The T-34 is the best tank of World War II. What about airplanes? According to /k/
Yeah
>>64738946That's nuts nigga
>>64738946>The T-34 is the best tank of World War III am calling bait and proclaim than OP is a faggot
>>64738988He was close, the real answer is T44.
>>64738946
>>64738946IL-2 of course, durable enough to shrug of 40mm AA fire, with firepower to erase whole armored columns in one passing
>>64738946>The T-34 is the best tank of World War II.How so? It is shittier in all regards when compared to the workhorse medium designs of the other major powers.
>>64738946>>64738984>>64739035>>64739084ahem.
>>64738946production numbers? me109service time? me 109variants? me109aces n shieeeet? me109performance? me109slats? me109autocannon? me109camo patterns? me109
>>64739197The FW180 is much better.
>>64739197I am pretty sure the F4U was the warbird that saw the longest active service after the war. Not necessarily the best at any one thing but the best all around, especially for naval aircraft. The overmatch it had compared to IJA/IJN fighters on release was bonkers. More than twice the HP.
Sherman was the best tank of the war.
>>64738946The Po-2, according to the same metric.
Stuka of course>REEEEEEEEeeeeeee
>>64738946I love the T-34, but its the 2nd best tank of the war.Not because of any of the popular reasons normies point out. Just due to the fact you could Chuck it on a ship and make it fight from the islands of the pacific to the Russian thundra>What about airplanes?The C-47, for a similar reasons to the sherman
>>64738946>The T-34 is the best tank of World War IINot even the Soviets thought that.
>>64739170I mean, it was no Sherman, but for a mid-30's design it was pretty damn spectacular how long it just kept being in the race.
>>64739084>>64739170Both the Panzer IV and T-34 were better than the Italians' attempt.
>>64739233It was inferior to the contemporary Grummans (F6F and F8F). The only reason it remained in service is because Corsair couldn't design a replacement and end its production, meanwhile Grumman jumped to jets immediately and the F8F wasn't good as attacker airplane (the role of the post war F4U).
>>64739356> is because Corsair is because Vought*
>>64738946with airplanes don't we need at least to specify a role
T-34 was shit
>>64738946The P-40 is the only one I regularly dream about when I relive my WW2 past life.
>>64738946Americans because of high octane air fuel.
>>64738984>Name the tank something the Germans or Japanese spotting it could never pronounceClever.
>>64739197Then why did you lose the war?
Tonnage sunk award goes to.....
I think it would be appropriate to choose only from the weapons of the victors, not the fucking losers. Maus also had high performance characteristics, but now it is gathering dust in the corner of the largest (nearly 16,000 acres) Russian museum of military equipment, which houses a collection of trophies from all Russian wars and their allies. Maus is a tank of the losers; despite its characteristics, it did not fulfill its task, which means that, logically, it cannot be the best, just like any military equipment of the losers
>>64739430what about the yellow cousin
>>64739349Just needs its scorpion rocket to be installed and it'll be competitive.>>64739505kek
I'm tempted to say the P-47>good high altitude performance>heavy bomb payload>8 fiddies for nearly all targets>durable radial>sexy razorback models>>64739197The 109 gets it's stats artificially boosted in that most people lump the entire series together as one design. An E-model has a different airframe, engine and armament compared to a late-war variant.
>>64739563I disagree, the quality of a piece of equipment should not be judged on the strategic situation of its nation. Had Germany made the AR-15 in April 1945 it wouldn't have been a bad gun just because they lost the war
>>64738946>Best aircraft of WW2Any answer besides pic related is certified casual.
>>64739563What ifs don't count. The best tank for most of the cold war snuck in just before the painter shot himself. Allegedly.
>>64739717The DB605 is nearly identical with the late DB601, the main difference was reboring the cylinders to the max diameter, not different than the R-1830 -> R-2000 in the DC-3.The changes from the early A-B to the E were more considerable than from the E to F or G.
>>64739809There is talk of a restomod Catalina. My bank manager will have a fit if I mention one.
I don't know if its the best plane or not, I just wanted to P-38 post because its my favorite:)
Best at its role? The B29 was the most advanced bomber of the war and cast a long shadow over cold war bomber design. The Tupolev Tu-4 which was a reversed engineered B29 was kept in service until the late 80s.
Spitfireobviously
The zero was the best dogfigther. No one dared to go 1 vs 1.Americans had to use shameful tactics like going 2 vs 1. And doing zoom and boom.They avoided dogfight.
>>64738946>T-34 is the best tank of World War IINo. It's a fully functional brand-new one of thesehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JKYGt1ZEzys&t=515s(before the transmission fails and it runs of precious fuel)>>64738946>What about airplanes?I like the twin boom and engine P-38 Lightninghttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yxJaqoU56uYAlso there was something special about the Mosquitohttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cg_Q_YxB9ww
>>64739197>production numbers? me109>service time? me 109Mainly because Germany was too poor to switch over entirely to the objectively superior Fw190>>64739233F4U is a good bird but typical of late-war Allied fighters>>64739356>It was inferior to the contemporary Grummans (F6F and F8F)Corsair beats the F6F and had a bigger payload than the F8FThe Bearcat was a very late-war plane and its main advantage over the Corsair is its devastating quad 20mm Hispano Colts
>>64740868>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JKYGt1ZEzys&t=515shttps://youtu.be/JKYGt1ZEzys?t=515
>>64739499>high octane air fueldelivered a significant performance boost but not a massive one, and the Germs had high octane equivalents as wellClaims of it being a "war winner" are because of media hyping up petrochemical engineers jerking themselves offAeronautic engineers deserve as much if not more credit for building the systems that could make use of this fuel in the first place, and all the other key factors such as armament, airframe etc
>>64738946>"It makes me furious when I see the Mosquito. I turn green and yellow with envy. The British, who can afford aluminum better than we can, knock together a beautiful wooden aircraft that every piano factory over there is building, and they give it a speed which they have now increased yet again"Hitler
>>64739550Only trve answer, though OP probably refers to more generalist planes and/or fighters.This humble biplane sank around as much tonnage as the entire Imperial Japanese Navy Air Service did (both sank around 1.1-1.3 million tons). The swordfish probably contributed to more as a bunch of battles started with some swordfish hitting a ship that then got pummeled by other ships like what happened to Bismark.
