davparlr
Senior Master Sergeant
You have a good point but the same can be said about the P-51H and possibly about Spitfire XIV.
Best German Fighter of WWII
- Thread starter Zniperguy114
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
You have a good point but the same can be said about the P-51H and possibly about Spitfire XIV.
Against whom would've they lose?
Not against Poland, against Norway it played nothing, the Belgian Dutch air forces were taken out by surprise by greater numbers while being on the airports, with their airports captured by German ground forces.
French air force was a competitor on the paper, but they (the top brass) blew it. They've flown under 1 (one) sortie per plane per day, Germans triple that number. Effectively Germans have had 3 times the air force of French. Eventually German ground forces have captured the airfields in Northern France, and bombed many others, while the French have little or no way to make early warning, not the speed, firepower numbers to do stem the tide.
The RAF did not devoted Spitfires over continent, leaving early Hurricanes to defend NW France rest of Belgium. Without numbers early warning, not enough by a long shot.
My point being, that if Germans decided to go all-Bf-110 (in half of numbers of Bf-109 produced), or He-112/100, the things would've unfolded exactly as they did. It was doctrine, tactics, numbers experience that counted, not some silver bullet.
fastmongrel
1st Sergeant
Excellent point we sometimes forget its tactics and men not machinesthat win and lose battles.
Hi,
the Ta152C and specialy H was extreme different to the 190D9 and even D12.
Sure, they are from the same developer and they are the result of the knowledge about the 190´s, but they so far away from them. The fuselage, tail, cockpit position is much different, the wings as well.
The P51H was not that much different to the P51D and the SPit14 had still the same wings, appart from structural changings.
The Ta152 is much more far away from the 190D9 than the 109E from the 109F for example and thats already a big step.
Also the Fockewulf internal designation changed, what is a clear sign of a new type. Otherwise it would have been the Ta190E etc, same like the Bf109K got to be the Me109K.
The 109G was a extreme good all around interceptor, while the 190D´s performence lost much by its engine power loss above even 1500m altitude and later by its ealy extreme wingload.
The 190D9 with the late engine(Sonmdernot + Bodenlader) was probably a extreme good fighter, but this plane came very late.
There was a reason why the 109´s mainly got used for the topcover units.
But anyway, imho no plane of that time could combine manouverability, extreme firepower, very good climb ratio, very good speed and range and all this in all altitudes at same time.
As such the 109F/G and FW190A was a perfect combination, unfortunatelly they didnt used the advantages of both planes in combination, or at least much to seldom.
Greetings,
Knegel
Typo
Knegel, sorry but I have to disagree. Many of the Ta 152 changes were used in Fw 190 A, C or D prototypes and the designation Fw 190 was still used. Only the shift of the cockpit for cog purposes gave it a more radical new look. In fact the Fw 190 V30 (internal Focke-Wulf designation) is pretty much identical to the pre-series Ta 152 H-0. In fact, I think most of the Ta 152 H prototypes kept the Fw designation
And it is true, that the wing was essentially an elongated A-8 wing. In this regard it is not so much different than the Spitfire. The Ta 152 is by all means a member of the Fw 190 family.
You say the Bf 109 Emil is much closer to the Friedrich than the Ta 152 is to the Fw 190. I'd be interested to see your proof for that, because I think actually as far as parts commonality is concerned that is not the case. Either way, the Bf 109 C and D are also far from the K, still noone doubts they are Messerschmitts.
drgondog
Major
I lump the Fw190D variants into the 190 and clearly go that direction. Bigger, more options and flexibility re: mission and range.
Fw 190A vs all variants of the 109 and it is a tougher call. The 190A only 'suffered in air to air performance because it was forced to defend agianst the only high altitude bombers and escorts in the world - a mission never contemplated when in preliminary design to Reich specs.
Like wise the 109 was designed as a pure fighter and remained a top one through the end of the war.
Another way to look at the picture is to force each Allied air force to choose one or the other - for their own doctrine. The Fw190 should win.
Fw 190A vs all variants of the 109 and it is a tougher call. The 190A only 'suffered in air to air performance because it was forced to defend agianst the only high altitude bombers and escorts in the world - a mission never contemplated when in preliminary design to Reich specs.
Like wise the 109 was designed as a pure fighter and remained a top one through the end of the war.
Another way to look at the picture is to force each Allied air force to choose one or the other - for their own doctrine. The Fw190 should win.
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
Another thing to look at is the commonality of the assembly tooling between the Ta 152 and Fw 190 family. That would be a great indicator of how close the two aircraft are structurally. I would not call the differences between latter model Fw 190s and Ta 152 "extreme" by any means, in fact I bet there's a lot of common parts between the two, especially below the surface. They are certainly from the same family if not from the same production line.
Njaco
The Pop-Tart Whisperer
Same could be said of the Bf 109E and the Bf 109G - doesn't make them different 'families'.
Kurfürst
Staff Sergeant
I would say it would be more accurate to say it was heavier airframe with more potential/versatality, but the price that had to be paid for this and a radial power plant was that it required more power to haul around, and was more sensitive to power changes. In contrast the 109 was a very purpose designed airframe, the smallest and lightest possible, meaning that it made much better use of every horsepower available to it. Its simply down to the airframe. Put the same engine in the two airframes, and the 109 will make better use of it - a workhorse may be far more ideal in a great number of practical roles, but its foolish to except it to beat 'throughbreds' at their own game at the Ascot... Kurt Tank did a bloody good job getting close to beating them at that, though!
Its a bit of a myth to blame the FW 190s relatively modest performance at altitude to the BMW 801, as actually the 801 had no different chacteristic in this regard than the DB 605A or even DB 603A, a rated alttiude of ca 6 km and similar output drop off above that. The other is that the Jumo 213 was a "poor" engine compared to the DB 603: actually their output was almost a perfect match.. neither the Jumo 213A in the Dora presented much improved altitude power output - the Dora's increase in performance was mostly down to reduced drag from using an inline engine in place of a radial...
Mustang Driver
Recruit
So which fighter is the best changes depending on the situation. What altitude are they at? Is one plane at a higher altitude than the other? Will the pilot try to engage his opponent in a turn fight? What armament is each fighter equipped with (Bf-109s with the add-on underwing cannons suffered reductions in speed and turn radius) and is their aircraft equipped with some form of boost like the German MW50? These are all things that you have to consider. For the sake of just choosing one, the Bf 109 for me.
Hello Kurfürst,
in general I agree with your assessment. But some things to consider: The Fw 190 aerodynamic design philosophy was imo not much different than that of the Fw 190: keep the fuselage and wing dimensions as small as possible. But they relaxed these features for various reasons later on in the development. Other features like the landing gear and the spars however were built much stronger than those of the Bf 109 on purpose. Still the Fw 190 is nimble when compared to some of the Allied contemporaries. It certainly is no P-47 or even Typhoon. In the end the Fw 190 philosophy was imo the more future-proof, the weight increase that comes with development led to a lot of redesigns in all possible areas with the Bf 109.
in general I agree with your assessment. But some things to consider: The Fw 190 aerodynamic design philosophy was imo not much different than that of the Fw 190: keep the fuselage and wing dimensions as small as possible. But they relaxed these features for various reasons later on in the development. Other features like the landing gear and the spars however were built much stronger than those of the Bf 109 on purpose. Still the Fw 190 is nimble when compared to some of the Allied contemporaries. It certainly is no P-47 or even Typhoon. In the end the Fw 190 philosophy was imo the more future-proof, the weight increase that comes with development led to a lot of redesigns in all possible areas with the Bf 109.
The question is what was the "best", not greatest or most famous German fighter. The Fw-190 was clearly a better and more modern airplane than the 109. When introduced, the Fw-190A-3 was better than the Bf-109E and 109F. Later A models were better all-round fighters than the 109G. The Fw-190D might just possibly have been the best all-round fighter of the entire war. The 109 was a remarkable plane amenable to continued modernization, and the Luftwaffe was really lucky they chose it rather than the He-112. Bf-109s could do some things better than the Fw-190, especially at higher altitudes, but the Fw190 was just hitting its stride when the Bf-109 started to show its age.
Again people it really comes down to the conditions. The Fw 190 was an overall better airframe and aircraft, but it was outclassed by the Bf 109 at the altitudes where it mattered most (at least the A variants). That is where the bomber streams were located.
claidemore
Senior Airman
True. But the tanks, troops, transport, towns and everthing else that has to be either destroyed or taken in order to win the war were on the ground, where the FW190 was as good as anything. It all depends on how much weight you put on strategic bombing vs the tactical air war. The two worked hand in hand, strategic offensive reduced Germanys tactical capabilities, but the war still had to be won low down. You can't win a war from 30,000 ft.
The Dora 190's had sufficient altitude performance to deal with B17s and B24's, and were produced specifically with that purpose in mind. However the situation was such that they ended up being used primarily against fighters at medium and low altitude.
Much pride is taken with the ability of the 8th AF to 'take the war to Berlin', yet it was the Soviets (who had no strategic capability but huge tactical ability) who ended up taking the city.
The Focke Wulf might not have had the high alt performance of the 109, but it could be used in many more roles, including fighter vs fighter, bomber interception, ground attack and night fighter. It was a much more versatile plane, ergo a 'better' one.
The Dora was only supposed to be a stopgap until the Ta 152 came online.
drgondog
Major
True. But the tanks, troops, transport, towns and everthing else that has to be either destroyed or taken in order to win the war were on the ground, where the FW190 was as good as anything. It all depends on how much weight you put on strategic bombing vs the tactical air war. The two worked hand in hand, strategic offensive reduced Germanys tactical capabilities, but the war still had to be won low down. You can't win a war from 30,000 ft.
The Dora 190's had sufficient altitude performance to deal with B17s and B24's, and were produced specifically with that purpose in mind. However the situation was such that they ended up being used primarily against fighters at medium and low altitude.
Much pride is taken with the ability of the 8th AF to 'take the war to Berlin', yet it was the Soviets (who had no strategic capability but huge tactical ability) who ended up taking the city.
The Focke Wulf might not have had the high alt performance of the 109, but it could be used in many more roles, including fighter vs fighter, bomber interception, ground attack and night fighter. It was a much more versatile plane, ergo a 'better' one.
Claidmore's thoghts dovetail with mine very closely. When a high altitude fighter with heavy armament and able to fight with Mustangs was needed the Fw 190D-9 was developed which was as capable as the latest 109K's.. when a fighter bomber was required to provide close air support and still fight well in the weeds the Fw 190A was superb. When a medium altitude, medium range air superiority fighter was required the 190A and 190D were as easily capable as the 109 against the Spit (or Mustang)..
It had greater capacity for mission changes and adaptable to virtually every tactical assignment except long range escort or catching Mosquitos.
Erich
the old Sage
side notation the Dora 9 did not have the armaments package to deal with US heavy bombers on a whole like the Fw 190A-8 and sub-variants with arms deliveries.
The Ta 152H was indeed a different A/C though we would call it an extension of later Fw Dora designs in effect it was not, and this is according to documents collected such as AIR 40/209
The Ta 152H was indeed a different A/C though we would call it an extension of later Fw Dora designs in effect it was not, and this is according to documents collected such as AIR 40/209
claidemore
Senior Airman
Erich: Below are two quotes from two different articles on wiki, (I know, I know), but what are your thoughts on them?
For me this shows that the Ta152 was a developement of the 190.
For me this shows that the Ta152 was a developement of the 190.
Gixxerman
Senior Airman
For piston engined fighters surely the ultimate was the final Ta design (the Ta 153)?
I rarely see much info on this plane - the Focke-Wulf Ta 153 (GH+KV) - but my understanding is that this was KT's ultimate goal for the type and it at least made it into a flying prototype - the V32?
After this I imagine that the jets and things like the Ta 183 take over his drawing board completely.
For jets that made it to the air I would think the Me 262C was pretty much the one you'd want to be in (except on landing with the skies crawling with allied fights).
As ever the mission dictates 'best' but they'd be my picks.
I rarely see much info on this plane - the Focke-Wulf Ta 153 (GH+KV) - but my understanding is that this was KT's ultimate goal for the type and it at least made it into a flying prototype - the V32?
After this I imagine that the jets and things like the Ta 183 take over his drawing board completely.
For jets that made it to the air I would think the Me 262C was pretty much the one you'd want to be in (except on landing with the skies crawling with allied fights).
As ever the mission dictates 'best' but they'd be my picks.
Last edited:
