Best ETO fighter from 1939-1942

Best ETO Fighter from 1939-1942?

  • Total voters
    49

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

Status
Not open for further replies.
Gnomey said:
Nice info wmaxt. The P-38 did a lot better than I thought it did in the ETO.
Click to expand...

Thanks.

The P-38s main problem in the ETO was that it was available while the 8th AF was proving self escorted bombers is a great way to commit suicide. For instance it was claimed the early P-38s had less range than the P-51s but the 300gal drop tanke were NEVER used in the ETO, every where else they were flying up to 800mi (each way) missions.

wmaxt
 
cheddar cheese said:
Why were the 300gals not used in the ETO?
Click to expand...

As far as I can tell they were never requested, The P-38s were never adequately supported in the ETO.

Another example is combat training, combat experianced pilots were seldom given more that cockpit checks. New pilots in P-38s got around 20hrs in type then off to combat. New pilots in P-51s were given 50hrs just in combat orientation prior to combat.

Problems like compressability and engine bugs occured in the P-51s (Engine), and P-47s (compressability they got dive flaps too) but the P-38s problems were delt with in combat (and in front of everyone) because the other planes weren't as ready for combat as the P-38. The amazing thing is the not ready P-38 still did better than the fixed versions of the others!

wmaxt
 
Part of the reason NO fighters got belly tanks in England is the generals wanted to prove that unescorted bombing worked according to theory.

Once that issue was settled, belly tanks of all capacities began to show up.
 
syscom3 said:
Part of the reason NO fighters got belly tanks in England is the generals wanted to prove that unescorted bombing worked according to theory.

Once that issue was settled, belly tanks of all capacities began to show up.
Click to expand...

Yep I mentioned that above. There NEVER were 300 gal tanks for P-38s in the ETO.

BTW: P-39s tested the first belly tanks in the AAF in '41 (they were forbiden in the AAF until '42). Lockheed flew a P-38F 3,100mi in early '42. The Lockheed tanks were the most streamlined and the 165gal tanks were used in the pacific on P-47s.

The Bolero mission flying P-38s to Britain finaly proved that drop tanks were practicle and were useful in extending range.

wmaxt
 
For the ETO I disagree. While it was a great aircraft it was better suited for the PTO. There were plenty of aircraft in the ETO that were just as good as a P-38.[/quote]

I agree. Especially with the aircraft that would be available within a year such as P-47 and P-51s. But I still love all that concentrated firepower. Still, again and some can correct me on this, wasn't the Beaufighter also more effective in warmer climates such as Africa, the Med, PTO, and Asia-Burma.

:{)
 
I Picked The Hawker Hurricane because it was the backbone of the RAF From 1939-1942, It was the Empires mostly largely produced aircraft at the time, it accounted for 75% of the Casualties inflicted on the Luftwaffe during the battle of Britain, It wasnt as fast or had the firepower that the BF-109 did but, it had superior agility, Its Ruggedness and reliability was excellent, its firepower and Endurance was much better than the Spitfire during this time period, And during the Battle Of Britain, Canada had fought alongside the RAF with its Deployment of only 100 Hurricanes and shot down over 200 german planes and only sufferd 12 casualties.
 
The hurricane up against a 190A would be in alot of trouble, because the 190 is faster, manoueverable, but cant turn as tight, and is all around just a better aircraft in terms of statistics. one of the few shortcomings was that early 190s stayed close to home from engine overheat troubles, giving the hurricane the reliability advantage, and the hurricane could take more punishment...but the 190 was still a better aircraft, even better than the spit v when it appeared.
 
carpenoctem1689

YOUR RIGHT THE 190 WAS A BETTER AIRCRAFT THAN THE HURRICANE BUT ONLY BY A SMALL MARGIN, BECAUSE BY THE TIME THE FOCKE WOLF CAME OUT, THE HURRICANE HAD RECEIVED MAJOR UPRADES, THE 4X30.CAL MGS WERE REPLACED WITH 4X20MM CANNONS,
THE ENGINE WAS REPLACED WITH THE ROLLS ROYCE MERLIN V-12 ENGINE PROVIDING A BONE SHATTERING 1800HP AND NOT TO MENTION, THE HURRICANE HAD FUEL INJECTION WHILE THE FW-190 WAS STILL USING A CARBORATOR MEANING THE 190 COULDNT DO A STRAIGHT DIVE WHICH AT THE TIME WAS THE MOST EFFECTIVE EVASIVE MANOUVER. SO IF THE 190 POINTED HIS NOSE DOWN TOO FAR THE ENGINE WOULD SHUT OFF, HENSE IN A COMBAT SITUATION SOURKRAUT WAS SO SCREWD.
 
Even with those upgrades the Fw-190 still was superior to any Hurricane. It was a different class of aircraft. The Hurricane was outdated by Fw-190 standards. When it came out it was the finest fighter in service in the world and it never left being in the top.
 
But lets remember the timeline, the FW190 though made its appearance in North Africa in 42, it was small, and through this timeline 39-42 the Hurricane had the best service record, it served on all fronts, it was a good all around fighter, and the FW-190 dindnt go into mass production until 1943, and by that time the new spitfires, P47 thunderbolts, and P38Js had taken over for the Hurricane, the Battle of Britain was the ultimate test of who had the best airforce, Britain won and the majority of the aircraft used by the RAF and its Colonies were Hurricanes.
 
The Fw-190A first appeared in combat against the allies in 1941 not in 1942 and over France not N. Afrika. Where do you get your information from?


And who cares about timelines or what not. The Fw-190 was much better than the Hurricane, any varient period. They way you are coming up with your assumption is like saying that the Sopwith Camel is better than the P-51D because the Sopwith Camel did more in 1918 than the P-51D did in the whole war.

The BoB did not really prove who had a better airforce. The Germans lost because they made very very very dumb mistakes like a change in tactics and what not.
 

Where did you found documentation about a 1800hp- fuel injection Merlin in 1942? Never heard of a Merlin with fuel injection until very late in the war, and I am not sure it went into production.
I never heard about it, nor that it was fitted on a hurri. Also I never heard/read that the 190 had engine cut problems in dive, no matter how steep.

What I know is that RR was faithful to carburettors because they believed that the lower temp of the mix was offsetting the advanytages of the injection.

It reminds the story of the early merlins vs DB601 with the name changed!





'
 

I think you're a little off the mark.....

The most powerful engine the Hurricane had was the Merlin 32 that produced 1645 hp and these were on the Mark Vs.

The BMW 801 used on the FW-190 A8 featured a pressure carburetor. This works like a fuel injection unit except an intake manifold is still used. What you describe is typical of early Spitfires and Hurricanes.....

So tell me, where did you read about all this?!?
 
Yeap same here I have not heard of Fw-190s engines just quitting because they were in a dive. A Fw-190 would outdive a Hurricane anyhow. Hell the BMW-801s were very good engines. Not the best but very robust and good.
 
I've posted this before....

The BMW 801D-2 was fed by methanol-water injection. Most revolutionary however, was the hydraulic-electric 'brain' unit, operated by a single control which was the pilot's throttle lever. It automatically adjusted fuel flow, mixture strength, propeller pitch setting and ignition timing. It also cut in a second stage of the supercharger at the correct altitude. The pilot could, if required, manually set the propeller pitch without altering any of the other settings.

Oh - I was wrong about the pressure carb - the -801 had a FUEL INJECTION PUMP!!!! THE ENGINE COULD OPERATE IN ANY ATITUDE!!!! See the link for additional information.....

http://cip.physik.uni-wuerzburg.de/~vernalek/glc9-2106US.html

What about the -190s engine shutting off?!?!?
 
I dont know what you were talking about with a hurricane having an 1800hp engine, i dont even know if a hurricane prototype ever had such HP, much less any production aircraft. I also have never heard of a 190s engine cutting out in a dive, only that the engine overheated early on, and some fume exhaust leakage, but that was also fixed. And the reason the hurricane was so important was because it was simply the most available when it was needed, not that it was an outstanding aircraft, yes it was good in several roles, of fighter, and ground attack, but the 190 was better in every conceivable role.
 
CurzonDax said:
For the ETO I disagree. While it was a great aircraft it was better suited for the PTO. There were plenty of aircraft in the ETO that were just as good as a P-38.
Click to expand...

I agree. Especially with the aircraft that would be available within a year such as P-47 and P-51s. But I still love all that concentrated firepower. Still, again and some can correct me on this, wasn't the Beaufighter also more effective in warmer climates such as Africa, the Med, PTO, and Asia-Burma.

:{)[/quote]

The P-38L was available at the same time as the P-47D/P-51D were available in the ETO and was superior to both and had none of the problems that were supposedly in the early models remained. The P-38s kill rate was twice the P-51s which was ahead of the P-47. Further the P-38s record was achieved with green planes, green pilots, green ground crew, insuffient support, machanical losses against experienced German pilots and 10:1 P-38 odds NONE of which the P-51/P-47s had to deal with.

Several sources claim 20:1 P-38 for the L models fighting in the same conditions in the ETO with the P-51D/P-47Ds, and even without Ls the MTO rate was 6:1 P-38.

Also the decision by Doolittle was for logistical reasons not performance, Warren Bodie summarizes the interview in his book P-38. The P-51 had 2 factories and supplied 2 times the planes so they concentrated them in the ETO. Many sources contend P-38 was wanted over the P-51/P-47 everywhere else (esp the Pacific).

In '39 through '42 the Bf-109 has to be considered with the Spit V, Fw190A, and P-38 with the P-40 and Hurricane close behind too. The best plane in this group is who is the best pilot/best mission. Long range escort was absolutly the P-38, the heavest bomb load was the P-38 (3,200lbs), high cover was P-38 (and cold fingers) and the P-38 could mix it up on ~equal terms with the others. The ETO, and its sustained very high altitude, was not involved at this time.

If you choose something else thats fine and your choice, but if you do a little research, I don't think it will be on the actual performance record of the P-38, early or late.

Try this site for a start: http://home.att.net/~C.C.Jordan/index.html There are 5 articals on the P-38 several are titled as Der Gabelscgwanz Teufel.

wmaxt
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

Second best fighter of World War II
Replies
15
Views
2K
SaparotRob
A
Best British single engined radial aircraft in WW2?
2
Replies
23
Views
2K
nuuumannn
  • Poll
Best US escort fighter in ETO during 1943?
3 4 5
Replies
90
Views
13K
DarrenW
  • Poll
Best Biplane fighter ww2
Replies
1
Views
4K
wlewisiii
  • Poll
German multiengine jet bomber best immune to Allied interception
Replies
0
Views
896
Vahe Demirjian
Menu
Log in
Register