Best Aircraft Vs Worst Aircraft

Nice point, Tom and, completely true.

F=MA

[Ginger.]

It puts that fanciful 'Knights jousting in the clouds' rhubarb perfectly into perspective dunnit?

[Elfen]

Its not the plane, but the pilot behind the controls. TomVrille said it best.

Most experienced pilots could guess who they were up against due to flying styles and attacks of their enemy counterparts. Individual markings of the German Jastas made it easy to spot established pilots through out the war.

Many pilots perfered one ac over another, others tried to stay with one specific ac for as long as they could- Albert Ball try to keep his Neuport for as long as he could, even while flying his SE5.

For Voss, his testiment was not his of his F1, but that in his last battle he took down 3 with him and 'holed' all the others! Many of B-Flight swore they hit him, and even commented that he must have had amoured plating when a Fokker was just a canvas covered aluminum tubing! That says something about the pilot, and to some extent, the Fokker he flew.

Guynemer vs Udet; in moreless evenly matched planes, though Udet suffered a handicap of a bummed set of guns, did his best not to be be the other's target. We know that in the end, Guynemer ended the match with honour and style in not fighting an unarmed opponent.

I can bet that many pilots had landed shaking and in a cold sweat, after having such close calls in the skies.

[Dan_San_Abbott]

Gentlemen:
The best British aircraft was the S.E.5a with geared Hisso, This machine produce more good fighter pilots and aces than any other British fighter. worst B.E.2c
Best French, Morane-Saulnier Type AI, worst Farman Longhorns
Best German, without a doubt the Fok.D.VII with the BMWIIIa engine. The worst Otto pushers.
Blue skies,
Dan-San

[JG1Schorner]

I disagree a little bit on the BE2. The BE2 design was a wonderful design in its time. It even set altitude records. The problem is that "its time" was 1913. It is IMHO a little unfair to blame the type just because it was kept in service (with modifications, but not nearly enough) long after it should have been retired. The BE2 type should have been withdrawn by the summer of 1916, nevermind the spring of 1917.

By own opinion for "worst" on the British side is the BE12. I know, lets take an overly stable, slow, obsolete aircraft, take out its only real means of protection (the observer operated rear facing gun), and turn it into a scout. The person who came up with this should have been forced to fight in one.

[Taz]

F=MA- Back from vacation. The ability to disengage at will is important. One way to do it is with speed, the other is with climb or with the ability to maneuver without losing altitude. The SE-5a was faster, the Dr.I climbed much better and was much more maneuverable due in part to its lower wing loading and in part to its superior airfoil design. The speed differentials between WWI aircraft were not large in absolute terms. The SE-5a was ~15 mph faster than a Dr.I, which works out to 22 fps. If willing to fly straight for 10 seconds while disengaging, the SE-5a would only gain 220 ft while being fired at by 3000 fps bullets. This is a good way to get killed.

One on one with two equal pilots at low to medium altitude, I will take the Dr.I. Jacobs and Raben even preferred the Dr.I to the D.VII at those altitudes, and we know the D.VII was superior to the SE-5a. Plus the Dr.I pilot will not waste time swapping out Lewis drums while someone is trying to kill him. Silly set-up for fighter vs fighter combat when your apponent has two MGs with 500 rounds each.

Taz
Terry Phillips

Agreed on the low to medium altitude one-on-one with a good pilot, as I said before. Were it me in the seat, I'd hope I'd be good enough to use the DR.1's advantages. Pilot's airplane that it was, it could be as bad an adversary as any enemy if mishandled. The SE is much better in this regard and that's shown, as Dan San said, by the number of aces produced by the type. I'd bet even if we equalise the numbers issue, as there were only a few Dr.1s and zillions of SE 5as, we'd still see the SE able to produce more aces and return more aces from the war to house and home.

Interesting conversation, largely moot, of course but, fun nonetheless. Wish we still had people from that time to ask what they'd think of our topic here. From what I've read and pilots I've talked to, pilots develop an affection for what they are flying and often come to see it as the best plane around, even in the face of contrary evidence. It's just being hopeful and confident, I suppose. One wonders if that sentiment is true for the hapless Be.12 crew

F=MA

[Barrett]

Excepting The One You Never See, the most feared bandit is the one at your deep six. Heartily concur that machine makes vastly less diff than the man.
But, as noted here, the relative merits certainly apply. If I'm a BE wonk jumped by any Hunnish single-seater, I'm AFRAID.

However, assuming either a head-on or angles merge, the enemy pilot most feared is the one who stays to fight rather than evade (whether he can or not). At that point, both pilots make their Best Move in an effort to kill the bandit soonest. If that's a standoff, then it's a matter of controlling one's emotions ("stay frosty") and fly your kite to the limit of its performance. An excellent example was Bud Anderson's vertical fight with the very well-flown 109 in May '44. Two experienced, aggressive pilots locked in an all or nothing duel from which only one could survive. (BTW, it's often asked who the 109 pilot might have been. All we know fershure is that he was not one of the centurian aces.)