What would have been the best "super prop" if the war continued into 1946 on both sides?

>F8F Bearcat
>Sea Fury
>Spitfire Mk 24
>Ta-152
>La-9
>J7W Shinden

>>64026962 (OP)
Why list the J7W? that was an interceptor prototype, not even a fighter

>>64026970
Japan needed a spot. What would you put there?

>>64026962 (OP)
To talk about a real war in 1946 you need to alter the history after 1942 otherwise the Axis would only have prototypes of superprops, even in 1946, Germany and England would be using jets most of the time. No thanks.

>>64026962 (OP)
F4U-4 and it's not even close

Video gamers and autistic people are obsessed with hierarchical rankings on a simple scale.

>>64026962 (OP)
Realistically in 1946 assuming that jets didn't exist? The XP-72 or Spiteful would've been at the top for aircraft actually realistically entering service, though given the fact that range was very important by that stage in the war, the XP-72 and P-51H would likely have been the highest performance fighters that saw a lot of use

>>64027006
The N1K. It'd be interesting to see what would've came out of later developments for it.

>>64027006

>>64027006
Ki-84 was comparable to various Allied fighters at the end of the war

>>64026962 (OP)
The P-51H would have utterly raped anything that flew then.

My vote goes to Hawker

>>64026962 (OP)
according to postwar pilots, it's a tossup between the Sea Fury and the Bearcat
my money's on the Sea Fury

>>64026962 (OP)
The germans and japanese were running out of everything at the end of the war, none of their designs would've beaten allied designs, engine specs had to suffer from lack of materials and high quality fuel, airframe would also suffer from lack of materials.

>>64026962 (OP)
Spiteful

>>64026962 (OP)
Given that the air to air role would still get quickly taken over by jets, Skyraider.

The Goodyear F2G Corsair was impressive.

>>64027486
She's a looker for sure.

>>64027983
Story on the toilet?

>>64026962 (OP)
>Sea Fury
Tempest II was actually delivered to the front by late 45 while Sea Fury wasn't really till 47 although they could have rushed it if they wanted.
The engine on the thing was so powerful that if you went from low throttle to max instead of the propeller moving it would essentially remain still and the spin the plane instead. There's some video footage out there of that happening to Sea Fury's when they were landing short so the pilots panicked and tried to pull away only to end up diving into the deck.

>>64030110
Should have gone with contra-rotating props if it had that much angular torque.

>>64030110
>you went from low throttle to max instead of the propeller moving it would essentially remain still and the spin the plane instead.
Sopwith Camel Mk II.

>attempt to find footage of the Sea Fury torque issues in action
>find a 12 minute video of Ausfags crashing planes onto HMAS Sydney
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=161cbt0tWDQ
Enjoy fags. Can kind of see a Sea Fury trying to correct but pulling itself through torque roughly 5 minutes in but its worth watching the whole footage as a good bit of silent entertainment.

I CAC could have gotten the super prop they were working on done it would have been awesome

>>64026962 (OP)
The Shinden because I'm a sucker for pusher props and for no other reason.

(why yes I am enjoying the drone age thank you for asking)

The US had an early version of the F-15 in 1946. Do NOT google this, its crazy top secret. It had eight engines instead of two of course, but performed pretty similarly.

>>64030256
They really should've adopted the contra-rotating prop system earlier, instead of letting it languish as a prototype due to muh complexity.

I like the the Sea Hornet since I'm a sucker for the DH twin engine heritage from the prewar racers onwards. Although idk if it counted as the as super-prop since it used 2000hp rated Merlins not the Griffon engine.

In general I love the wacky fighters the FAA prior to the F4 Phantom like the Sea Vixen where the RIO was relegated to a windowless cuck shed in the fuselage.

>>64030057

It was to celebrate a milestone in bombs dropped. the shitter was being thrown out anyway and it nearly hit another aircraft due to its erratic flight.

Back before environmentalism carrier crews used to also kiting random stuff off the steam catapults for their own amusement. HMS Ark Royal launched at least 2 pianos off the bow cats (that we know off from footage).

>>64030503
why would they have a spare piano lying around, let alone two

>>64030477
It's ok, some people even refers to the F8F and P-51H as superprops. And the Griffon wasn't as developed as the Merlin so they aren't that different in HP, at least the Merlins century.

Do Dornier 355 pfeifer

>>64030507
it was an RAF tradition to burn pianos

>>64030525
yeah but the raf at least has the excuse they operate on land and have access to pianos
how's the royal navy getting them, fishing them from the sea?

>>64030507

in 1970 they catapult launched a piano with Fly Navy written on it for the final episode of the Peter Cook comedy Not Only... But Also.

In 1978 when they learned the ship was being paid off they held a burial at sea ceremony for the well worn wardroom piano then launched it off one of the the bow catapults.

>>64026962 (OP)
Super Jug

>>64030527
anon above has answered the question

but, for sake of argument, it's conceivable that someone would buy a piano and hoist it onboard
the RAF used to do that; go buy a clapped-out old piano from any junker nearby and burn that

Sea Fury and Tempest II engines didn't have 2 stage superchargers, limiting their power over 20K feet, and would be bad for intercepting high flying bombers like the B-29. So the Spiteful wins.

The best super prop that actually saw combat.

>>64027028
>>64031140
How can they not know?

>>64031140
You mean the ensign killer that was outdone in every metric by the fucking Hellcat?

Turboprop Meteor

Also the B-36 would have been fast tracked and replaced the B-29 for air raids over Japan.

>>64031377
>Also the B-36 would have been fast tracked and replaced the B-29 for air raids over Japan

>>64031382
what's it with americans and their obsession with huge metal cocks

>>64031377
What's the advantage of losing 1/3rd of thrust for speeds above 600 km/h?

>>64031401
You seem to be both preoccupied and jealous. It suits you.

>>64030256
That's a lot of maintenance and engine rebuilds in that video.

>>64031382
>B-36
>Aluminum overcast

>>64031166
>outdone
Nope
>ensign killer
Literal skill issue

Americans don't seem to be able to wrap their heads around the fact that the USN grew from like maybe 300 carrier pilots in 1939 with zero combat experience to tens of thousands in 1944. That kind of growth means the average pilot has very little stick time and will make mistakes in training, often deadly.
Older, more mature air forces with significant pre-1941 combat experience know this.

>>64027006
Ki-100 would probably clear all of those fighters if it went into production.

>>64027486
sex

>>64028929
Last prop fighter aircraft to be used in a2a combat in the Soccer War.

>>64032011
the hellcat only had better numbers than the corsair because it was easier to fly, the corsair was better than it in every way other than that

>>64026962 (OP)
P51H IRL
none of the others have the range to be useful outside of being an interceptor

>>64027097
The Spiteful was dogshit, no better than a later Spitfire. Laminar flow is a meme and what makes the matter even worse is that Brits just copy whatever they see without understanding it like the elliptical or laminar flow wing.

>>64026962 (OP)
Forgot the Tempest.

>>64034410
>Sea Fury

>>64026962 (OP)

F8F Bearcat

>>64027097
>>64027431
>P-51H
This, and OP needs to be banned.

>muh Sea Fury
both the Tempest VI (Sabre) >>64034410
and Tempest II (Centaurus, in airframe which actually could handle the torque) >>64030110 far outclassed its performance, the Sea Fury was a gimped-airframe derivative for RN carrier use

>>64027028
>>64031140
>>64031159
>F4U-4
The cannon-armed -4 was a post-1946 variant.
F4U-4s that were actually deployed to the Pacific were 6×.50 armed
Yes it was a highly capable fighter bomber, rough equivalent of the USAAF's P-47M and N at that time

>>64030477
>DH.103 Hornet
This was the peak performance-wise of mid-1940s piston engined fighter development
(it didn't have the nose landing gear or high altitude systems refinement/turbosupercharging of the P-38L but much greater performance)

>>64027048
F7F-1 (BuNo 80286) parked in July 1945

>>64033883
Laminar flow (wing) isn't a meme, but the Spiteful was a Spitfire too far.
Tempest (VI and II) was a superior aircraft for multirole use

Also the Griffon Spitfires couldn't handle that much power, same thing happened to the upengined post-F variants of the Bf 109. These were 1930s airframe designs with post-1941 2K hp class engines shoehorned into them, and with outward-retracting main landing gear. Deathtraps on takeoff