Best German fighter for the Eastern Front

[davebender]

Performance of Me-109 equipped JG52 speaks for itself. No other figher type or fighter unit comes close in actual wartime accomplishments.

 

[parsifal]

Performance of Me-109 equipped JG52 speaks for itself. No other figher type or fighter unit comes close in actual wartime accomplishments.

wrong. perhaps in the narrow confines of german units, but the lae wing were the best individual unit of any nationality during the war.

 

[steve51]

Parsifal,
I'm curious on what you base your assertion about the Lae Wing. I know that the average number of flight hours of the pilots was quite high. Do you have other relevant statistics?

 

[Erich]

too few in numbers on the Ost front with JG 51 and IV./JG 3 but the Fw 190Dora proved itself a match for all Soviet types............

guess you could also include the Me 262A-1a with which the Soviets did not know what to do with, it was also well suited for the ground attack role as well

 

[riacrato]

I think the Bf 109 wasn't up to low-altitude combat with the Yaks and Lavochkins becasue of all the low-altitude losses they experienced after the two Soviet birds showed up. Many a Bf 109 stalled and spun in trying to follow a Yak in a tight turn at low altitude, according to the Russians. They must be correct, at least in most of their assertions about the German fighters because they shot most of them down in the 1943 and onward timeframe.

I don't really get what you are trying to say with that. The FW 190 will likewise have a hard time following a Yak in a tight turn, as will a P-51, most of the time, that is. "They shot most of them down"? Sorry but that statement misrepresents the situation enormously. The VVS was still losing much more planes in combat in comparison to the LW until long after that. The ratio was simply improving due to inevitable improvements in training, tactics and technological quality.

It is possible the quality of the German pilots was the primary deciding factor as the war dragged on but, if so, then the aircraft isn't going to make any difference anyway. Either way, the survivability of the Bf 109 on the Soviet front after summer of 1943 was pretty low no matter how you cut it.

And the survivability of the FW 190 was significantly better? Or that of the La 5? I doubt it, but if you can provide evidence to the contrary I'd be glad to see that.

 

[wiking85]

too few in numbers on the Ost front with JG 51 and IV./JG 3 but the Fw 190Dora proved itself a match for all Soviet types............

guess you could also include the Me 262A-1a with which the Soviets did not know what to do with, it was also well suited for the ground attack role as well

Was it actually effective as a ground attack aircraft?

 

[parsifal]

Parsifal,
I'm curious on what you base your assertion about the Lae Wing. I know that the average number of flight hours of the pilots was quite high. Do you have other relevant statistics?

Lots of sources really, but here is one that might be of some interest

Nishizawa: Japan's Deadliest Combat Pilot—102 U.S. Air Force Kills

 

[Jenisch]

Deleted.

 

[Jenisch]

The 190 had some isolated advantages, but in overall the 109 was better.

 

[steve51]

Parsifal,
Thanks for the link. I think we're getting away from the subject of the tread, but there's no question that the Lae Wing was a remarkable collection of excellent pilots.

 

[parsifal]

As a dedicated fighter, i have no issue calling the 109 the best available. But a dedicated fighter was NOT what was required, especially after air superiority had been irretrievably lost. A better option was a multi-role aircraft. However dreaming up an exotic, not yet in production type is simply going to play havoc with the numbers, and in the end, numbers count far more than any theoretical performance advantage.

All of these constraints lead to the inescapable conclusion that the 190 was the best choice for the eastern front. It was available in quantity, could effectively undertake both the air superiority and CAS roles and was a better mount for poorly trained pilots. We read a lot about the uber german aircrew, hardly anything about the hastily trained crews that really struggled. and I have 60000 reasons to say that the Germans werent always the super efficient aerial killers that post war propaganda triesd to portray them as.

 

[wiking85]

The 190 had some isolated advantages, but in overall the 109 was better.

Why? By what measure?

 

[Jenisch]

Why? By what measure?

The 109 was equal or faster than the Anton, but it climbed much better.

 

[Jenisch]

Parfisal,

The airframe of the 190 was better, the problem was the engine power. The Lavochkin had a similar output, but was much ligther (and the La-7 was faster). In order to be effective, the Fw would need a more powerful engine (preferably radial).

 

[wiking85]

The 109 was equal or faster than the Anton, but it climbed much better.

What about the Dora? The 109s that were faster were contemporaries of the Dora, not the Anton. But even the late Anton's kept up with the Me109Gs and Ks.

Parfisal,

The airframe of the 190 was better, the problem was the engine power. The Lavochkin had a similar output, but was much ligther. In order to be effective, the Fw would need a more powerful engine (preferably radial).

Why radial? The FW190D was the fastest and it had a liquid cooled inline.

 

[Jenisch]

The 109s that were faster were contemporaries of the Dora, not the Anton.

If you pick the 109 G-2, you already have an overall better plane. The 109 pilot can maneuver, he can outclimb the enemy. You need to have a relevant speed advantage if your plane is heavier, otherwise you are obligated to use less flexible tactics.

But even the late Anton's kept up with the Me109Gs and Ks.

The late war Antons were outclassed. "Ah, but they would shoot you down". This is not the problem, I'm not with charts at the momment, but it's just a matter of you verify them; the speed of the late war Antons was inadequated even for the Russian Front.

 

[parsifal]

Parfisal,

The airframe of the 190 was better, the problem was the engine power. The Lavochkin had a similar output, but was much ligther (and the La-7 was faster). In order to be effective, the Fw would need a more powerful engine (preferably radial).

190s were never really bettered in 1 on 1 situations with the rusians. Air superiority was a "nice to have" not an "essential" on the Eastern front. What was important was the application of massed CAS at the point of breakthrough. The Russians reognized that al they needed to do was keep the german fighters busy long enough for their Sturmoviks to get through and provide the force multipliers needed by their assault teams to break through the German front lines. It was a bonus for them to keep the rather meagre German counter CAS forces away and shoot down afew if they could. on all counts the russians were successful in those missions. The Germans could never hope to do anything other than a pinprick here or there.

What might have made some difference for the germans was if they could get more CAS into the battle that was survivable. The best instrument readily available for that was the FW190 airframe. It was a very effectivfe ground support weapon, the 109 was less so. Both the 190 and the 109 were efective fighters, but because the 190 was more adept at the FB role, it comes out as the more effective type for the EF overall.

 

[Marcel]

You guys do it all wrong. Instead of the old performance stuff about which we already have millions of threads, you should consider robustness and abillity of the engine and airframe to cope with the very low temperatures. Which aircraft did cost the least manhours to keep it flying under the very harsh conditions at the Eastern front? Which one was still able to take off from a bumpy, very muddy runway or snow?

 

[GregP]

Hi Riacrato, apparently we have read different references. I have about 45+ years of reading about it and talking with people who fly and flew both the Me 109 and the Fw 190. I have no need to defend my views; they are my views regardless. Maybe you should continue reading about it as I will. Perhaps we will come to a similar conclusion in time ... or not.

The Fw 190 wrested superiority from the Spitfire immediately after it was released and it took an update to the Spitfire to regain near parity. The Russians shot down both in droves from 1943 onward and considered the Bf 109 an easier target.

If you think otherwwise, please do so in peace. After talking with pilots of both, I choose the Fw 190. If you don't, I suppose we talked with different people and read different books ... that's all. Nothing overly important about it.

 

[delcyros]

but the strange thing is, the russians always considered the -190 easier to combat than the -109. Testified by Yakolev the head of the Yak design team and Prokryshkin.
In the west, the Fw is considered a more potent fighter A/C but in the east, the -109 was recognized as more dangerous.
An MW-50 boosted Bf-109G10/14 is nothing to sneeze about at medium altitudes.
Late war, most missions were air defensive and the Luftwaffe fell back on better prepared airfields in the Reich, hungary or occupied Poland and Czechia.