kill ratio, during WW2 , was used in the Korean war, (and shot down a Mig 15) First Indochina War, Suez Crisis, Algerian War, and the final action it saw was in 1969's"Football War"
F4u was in active military service from 1942 to 1979 (USA retired it in 1953) seemed to be effective enough for the US to keep it in a fighter role up to 1953....well after the Mustang, Hellcat, Thunderbolt and P38(my all time favorite, next to the ME262) were retired
The Corsair is generally credited with around 2100 kills for American pilots. It was also used by other countries but at that stage of the war, their adversaries were depleted.
@@oswaldoramosferrusola5235 Literally what Rick Gehring said. Had it been rolled out into service in large numbers earlier in the war I have no doubt it would have eclipsed several of the planes on this list as far as kill/death ratio and total kills.
@@danzervos7606 Yeah like I said to the other guy if they would have started using them in mas earlier in the war it's numbers would have been significantly higher.
Thanks, I'm still a zero and thunderbolt fan. Good vid.
If you were to count all the Russian Yak variant (Yak-1, 3, 7, 9) kills, which is really not that much different from Spitfire variants (Mk, I, II, V, IX, XIV, etc.) or Bf-109 variants (E, F, G, K), I wonder if the Yak would make the list - since most of the German/European war took place on the Eastern front?
It would certainly be the most produced fighter
It seems that the fact that the 109 was also in the Spanish civil war scoring kills was forgotten
It would have, definitely. La5s/La7s maybe would have too
Difference is those are different planes not different models of the same plane
@@Bread-zv7ky I think that is highly debatable. It can be argued that the Soviets/Russians just used a different 'variant naming convention' than other WWII participants. As a further example of this, take the Lavochkin 5 and 7 (La-5 and La-7), These are clearly variants of the same fighter - NOT new models altogether.
Could I suggest a kill to loss ratio, or a kills per plane in service ratio as a better metric to analyse?
Love your videos btw, esp the use of war thunder for the visuals, you pick interesting stories and tell them we'll, keep it up!
One of the reasons for the BF 109's kill count was that for the first couple years of the war the Russian front was the Russian version of the "Great Marianas Turkey Shoot." With Russian pilots who barely knew how to take off and land flying inferior aircraft being thrown wholesale into the meat grinder.
And how about in Poland were the 109 was beating up on Bi planes or in France were they would rather run than fight!
@@mylanmiller9656 as I put somewhere else the 109 was also in the Spanish civil war
The Finnish Air force also took out a lot of russians with their inferior Brewsters and Gladiators
That's a true statement, and I was a bit shocked to learn from the books "The German Aces Speak I & II" that most russian fighters didn't even have gunsights, but a cross taped onto the windshield. Sometimes they stole American gunsights from scrapped Lend-Lease a/c. Another factor was the Russian AF organization. German pilots knew that if they took out the leader the rest were just simple prey and fleeing and disorganized. It truly was a "turkey shoot" as you said. It was so ridiculous that "the fat one" questioned the honesty of his pilots. Eric Hartman described how he followed a Russian plane back to his home base and found a very happy hunting ground that he kept secret to himself. His fellow flyers were wondering WTF he was doing to get so many kills. He had found a Russian airbase in a particular area that offered tons of easy kills for him! He eventually spilled the beans and let his fellow pilots join in on the fun.
The "Red Banner" Russian pilots were VERY good, but the rest were rather simple-minded and disorganized. Yes, it was a "Marianas Turkey Shoot" scenario, like you pointed out - as different from the Western Front as night and day.
In other words the germans are excellent.they got the top most spot.
For the BF-109 you can also add the kills from the Spanish Civil War if you want to make an overall tally.
The ME109 shot down the most airplanes in WW-2. German Major Eric Hartman alone shot down more planes than all the allies aces in the European theater.
@yo yo over 33.000 Me109s were built itvwas the most produced fighter in history.
@yo yo Ya well the Russians under the USSR make lots of claims. I just looked at official US military recorded compiled for the official records for WW-2. It says the Me109 was the most produced fighter of WW-2 with over 33.000 manufacturers during its production. Spain built them Into the 1970s and that number isn't even counted. Go read a book.
JG 52 will remain a legend, in all times. Even considering the overclaiming their score is to damn high.
I enjoyed the picture of "Bubi" Hartmman.
Great content!
The 109 also had far more targets to shoot down than allied aircraft with tens of thousands of UASF and RAF bombers descending on Germany day and night.
This is a very important statistical fact that seems to get omitted whenever these so called 'lists' get compiled. In so doing actual comparison gets 'skewered' .
The Germans always fought against a superior number. However, your description refers to the final phase of the war. When the Allied terrorist bombers attacked with up to 2,000 aircraft. The Germans usually only took off a handful of pilots because there were simply not enough left. Up to a hundred pilots pounced on every German pilot. These operations were pure suicide squads. But they knew that every bomber shot down saved the lives of perhaps hundreds of civilians. For this reason, the Luftwaffe never had any problems finding volunteers for these hopeless missions. The top aces of the Germans mostly survived only because of their great experience in hundreds of dogfights and because they had the better planes. Most experts flew the Me 262 at the end of the war.
Something else it should be noted is that the bf-109 kill count includes bombers especially unescorted bombers. The Mustang in particular fought Fighters primarily.
ME 109 you can use either or but BF sounds stupid. I know it stands for the maker but it’s a Messerschmitt.
@@juliusdream2683 my point is still valid the Messerschmitt 109 primarily shot down unescorted bombers. With equal Pilots one-on-one against the Mustang the Messerschmitt 109 loses.
@@markjordan348 The vast majority of Bf 109 kills were single-engined fighters and attack planes (IL-2) on the Eastern front. Late war 109s were the equal of the P-51, the K-4 probably even superior. The P-51 could out-dive the 109,but the latter could out-climb the US fighter. One on one, it mainly came down to the pilot, and here the americans had the overall edge from mid-44, as lack of fuel severely hampered Luftwaffe training.
not surprised about the 109==not only did it serve during the entire war but it's earlier models also saw combat in the Spanish Civil War==a real 'first to last' weapon like the Spitfire.
There weren't many parts interchangeable between the first and last BF109s. The Soviets had the opposite approach where comparatively minor alterations led to new model designations.
Most informative , very close to accurate and thank you-brilliant video!
Thank you.
Being an amateur aviation historian with much research into WW2 I would amend this list to the following approximate numbers. 1.Bf109 25,000 to 30,000. 2. FW190 15,OOO to 20,000. 3. Lavochkin LaGG-3, La5 and La-7 series 10,000 to 15,000. Yak 1, Yak 3, Yak 7 and Yak 9 series 10,000 to 15,000. 4. Spitfire 6,000 to 9,000. 5. P-51 5,000 to 6,000. However, several other contenders in the 5,000 to 6,000 range would include the F6f Hellcat, Ki43 Hayabusa, Zero, and unexpectedly the P-39 which some reports indicate had great low level success on the Eastern Front. Soviets scored many more victories in the P-39 than US pilots because they flew many more sorties at low level where it excelled.
Also surprisingly some evidence shows the Ki43 Hayabusa (JAAF equivalent to the Zero) had more kills than the Zero, many in southeast Asia.
I'm puzzled why the Lavochkin and Yakovlev fighters were left off the list. No question they scored more kills than the Mustang or Hellcat.
Thanks for the insight. I actually had quite a bit of trouble finding insight on soviet fighters.
I wouldn't believe much of the Soviet claims, especially of the P-39.
Air Superiority relies on many, many factors, some of which the author of this vid acknowleges at the beginning. Good job.
#1 factor: whether you can outnumber your enemy. As Stalin said, "quantity has a quality of its own; and can you feed the battle of attrition (sadly) better than the enemy.
Other factors: Command & Control / radar / intel, strategies, tactics, leadership, environmental conditions, battle space target rich or not, pilot individual training, Squadron/Wing training (teamwork), supply chain, engineering/maintenance & mods/ tech development (eg gunsights, engine mods, etc), access to strategic materials/metals/oil, etc.
Now consider all that and also apply it to the enemy forces.
Hey man I think the Fw 190 kill count is far off and there is no way the Spitfire got more kills than the Fw 190 which fought against the Soviets, British and American Fighter and bombers. I hope you can correct and show how underrated the Fw 190 really is.
The 190 kill count was the most difficult to find. I think it could be higher than 8k or 10k potentially, but any higher than that is a stretch considering only 15-21k were built (depending on which model you refer to).
@@TJ3 Yes but JG54 alone claimed around 5.000 kills flying the 190 (out of their ~9.600) so even assuming it's inflated I think that the 190 probably surpassed the 10.000 kill mark. It's the plane with the most kills in a day (18) and in a mission (13) too, due to its splendid armament and ammo reserve.
Hey TJ3, you forgot to take a look at the kill totals for the Wildcat, and the Corsair, along with the P-39/P-63 fighters, as well.
If you took timing, logistics, quantity and quality control issues out of the equation in a hypothetical scenario I would bet the HE-162 would have been a massive success.
🤣
the ME262 was another one if Hitler didn't demand it be redesigned as a fighter bomber , it would of entered in late 42 instead of early-mid 44...would of made a major impact on the war.....I don't think it would of changed the final out come...might prolonged the European war to early 46, maybe late Dec-45 either way once the American war machine hit it's production stride it became a war of who had more toys to play with.
@@rickgehring7507 That story that Hitler delayed the entry of the Me-262 is mostly incorrect. What delayed the deployment of the jet was the delay in producing a reliable engine using the non-strategic metals the Germans had available. Even then a Jumo lasted only about 20 hours in service. Hitler was desperate to get a fighter that could get through to attack the coming invasion fleet where the Allies controlled the airspace. The jet appeared to offer the solution - but they just could not get the engines ready in time. Hanging bombs on the jet was trivial, didn't delay the deployment of jet fighters and at worst added a delay of a month. Messerschmidt always intended to make the jet into a fighter bomber. This story of Hitler's meddling comes from Galland's book where he kind of excuses the Luftwaffe loss.
@@danzervos7606 Thanks for writing that for me. The reason I picked the HE-162 was due to its size, inherent instability (noted as a huge asset by experienced pilots from the allied men who flew it), simplicity and armament. The 2x20mm cannons in a plane that size with its performance would have been devastating.
@@danzervos7606 EXACTLY Dan! Some myths never die!
There needs to be an honourable mention for the Yak 3 and Yak 9. They were a lot better than most people realise.
I can't believe Germany lost WW2, they were so far ahead of the game.
Yeah they just made far too many strategic blunders. They were certainly in a great spot at the beginning. Their leaders were just too dumb oftentimes.
@@TJ3 Their leaders weren't dumb, just overwhelmed by massive material and manpower.
Well, that's the problem when you got to war with all the super power in the world at the same time just after conquering europe.
IF germany had saw the massive advantage the Me 262 gave them early on and had the perfected version on the hands of it's great aces when the 8th only had 4 bomber groups flying daylight raids its possible Germany would have knocked the U.S air force out of europe. Imagine if you will the schwienfurt/regandsburg raids facing 300 262,s Instead of 109,s and 190 focke wulfs.With no escort instead of the 60 bombers lost it would have been 200 .The 4 30mm cannons in the 262,s nose were capable of downing a heavy bomber with one accurate burst.
Germany lost the war when they couldn't finish off Britten, From there on they forced them self's to Fight 3 fronts. This was there biggest reason for defeat. They needed to finish one war before they started a second and a third!
Enjoyed your video so I gave it a Thumbs Up as a support
I'm surprised that the mustang made the list due to its late arrival.
I also would have guessed the hurricane had more victories then the spitfirers due to their targets ( bombers v fighters)
when Curtis LeMay commanded the USAAF 6th Air Force , the Mustang was unleashed on the Luftwaffe , rather than just escorting the bombers , which ( added to its superior range over the P 47 Thunderbolt , vastly added to its kill numbers
Because its US bullshit , germany didn't have the numbers to get these miraculous kill counts late in the war
The Hurricane had more aerial victories than the Spitfire in the Battle of Britain in 1940. But after the Battle of Britain, the Spitfire gradually became the primary RAF fighter, while the Hurricane was increasingly relegated to the fighter bomber role. So over the course of the entire war, the Spitfire had far more aerial victories than the Hurricane.
The germans seem to have pumped out a lot aircarft in 1944 with total war. My guess pilots rushed into planes with no experience flying up to bombers where the Mustangs waited for them having a height and speed advantage. The Bf-109 focused on the bombers and Mustangs just line up from behind.
@@dovidell First it's the 8 air force and 2 the P47 had the same range then P51. It's just easier to build P51 and more planes are always better.
It is also historically noted the the Hurricane shot down more enemy planes than the spitfire in the battle of britain.
Not surprising really, the RAF had about twice as many Hurricanes as Spitfires during the battle and they were much faster to build.
The Vought F4U Corsair didn't even get an honorable mention? Really?🤔🤨
Good call! It probably deserved one.
there was a study recently done between the performance of the F4U Corsair against that of the P 51-D Mustang , and the Corsair came out on top !!
@@dovidell The germans captured and tested a FAA Corsair and told their pilots to avoid at all costs after testing against 109 and 190.The Brits used them for top cover and suffered no losses as no Germans came up to fight.
@@dovidell The Corsair actually shot down a Mustang back in 1969😱! It was the “Football Wars” in Central America between I think it was El Salvador and Honduras!
😊@@TJ3
Considering that the JG squads were based very close to the combat zones and could possibly make several sorties a day in a sky dense with enemies. Add that to the experienced pilots and it’s easy to believe the higher number of kills.
I believe I've read that more German fighters were lost in combat with Russians on the eastern front, than in any other theatre and Russia is the Luftwaffes greatest graveyard. As such I am surprised no Russian model even got an honorable mention. Yak 3? La-5?
I don't really believe that, bombers preharps, but not fighters. 1941-1942 we all know what happened in the skies over Russia, 109s vs I-16, Lagg-3, P-39 etc, the Jagdwaffe barely took losses. In first half of 1943 most of the Jagdwaffe was grounded to save fuel for Operation Citadel. In the early stages of Kursk Jagdwaffe had the upper hand until they ran out of fuel again. Then by late Summer most of the jagdwaffe was transfered to the West, leaving only JG 52 in the East. From mid 43 to mid 44 we know much of the Jagdwaffe was destroyed in the defense of the Reich, and from mid 44 onwards it was a slaughter in the skies on the Western Front. It would only make sense to conclude more German fighters were lost in combat on the Western front since more Jagdwaffe units was deployed there from mid 1943 onwards.
На восточный фронт пришлось примерно четверть всех самолето-вылетов Люфтваффе в 1941-45 годах. Возможно, что в первой половине 1943 года ВВС Германии перебросили больше сил против СССР, но после начала массированных налетов "Летающих крепостей" на территорию Третьего Рейха большую часть истребителей пришлось вернуть на Запад.
Что касается оценки результативности истребителей, то есть только два точных и объективных показателя: количество побед деленное на количество боевых вылетов и еще раз деленное на количество боевых потерь конкретного самолета.
По этому показателю один из лучших истребителей союзников -- P-39 Аэрокобра, но только под управлением советских пилотов, западные на нем летать не любили (для них он был слишком сложным -- "валким" и трудно выводимым из штопора).
Great video. I loved it.
The Spitfire also serverd also until the end of the war.
And since 1943,the americans were sending, their airplanes in bulk to Europe, and the difference in numbers were abysmal, makes the role of the bf 109 and fw 190,even more remarkable.
PS : and If the fw 190 insted , of took severel rolls in The war, and put him only, as an intercepter fighter, his tally would be much superior, than most allied fighters., because He was far superior than the bf 109.
PS : And in mine opinion the Fw 190 was the Best piston fighter of the war. My opinion.
One ex, in Dieppe the first time the FW 190 was deploy, the Spitfires Just run for their lifes, how superior the FW 190 was.
They just upgraded the Spitfire to deal with the FW190. No use upgrading till you have seen the opposition you are up against. I'm sure the FW190s were upgraded when they dealt with the new Spitfires.
@@jelkel25 the FW 190 had 7 diferent variantes, operating at any Time.
Fighter, close support, bomber, air recon, photo recon, etc
Thats how versetable and sucecfull the FW 190 was.
Actually, the best fighter of the war is the P-51 Mustang, because of it's long range, speed,and maneuverabilty.
@@johnosbourn4312 its your opinion. To me its the FW 190.
Once the Spitfire Mk IX, (and later VIII, XIV) arrived, the FW190 was outclassed in many regards. Still it had the best roll rate and was easier to fly than the 109. .
Key factor here is length of service, numbers produced and theatres served in. Eastern front probably was key advantage of Bf 109 over the Spit. Worth remembering Spit was also best PR aircraft of the war and was still competitive at end of the war unlike the later Bf 109 which were overpowered for the smaller airframe wrecking the handling - so Spit could be further developed. Spit XIV was actually superior to P51D in all aspects except range which was pretty remarkable for an airframe at least 5 years older.
Well said, the contention that the 109 was still a top fighter flies in the face of reality which was that the likes of the Spitfire XIV and Tempest were markedly superior.
@@patm8622 absolutely Winkle Brown when he tested a late 109G stated “ He was not impressed” he much preferred the 190 albeit until the later D-9 onwards it lacked high altitude performance hence the 109 being kept in production particularly for USAF bomber stream intercepts as the in,y alternative till the 262.
The Luftwaffe counted aircraft destroyed on the ground as a 'kill', so ascertaining the most successful is complicated. I have also read that the Corsair shot down over 5,000 aircraft while only losing 189 to enemy action, so should that not put it ahead of the Hellcat?
No the Corsair pilots in WW2 claimed 2,140 victories, not 5,000. It was definitely an excellent fighter but didn't see combat until February 1943. It probably would have achieved many more victories if they had solved the cockpit visibility and bouncy landing on carriers issue earlier. Look up F4U Corsair on wikipedea, it has a good summary of its operational history.
When it comes to Spitfires I expect they occupy a niche all of their own since the earl B.O.B Mks up to the Mk 9 which Johnnie Johnson said was his favourite, up to the late war XIV's with the Griffon engine.
Power to weight ratio is the most important factor in dogfighting. The 109 had the best power to weight ratio throughout the war. The spitfire was a close second. The reason is because of the landing gear, both the spitfire and the 109 had the hinge points in the fuselage, the smartest place to them.
The Thunderbolt weight almost twice as much but was faster then the 109 in leave flight.
Two reason it had 2,200 hp and a 4 bladed prop with a 10 ft diameter.
@@Crashed131963 The P-47M had 2,800 hp, the most of any fighter
@@shawns0762 That came in very late in lower numbers.
I read a book called "Luftwaffe Fighter Aces"
By Mike Spike.
It tells the story from German pilot in a 109G trying to lose a Thunderbolt in a vertical climb and his 109 stalled in the climb and the p-47 over shot him in the 90 vertical climb chase.
Biggest thing to note here is that shooting down a clumsy, giant, lumbering bomber, dive bomber, scout plane, or transport/cargo/utility plane counted equally as an aerial victory as downing an enemy fighter in a dogfight.
As such, the Bf 109 was not only used throughout the duration of the war, it was used in every single fighter combat mission role. It was used in escort missions for light, medium, and heavy bombers, it was used in scouting, patrols, and defensive bomber interceptions.
This included downing huge numbers of bomber squadrons that went without fighter escort for Russia and the US in disastrous daytime bombing campaigns.
Compare to the Spitfire for example, which was primarily a dedicated defensive fighter interceptor. During the Battle of Berlin, the Spitfires would hunt down and draw away enemy fighter planes (therefore, dogfighting other enemy fighters), while the Hurricanes were used to intercept and attack German bombers. While the Hurricanes did dogfight and Spitfire shot down bombers, it wasn't their primary goal to do so.
Well done!
I once sat in a Spanish-version of the Bf-109,{--Merlin engine} and I couldn't believe how TIGHT the cockpit sides were! And to look through the bullet-proof windscreen, was like looking through a space the size of a post-card! The BF-109 airframe was built after the war, in Czechloslovakia, where the Czechs used Junkers Jumo bomber engines to power it, which was called the Avia Av-199. The IDF had its 1st air victory over an Egyptian Spitfire, with an Avia 199.
They the reason for the tight cockpit as far as I remember was to stop pilots from getting bounced around when doing acrobatic maneuvers I can't remember what the reasoning behind the small windshield was
A better research of a top 5 pick would be a fighter at its peak development . A comparison in a fighter planes capability in speed , maneuverability and fire power.
I know you probably most likely already have this in mind, but how about a top strike aircraft or top bombers?
Thank you for your amazing content!
Well presented, and accurate in my opinion!
Thanks!
Pre video I would say the spitfire as it fought damn near the whole war with varying versions.
109 huh? I can see that.
It helps for this list if a nation mainly uses one aircraft and keeps modifying that same airframe instead of having many different planes.
Now do one of what planes got shot down the most.
Seems like the Corsair should have made the honorable mention group.
Great video!
What they fought against, and how long they had been fighting or were in service, are huge factors.
The 109's insane kill count is due almost exclusively to the vastly technologically inferior opponents on the eastern front.
ED cure: High quality picture of P-51D Mustang at altitude.
Me : Clicks on WW2 fighter planes video
TJ : hey do you have ED
Quite amazing the ME-BF 109 Gets the most kills. Great aircraft. One of the best flat out fighters.I thought P-51D would have a high count. But it did come along later than other Allied aircraft. Or the Corsair. I thought they had been a great interceptor,fighter.
The F4U came around the same time as the Hellcat, but was rejected for carrier based ops until after the war, this reduced the number actively involved to much to get the kill count for this list.
I think that the sheer number of types has a lot to do with the kill counts. Germany didn't produce that many different types. They just produced a boat load of a couple of types.
Was afraid that you'd miss the hellcat, thx lol😂😜😜
If I hadn't done my research, I probably would have. I didn't expect it to be top 5.
Biggest reason for the Bf109's incredible total kill number was that early/mid of the war their primary targets were allied bombers flying daylight formation. Without long range fighter escort they were sitting ducks.
One thing I will say about each new aircraft introduction was because of unacceptable losses by either side.
Erich Hartmann, 352 kills....
Some sources even say the Fw 190 made 10.000 kills, but the Fighting in the Air was so chaotic, that not every plane was counted, some were counted twice and sometimes a Pilot believed he shot down a plane, but it just sank 1000 feet.
Only in the Battle of Kursk Salient probably 500-1000 planes were downed by the Fw 190
Where's the Yak on this list? It doesn't even get a mention.
The FW 190 was a great fighter, but a lot of those kills were against Allied bombers, before the escort planes were able to escort them all the way to the target. Same for the ME Bf109. Good plane, but many kills against unescorted bombers and early bombers with fewer turrets at that. The Spitfire also got a lot of kills against bombers during the Battle of Britain. The Mustang was arguably the best anti-fighter propeller plane built. And the Me 262 was the most deadly fighter of the war beyond any doubt.
The registration plate on my motorbike is BF109
I think a lot of it had to do with the skill of the pilot. We had great fighters very fast ones P 51 mustang’s over 437 miles per hour, but the spitfire was a great plains, so was the Messerschmidt. I enjoyed your video very much. You have a great channel. I watch a lot of it appreciate your videos. Thanks so much.😀😆👍🏼👍🏼
The top 10 highest scoring p-47 pilots survive the war. No other us fighter plane had this distinction.
Very interesting!
If you have a lot of slow moving targets to shoot at, your numbers will be higher. Thousand and thousands of B17 and B24 bombers were shot down over several years of daylight bombing raids. It is easy to have the highest tally if you have the highest number of target opportunities. The BF-109 got for no other particular reason than it had a lot of slow flying bombers as targets.
Not to poke holes, but the P51 B carried 4 wing mounted .50 caliber MG's. The P51 D mounted six. I forget which version originally mounted six, I know the A36 Apache, had 6, 4 wing mounted and two beneath the engine if memory serves. I think they were mixed .30 and .50. Otherwise a great video!
Personally I think the Defiant and Typhoon should of had a mention.... What those two, and the Hurricane contributed during the Battle of Britain and beyond was what many today owe their freedom too.... Thankfully the brave RAF pilots and (gunners) fought with such courage and grit and put a stop to Operation Sealion...