Fighters from the Second World War. The best fighters of the Second World War

12.02.2019

Start:

The German fighter Messerschmitt Bf 109 was created around the same time
like the Spitfire. Like the English aircraft, the Bf 109 became one of the most successful examples of a combat vehicle during the war and was big way evolution: it was equipped with more and more powerful engines, improved aerodynamics, operational and flight characteristics. In terms of aerodynamics, the biggest changes last time were carried out in 1941, when the Bf 109F appeared. Further improvement of flight data was achieved mainly through the installation of new engines. Externally, the latest modifications of this fighter - the Bf 109G-10 and K-4 - differed little from the much earlier Bf 109F, although they had a number of aerodynamic improvements.

This aircraft was the best representative of the light and maneuverable combat vehicle of Hitler's Luftwaffe. Throughout almost the entire Second World War, Messerschmitt Bf 109 fighters were among the best examples of aircraft in their class, and only towards the end of the war did they begin to lose their position. It turned out to be impossible to combine the qualities inherent in the best Western fighters, designed for relatively high combat altitudes, with the qualities inherent in the best Soviet “medium-altitude” fighters.

Like their English colleagues, the designers of the Bf 109 tried to combine a high maximum speed with good maneuverability and takeoff and landing qualities. But they solved this problem in a completely different way: unlike the Spitfire, the Bf 109 had a large specific wing load, which made it possible to achieve high speed, and to improve maneuverability they used not only well-known slats, but also flaps, which right moment the battle could be deviated by the pilot at a small angle. The use of controlled flaps was new and original solution. To improve takeoff and landing characteristics, in addition to automatic slats and controlled flaps, hovering ailerons were used, which worked as additional sections of flaps; A controlled stabilizer was also used. In short, the Bf 109 had a unique system of direct lift control, largely characteristic of modern aircraft with their inherent automation. However, in practice, many of the designers' decisions did not take root. Due to the complexity, it was necessary to abandon the controlled stabilizer, hovering ailerons, and flap release system in combat. As a result, in terms of its maneuverability, the Bf 109 was not very different from other fighters, both Soviet and American, although it was inferior to the best domestic aircraft. The takeoff and landing characteristics turned out to be similar.

Aircraft manufacturing experience shows that gradual improvement combat aircraft almost always accompanied by an increase in his weight. This is due to the installation of more powerful and therefore heavier engines, an increase in fuel reserves, an increase in the power of weapons, the necessary structural reinforcements and other related measures. Eventually there comes a time when the reserves of a given design are exhausted. One of the limitations is the specific wing load. This, of course, is not the only parameter, but one of the most important and common to all aircraft. Thus, as Spitfire fighters were modified from variant 1A to XIV and Bf 109 from B-2 to G-10 and K-4, their specific wing load increased by about a third! Already the Bf 109G-2 (1942) had 185 kg/m2, while the Spitfire IX, which was also released in 1942, had about 150 kg/m2. For the Bf 109G-2, this wing load was close to the limit. With its further growth, the flight, maneuverability and takeoff and landing characteristics of the aircraft sharply deteriorated, despite the very effective mechanization of the wing (slats and flaps).

Since 1942, German designers have been improving their best air combat fighter under very strict weight restrictions, which greatly limited the possibilities for qualitative improvement of the aircraft. But the creators of the Spitfire still had sufficient reserves and continued to increase the power of the installed engines and strengthen the weapons, without particularly taking into account the increase in weight.

The quality of their mass production has a great influence on the aerodynamic properties of aircraft. Careless manufacturing can negate all the efforts of designers and scientists. This doesn't happen very rarely. Judging by captured documents, in Germany, conducting a comparative study of the aerodynamics of German, American and British fighters at the end of the war, they came to the conclusion that the Bf 109G had worst quality production performance, and, in particular, for this reason its aerodynamics turned out to be the worst, which with high probability can be extended to the Bf 109K-4.

From the above it is clear that in terms of technical concept creation and aerodynamic features of the layout, each of the compared aircraft is completely original. But they also have a lot common features: well-streamlined shapes, careful engine bonneting, well-developed local aerodynamics and aerodynamics of cooling devices.

As for the design, Soviet fighters were much simpler and cheaper to produce than British, German and, especially, American aircraft. Scarce materials were used in very limited quantities. Thanks to this, the USSR managed to ensure a high rate of aircraft production in conditions of severe material restrictions and a lack of qualified personnel. work force. It must be said that our country finds itself in the most difficult situation. From 1941 to 1944 inclusively, a significant part of the industrial zone, where many metallurgical enterprises were located, was occupied by the Nazis. Some factories were evacuated inland and production was set up in new locations. But a significant part of the production potential was still irretrievably lost. In addition, a large number of skilled workers and specialists went to the front. They were replaced at the machines by women and children who could not work at the appropriate level. And yet, the aircraft industry of the USSR, although not immediately, was able to meet the needs of the front for aircraft.

Unlike all-metal Western fighters, Soviet cars wood was widely used. However, metal was used in many of the power elements, which actually determined the weight of the structure. That is why, in terms of weight perfection, the Yak-3 and La-7 were practically no different from foreign fighters.

In terms of technological sophistication, ease of access to individual units and ease of maintenance in general, the Bf 109 and Mustang looked somewhat preferable. However, Spitfires and Soviet fighters were also well adapted to combat conditions. But in terms of such very important characteristics as the quality of equipment and the level of automation, the Yak-3 and La-7 were inferior to Western fighters, the best of which in terms of degree of automation were german planes(not only Bf 109, but also others).

The most important indicator of an aircraft’s high flight performance and its combat effectiveness as a whole is the power plant. It is in aircraft engine building that the latest achievements in the field of technology, materials, control systems and automation are primarily implemented. Engine building is one of the most knowledge-intensive branches of the aircraft industry. Compared to an airplane, the process of creating and fine-tuning new engines takes much longer and requires more effort.

During the Second World War, England occupied a leading position in aircraft engine building. It was the Rolls-Royce engines that equipped the Spitfires and best options"Mustangs" (P-51B, C and D). It can be said without exaggeration that it was the installation of the English Merlin engine, which was produced in the USA under license by Packard, that made it possible to realize the great capabilities of the Mustang and brought it into the category of elite fighters. Before this, the P-51, although original, was a rather mediocre aircraft in terms of combat capabilities.

A feature of English engines, which largely determined their excellent characteristics, was the use of high-grade gasoline, the nominal octane number of which reached 100-150. This made it possible to apply a greater degree of air pressurization (more precisely, the working mixture) into the cylinders and thereby obtain greater power. The USSR and Germany could not meet the aviation needs for such high-quality and expensive fuel. Typically, gasoline with an octane rating of 87-100 was used.

A characteristic feature that united all the engines that were installed on the compared fighters was the use of two-speed drive centrifugal superchargers (MCP), providing the required altitude. But the difference between Rolls-Royce engines was that their superchargers had not one, as usual, but two successive compression stages, and even with intermediate cooling of the working mixture in a special radiator. Despite the complexity of such systems, their use turned out to be completely justified for high-altitude motors, since it significantly reduced the loss of power spent by the motor on pumping. This was a very important factor.

The original was the injection system of the DB-605 engines, driven through a turbo coupling, which, under automatic control, smoothly adjusted the gear ratio from the engine to the supercharger impeller. Unlike the two-speed drive superchargers found on Soviet and British engines, the turbo coupling made it possible to reduce the drop in power that occurred between pumping speeds.

An important advantage of German engines (DB-605 and others) was the use of direct fuel injection into the cylinders. Compared to a conventional carburetor system, this increased the reliability and efficiency of the power plant. Of the other engines, only the Soviet ASh-82FN, which was installed on the La-7, had a similar direct injection system.

A significant factor in increasing the flight performance of the Mustang and Spitfire was that their engines had relatively short-term operating modes at high power. In combat, the pilots of these fighters could for some time use, in addition to the long-term, that is, nominal, either combat (5-15 minutes), or in emergency cases, emergency (1-5 minutes) modes. Combat, or, as it was also called, military mode, became the main mode for engine operation in air combat. The engines of Soviet fighters did not have high-power modes at altitude, which limited the possibility of further improving their flight characteristics.

Most versions of the Mustangs and Spitfires were designed for high combat altitudes, characteristic of aviation operations in the West. Therefore, their engines had sufficient altitude. German engine builders were forced to solve a complex technical problem. Given the relatively high design altitude of the engine required for air combat in the West, it was important to provide the necessary power at low and medium altitudes required for combat operations in the East. As is known, a simple increase in altitude usually leads to increasing power losses at low altitudes. Therefore, the designers showed a lot of ingenuity and used a number of extraordinary technical solutions In terms of its height, the DB-605 motor occupied an intermediate position between English and Soviet motors. To increase power at altitudes below the design one, the injection of a water-alcohol mixture (MW-50 system) was used, which made it possible, despite the relatively low octane number of the fuel, to significantly increase the boost, and, consequently, the power without causing detonation. The result was a kind of maximum mode, which, like the emergency mode, could usually be used for up to three minutes.

At altitudes above the calculated one, the injection of nitrous oxide (GM-1 system) could be used, which, being a powerful oxidizer, seemed to compensate for the lack of oxygen in a rarefied atmosphere and made it possible to temporarily increase the altitude of the engine and bring its characteristics closer to those of Rolls engines. Royce. True, these systems increased the weight of the aircraft (by 60-120 kg) and significantly complicated the power plant and its operation. For these reasons, they were used separately and were not used on all Bf 109G and K.

A fighter's weaponry has a significant impact on its combat effectiveness. The aircraft in question differed greatly in the composition and arrangement of weapons. If the Soviet Yak-3 and La-7 and the German Bf 109G and K had a central location of weapons (cannons and machine guns in the forward part of the fuselage), then the Spitfires and Mustangs had them located in the wing outside the area swept by the propeller. In addition, the Mustang had only large-caliber machine gun armament, while other fighters also had cannons, and the La-7 and Bf 109K-4 had only cannon armament. In the Western Theater of Operations, the P-51D was intended primarily to combat enemy fighters. For this purpose, the power of his six machine guns turned out to be quite sufficient. Unlike the Mustang, the British Spitfires and the Soviet Yak-3 and La-7 fought against aircraft of any purpose, including bombers, which naturally required more powerful weapons.

Comparing the wing and central weapons installations, it is difficult to answer which of these schemes was the most effective. But still, Soviet front-line pilots and aviation specialists, like the German ones, preferred the central one, which ensured the greatest accuracy of fire. This arrangement turns out to be more advantageous when an enemy aircraft is attacked from extremely short distances. And this is exactly how they usually tried to act on Eastern Front Soviet and German pilots. In the West air battles were carried out mainly on high altitude, where the maneuverability of fighters deteriorated significantly. Getting close to the enemy became much more difficult, and with bombers it was also very dangerous, since the fighter’s sluggish maneuver made it difficult to evade the fire of air gunners. For this reason, they opened fire from a long distance and the wing-mounted weapon, designed for a given range of destruction, turned out to be quite comparable to the central one. In addition, the rate of fire of weapons with a wing configuration was higher than that of weapons synchronized for firing through a propeller (cannons on the La-7, machine guns on the Yak-3 and Bf 109G), the weapons were close to the center of gravity and ammunition consumption had virtually no effect on their position. But one drawback was still organically inherent in the wing design - an increased moment of inertia relative to the longitudinal axis of the aircraft, which caused the fighter's roll response to the pilot's actions to deteriorate.

Among the many criteria that determined the combat effectiveness of an aircraft, the most important for a fighter was the combination of its flight data. Of course, they are important not on their own, but in combination with a number of other quantitative and qualitative indicators, such as stability, flight properties, ease of operation, visibility, etc. For some classes of aircraft, training, for example, these indicators are of paramount importance. But for combat vehicles of the last war, it was the flight characteristics and weapons that were decisive, representing the main technical components of the combat effectiveness of fighters and bombers. Therefore, the designers sought first of all to achieve priority in flight data, or rather in those of them that played a primary role.

It is worth clarifying that the words “flight data” mean a whole range of important indicators, the main of which for fighters were maximum speed, rate of climb, range or time of sortie, maneuverability, ability to quickly gain speed, and sometimes service ceiling. Experience has shown that the technical perfection of fighter aircraft cannot be reduced to any one criterion, which would be expressed in a number, formula, or even an algorithm designed for implementation on a computer. The question of comparing fighters, as well as finding the optimal combination of basic flight characteristics, still remains one of the most difficult. How, for example, can you determine in advance what was more important - superiority in maneuverability and practical ceiling, or some advantage in maximum speed? As a rule, priority in one comes at the expense of the other. Where is the " golden mean", which gives the best fighting qualities? Obviously, much depends on the tactics and nature of the air war as a whole.

It is known that the maximum speed and rate of climb significantly depend on the operating mode of the engine. Long-term or nominal mode is one thing, and extreme afterburner is quite another. This is clearly seen from a comparison of the maximum speeds of the best fighters in the final period of the war. The presence of high-power modes significantly improves flight characteristics, but only for a short time, since otherwise the motor may be destroyed. For this reason, a very short-term emergency mode of operation of the engine, which provided the greatest power, was not considered at that time the main one for the operation of the power plant in air combat. It was intended for use only in the most emergency, deadly situations for the pilot. This position is well confirmed by an analysis of the flight data of one of the last German piston fighters - the Messerschmitt Bf 109K-4.

The main characteristics of the Bf 109K-4 are given in a fairly extensive report prepared at the end of 1944 for the German Chancellor. The report covered the state and prospects of German aircraft manufacturing and was prepared with the participation of the German aviation research center DVL and leading aviation companies such as Messerschmitt, Arado, Junkers. In this document, which has every reason to be considered quite serious, when analyzing the capabilities of the Bf 109K-4, all its data provided correspond only to the continuous operation mode of the power plant, and the characteristics at maximum power mode are not considered or even mentioned. And this is not surprising. Due to thermal overloads of the engine, the pilot of this fighter, when climbing at maximum take-off weight, could not use even the nominal mode for a long time and was forced to reduce speed and, accordingly, power within 5.2 minutes after take-off. When taking off with less weight the situation did not improve much. Therefore, it is simply not possible to talk about any real increase in the rate of climb due to the use of an emergency mode, including the injection of a water-alcohol mixture (MW-50 system).

The above graph of the vertical rate of climb (in fact, this is the rate of climb characteristic) clearly shows what kind of increase the use of maximum power could provide. However, such an increase is more of a formal nature, since it was impossible to climb in this mode. Only at certain moments of the flight could the pilot turn on the MW-50 system, i.e. extreme power boost, and even then when the cooling systems had the necessary reserves for heat removal. Thus, although the MW-50 boost system was useful, it was not vital for the Bf 109K-4 and therefore it was not installed on all fighters of this type. Meanwhile, Bf 109K-4 data is published in the press, corresponding specifically emergency regime using the MW-50, which is completely uncharacteristic of this aircraft.

The above is well confirmed by combat practice at the final stage of the war. Thus, the Western press often talks about the superiority of Mustangs and Spitfires over German fighters in the Western theater of operations. On the Eastern Front, where air battles took place at low and medium altitudes, the Yak-3 and La-7 were beyond competition, which was repeatedly noted by pilots of the Soviet Air Force. And here is the opinion of the German combat pilot W. Wolfrum:

The best fighters I encountered in combat were the North American Mustang P-51 and the Russian Yak-9U. Both fighters had a clear performance advantage over the Me-109, regardless of modification, including the Me-109K-4

In the Great Patriotic War, we defeated an experienced, organized, cruel and well-armed enemy. However, in our literature throughout post-war years practically no objective analysis of the German military equipment, including aviation. While preparing material about the La-5 and FW 190 fighters, I could not stop only at brief description German plane, because it was one of our main opponents in the skies of war, truly strong and dangerous.

But it seems to me that a whole generation of people who are more or less interested in aviation are accustomed to thinking in certain stereotypes. Thus, without any doubt, we call the Spitfire the best English fighter of the Second World War and disparage the Hurricane. The American Airacobra has become almost our favorite aircraft, and at the same time we know almost nothing about the Hellcat. We are accustomed to respecting the Mustang and look at the fat, ugly Thunderbolt with obvious misunderstanding, without even thinking about why this particular fighter was the most popular aircraft in the US Air Force during the war.

There is nothing surprising in the fact that we consider the Yak-3 the best fighter in the world. An equally stereotypical opinion exists regarding German aircraft, because in almost all books we read the same words. Let's open, for example, famous book aircraft designer A. Yakovlev " Soviet aircraft" He writes: “Our main fighter aircraft “Yak” and “La” in their combat qualities throughout the war had an advantage over German machines of similar purpose - Me 109 and FW 190.”

In addition, the FW 190 fighter is often shown as a clumsy, overweight aircraft that cannot be compared with Soviet and foreign aircraft. Well, how can you doubt this? And suddenly, a quote from the book of English researchers D. Richards and H. Sanders “The British Air Force in the Second World War 1939-1945” sounds dissonant.

“The Spitfire fighter in all its variants was little superior (if only it had any superiority at all) in its flight-tactical data the best german fighter Focke-Wulf 190".

Isn't it quite enough? interesting statement? So, in order to understand the issue more clearly, let's take a closer look at the flight performance characteristics of the Fokker in comparison with other aircraft, and above all with the La-5 fighter. Moreover, these aircraft not only constantly engaged in air battles with each other, but were also more or less close in size, flight weight and power plant power.

As you know, the main criterion characterizing the perfection of any aircraft is its maximum flight speed. Let's see who had the advantage. Let's start with 1942 (from the moment these aircraft appeared at the front). At this time, the maximum flight speed of the La-5 was 509 km/h at the ground and 580 km/h at an altitude of 6000 m. For the German aircraft, these figures were 510 and 610 km/h, respectively (data from the results of flight tests of the captured FW 190A fighter -4 at nominal engine operating mode). A year later, in battles on Kursk Bulge improved La-5FN and FW 190 aircraft of the A-5, A-8 and A-4 series appeared, many of which were equipped with the MW-50 system for injecting a water-methanol mixture into the engine cylinders. The maximum flight speeds of these machines were: for the FW 190 - 571 km/h at the ground and 654 km/h at an altitude of 6000 m. Without the use of the MW-50 system, the maximum speed was 10 km/h less. Thus, Soviet fighters had some advantage in speed at altitudes below 4000 m, where, as a rule, air battles were fought. However, there are certain subtleties here too. Thus, in the book “Wings of Victory” by A. Shakhurin (who was at that time the People’s Commissar of the aviation industry), pilots’ statements are given about the comparison of the La-5 and FW 190 fighters. “Horizontally, the La-5FN is slow, but it catches up with the FW 190, then the candles give up and FW 190 is slowly going away.”

In this regard, the pilots repeatedly turned to the designers with a request to add another 20-30 km/h to the aircraft. In 1944, improved La-7 fighters began to arrive at the front, with a maximum flight speed of 680 km/h. However, here too, for the sake of objectivity, it must be compared with the new version of the Focke-Wulf - the FW 190D fighter, also released in 1944 and which appeared at the front. The flight speed of this aircraft reached 685 km/h. Speaking about the value of the maximum flight speed, it should be noted that in air battles they were never achieved, since the aircraft were constantly maneuvering, many of them had externally mounted weapons, worn-out engines, patches on damaged areas, removed or torn landing gear doors, which greatly reduced flight speed.

From the history of air combat it is known that pilots, in order to increase flight speed, tried to attack the enemy from above, gaining it in a dive. In this regard, the Focke-Wulf-Fam had no equal (at least on the Soviet-German front). Our pilots constantly noted the fact that the Germans often evaded pursuit by diving towards the ground (if altitude allowed). Moreover, even in a fairly flat dive with an angle of thirty degrees, the FW 190 accelerated to a speed of 1045 km/h (one of the evidence of its good aerodynamics). Of all the Allied aircraft, only the Mustang and Thunderbolt could catch up with the Fokker while descending. But in terms of maneuverability characteristics in close air combat, the FW 190 was somewhat inferior to our fighters.

As is known, horizontal maneuverability (turn radius and turn time) is directly proportional to the specific wing load. For FW 190 it was quite high and amounted, depending on the modification, 210-240 kg/m2. At the same time, for all Lavochkin fighters it did not exceed 190 kg/m2. It is not surprising that the turn time of the La-5 and La-7 was 3-4 seconds less than that of the Focke-Wulf (19 instead of 22 seconds). Yakovlev's fighters had even better horizontal maneuverability.

The British Spitfire V and Spitfire IX fighters had the highest horizontal maneuverability among all Allied aircraft, since their specific wing load did not exceed 150 kg/m2. It would seem that these highly maneuverable high-speed fighters, which had proven their complete superiority over the German Messerschmitt Bf 109 fighters, should have had even greater advantages over the heavy Focke-Wulfs. However, this just did not happen. It was quite difficult for the Spitfire pilots to shoot down the FW 190.

The thing is that before making a turn, any aircraft must make a roll, that is, make a turn around the longitudinal axis. The roll rate of all aircraft was different. It depends on the efficiency of the ailerons, the moment of inertia of the aircraft and the wing span. Moreover, as the span increases, the roll speed sharply decreases. In this regard, the Spitfire, which has more large sizes, lost to Focke-Wulf. The German fighter took a turn faster, and when the pursuing Spitfire began to overtake it, the Focke-Wulf pilot quickly moved the car from the right turn to the left or vice versa and again escaped from the attack. True, the above does not mean that the FW 190 turned out to be more maneuverable. In the same way, the German pilots could not do anything with the Spitfire, which was escaping fire in a steep turn. In a word, for the British the German fighter turned out to be a “tough nut to crack.” It is enough to quote the words of F. Lloyd, one of the famous English specialists in the field of aviation, which he said at the end of 1943.

“If the British aircraft do not match the FW 190 in this respect (meaning the high roll rate), then it will always be able to elude attack.”

By the way, the cut ends of the wings on some modifications of the Spitfires can apparently be explained by the desire to increase the roll rate. As for the Soviet fighters, they were much better in this regard, since they had a smaller wing span, as well as a small moment of inertia - after all, the guns on Soviet aircraft were located in the fuselage, and not in the wing, like all British aircraft.

A few words about vertical maneuverability. Of course, the rate of climb of the FW 190 was not very high - 12-14 m/sec, while for other fighters it was 15-20 m/sec, and naturally, in maneuverable air combat, the La-5 fighters had complete superiority. However, the following point must be taken into account. It turns out that the rate of climb when performing a vertical maneuver depends not only on the specific power load (the ratio of the mass of the aircraft to the power of its power plant - for the La-5 this value was approximately 2.3 kg/hp, and for the FW 190 - 2, 5 kg/hp), but also on the ratio of the flight mass to the total aerodynamic resistance of the aircraft. When an airplane begins to climb steeply after a dive or after flying at high speed, then the first part of the rise occurs due to its inertia. In other words, the greater the mass of the aircraft and the flight speed and the lower its resistance, the faster the aircraft will gain altitude at the first moment. And in this regard, the German pilots had a certain advantage over the enemy. In any case, their first attack and exit from it were always swift.

Getting involved in a close maneuverable air battle was considered inappropriate, since during sharp maneuvering the heavy Focke-Wulf quickly lost speed and its rate of climb dropped sharply. In addition, the practice of combat operations showed that in group air battles the advantages of some aircraft over others could not be fully demonstrated, since the pursuers were often themselves subject to enemy attacks. By the way, in memoir-type literature, German pilots who evaded air combat are called cowardly. However, they had their own calculations in this. The FW 190 could not conduct a maneuverable battle with our fighters at low speed, and the Germans, naturally, did not get involved in such battles, especially since a maneuverable battle is, in general, defensive, not offensive. During the war, the Germans, on the contrary, preferred the “hunter” tactics. And here we come to the most interesting...

It turns out that we and the Germans had different approach regarding the actions of fighter aircraft. The main task facing Soviet pilots was to cover ground forces from enemy aircraft and escort their bombers. This alone forced them to conduct mainly defensive battles with German fighters. At the same time, German fighter pilots faced another primary task - the destruction of enemy aircraft, and ground troops had to rely more on their own funds air defense, which they had in abundance. With this approach, German pilots more often used free-hunting tactics and chose bomber and attack aircraft as targets. It is not surprising that many of them had 100, 200 and even 300 or more air victories.

As for the FW 190 fighter, it was quite well suited for such purposes. The FW 190 was reliably protected from the fire of defensive weapons of bombers (and these were, as a rule, machine guns). And the powerful 20-mm MG151/20 cannons made it possible to hit targets at a slightly greater range than the machine guns on bomb carriers.

Special mention must be made about the armament of the FW 190 aircraft. According to such a criterion as the weight of a minute salvo, vehicles even of the first modifications - A-3 or A-4 - were almost twice as large as the La-5. Judge for yourself: this value was 275 kg/min for the FW 190, 150 kg/min for the La-5, 202 kg/min for the Spitfire IX and 160 for the Airacobra (version with a 37 mm cannon). kg/min. After replacing machine guns and wing cannons on the Focke-Wulf with more advanced ones, the weight of a minute salvo increased to 350 kg/min, and the FW 190 became the most powerful single-engine fighter in the world. True, the American Thunderbolt had the same weight per minute salvo, but it was armed only with machine guns, and the destructive effect of the bullets was lower than that of an exploding shell. When, at the end of the war, the latest 30-mm MK108 cannons, whose projectile mass was three times greater than that of the 20-mm MG 151 cannons, began to be installed on FW 190 fighters, the weight of a minute salvo increased to almost 600 kg/min. For comparison, for the heavy twin-engine Mosquito fighter, equipped with four cannons and four machine guns, this value was 345 kg/min. Thus, even without taking into account the use of missile weapons, FW 190 fighters posed a serious danger not only to front-line, but also heavy strategic bombers.

Summarizing the results of the analysis, it should be noted that, on the one hand, the FW 190, of course, is not the best fighter in the world (as Hitler’s propaganda imagined it), since it did not have any advantage in air battles with Soviet fighters, but on the other hand, should not be underestimated and strengths this truly formidable fighting machine.

And finally the last thing. At the end of the war, German aviation, although it posed a certain danger, did not conduct active combat operations. The latest modifications of the FW 190 aircraft that appeared in the air were successfully shot down by Soviet, British and American fighter pilots. This did not mean that German aircraft were worse than enemy aircraft. On the contrary, at this time the Germans really had good cars. By the way, when at the beginning of April 1945, advanced British units captured Professor K. Tank himself, it was clear from his testimony that German designers had made significant progress.

However, in conditions of complete air supremacy of Allied aviation, no most advanced aircraft could change the nature of the war. German fighters only defended themselves in extremely unfavorable conditions. In addition, there was practically no one to fly them, since the entire flower of German fighter aviation was “laid to the bone” on the Eastern Front in fierce battles with Soviet pilots. And this is precisely what, of course, should be considered the main and decisive reason complete defeat of the Luftwaffe.

“Wings of the Motherland” No. 5 1991

In World War II, aviation was one of the main branches of the military and played a very important role during the fighting. It is no coincidence that each of the warring parties sought to ensure a constant increase in the combat effectiveness of their aviation by increasing the production of aircraft and their continuous improvement and renewal. As never before, scientific and engineering potential was widely involved in the military sphere; many research institutes and laboratories, design bureaus and testing centers operated, through whose efforts the latest technology was created. Combat vehicles. It was a time of unusually rapid progress in aircraft manufacturing. At the same time, the era of evolution of aircraft with piston engines, which had reigned supreme in aviation since its inception, seemed to be ending. The combat aircraft of the end of the Second World War were the most advanced examples of aviation technology created on the basis of piston engines.

A significant difference between the peacetime and war periods of the development of combat aviation was that during the war the effectiveness of equipment was determined directly by experiment. If in peacetime military specialists and aircraft designers, when ordering and creating new aircraft models, relied only on speculative ideas about the nature of the future war or were guided by limited experience local conflicts, then large-scale military operations dramatically changed the situation. The practice of air combat has become not only a powerful catalyst in accelerating the progress of aviation, but also the only criterion when comparing the quality of aircraft and choosing the main directions for further development. Each side improved its aircraft based on its own experience in combat operations, the availability of resources, the capabilities of technology and the aviation industry as a whole.

During the war years, a large number of aircraft were created in England, the USSR, the USA, Germany and Japan, which played a significant role in the armed struggle. Among them there are many outstanding examples. A comparison of these machines is of interest, as is a comparison of the engineering and scientific ideas that were used in their creation. Of course, among the numerous types of aircraft that took part in the war and represented different schools of aircraft construction, it is difficult to single out the undeniably best. Therefore, the choice of cars is to some extent conditional.

Fighters were the main means of gaining air superiority in the fight against the enemy. The success of combat operations of ground troops and other types of aviation and the safety of rear facilities largely depended on the effectiveness of their actions. It is no coincidence that it was the fighter class that developed most intensively. The best of them are traditionally called the Yak-3 and La-7 (USSR), North American P-51 Mustang (Mustang, USA), Supermarine Spitfire (England) and Messerschmitt Bf 109 ( Germany). Among the many modifications of Western fighters, the P-51D, Spitfire XIV and Bf 109G-10 and K-4 were selected for comparison, that is, those aircraft that were mass-produced and entered service military air force at the final stage of the war. All of them were created in 1943 - early 1944. These vehicles reflected the wealth of combat experience already accumulated by that time by the warring countries. They became, as it were, symbols of military aviation equipment of their time.

Before you compare different types fighters, it is worth saying a little about the basic principles of comparison. The main thing here is to keep in mind the conditions of combat use for which they were created. The war in the East showed that in the presence of a front line, where the main force of armed struggle was ground troops, aviation was required to have relatively low flight altitudes. The experience of air battles on the Soviet-German front shows that the vast majority of them were fought at altitudes of up to 4.5 km, regardless of the altitude of the aircraft. Soviet designers, while improving fighter aircraft and engines for them, could not help but take this circumstance into account. At the same time, the English Spitfires and American Mustangs were distinguished by their higher altitude, since the nature of the actions for which they were designed was completely different. In addition, the P-51D had a much longer range to escort heavy bombers and was therefore significantly heavier than Spitfires, German Bf 109s and Soviet fighters. Thus, since British, American and Soviet fighters were created for different combat conditions, the question of which of the machines as a whole was the most effective loses its meaning. It is advisable to compare only the main technical solutions and features of the machines.

The situation is different with German fighters. They were intended for air combat both in the East and in the Western fronts. Therefore, they can quite reasonably be compared with all Allied fighters.

So what made the best fighters of World War II stand out? What was their fundamental difference from each other? Let's start with the main thing - with the technical ideology laid down by the designers in the designs of these aircraft.

The most unusual in terms of the concept of creation were, perhaps, the Spitfire and the Mustang.

“It’s not just a good plane, it’s a Spitfire!” - this assessment by the English test pilot G. Powell undoubtedly applies to one of the last fighting versions of the fighter of this family - the Spitfire XIV, the best fighter of the British air force during the war. It was the Spitfire XIV that shot down the German Me 262 jet fighter in an air battle.

When creating the Spitfire in the mid-30s, the designers tried to combine seemingly incompatible things: high speed, characteristic of the high-speed monoplane fighters that were then coming into use, with excellent maneuverability, altitude and takeoff and landing characteristics inherent in biplanes. The goal was largely achieved. Like many other high-speed fighters, the Spitfire had a cantilever monoplane design with well-streamlined shapes. But this was only an external resemblance. For its weight, the Spitfire had a relatively large sizes, which gave a small load per unit of bearing surface, much less than that of other monoplane fighters. Hence, excellent maneuverability in the horizontal plane, high ceiling and good takeoff and landing properties. This approach was not something exceptional: Japanese designers, for example, did the same. But the creators of the Spitfire went further. Due to the high aerodynamic drag of such a significant wing, it was impossible to count on achieving a high maximum flight speed - one of the most important indicators of the quality of fighter aircraft of those years. To reduce drag, they used profiles with a much smaller relative thickness than other fighters and gave the wing an elliptical planform. This further reduced aerodynamic drag when flying at high altitude and in maneuver modes.

The company managed to create an outstanding combat aircraft. This does not mean that the Spitfire was without any shortcomings. They were. For example, due to the low wing load, it was inferior to many fighters in terms of acceleration properties during a dive. It responded more slowly in roll to the pilot’s actions than German, American, and especially Soviet fighters. However, these shortcomings were not fundamental, and in general the Spitfire was undoubtedly one of the strongest air combat fighters, which demonstrated excellent qualities in action.

Among the many variants of the Mustang fighter, the greatest success fell on the planes equipped with English Merlin engines. These were the P-51B, C and, of course, the P-51D - the best and most famous American fighter of the Second World War. Since 1944, it was these aircraft that ensured the safety of heavy American B-17 and B-24 bombers from attacks by German fighters and demonstrated their superiority in battle.

Home distinctive feature In terms of aerodynamics, the Mustang had a laminar wing, which was the first in world aircraft manufacturing to be installed on a combat aircraft. Special mention should be made about this “highlight” of the aircraft, born in the laboratory of the American research center NACA on the eve of the war. The fact is that the opinion of experts regarding the advisability of using a laminar wing on fighters of that period is ambiguous. If before the war high hopes were placed on laminar wings, since under certain conditions they had less aerodynamic drag compared to conventional ones, then the experience with the Mustang diminished the initial optimism. It turned out that in real operation such a wing is not effective enough. The reason was that to implement laminar flow on a part of such a wing, very careful surface finishing and high precision in maintaining the profile were required. Due to the roughness encountered during application protective painting on the aircraft, and even a small inaccuracy in the profiling, which inevitably appeared in mass production (slight waviness of the thin metal skin), the effect of laminarization on the P-51 wing was greatly reduced. In terms of their load-bearing properties, laminar profiles were inferior to conventional ones, which caused difficulties in ensuring good maneuverability and takeoff and landing properties.

At low angles of attack, laminar wing profiles (sometimes called laminated) have less aerodynamic drag than conventional airfoils.

In addition to reduced resistance, laminar profiles had better speed properties - with equal relative thickness, the effects of air compressibility (wave crisis) appeared in them at high speeds than on regular type profiles. This had to be taken into account even then. When diving, especially at high altitudes, where the speed of sound is significantly less than that of the ground, aircraft began to reach speeds at which features associated with approaching the speed of sound already appeared. It was possible to increase the so-called critical speed either by using higher speed profiles, which turned out to be laminar, or by reducing the relative thickness of the profile, while putting up with the inevitable increase in the weight of the structure and a reduction in wing volumes, often used (including on the P-51D) for placement of gas tanks and weapons. Interestingly, due to the much smaller relative thickness of the profiles, the wave crisis on the Spitfire wing occurred at a higher speed than on the Mustang wing.

Research at the English aviation research center RAE showed that, due to the significantly smaller relative thickness of the wing profiles, the Spitfire fighter at high speeds had a lower aerodynamic drag coefficient than the Mustang. This was explained by the later manifestation of the wave flow crisis and its “softer” nature.

If air battles were fought at relatively low altitudes, crisis phenomena Air compressibility was almost non-existent, so the need for a special high-speed wing was not acutely felt.

The path to creating the Soviet Yak-3 and La-7 aircraft turned out to be very unusual. Essentially, they were deep modifications of the Yak-1 and LaGG-3 fighters, developed in 1940 and mass-produced.

In the Soviet Air Force at the final stage of the war there was no fighter more popular than the Yak-3. At that time it was the lightest fighter aircraft. The French pilots of the Normandy-Niemen regiment, who fought on the Yak-3, spoke about its combat capabilities this way: “The Yak-3 gives you complete superiority over the Germans. On the Yak-3, two people can fight against four, and four can fight against sixteen!”

A radical redesign of the Yak design was undertaken in 1943 with the goal of dramatically improving flight characteristics with a very modest power plant power. The decisive direction in this work was to lighten the aircraft (including by reducing the wing area) and significantly improve its aerodynamics. Perhaps this was the only opportunity to qualitatively promote the aircraft, since the Soviet industry had not yet mass-produced new, more powerful engines suitable for installation on the Yak-1.

Such a path of development of aviation technology, extremely difficult to implement, was extraordinary. Regular way improvement of the complex of aircraft flight data then consisted of improving aerodynamics without noticeable changes in the dimensions of the airframe, as well as installing more powerful engines. This was almost always accompanied by a noticeable weight gain.

The designers of the Yak-3 coped with this difficult task brilliantly. It is unlikely that in the history of aviation during the Second World War one can find another example of similar and so effectively completed work.

The Yak-3, compared to the Yak-1, was much lighter, had a smaller relative profile thickness and wing area, and had excellent aerodynamic properties. The aircraft's power supply has increased significantly, which has dramatically improved its rate of climb, acceleration characteristics and vertical maneuverability. At the same time, such an important parameter for horizontal maneuverability, takeoff and landing as the specific wing load has changed little. During the war, the Yak-3 turned out to be one of the easiest fighters to pilot.

Of course, in tactical terms, the Yak-3 did not at all replace aircraft that were distinguished by stronger weapons and a longer combat flight duration, but perfectly complemented them, embodying easy idea, a high-speed and maneuverable air combat vehicle designed primarily to combat enemy fighters.

One of the few, if not the only fighter with a motor air cooling, which can rightfully be considered one of the best air combat fighters of the Second World War. Using the La-7, the famous Soviet ace I.N. Kozhedub shot down 17 German aircraft (including the Me-262 jet fighter) out of 62 he destroyed on La fighters.

The history of the La-7 is also unusual. At the beginning of 1942, on the basis of the LaGG-3 fighter, which turned out to be a rather mediocre combat vehicle, the La-5 fighter was developed, differing from its predecessor only in the power plant (engine liquid cooling replaced with a much more powerful two-row “star”). During the further development of the La-5, the designers focused on its aerodynamic improvement. During the period 1942-1943. La brand fighters were the most frequent “guests” in the full-scale wind tunnels of the leading Soviet aviation research center TsAGI. The main goal Such tests were aimed at identifying the main sources of aerodynamic losses and identifying design measures that would help reduce aerodynamic drag. An important feature of this work was that the proposed design changes did not require major alterations to the aircraft or changes in the production process and could be carried out relatively easily by serial factories. It was truly “jewelry” work, when seemingly mere trifles produced a rather impressive result.

The fruit of this work was the La-5FN, which appeared at the beginning of 1943 - one of the strongest Soviet fighters of that time, and then the La-7 - an aircraft that rightfully took its place among the best fighters of the Second World War. If, during the transition from the La-5 to the La-5FN, an increase in flight performance was achieved not only due to better aerodynamics, but also thanks to a more powerful engine, then the improvement in the characteristics of the La-7 was achieved solely by means of aerodynamics and a reduction in the weight of the structure. This plane had a speed of 80 km/h more than the La-5, of which 75% (that is, 60 km/h) was due to aerodynamics. Such an increase in speed is equivalent to an increase in engine power by more than a third, without increasing the weight and dimensions of the aircraft.

The best features of an air combat fighter were embodied in the La-7: high speed, excellent maneuverability and rate of climb. In addition, compared to other fighters discussed here we're talking about, it had greater survivability, since only this aircraft had an air-cooled engine. As is known, such motors are not only more viable than liquid-cooled engines, but also serve as a kind of protection for the pilot from fire from the front hemisphere, since they have large cross-sectional dimensions.

The German fighter Messerschmitt Bf 109 was created around the same time as the Spitfire. Like the English aircraft, the Bf 109 became one of the most successful examples of a combat vehicle during the war and went through a long path of evolution: it was equipped with more and more powerful engines, improved aerodynamics, operational and aerobatic characteristics. In terms of aerodynamics, the most significant changes were last made in 1941, when the Bf 109F appeared. Further improvement of flight data was achieved mainly through the installation of new engines. Externally, the latest modifications of this fighter - the Bf 109G-10 and K-4 - differed little from the much earlier Bf 109F, although they had a number of aerodynamic improvements.

This aircraft was the best representative of the light and maneuverable combat vehicle of Hitler's Luftwaffe. Throughout almost the entire Second World War, Messerschmitt Bf 109 fighters were among the best examples of aircraft in their class, and only towards the end of the war did they begin to lose their position. It turned out to be impossible to combine the qualities inherent in the best Western fighters, designed for relatively high combat altitudes, with the qualities inherent in the best Soviet “medium-altitude” fighters.

Like their English colleagues, the designers of the Bf 109 tried to combine a high maximum speed with good maneuverability and takeoff and landing qualities. But they solved this problem in a completely different way: unlike the Spitfire, the Bf 109 had a large specific wing load, which made it possible to achieve high speed, and to improve maneuverability they used not only the well-known slats, but also flaps, which at the right time the battle could be deviated by the pilot at a small angle. The use of controlled flaps was a new and original solution. To improve takeoff and landing characteristics, in addition to automatic slats and controlled flaps, hovering ailerons were used, which worked as additional sections of flaps; A controlled stabilizer was also used. In short, the Bf 109 had a unique system of direct lift control, largely characteristic of modern aircraft with their inherent automation. However, in practice, many of the designers' decisions did not take root. Due to the complexity, it was necessary to abandon the controlled stabilizer, hovering ailerons, and flap release system in combat. As a result, in terms of its maneuverability, the Bf 109 was not very different from other fighters, both Soviet and American, although it was inferior to the best domestic aircraft. The takeoff and landing characteristics turned out to be similar.

The experience of aircraft construction shows that the gradual improvement of a combat aircraft is almost always accompanied by an increase in its weight. This is due to the installation of more powerful and therefore heavier engines, an increase in fuel reserves, an increase in the power of weapons, the necessary structural reinforcements and other related measures. Eventually there comes a time when the reserves of a given design are exhausted. One of the limitations is the specific wing load. This, of course, is not the only parameter, but one of the most important and common to all aircraft. Thus, as Spitfire fighters were modified from variant 1A to XIV and Bf 109 from B-2 to G-10 and K-4, their specific wing load increased by about a third! Already the Bf 109G-2 (1942) had 185 kg/m2, while the Spitfire IX, which was also released in 1942, had about 150 kg/m2. For the Bf 109G-2, this wing load was close to the limit. With its further growth, the flight, maneuverability and takeoff and landing characteristics of the aircraft sharply deteriorated, despite the very effective mechanization of the wing (slats and flaps).

The quality of their mass production has a great influence on the aerodynamic properties of aircraft. Careless manufacturing can negate all the efforts of designers and scientists. This doesn't happen very rarely. Judging by captured documents, in Germany, at the end of the war, conducting a comparative study of the aerodynamics of German, American and British fighters, they came to the conclusion that the Bf 109G had the worst manufacturing quality, and, in particular, for this reason its aerodynamics turned out to be the worst, that with a high probability can be extended to the Bf 109K-4.

From the above it is clear that in terms of the technical concept of creation and aerodynamic design features, each of the compared aircraft is completely original. But they also have many common features: well-streamlined shapes, careful engine bonneting, well-developed local aerodynamics and aerodynamics of cooling devices.

As for the design, Soviet fighters were much simpler and cheaper to produce than British, German and, especially, American aircraft. Scarce materials were used in very limited quantities. Thanks to this, the USSR was able to ensure a high rate of aircraft production in conditions of severe material restrictions and a lack of qualified labor. It must be said that our country finds itself in the most difficult situation. From 1941 to 1944 inclusively, a significant part of the industrial zone, where many metallurgical enterprises were located, was occupied by the Nazis. Some factories were evacuated inland and production was set up in new locations. But a significant part of the production potential was still irretrievably lost. In addition, a large number of skilled workers and specialists went to the front. They were replaced at the machines by women and children who could not work at the appropriate level. And yet, the aircraft industry of the USSR, although not immediately, was able to meet the needs of the front for aircraft.

Unlike the all-metal Western fighters, Soviet aircraft made extensive use of wood. However, metal was used in many of the power elements, which actually determined the weight of the structure. That is why, in terms of weight perfection, the Yak-3 and La-7 were practically no different from foreign fighters.

In terms of technological sophistication, ease of access to individual units and ease of maintenance in general, the Bf 109 and Mustang looked somewhat preferable. However, Spitfires and Soviet fighters were also well adapted to combat conditions. But in terms of such very important characteristics as the quality of equipment and the level of automation, the Yak-3 and La-7 were inferior to Western fighters, the best of which in terms of automation were German aircraft (not only the Bf 109, but also others).

During the Second World War, England occupied a leading position in aircraft engine building. It was Rolls-Royce engines that equipped the Spitfires and the best versions of the Mustangs (P-51B, C and D). It can be said without exaggeration that it was the installation of the English Merlin engine, which was produced in the USA under license by Packard, that made it possible to realize the great capabilities of the Mustang and brought it into the category of elite fighters. Before this, the P-51, although original, was a rather mediocre aircraft in terms of combat capabilities.

Most versions of the Mustangs and Spitfires were designed for high combat altitudes, characteristic of aviation operations in the West. Therefore, their engines had sufficient altitude. German engine builders were forced to solve a complex technical problem. Given the relatively high design altitude of the engine required for air combat in the West, it was important to provide the necessary power at low and medium altitudes required for combat operations in the East. As is known, a simple increase in altitude usually leads to increasing power losses at low altitudes. Therefore, the designers showed a lot of ingenuity and used a number of extraordinary technical solutions. In terms of its height, the DB-605 motor occupied an intermediate position between English and Soviet engines. To increase power at altitudes below the design one, the injection of a water-alcohol mixture (MW-50 system) was used, which made it possible, despite the relatively low octane number of the fuel, to significantly increase the boost, and, consequently, the power without causing detonation. The result was a kind of maximum mode, which, like the emergency mode, could usually be used for up to three minutes.

Comparing the wing and central weapons installations, it is difficult to answer which of these schemes was the most effective. But still, Soviet front-line pilots and aviation specialists, like the German ones, preferred the central one, which ensured the greatest accuracy of fire. This arrangement turns out to be more advantageous when an enemy aircraft is attacked from extremely short distances. And this is exactly how Soviet and German pilots usually tried to act on the Eastern Front. In the West, air battles were fought mainly at high altitudes, where the maneuverability of fighters deteriorated significantly. Getting close to the enemy became much more difficult, and with bombers it was also very dangerous, since the fighter’s sluggish maneuver made it difficult to evade the fire of air gunners. For this reason, they opened fire from a long distance and the wing-mounted weapon, designed for a given range of destruction, turned out to be quite comparable to the central one. In addition, the rate of fire of weapons with a wing configuration was higher than that of weapons synchronized for firing through a propeller (cannons on the La-7, machine guns on the Yak-3 and Bf 109G), the weapons were close to the center of gravity and ammunition consumption had virtually no effect on their position. But one drawback was still organically inherent in the wing design - an increased moment of inertia relative to the longitudinal axis of the aircraft, which caused the fighter's roll response to the pilot's actions to deteriorate.

It is worth clarifying that the words “flight data” mean a whole range of important indicators, the main of which for fighters were maximum speed, rate of climb, range or time of sortie, maneuverability, ability to quickly gain speed, and sometimes service ceiling. Experience has shown that the technical perfection of fighter aircraft cannot be reduced to any one criterion, which would be expressed in a number, formula, or even an algorithm designed for implementation on a computer. The question of comparing fighters, as well as finding the optimal combination of basic flight characteristics, still remains one of the most difficult. How, for example, can you determine in advance what was more important - superiority in maneuverability and practical ceiling, or some advantage in maximum speed? As a rule, priority in one comes at the expense of the other. Where is the “golden mean” that gives the best fighting qualities? Obviously, much depends on the tactics and nature of the air war as a whole.

The above graph of the vertical rate of climb (in fact, this is the rate of climb characteristic) clearly shows what kind of increase the use of maximum power could provide. However, such an increase is more of a formal nature, since it was impossible to climb in this mode. Only at certain moments of the flight could the pilot turn on the MW-50 system, i.e. extreme power boost, and even then when the cooling systems had the necessary reserves for heat removal. Thus, although the MW-50 boost system was useful, it was not vital for the Bf 109K-4 and therefore it was not installed on all fighters of this type. Meanwhile, the press publishes data on the Bf 109K-4, corresponding specifically to the emergency regime using the MW-50, which is completely uncharacteristic of this aircraft.

In World War II, aviation turned out to be one of the main strike forces. The combat effectiveness of aircraft was the key to successful military operations. Fighters fought for air supremacy.

Soviet high-altitude fighter MiG-3

MiG-3 - Soviet high-altitude fighter from the Great Patriotic War Patriotic War, developed on the basis of the Polikarpov I-200 fighter by a design team headed by A. I. Mikoyan and M. I. Gurevich.

At high altitudes, the MiG-3 was more maneuverable than other fighters. Big role The fighter played a role in the first months of the war, and then during the Battle of Moscow in 1941, when it was effectively used in repelling German air raids on the capital. The fighter's relatively weak machine-gun armament was recognized as a disadvantage. Necessity mass production engines for the Il-2 led to the discontinuation of the high-altitude fighter, given that a significant part of the fighting took place at medium and low altitudes, where the MiG-3 did not have significant advantages.

The famous test pilot, Hero, fought on the Mig-3 and died on July 4, 1941 in a battle with a group of enemy aircraft Soviet Union Stepan Suprun. A total of 3,178 MiG-3s were produced.

German fighter Messerschmitt Bf.109

The Bf.109 fighter became one of the most famous and popular German aircraft of the Second World War. First combat use took place during civil war in Spain. Depending on its modification, it could be used as a fighter, high-altitude fighter, fighter-interceptor, fighter-bomber or reconnaissance aircraft.

Early modifications were armed with four 7.92 mm machine guns; on later ones, in addition to machine gun armament, two 20 mm or one 30 mm cannons were installed. Throughout World War II it was Germany's main fighter. Until the end of the war, as of April 1945, 33,984 Bf.109 fighters of all modifications were produced. It became one of the most popular fighters in history, and in terms of the number of World War II aircraft produced, it was second only to the Soviet Il-2 attack aircraft.

American fighter-bomber P-38 Lightning

An American fighter-bomber that performed well during World War II. The design of the aircraft consisted of two tail booms and a gondola with a cockpit.

In addition to powerful small arms Consisting of a 20 mm cannon and four 12.7 mm machine guns, the Lighting could carry two 726 kg bombs or ten rockets. The aircraft was actively used both to escort heavy bombers and to attack ground targets. By the end of the war, two-seat “flagship” fighters appeared, whose crews coordinated assault operations single seat aircraft. The plane was simple and reliable to fly. The P-38 became the only fighter aircraft produced in the United States throughout the war. In total, about 10 thousand units were produced. Advertising

Japanese fighter "Zero"

The Japanese carrier-based fighter was produced from 1940 until the end of World War II. The aircraft carried powerful armament for the start of World War II, consisting of two 20 mm cannons and two 7.7 mm machine guns.

Until 1942, the Zero had a clear advantage over most Allied aircraft, and the presence large number well-trained pilots made it possible to make full use of the best properties of the machine - high maneuverability and a long (up to 2600 kilometers) flight range.

The Battle of Midway Atoll was a turning point not only in the struggle for Pacific Ocean, but also in the fate of “Zero”, which gradually began to lose its dominance in the air. At the end of the war, Zeros were also used by kamikaze pilots. Thus, during the battle in Leyte Gulf on October 25, 1944, the escort aircraft carrier Saint-Lo was sunk. A total of 10,939 fighters were produced and it became the most produced Japanese fighter of the Second World War.

Soviet fighter La-5FN

One of the most successful modifications of the La-5 fighter was the La-5FN, which received a new engine with a power of 1850 l/s. Maximum speed fighter reached 635 km/h. The aircraft carried weapons similar to the La-5, consisting of two 20 mm. automatic guns.

The La-5FN fighter is rightfully included in the number the best aircraft peace in the second half of the war. In terms of maneuverability and speed at low and medium altitudes, it was superior to the German FW 190A fighter. The first mass use of the La-5FN was associated with the battles on the Kursk Bulge. Heroes of the Soviet Union Alexey Maresyev and Alexander Gorovets performed their feats on the La-5FN at the Kursk Bulge. Ivan Kozhedub, the most successful Soviet pilot, with 62 aerial victories, also began his combat journey on the La-5FN.