I have an un-explainable admiration for Italian fighters, as I have NO Italian blood or relatives. But for me , the CR.42 is one of my top favorites. I love how it looks ! I have built a model in 1/76 of the Fiat CR.42 Falco, and have plans to eventually build my own "Italian Air Force" to include at least one of every Italian plane of WW II, As many as possible in 1/76, but if any Italian aircraft models are only available in scales other than 1/76, I will include them in my collection so I have one of every Italian plane of WW II. Then I will look for any model kits of Italian WW I aircraft, Italian a/c just look so cool to me !

I love the Italian fighter designs, they generally had serious flaws often related to armaments more than anything else, but they were beautiful planes.

I think Sweden was the only nation to have both Gloster Gladiators and Fiat CR.42s. It would be interesting to hear which one the Swedish Air Force felt was the best. As they were the only ones who used both.

I once dated a beautiful Italian girl named Catsia Rosatelli. She had biplanes for extra lift, a wide undercarriage for bumpy landings, and good handling characteristics. I miss her.

Pilot skill is another factor, I have Dust Clouds In The Middle East which has first person narrative from the Hurricane pilots that one had to be careful against a skilled Italian pilot, cheers

CR42 saw combat in the Battle of Britain. Didn't fare well, but it was there.

For me it would be a joint first with the Gloster Gladiator and the Fiat CR.42. Definitely the pinnacle of the biplane. Interestingly the Gladiator was the not only the last biplane to see frontline service for the British Royal Air Force but it was the last propeller driven aircraft designed by Gloster to see service. Its next aircraft to see service with the RAF was its first jet, Gloster Meteor. Talk about jumping a step.

The avia b-534 is probably my favorite biplane of all time I hope it gets a video of its own!!

Hey there! Sorry for the long period between videos. I have a lot on my plate at the moment. I'll keep supporting the "Battle of Kuban" series, alternating with "Regular" videos. I hope you enjoy this one!

Cr-42. Gotta love it.

I've read the Osprey's book about Gloster Gladiator vs CR42. Apparently the British biplane was slightly slower but more agile and better armed with 4 machine guns. The victory ratio was 1.2 in favour of the Gladiator.

A very neat little aircraft.

Great video!! As an Italian i saw in person in a museum all the Major fighters that the R.A. had, and i found your video to be very accurate and clear, i hope that One day u could bring the Re.2005, my fav fighter.

Italian aircraft aren't given enough credit. They made some visually stunning designs. These machines are very interesting but there is very little information compared to other countries planes.

I don't know if it was the Best, but it was one of the best looking Biplanes ever made for sure.

10:47 - the Soviet ShkAS mg on the I-153 had a far superior rate of fire compared to others, so it definitely had the best armament.

There were many other biplane fighters in action in WWII. Belgian Fairey Firefly biplane fighters were used against Luftwaffe during the German invasion of Belgium. During the invasion of Yugoslavia an Italian CR 42 downed a Yugoslav Hawker Fury biplane fighter. However, South African Air Force Fury biplanes had some succes against the Italian forces in East Africa in 1941 and destroyed two Caproni bombers as well as strafing many airfields, destroying fighters and bombers on the ground. Curtiss Model 68 Hawk III (Goshawk) biplane fighters of the Thai Airforce were used against the French in the Franco-Thai War and the Japanese invaders in December 1941. One of the most noteworthy biplane fighter victories in WWII was the air battle over Oslo where six Norwegian Gladiators shot down a Junkers 52 three-engine transport presumably filled with airborne troops, a Heinkel 111 two-engine bomber and three Messerschmitt 110 two-engine fighters for the loss of a single Gladiator.

I read an article account by an RAF Hurricane pilot who flew against the CR42 in North Africa. I remember he said that the CR42 was a very manoeuvrable fighter, often expertly flown. But " if you gave it a squirt with 8 Browning's, it just fell out of the sky"

Excellent video! These aircraft were so close in capability that I suppose that it would come down to, as usual, the skill of the pilot.

best byplane has to be the fairy swordfish.what a combat plane the stringbag,well past its sell by date,yet the damage it done the bismark,taranto.great show and info.

Great video I really like the coverage of lesser-known world war 2 airplanes

Years ago I knew a SAAF pilot who flew Gladiators in 40/41, I remember him saying that their "kites" had the advantage over the "eyties in their 42's"

One small note regarding the Italian 12.7mm machine gum. For Aviation use it was loaded with Frangible bullets, an unwise choice as they shattered on impact with any metal, and often failed to do real damage to engines. They could be and were lethal to unprotected pilots, but the advent of even minimal pilot armour tended to lessen that. The Italian 7.7mm guns did more damage, despite a lower velocity and lower weight of fire.

Great video. I especially liked the in depth comparison of the four contenders for best biplane. If I had the money I would still go for the Gladiator as a fun plane to fly and wow everyone at air shows. I would add a heater as I like a bit of comfort.

Most of the only dogfights between biplanes in WW2 were between Italian biplanes and Gloster Gladiators. A comparison would be interesting.

I'm pleasantly surprised at professionalism & open discussion of various plusses & minuses. I subscribed.

Excellent presentation. Well done most informative and interesting.

Excellent analysis. Very well presented and argued. Now I need to find a good model kit. Thank you

Nice video of the Italian falcon. Like to see similar videos of other biplanes like the gladiator or I 153.

THIS ! is a REALLY good quality, informative video...thank you.

There was an attempt to put a DB 601 on the 42. Looks pretty cool

Great video! It's only just struck me that I can't recall ever reading an account of a Gladiator vs Falco combat... I always wondered if they'd ever met in the air!

A great examination of the CR-42 thanks.

Very Educational! great comparisons. nice charts. Thanks!

A very well put together video thank you

Didn't they test a version with a Daimler 601 that did something like 530 kph, wouldn't that been a surprise for allied pilots.

There is a CR42 and a Gladiator in the flying hanger at Duxford at the moment. They should both be flying by the summer of 2023 I believe.

Very interesting. Thank you. I would give it to the Gladiator. My favorite biplane fighters of the war were the I-190, but only one was completed (I think). And the I-195 - which even the prototype was not completed. ☮

Honorable mention of the Barrel Fighter!! It was actually superior to the AAC's land-based P26 monoplane!

Nice videos as always. Keep it up.

先日、ICMの１/３２ Fiat Cr.42をモーターライズで製作したばかしなんで興味深く拝見しました。やっぱ、地中海方面の戦闘でライバルはグラディエーターですね。

good video. and kudos for your pretty good pronunciation of Italian words and names!

Gladiator. The pilot with the better training and experience would probably be the deciding factor in 1v1 combat.

I think it would be nice to know more about the Fokker G.I, maybe you can make an video about it?

i built about 50 , years ago, the Airfax 1/72nd styrene kit, Cr-42 in that camouflage, good-looking aircraft.

I'm biased here,but I think that Polikarpov's I-153 takes the cake as an all around great fighter biplane,most versatile of all of those listed (except for naval version of Gladiator for carrier operations,but Soviets didn't built any carriers for to need naval version of I-153).4 SHKAS 7,62 MGs are no joke,with about 600 rounds per gun.Is just slightly slower than Cr.42 in top speed,can carry up to 4x100 kg bombs (4x50 was most common load,but still was much better than none for Gladiator and at best 100 kg for cr.42 and B-534).Can carry 8 rs-82 mm rockets.Turns greatly due to it's quite forward wings.Flat spin could be a problem, but it's low stall speed meant that rarely would someone make such an error in piloting.Low production variant for high altitude interception had closed cockpit (quite weird looking, I might add),and P variant had 2x20 mm cannons for if SHKAS feels anemic. I'm open for counterargument,though.

Отличные видео, товарищ))

Shame the video ended with an example going down in flames, most unfortunate. Keep up the good work though!

Out of these four, I personaly prefer the I-153, both because of its looks and its performance: In WarThunder(yes i know, the grind is shit and its not as good of a sim as DCS or IL2 are, but it "works") Air Sim battles I use it as a small ground attacker because it got 4x 50kg bombs. Its small and agile so if there is a fighter near by, i can defend myself. And the four ŠKAS MGs arent half bad, tho i prefer the P version with two 20mms. Its speed also isnt bad and the handling is pretty nice except when you use rudder too much or try to aim at stationary target. Btw, very nice video. Would be great if you did a vid on all four of the "best WW2 biplanes", but considering the Battle of Kuban series and the fact that not all of your viewers are interested in biplanes, i doubt you will make them. Still, nice work mate, keep going. But if you need to, take your time. Cheers.

Been flying low tier Italian planes in war thunder recently and having alot of fun, ones like the re 2001 and fc.20, so it was great to hear about this one.

My great uncle was an RAF pilot in the battle of El Alamein with the 250 squadron and flew a kitty hawk like you showed in the video

Yes it was the best but don't let the Gloster Gladiator fans hear you lol yes the "I just Like it" factor is a tough one for me as I like the Gladiator is just got all the right lines but at the same time there's something very sweet about the Avia design its got a really nice shape. I bet a Henschel 123 would be a seriously tough opponent for these fighters especially the light machine-gun armed planes. A lot of armour around the pilot and engine on that plane.

Well done great video how about a video on reconnaissance aircraft Of the early war period Some beautiful aircraft or a potez25 Video a plane never talked about But many were made and served in so many wars Take care 👍 Ps you forgot about the Japanese ki10 🤕

I remember reading that later biplanes would stagger the upper and lower wings to achieve better lift. It's surprising to see that such a late biplane design didn't incorporate such a feature!

Found it. Thanks.

One area you omitted, structural strength, the Falco was probably the most robust of all these designs, it coud be dived wihout fear of structural failure!

Such a beautiful bird.

For best biplane of WWII, I'd have to go with the Gladiator, just because of their role in the defence of Malta. Sometime, the technical abilities of an aircraft are less important than being just what is needed, and in the right place!

As I researched it, the conclusion by the Italian Air ministry that the Bi-plane still had a role to play, was based on the success of the CR-32 in Spain. In addition the Air battles over Ethiopia, North Africa, and Greece showed that the Gladiator had a slight edge over the CR-42.

I do think that camouflage is damn cool

hi, the winner according to your table is Avia B-534 if you take all versions in account. Since the last version of Avia introduced shortly before war was Avia Bk-534, it had full instrument setup so it is a tie for the first place with Gladiator in equipment, and in armament it is clear winner and all others are lower, since Bk-534 had 2x7,92mm machine guns+ 1x20mm Oerlikon cannon.

Assuming every biplane was obsolete by 1935, I would go with the plane which more closely fulfils the requirements. For example, having an enclosed cockpit does not automatically be the best choice as some nation preferred an open one. Other nations, like Great Britain preferred a closed cockpit due to usual bad weather conditions, but in Africa and the mediterranen, an open cockpit was to be preferred on a biplane because of low maximum ceiling and speed. Another thing that we cannot easily judge is the "Feeling" of the plane, which is different from sustained max rate of turn or just the ability to get high fast. A smaller lower wing on a biplane is less destabilizing for the air flow on the upper main wing (a typical issue for biplanes) It also allows for a much sturdier wing construction that both give torsional resistance to the upper wing and makes the whole cabling more rigid at high speeds. Control harmonisation is also extremely important on a plane for reducing fatigue for the pilot and it also can be very important into reducing the "stiffness", and with that the manoeuvrability, of the plane after a dive, or reducing the overall drag and loss of energy after an abrupt manoeuvre. Finally engine is also a big factor, not just about power, but also about "taming" and capability of both the carburettor and the oil system to keep working smoothly in every flight condition. Which one was the best biplane? I don't know as I haven flown any.

Personally, I'd have gone for the Avia B-534 ,granted less combat proven and maybe just my bias but a truly beautiful WW2 biplane fighter.

Interesting. We should all remember that WW2 was fought with what you had on hand. A fact often forgotten? Such is the military!

I´d also give bonus points for enclosed cockpits, but that would sound like an obvious bias. Also, the B-534 was ready to be equipped with a propeller shaft mounted 20mm autocannon, and was also considered for the role of a naval fighter for the Graf Zeppelin aircraft carrier. On the other hand, it had probably the worst cockpit visibility and thus situational awareness. But if it had as much time to be upgraded as the other 3, Im sure it would surpass them (as it was basically a modern monoplane fighter only with an additional upper wing).

will you do the Australian Boomerang next please? the first and last time we tried to do a fighter. maybe the wirraway?

Fiat CR-42, THE Beauty

It's a pity that the CR.42 was not matched with a Daimler Benz DB601, like some of the Macchi aircraft were - that would have been a sight!

Nice video - but I think you forgot one important factor regarding byplanes: all around visibility - in that category, I'd put the Chaika first

The Gladiator according to your review. 3 Gloster Gladiators ;Faith, Hope, and Charity also successfully defended Malta in the initial stages of WW2 from the Italian airforce though vastly outnumbered. 👍🏻🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿

I prefer the Polikarpov I-153. But this is still a good plane.

CR42 and Me262 both produced during the same time for combat service in the same general theater of the same war by the same side. And some are amazed at Mosin Nagants and AK74s serving side by side in Ukraine.

Imagine a Merlin powered Gladiator!! (I have, and made a model of it)

Not in the running but since it was a biplane. I'll bring up the role of the Fairy Swordfish in sinking the German battleship Bismarck..

To think Mussolini took Italia into war in 1940, knowing that the CR-42 was his main fighter aircraft.

Speaking only in war thunder, but the I 153 is so good that it can handle monoplane, and one variant have 2 20mms.

War is tragic. However, the technology created centered around war, is absolutely amazing. War actually advances technology quicker than any other way.

Se consideri che, a parte il primissimo impiego come caccia nelle fasi iniziali della guerra, il Fiat CR 42 fu poi usato prevalentemente come aereo di attacco al suolo e di supporto aereo ravvicinato (close air support) delle forze terrestri, andrebbe confrontato anche con il tedesco Henschel HS 123, altro iconico biplano della seconda guerra mondiale, anch’esso utilizzato fino alla fine della guerra. Alla fine tutte le maggiori aviazioni avevano in servizio biplani in prima linea, almeno all’inizio della guerra

10/10 ❤

The question to which plane is the best is the one that you would choose to have if you were a commander, if given the choice of the four I would go with the CR.42 based off range as most other stats are very close , I think having a quarter inch armour plate to protect the pilot outweights the radio option though. Plus the .5 inch anti material gun would be more practical for its role as a non front line fighter in an anti bomber/ground attack/recon role that bi-planes were relegated too.

There was an experimental CR42 fitted with the German DB605 engine that recorded a top speed of 341 miles per hour. If that had been produced in numbers then that would undoubtedly be the best biplane fighter of the war, but it wasn't to be.

Hi, I almost NEVER subscribe...idk? why....but YOUR video is SO GOOD that I DONT want to rely on yt occasionally giving me one...thank you again

A biplane that I love is the Hawker Fury, but probably it had not participated in the WW2.

As for the last, least important category here, i think the CR-42, with its stout, powerful look is the best looking among these machines. Dunno, it's got an intimidating, "mean business" appearance.

Hi! Very nice video as usual. Thank you very much for doing such comparison of aircraft’s as nice bonus. You made some mistakes in your spreadsheets. But because it is Avia B-534 involved, I feel need to help you improve your data, little bit. 1. You wrote data for Gladiator Mk.I instead of MK.II MK.II has takeoff weight 2206 kg, max speed at sea level 346 km/h, max speed 414 km/h at 4420 m, can reach 3000 m in 4.5 min, has ceiling 10200 m, and range of 714 km. (The size of its wings was exactly 30,01 m2, it´s not important diference) 2. You used incorrect size of wings for CR.42, it has 22,4 m2. (And 22,1 m2 was for CR.32). 3. Same for Avia B-534, it has size of wings 23,56 m2, not less. 4. Using simply hp, for the value of motor power, can lead to incorrect belief that your engines numbers are in imperial hp, aka hp(I). But all numbers you wrote about engine power, including Gladiators MK II Mercury VIII A, are in fact in unit horse, aka PS, aka metric horse power hp(M). It will be OK if you just fix spreadsheet using hp(M) unit, instead hp. (But it will be also nice, if you add two other columns for kW, and actual imperial hp(I), or rather simply hp, to make it clear for all folk around.) Because you probably already know, I summarize more info for others. Easiest conversion its 1 kW = 1,359622 hp(M), aka PS etc. = 1,341022 hp(I), aka hp. Or reverse conversion: 1 hp(I) = 0,7457 kW = 1,01387 hp(M), and 1 hp(M) = 0,7355 kW. (I apologize for my English, as you can see, I´m not a native speaker.)

Served very well in East Africa along side the cr32. Unfortunately the British had the gladiator and also later hurricanes

You forgot about invasion of Greece. I’m nearly sure some of them where used in that conflict

Not sure how many kills Pat Pattle scored flying the Gladys, I think it was quite high, also the last biplane flying for the British was the Swordfish.

Would it have been viable doctrine for the Italian air forces to field combined units of both biplanes and monoplanes? If the biplanes were viable in a close dogfight, but thwarted when approached from range, having monoplanes handy to intercept other fighters trying to boom and zoom on the biplanes could be useful and viable for Italy at the time. Obviously it's better to have 1 fighter that can do both functions, but just going with what the Italians were working with - buying time until more fighter production is up and running.

How does the Heinkel He 51 compare?

Discussing what was the best biplane fighter of WW2 is roughly the same as discussing what was the best musket of WW1... but I would go with either the Falco or the I-153 😉 BTW, you are Portuguese, right? Um abraço!

And finally, after some constructive criticism, I can also help you with that sea level speed of the Avia B-534 IV. If speed near the ground will be a sufficient substitute, the numbers for the first B-534 prototype are published. Which gave Avia victory over its competitors. *: Speed near the ground 326.2 km/h. Maximum speed 363 km/h at 4000 m. Now you can easily derive the numbers for version IV. I already did it for you. Speed near the ground was 341.5 km/h for the IV. version. With exactly the same equipment as for a maximum speed of 380 km/h at a standard altitude of 4000 m, (using Military Power mode as the maximum allowed in peacetime...). I really wonder what the equipment was like, and if it included bomb racks already installed or not. For now, it remains a mystery of Avia, at least for me. I also want to note, that the Avia B-534 never reached its full potential. Improvements to its propulsion system stalled in Phase 1 during mobilization in September 1938. (Was set WEP mode! ** Results remained secret..., probably shredded just before occupation in March 1939?) Where the CR.42 has a 3-blade constant speed propeller, the I-153 has a 2-blade with 2 positions or an improved fully adjustable version, the standard Gladiator MK.II only has a fixed 3-blade. Avia has 2-blade adjustable on the ground only. But with a modern 3-bladed constant speed propeller, the Avia B-534 would become a real biplane demon!.. :-) And the CR.42 would have a really tough competitor, vying for the position of 2nd best biplane fighter of WW2. (No. 1 was clearly the I-153, and even a fully modernized B-534 could not compete with the speed and raw firepower of the I-153.) If Czechoslovakia had managed to avoid the Munich Agreement and somehow survive... That's another story, for another discussion. A few mistakes are nothing I won't forgive you easily, when I know you do it from the heart. And I like your presentation style. I wish you many more beautiful videos like this one, keep up the good work! * That, and a dirty but effective method ... which ensures that no other competitor has the option of getting the 12Ydrs engine supplied (even directly from Hispano-Suiza company in France). Because with the same engine either of them could easily beat the B-534. Czechoslovakia clearly missed the opportunity to have better equipment. And it's sad to even think about it... Source, AVIA B-534, (C) ing. VRANÝ Jiří, Prague: MBI 1994, ISBN 80-901263-6-7 ** Curych 1937, Kareš Marcel, Rajlich Jiří, Prague: Mladá fronta 2017, ISBN 978-80-204-4674-9

Supercharged, constant speed propeller on biplane, WOW

Favorite biplane fighter is a toss up between the Hawker Nimrod and I-15.

This does make one wonder what a modern Pitts Aerobics special would do if armed and put into the World War II conflict?!? 🤔

I think the best armament goes to the CR.42. Those 12.7mm are vastly superior to 7.7s. Pilot armor and self-sealing fuel tanks made 7.7mm guns incredible ineffective while 12.7mm bullets remained relevant till the end of the war, being able to penetrate more armor and cause fuel leaks or fires. Of course, if a plane has neither, more 7.7s guns are generally better. See early Spitfires or Hurricanes :D

Being the best biplane fighter model of WW2 is a bit like being the best cavalry horse breed of WW1.

Overall I would go with the Italian fighter. Japanese monooplanes did not have radios, armor or self sealing fuel tanks.

Multo bene

Polikarpov I 15 is my favorit.