Best Piston Engined Fighter Ever

Wespe, ever hear of the P-51H or DH Hornet?

Soren, that page lists 7 reports from E-Stelle Rechlin as well as from Focke Wulf. I wonder what makes the report you've seen more worth than these?


Wespe, for every Fw 190 the Germans could build 2 Bf 109s. Could the Fw 190 shoot down twice as many aircraft as the Bf 109? No! If one of the two had to go, the rational thing to do was stop production of the Fw 190, and not of the Bf 109.
Kris

Civettone said:

Soren, that page lists 7 reports from E-Stelle Rechlin as well as from Focke Wulf. I wonder what makes the report you've seen more worth than these?


Wespe, for every Fw 190 the Germans could build 2 Bf 109s. Could the Fw 190 shoot down twice as many aircraft as the Bf 109? No! If one of the two had to go, the rational thing to do was stop production of the Fw 190, and not of the Bf 109.
Kris

Click to expand...

Could you start to put some sense in your posts, would you pleeeease?

You are contradicting yourself; just some pages before you finalised that the
germans had no fuel - no pilots - no nothing, so what is the point of producing the lower performing plane - just because according to you they could have build 2 instead of one.
Wespe

Morai_Milo said:

Wespe, ever hear of the P-51H or DH Hornet?

Click to expand...

The P-51H model never saw combat in Europe, entering service in late summer 1945.
Same goes for the Hornet
First of two prototypes (unarmed) flown July 28, 1944 (initially with two Merlin 130s); second prototype carried armament and 200-Imp gal (910-1) underwing drop tanks. Initial production flight February 1, 1945, but quantity deliveries (to equip No 64 Sqn initially) too late for combat use.

Interesting report by ChuckYaeger:
Chuck Yeager is on record saying he disfavored the P-51H compared to the D as it was less stable (despite the taller tail and extra foot of fuselage length) in cruise and therfore more tiring to fly. Bob Chilton, NAA test pilot and maiden pilot for the H, says that the plane was "no better, no worse than other (P-51) models he tested (North American P-51H Mustang by David McClaren, Air Force Legends #209 published by Steve Ginter, 2000). Chilton goes on to say the -H was good to Mach 0.8 in a dive without porpising, but it did "rattle, shake, and scare". He says the H also benefited from the development work expended on all of the previous Mustang variants and less problems were encountered with parts flying off or breaking.

If you want to go for the fastest allied plane to see action in Europe, then please refer to the P-47N was fully 40 mph faster than the P-47D-25-RE, top speed at 467 mph at 32,000 ft.

Wespe

These are two different discussions, Wespe.

One was about Udet about the Me 410, this one is you about the Fw 190. If you would have taken the effort to read some of my last post, you would have seen that I acknowledged that the Germans could have build three times as many Bf 109s than Me 410s but that it wouldn't matter much if they weren't flown by decently trained pilots.

You on the other hand, stated that the production of the Bf 109 should have been stopped in favour of the Fw 190. This is unrelated to the 1944 discussion of having more Bf 109s to stop the American bombers. At least you didn't mention this, so I assume that you're talking about a period from mid 1942 to mid 1944. After that, I suppose you would be pushing for the Me 262 instead of the Fw 190 to replace the Bf 109.
I tried to explain this as simply as possible for you and so I'm surprised and sad you do not see the sense in my posts.
But moving on ... this is mainly about you claiming that the Bf 109 is the "lower performing plane" compared to the Fw 190. I do not only disagree with this, I also prefer the Bf 109 as they are two times 'cheaper' to build and because of that alone twice as 'good'.
I only see a role for the Fw 190 as a Jabo, Schlachtflugzeug, Begleitungsjäger and Sturmbockjäger.

Kris

Wespe, I already explained that the allies had several aircraft behind the door. Not only the P-51H and P-47N but also the P-51F/G and P-47M. Only few P-47M aircraft were produced, because there was no need for them as the allies had complete air superiority at the end of 1944. If not, then these fighters would have been operational in the Spring of 1945 just like the Fw 190D-12 or Ta 152. But they chose not to stop production for these but to continue until the arrival of the long-range P-47M and P-51H for use in the invasion of Japan.

And don't forget the British Spitfire 21 and Tempest II. They also had the Spiteful and the Fury had the war dragged on longer.

It's a mistake I often see in what-if scenarios. All kinds of ingenious plans are drawn up while not considering a change of plan by the enemy. Just as if that part of history was locked.
Kris

Civettone said:

Wespe, I already explained that the allies had several aircraft behind the door. Not only the P-51H and P-47N but also the P-51F/G and P-47M. Only few P-47M aircraft were produced, because there was no need for them as the allies had complete air superiority at the end of 1944. If not, then these fighters would have been operational in the Spring of 1945 just like the Fw 190D-12 or Ta 152. But they chose not to stop production for these but to continue until the arrival of the long-range P-47M and P-51H for use in the invasion of Japan.

And don't forget the British Spitfire 21 and Tempest II. They also had the Spiteful and the Fury had the war dragged on longer.

It's a mistake I often see in what-if scenarios. All kinds of ingenious plans are drawn up while not considering a change of plan by the enemy. Just as if that part of history was locked.
Kris

Click to expand...

Look I see it this way;

This forum is about WWII and not what would have happened in JUNE, or August 1945 or February 2007 in Europe.

Secondly, any contemporary literature will state that the best German fighter was the Fw. So if you think it was the 109, well then that is your opinion based on nothing.

Wespe, the only reason the Ta152H saw any service was because Nazi German was at the end of it's rope. The a/c was not ready, being full of bugs, to be operational under normal cercumstances.

The Allies had no need to rush new a/c into operational service as the a/c they had were already doing such a superb job.

Civettone, if the Germans had been more on the ball the DB603 powered Fw could have been flying operationally in 1943. A better a/c than the 109s flying at the time.

slightly bent response but the Ta 152H was the answer to the P-51D/K. this was the answer for so many III./JG 301 pilots at January 45's end but the unit was pushed farther and farther east to take on the Soviets and to the lesser extent the RAF. I can only find one reference so far in my data of P-51's being engaged by JG 301 with the Ta

Civettone, if the Germans had been more on the ball the DB603 powered Fw could have been flying operationally in 1943. A better a/c than the 109s flying at the time.

Click to expand...

Morai, about a year ago I posted the same opinion at the Luftwaffe Experten board. I just couldn't understand that Tank wasn't given the go-ahead on the Fw 190C. He was ordered to focus on the Dora with the Jumo 213 engine. The answer I was given then was because the DB 603 was already reserved for the Me 410, He 177 and Do 217. The Jumo 213 had a similar performance but wasn't yet "spoken for. And although the DB 603 had been around for a while the engine had so many problems that even the Me 410 wasn't fully operational till the end of the year.
I don't know if this can be the full story because I am still uncertain if that's all there's to it. Tank had the Fw 190D flying in 1943 but it took until October 1944 for mass production, and even then the engine was still troublesome and didn't have the MW 50 installation. This is all beyond my comprehension as the Jumo 213 was already a year operational on the Ju 188 by that time. Was the Jumo engine the cause of the Fw 190D appearing (too) late? Or would something similar have happened with the Fw 190C?
I personally think the problems of the Fw 190C were less dramatic than with the Jumo 213, and the Fw 190C could have been operational half a year earlier. But this would be my personal opinion as it is not based on historical evidence.
If also Tank is to blame for the slow development of the Fw 190D - perhaps already working too much on the Ta 152 and the Flitzer project ? - then I would have gone for the Fiat G.56.
But again ... the whole story is clouded and none of the experts I know have the answer.

Wespe said:

Secondly, any contemporary literature will state that the best German fighter was the Fw. So if you think it was the 109, well then that is your opinion based on nothing.

Click to expand...

You remind me of the way I was some years ago. I had strong opinions and my personal favourite aircraft whose honour I defended vigorously. But I learned the hard way - many guys knowing much more than I did - and who forced me to adopt a more critical view on data presented to me and on my own beliefs. Since then, my opinion on history and specific aircraft has changed significantly. There was a time that I was convinced the Bf 109G was difficult to fly, slow, lightly armed, not manoeuvrable and in the end too fragile to house a 2000 HP engine. I couldn't understand why the Germans didn't go for the Fw 190 which is presented as the better fighter on most internet sites and in many contemporary publications.
Not only has my view broadened on what is the best fighter, now including reliability, production costs, agility, fuel consumption, adaptability, etc, I also have come to realize that aircraft are often difficult to compare. And maybe thinking about training hours, logistics, and spare parts isn't much fun to think about, they are essential elements in judging the capability of a fighter&pilot weapon combination.

Looking at all the elements it's my personal opinion that the Bf 109 was slightly better than the Fw 190. But even granting that the Fw 190 was better than the Bf 109, one cannot dismiss the rational arguments of the war industry. The Americans and Russians grasped this from day 1 and built weapons in mass production. These weapons didn't have to be the best. If you could build twice as many as the enemy, they can be twice as bad. The Russians added poor leadership, tactics and training to the equation which resulted in staggering losses, but the Americans had the total system in check from production to logistics to training to spare parts to tactical deployment.
Do you know who the man in my avatar is? He was the only man in his branch who understood the importance of a 'system in check'. Just too bad he had a drug addict as his direct superior officer.

Kris

Kris, Outstanding post! A lot of wisdom.

Yes Civetonne, I am familar with all that. As I said, if the Germans were more on the ball.

Design work on a 603 powered Fw started in Feb 1940, long before any Me410. I also understand the 'power eg' was to be interchangable with the Me309.

Now the 309 was a no go, so one has ask what would have been the result if it did go into production?

Thanks Renrich.


Morai, I suppose it depends on when the Me 309 was going to be ready given that it had bad flight characteristics when the project was terminated. The Bf 209 wouldn't have been much better as it pretty much threw away its reason of existence: similarity of parts with the Bf 109.
What do you think of the Me 155 with the DB 603?



Kris

the best piston engined fighter is the TA-152
he is the best on hight altitude digfights and he could kill migs on mid altitude the only limite the luftwaffe had was the limitite fuel and the USAF bomber-offensive...

he....digfights....limite....limitite...

Sorry I had to. Dont worry my spelling is not the greatest either all the time.

Interesting story from Richard Linnekin's book 80 KNOTS TO MACH 2, about Bearcats and Spitfires. A Bearcat off a carrier in the Med had to land at Malta for a minor repair. The Spitfire pilots had never seen a Bearcat and visa versa. A spirited discussion began about the relative merits of the 2 A/C and eventually a contest was arranged. The rules of engagement established by the Bearcat pilot were: from a standing start together I will make a run on you before you get that thing off the ground. Over lunch and a few beers it was decided in order to equalize the matter of pilot experience in model so that the contest was about planes not pilots the Bearcat pilot was to fly the Spit and visa versa. Finally a superior officer stepped in with a cooler head and the contest was canceled.

If only....

Jabberwocky said:

Considering that the P-51 didn't enter combat service until May-1942, or some 32 months after the war started, I'd say that calling it "competitive throughout the whole war" is a little of a stretch.

Same thing for the P-47; it didn't enter operational service until June-1942 and it didn't see combat service until Mar-1943, some 41 months into the war.

On the other hand, the Spitfire first entered combat in Oct-1939 and recorded its final kill WW2 kill against Japanese kamikazis in Aug-1945 (in its Seafire form).

Click to expand...

Ermmm...was it the Spitfire that bore the brunt of the aerial combat during 1944?

Hmmmm USA vs UK vs German........they all have their champions.

I feel I should defend Russian or Japanese planes....


I think CC is the only one for Italian planes.

Also that some Spitfire pilot might in fact have succeeded in shooting down a Japanese plane -kamikaze- in the very last days of the war in the Pacific is about meaningless...if over Europe the RAF revealed itself a mediocre air force to say the least, now come and talk about the PTO. Did the pilots of the Navy know there were spitfires flying over there?