Best Dogfighter Poll Revisited...
- Thread starter lesofprimus
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
A
Anonymous
Guest
lesofprimus said:
What I mean is it could have the advantage in some circumstances.
In the most likely combat meeting between a P-51D and a Spitfire XIV, the P-51D was a match for, or maybe even a little superior to, the Spitfire. This is because the P-51D is already at altitude, and is cruising about 75-100 mph faster than the Spitfire when they see each other. It controls the enagagement at the start, which often is enough to mean victory. If it starts to loose control of the fight, it can exit combat in a shallow dive the Spitfire cannot keep up with.
=S=
Lunatic
A
Anonymous
Guest
plan_D said:Wait...no, he's just said it...he thinks the Mustang is a better dogfighter...
Grrrr...
No that is not at all what I said. I said that in realistic combat situations, you would expect the P-51 to start with an initial advantage, and that any time the fight is not in the P-51's favor, it should run away.
You see, that's a standard thing of thinking that dogfighting is a turning fight. We all know it's not, and the Spitfire is a better dogfighter.
The Mustang can run away, do you know how hard it is to actually run away. It's not a case of putting your nose down and waving goodbye, because the acceleration wasn't fast enough. This thing has gone on before with the Hurricane Vs. -109 ...the Corsair Vs. Shiden...if the -109 could just run away (which it could, on paper) why did the Hurricane shoot so many down!?
The Mustang can run away, do you know how hard it is to actually run away. It's not a case of putting your nose down and waving goodbye, because the acceleration wasn't fast enough. This thing has gone on before with the Hurricane Vs. -109 ...the Corsair Vs. Shiden...if the -109 could just run away (which it could, on paper) why did the Hurricane shoot so many down!?
the lancaster kicks ass
Major General
- 19,937
- Dec 20, 2003
because it could turn inside it for a start...........
cheddar cheese
Major General
I think that was more of a rhetorical question to prove a point...and a good point at that.
A
Anonymous
Guest
plan_D said:
Because not every fight is a "fair fight". Within the context of this type of discussion, I assume we are excluding the most common way that planes got shot down - by the sneak attack. You can bet that more than half of the 109's shot down by Hurricanes never realized they were a target. Either they were bounced and never saw tha attacker until it was too late, or they were fighting another plane when they got in the crosshairs of the plane that shot them down. And because of the combat situation, the 109's being far away from their bases with limited fuel and ammo, they were ripe for being bounced.
Within the context of this type of discussion, we assume such things are not the case. We assume an equal number of planes meet either at equal initial conditions, or at typical initial conditions. Typical conditions make more sense, because, as an example, P-38's engaging Zero's would almost always start at a higher altitude.
In the case of the P-51 vs. the Spitfire, the typical condition of contact would be that the P-51's would be cruising at somewhere between 330-395 mph TAS, the Spitfires at something around 275-300 mph TAS, because those were the cruise speeds the planes could sustain while seeking the enemy. Therefore, the P-51 should start with an initial speed avantage, and if it is unable to at least damage the Spitfire before the Spitfire gains the advantage, it should run away using its faster sustainable moderate dive speed. The smart P-51 pilot would never "turn-fight" with the Spitfire, except at very high speeds where it has the advantage (better roll rate, pilot in a G-suit, guns that are easier to score with).
=S=
Lunatic
Adolf Galland
Airman 1st Class
Umm, I can add one more thing to that:
The Hurricane (in BoB) got the highest kill for example is because it sucks, and the RAF command had to LET them attack the vunerable bombers while they FORCED the Spitfire to fight off the Messerschmitts, so the Hurricane is really NOT as good as SOME people might think...
The Hurricane (in BoB) got the highest kill for example is because it sucks, and the RAF command had to LET them attack the vunerable bombers while they FORCED the Spitfire to fight off the Messerschmitts, so the Hurricane is really NOT as good as SOME people might think...
In effect, RG, you just said if the Mustang failed in bouncing the Spitfire then it'd run away. GREAT DOGFIGHTER!
The Hurricane was a good plane. It was there to destroy the bombers, yes but it could and DID shoot down -109s and not always by bouncing.
Not every pilot thinks perfectly for every second of combat, the Mustang pilots would get into turning fight..or they'd just run away. What good is that? It's not a fight then is it.
The Hurricane was a good plane. It was there to destroy the bombers, yes but it could and DID shoot down -109s and not always by bouncing.
Not every pilot thinks perfectly for every second of combat, the Mustang pilots would get into turning fight..or they'd just run away. What good is that? It's not a fight then is it.
A
Anonymous
Guest
plan_D said:
Much of the time, they'd score in the first pass or two, and then they win. If not, they seperate, reposition, and come back. They have much longer endurance, so they can dominate the combat area. And they don't need to shoot down the enemy to succeed, only stop them from performing their missions.
I'd like to see one documented case of a Hurricane winning a dogfight against a 109E4 or later that was not a bounce or other blind shot. I.e., a one on one engagement with the two pilots mutually aware and at roughly equal altitude, both planes having sufficient fuel and ammo to fight. It probably did happen, but if it did it was because the 109 pilot made a huge mistake.
The Mustang was an escort fighter, if it failed to bounce the Spitfire (which the Spitfire had good visibility, so it wouldn't be a slaughter as you think) and the Spitfire was intercepting, the Mustang would have to run away..so the Mustang has failed.
The Spitfire is on a fighter sweep, the Mustang had to run away so it's failed.
The Spitfire on escort, the Mustang had to run away so it failed.
The Spitfire is on a fighter sweep, the Mustang had to run away so it's failed.
The Spitfire on escort, the Mustang had to run away so it failed.
A
Anonymous
Guest
plan_D said:
No, because the Spitfire cannot cruise at nearly the speed the Mustang can. 75 mph is a huge advantage at the start of combat. If the Spitfire maintains the same patrol speed as the P-51, it has to land in about 40 minutes. The P-51 can do it for over 2 hours.
The Spitfire was an interceptor, a dogfighter. It goes up to intercept the bombers, the Mustang is escorting. It HAS to keep the fighters off the bombers, so it has to stay and fight or the bombers are dead. The Spitfire can easily dogfight with the Mustang in this situation.
This isn't endurance, this is a dogfight. The Mustang couldn't just run away in a lot of situations. If the Mustang had to run away and re-adjust when defending the Fortresses, think how many more would be lost.
This isn't endurance, this is a dogfight. The Mustang couldn't just run away in a lot of situations. If the Mustang had to run away and re-adjust when defending the Fortresses, think how many more would be lost.
A
Anonymous
Guest
plan_D said:
Wrong. This never worked for any side that tried it, regaurdless of the planes involved. It was well proven that close escort didn't work!
What the Mustangs do is patrol in sweeps well out in front of the bombers, looking to catch the interceptors climbing or cruising to the targets, where they bounce and kill them. Sweeps are started at approximately 33,000 feet, and the P-51 dives at a little less than 1000 fpm, allowing it to attain a speed of over 450 mph TAS for 5 minutes and sweep an arc in front of the bombers approximately 60 miles in length over about 8 minutes. If no contacts are made, it zoom climbs from its finishing altitude of approximately 27,000 feet back up to about 31,000 feet, then climbs to 33,000 feet, then builds level cruise speed and then conducts another sweep. That is how the P-51 provided final escort after Gen. Doolittle took over the 8th AF.
plan_D said:
All the P-51 has to do to defend the fortresses is make the interceptors try to engage them. If the interceptors turn back to the bombers, the P-51's can turn back on the interceptors. If the interceptors engage the P-51's, their fuel situation precludes interception of the bombers.
And besides, as long as the fight is fast, the P-51 can duke it out with the Spitfire. The P-51 out rolls and out-zooms the Spitfire, and the pilot can handle higher G loads w/o blacking out. If the Spitfire wants to engage the P-51, it will have to chase it, and if it does so, it will have to give up altitude, making bomber interception impossible.
=S=
Lunatic
If it was as simple as you made out, then the Germans would have never intercepted the bomber formations. The roaming escort was effective, but in fact the Spitfire would not need to chase the Mustang. The reason being, unlike the Fw-190 and -109, the Spitfire would out-dogfight the Mustang, if the Mustang wanted to run away, it could because the Spitfire wouldn't need to give chase. It would just carry on to the bombers, while the Mustang is trying to re-adjust for its own advantage.
While it's re-adjusting, the bombers have been caught and slaughtered.
While it's re-adjusting, the bombers have been caught and slaughtered.
A
Anonymous
Guest
plan_D said:
But that only could occur after the Spitfires overcame the initial speed advantage of the P-51's. And by the time that is accomplished, the bombers are probably beyond Spitfire interception.
And again, the Spitfire could not out-dogfight the P-51 at high speeds. Above 350 IAS, the P-51 had the clear advantage, and above 300 IAS it held a slight advantage.
A clear advantage, so you're claiming that the Mustang was a better dogfighter.
In World War 2, planes could not keep up speed for long. The Mustang would need to slaughter on the first pass, and keep it fast by dropping lower and lower. The Spitfire didn't need to follow.
In World War 2, planes could not keep up speed for long. The Mustang would need to slaughter on the first pass, and keep it fast by dropping lower and lower. The Spitfire didn't need to follow.
A
Anonymous
Guest
plan_D said:
If the speed was high enough, yes the Mustang was a better "dogfighter" (your term). Spitfires at altitude were full wing versions, and rolled rather poorly at even moderate speeds, and quite poorly at high speeds.
The P-51 would use energy tactics. It attacks on the first pass and then levels out and zoom climbs. The Spitfires either engage or are subject to another free pass. To be effective, the Spitfires need to turn and fight. But in doing so, they loose their intercept opportunity. The same tactics that worked on 109G's would work on Spitfires.
