Best German Fighter of WWII

[Knegel]

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.

The La-7 also was developed from the Lagg-3, still it was a new plane type, cause the differents was extreme.

 

[billswagger]

I think the 109 was the better plane.

 

[claidemore]

The La-7 also was developed from the Lagg-3, still it was a new plane type, cause the differents was extreme.

Good point!
Biggest difference initially was the change of engine in the La5. Using the Lavochkin planes as the gauge would mean that the Dora series was a new plane as well (new engine) despite the fact that they still used the '190' in the name.
I would submit that the Soviet naming system where the inititals of the designers were used is different from the German one where the company name was used. The LaGG 3 was named after S.A.Lavochkin, V.P.Gorbunov and M.I.Goudkov. The three designers split, all three worked on fitting the Shvetsov radial to the LaGG 3 airframe, and ultimately Lavochkins plane was selected for production.

Because RLM changed their naming system the plane that would have been called FW190R3 was called Ta 152H.

We're arguing semantics in any case. The point here is the argument that the FW190 was a better plane than the 109 because it was developed into the Ta 152.

Messerschmitts insistence on sticking to his original design philosopy of the smallest possible airframe mounted on the biggest available engine and the 'advanced' thin, LE slat wing made more powerful armament difficult.
As a weapons delivery system the 190 beats the 109 hands down, and ultimately the job of the fighter is to deliver ordnance, whether against other fighters, bombers or ground targets.

 

[drgondog]

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

E ~ true on 190D-9 'package' but it had the same wing as the A and 4x20mm are still a powerful B-17 killer.. should still roll with a 51 and the reduction in climb and top speed would be less but not (IMO) a serious issue for most air to air combat between equal pilots.

 

[drgondog]

I think the 109 was the better plane.

Bill - the Me 109K was a marginally better interceptor of fighters than a Fw 190D. The BoB might have had a different outcome with Fw 190A and longer legs to escort LW bombers in daylight, and much longer for fighter sweeps.

The 109E failed as an escort simply becuase of range (IMO). It had zero capability of providing target escort to Ju88 or Do217 or He111 at their normal ranges whereas the Fw 190 could have upgraded internal fuel to make target escort work. In all other roles but fighter/fighter interceptor role at high altitude, the Fw 190A was a better choice.

 

[tomo pauk]

Think there were only 2 x 20mm on D-9, total...

 

[Erich]

the Ta 152H-1 had a single 3cm through the prop and two 2cm in the inner wings/ what I have in my data files on the model both H-O and H-1 and a couple other variants I will release later in a volume. if we want to call the Ta anything it would be known as a tarded late war Dora. longer narrow wing span cockpit sitting way back on the fuselage and broad tail as standard a huge in-line engine with monster air-intake scoop.

yes you can pretty much call the LW fighter force at will for 1946 but in essence it would of been more Ta's flying above Me 262A's.........you get the picture guys

 

[Erich]

the Ta 152H-1 had a single 3cm through the prop and two 2cm in the inner wings/ what I have in my data files on the model both H-O and H-1 and a couple other variants I will release later in a volume. if we want to call the Ta anything it would be known as a tarded late war Dora. longer narrow wing span cockpit sitting way back on the fuselage and broad tail as standard a huge in-line engine with monster air-intake scoop.

yes you can pretty much call the LW fighter force at will for 1946 but in essence it would of been more Ta's flying above Me 262A's.........you get the picture guys

 

[Kurfürst]

Bill - the Me 109K was a marginally better interceptor of fighters than a Fw 190D. The BoB might have had a different outcome with Fw 190A and longer legs to escort LW bombers in daylight, and much longer for fighter sweeps. The 109E failed as an escort simply becuase of range (IMO). It had zero capability of providing target escort to Ju88 or Do217 or He111 at their normal ranges whereas the Fw 190 could have upgraded internal fuel to make target escort work.

Yes, but its pretty unrealistic, considering that the 190A was not truely operations-worthy until late 42/early 1943 due to engine development problems. The very reason why the first 190s were deployed in France (ie. friendly turf) was that engine reliabilty was not sufficient to fly over hostile territory (desert, sea, russia)!
What they would have really needed (realistically), was the droptanked E-7 a couple of months earlier and retrofitting the others with that capability, or with a bit of optimism, widespread use of the 109F that was indeed in production by the summer of 1940 and had a range equal to the FW 190A.

In all other roles but fighter/fighter interceptor role at high altitude, the Fw 190A was a better choice.

They pretty much operated at their strenghts - 109s for high altitude fighter and photorecce units, 190s for medium altitude fighters and Jabo units. In any case, you cant build a fighter that is the best for all purposes - and while greater versatality of an airframe is great from the production point of view, tactically and operationally its a bit overrated imho. Units typically perform the same operational profile, and success depends on weather they get the right training and equipment for that task, not on which plane they fly.
A high altitude 109 staffel operating against high flying enemy photo recce aircraft will hardly miss the greater payload, since they rarely if ever do jabo missions (neither does the crew have the training or experience for such missions, much overlooked imho!). Similarly, no 190 Schlachtgeschwader would complain about great high altitude performance.Its about using the right tools for the right task.

 

[drgondog]

Kurfurst - good points about BoB, and still no question (in my mind) that a 109K was a better high altitude interceptor than a 190D.. having said that IMO the 190 was the airframe with the best mission expansion capability for all the reasons discussed above.