Best WWII Air-Force

[Marcel]

All other fights were over Russia, France, Italy and the Lowlands where the RAF, RCAF, VVS and P-47 equipped USAAF units had the range to engage. No question that P-47s were scoring in Western Germany plus Holland and Belgium but the 51s and 38s were the primary punishers of the LW in that short period of time.

Regards,

Bill

Of course you're right about the fact that the USAAF did most of the fighting over Germany, but I think the VVS did as much to break the LW's back. I agree with Soren on this. They are often overlooked in discussions like this as their planes were inferior, but the had so many of them and were so willing to sacrifice that they achieved considerable success. I think (but admitted cannot prove it at this moment, I'll read up on this) that the LW lost as many or even more planes to the VVS as to the USAAF.

 

[drgondog]

I can't remember post from you that ever showed any praise towards anything non-american.

Check my posts more carefully - particularly when I stipulated that the Me262 was the Best aircraft (in my opinion) built and flown in combat during WWII and agreed the Ta152 as best piston engine Fighter and Interceptor (not P-51H or Spitfire or Meteor or F4U)

Read carefully when I say the Luftwaffe was the Best AF through 1942 and into 1943.

Read carefully when I say I think the Lancaster was better than the B-24 (and B-17) all things considered.

Read carefully when I opine that the Me262 was the best Bomber Destroyer (over the Fw190A8) and why I think so.

Read carefully about my praise for the Mosquito.

Then see if you can make that statement. Your opinion - my written record on this forum.


I have praised the F4U Corsair many times on this forum as one of the very best fighters of the entire war, considering all the roles it could carry out only the FW-190 was really the equal of it.

Actually the Tempest and the P38 were equal to the Fw190 in 'All the roles' even though the Tempest was not used as an Interceptor

You should take a look at the statistics my friend, approx. 80-85% of all German casualties were inflicted on the eastern front,

You made these bold comments before including the statement that the LW was deployed 85% on East Front. I debunked that using Price's Luftwaffe Data Book which you have yet to refute other than waving your arms and saying 'You must believe me!".

I would be interested to see if the entire Ost front even lost the number of LW pilots KIA during the same period, that were KIA in LuftFlotte 3 and LuftFlotte Reich from 1 January through 30 April, 1944 - just battling the 8th AF over Germany alone

If you exclude the Ta-152H then yes, of not then most certainly not. The Ta-152H was the best prop fighter of WW2, and equipped with drop tanks the Ta-152H was the most lethal escort fighter of WW2.

Well the 'situation' didn't permit the Meteor, P-80 or F8F or P-51H to fly escort either and the Ta152H never flew 'escort' missions to my knowledge - so no, you don't have a basis to make the claim as Best Escort Fighter

The P-38 wasn't the equal of the Tempest and neither was the P-47, the P-38 suffered from some serious compressibility issues and the P-47 was a pig at low altitude. The F4U on the other hand is superior to all three.

LOL - the Pig certainly scored well against both the Dora 9 and other 'more agile' LW fighters on the deck - no question about less acceleration on the deck but a superb Attack Fighter, nevertheless. The 38L forward had zero compressibility issues

No, the He-277 was just as good. Had there been enough fuel, trained crew and escorts it would've proven just as good.

If this, if that - you are all about 'IF". So, why did Soviets copy B-29 and produce instead of 'superior' He277?

Incorrect, Germany Japan used just as good training aircraft, a task which wasn't hard btw.

Name one?

LoL and you call me biased ?! What about the Ju-88, Ju-188, Mosquito Ju-388 ?? All these were much better than the B-25, A-26 B-26 !

Ju 88 and series were excellent a/c but noticably absent in 1944 through 1945 timeframe in Tactical or Strategic Bombing role.. On what basis would you describe the Ju 88 series as better than the A-26 or B-26 as Medium Bombers? Cite missions and results please, along with performance with payload. I already stated that the Mosquito could have been a superb Medium Bomber but it really was too valuable to be used in daylight bombing role except for 'special' situations.


Well thats just the thing, this topic isn't about Air power its about the best airforce, but you amongst others see it as if its about the most powerful airforce, well it isn't.

So, an Air Force with one Fw190D, a Me262 a Ta152 and Ar234 becomes the nominated Best Air Force because of quality - not power? Is this how you have been 'objectively' judging the poll question? That would explain a lot.

Do you think the LW would have traded its a/c and pilots for US in 1944? No?


LoL, so excellent that it was restricted from military service in the ETO MTO yes, it was doomed dangerous to fly! It had many lethal bugs by 1945 and was no where near as servicable an a/c as the Me-262 or Meteor!

You are correct - and the Fw190D-13 and Ta152H and He277 was flawless in the same timeframe? Look up the records for fatal accidents for those a/ in the January 1945-March 1945 timeframe. The USA had the luxury of withdrawing the P-80 for two months while they fixed the fuel pump problem - but the LW did not.

And yet the Me-262 accelerated, climbed maneuvered better in comparative flights with the P-80 conducted in the US after the war.

check your climb and manueverability comparisons again before making the blanket statement. Cite the facts not your opinion please

I disagree, the F7F was too heavy - the F8F is another story though

Disagree all you wish, facts please

What a load of complete utter rubbish Bill! The LW was hugely out-numbered in the air, they couldn't initiate an attack without having to oppose a force 5 times their own size - THAT is why the Allies made it through, superior numbers of able aircraft, the LuftWaffe's aircraft were excellent but there were way too few. And it was the exact same thing going on on the ground, where a single Tiger or Panther tank would often have to fight off 5 - 6 Sherman tanks at a time.

I have cited the USAAF Fighter strength available to defeat the Luftwaffe over Germany between January 1944 and April 1944 and the available single engine fighters for LuftFlotte Reich and you are completely wrong for the airbattles over Germany with respect to USAAF fighters available to fight LW Fighters. Quit using 5:1 or 8:1 figures until you cite the facts - The 8th AF P-38s and P-51s plus 354FG on loan from the 9th AF was the only Fighter force capable of intercepting German attacks past Frankfurt in that time frame. It is a matter of public record how many were available for both sides.

No, you'll have to go abit further than 1943, mid to late 1944 infact. See the problem with you is that your eyes are completely closed to what the rest of the world possessed at that time, your ridiculous statement that the US could project its power everywhere with impunity in 1943 shows this clearly. Sail your carriers to the ETO in 1943 and your seriously risking loosing alot of them to the German U-boat force.

No I don't, not really. My thesis was "From late 1943 to the present, American airpower was/is the best" . I said with near impunity - and that comment was incorrect for perhaps 10 missions over Germany from December 1943 through the end of the war and completely correct for the PTO.

If you wish to deny the statement for the other 400+ missions it is ok with me but you might seem pretty foolish.

As to the carrier fleets - there was no real purpose other than placing a few on convoy duty to assist in the eradication of the U Boat fleet.. ah, you don't happen to have an example of the US Navy losing a capital ship to U-Boats do you, particularly the 'vulnerable' carrier? I guess the German U-Boat wasn't all that effective in late 1943 and 1944 and 1945? Oh, I know - it was all about numbers not 'quality'

Again your eyes are closed! The US alone merely scratched the Germans compared to what the USSR UK had done - the USSR drained the German war-machine more than anything else during the war, and the RAF also certainly took its part in bombing the German industry, it wasn't all US bombers buddy!

LOL Soren. So, the USAAF 'merely scratched the Germans compared to what the USSR and UK had done"?? Yes the RAF bombed hell out of Germany and forced round the clock approach to defense. Do you wish to present a thesis that the LW devoted more or even same fighter reaction to RAF bombing as USAAF from late 1943 onward? Do you wish to postulate that even the RAF and VVS COMBINED, destroyed as many German fighters as the USAAF? Go for it. Facts please. I suspect without proof that the P-51 destroyed more German aircraft in the last 15 months of the war than the the VVS and RAF combined - I could be wrong but that number is around 9600.

Forget about the VSS ???

No, but it did NOT destroy the Luftwaffe Fighter Arm nor did it inflict as many casualties as USAAF all by itself from Dec 1943 forward.

I am, but unlike you I'm also objective about the rest.

Excuse me but I haven't yet noticed that quality about you

Look up the numbers Soren. Just four of 21 Air Forces within just the USAAF dropped more tonnage and destroyed more German A/c than the RAF and VVS combined from Jan 1944 through the end of the war.. but you think it 'close' choice between US and RAF? And you think you are objective?

Define Objective please

Regards,

Bill

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Soren no offense but Bill is right. The majority of your arguement is based on "If", "If It", "It almost", "Another few more months" and you state a lot of things but put down no sources or facts to back it up.

You say that best is not allways most powerful. Well I am sorry but the the most powerful in WW2 won and you can not base the quality of an Airforce off of "what ifs".

 

[drgondog]

Soren no offense but Bill is right. The majority of your arguement is based on "If", "If It", "It almost", "Another few more months" and you state a lot of things but put down no sources or facts to back it up.

You say that best is not allways most powerful. Well I am sorry but the the most powerful in WW2 won and you can not base the quality of an Airforce off of "what ifs".

Chris - an interesting question is "Which Country would NOT trade their Airpower (all aircraft delivered, all aircraft on assembly lines that day, logistics, pilots, pipeline of trained crews) for the US Existing capability Worldwide on Jan1 1944?

Soren? Could you resist holding on to the Luftwaffe? Anyone think the RAF or VVS would stand pat?

Regards,

Bill

 

[Soren]

Check my posts more carefully - particularly when I stipulated that the Me262 was the Best aircraft (in my opinion) built and flown in combat during WWII and agreed the Ta152 as best piston engine Fighter and Interceptor (not P-51H or Spitfire or Meteor or F4U)

Well I'd certainly like to see where you've said this.

Read carefully when I say the Luftwaffe was the Best AF through 1942 and into 1943.

I agree, and I also agree it wasn't the best in 1944 - 45 but somehow you guys like making it sound like I do, again putting words into my mouth - a very bad habbit of yours Bill!

Then see if you can make that statement. Your opinion - my written record on this forum.

Well considering that I have praised thew F4U as one of the top 3 best fighters of WW2 I'd certainly like you to claim that I am biased again Bill - Your opinion vs My written record on this forum.

Actually the Tempest and the P38 were equal to the Fw190 in 'All the roles' even though the Tempest was not used as an Interceptor

No they weren't, the Tempest was much less agile than the Fw-190 and so was the P-38, the Tempest couldn't be used at high alt because of poor performance and the P-38 at low alt because of poor performance - the Anton suffered poor high alt performance.

You made these bold comments before including the statement that the LW was deployed 85% on East Front. I debunked that using Price's Luftwaffe Data Book which you have yet to refute other than waving your arms and saying 'You must believe me!".

No I said that 85% of ALL german forces were deployed on the Eastern Front, and ~80-85% of all casualties were as-well.

Well the 'situation' didn't permit the Meteor, P-80 or F8F or P-51H to fly escort either and the Ta152H never flew 'escort' missions to my knowledge - so no, you don't have a basis to make the claim as Best Escort Fighter

Again seemingly oblivious to you the reason for the fact that the Ta-152H never acted as escort or as a high altitude fighter was because of lack of fuel.

LOL - the Pig certainly scored well against both the Dora 9 and other 'more agile' LW fighters on the deck

Really ??! Care to prove that claim ?? Remember we're talking LOW alt here !

- no question about less acceleration on the deck but a superb Attack Fighter, nevertheless.

It dived well could take alot of punishment, plus it featured very good performance at high alt - thats it - at low alt it was a pig, and I've got German test-flight results to back that up as-well.

If this, if that - you are all about 'IF". So, why did Soviets copy B-29 and produce instead of 'superior' He277?

Bad excuse Bill. The B-29 was used because the Russians had a captured example of it, thats why.

Name one?

Sure, BF-108 Bf-109G-12 - thats two...

Ju 88 and series were excellent a/c but noticably absent in 1944 through 1945 timeframe in Tactical or Strategic Bombing role..

And why the heck do you think ?!! No fighters to protect them or fuel was available !!

On what basis would you describe the Ju 88 series as better than the A-26 or B-26 as Medium Bombers?

Sure, the Ju-88 Ju-188 were faster, could carry more bombs, higher ceiling, and had a longer range than the B-26. The Ju-388 was much faster in both cruise and max speed compared to the A-26 could carry a larger payload, plus it had a MUCH higher ceiling - infact all three LW a/c had a higher ceiling than the A-26.

Cite missions and results please, along with performance with payload.

LoL, you're traying to bore me out of this discussion by me having to look up successful missions !

There's too many to cite on this page !

So, an Air Force with one Fw190D, a Me262 a Ta152 and Ar234 becomes the nominated Best Air Force because of quality - not power? Is this how you have been 'objectively' judging the poll question? That would explain a lot.

Don't be stupid Bill, ONE of each ???? No wonder you see things your way

Do you think the LW would have traded its a/c and pilots for US in 1944? No?

Nope, but it would've happily traded its resources for Allied resources.

You are correct - and the Fw190D-13 and Ta152H and He277 was flawless in the same timeframe? Look up the records for fatal accidents for those a/ in the January 1945-March 1945 timeframe.

No you tell me about these fatal accident please ?? Esp. those suffered by the Dora-13, I'd be very interested in hearing about them please !

:Rolleyes:

The USA had the luxury of withdrawing the P-80 for two months while they fixed the fuel pump problem - but the LW did not.

So the fuel pumps was the only problem ?? Dream on.

check your climb and manueverability comparisons again before making the blanket statement. Cite the facts not your opinion please

Right back at you ! I cited the facts, cause fact is that the Me-262A-1 out-accellerated, out-climbed and out-maneuvered the P-80 in post-war comparative flights made in the US.

Disagree all you wish, facts please

I agree, facts please bill.

I have cited the USAAF Fighter strength available to defeat the Luftwaffe over Germany between January 1944 and April 1944 and the available single engine fighters for LuftFlotte Reich and you are completely wrong for the airbattles over Germany with respect to USAAF fighters available to fight LW Fighters. Quit using 5:1 or 8:1 figures until you cite the facts - The 8th AF P-38s and P-51s plus 354FG on loan from the 9th AF was the only Fighter force capable of intercepting German attacks past Frankfurt in that time frame. It is a matter of public record how many were available for both sides.

No Bill, all you have cited is the number of a/c available to the LW, NOT how many could actually leave the ground ! Remember you need fuel to go fly buddy

The number of a/c available to the LW in the air was FAR less than that available to the Allies, so yes 5:1 - 8:1 scenarios were very common, esp. for the dedicated fighters.

No I don't, not really. My thesis was "From late 1943 to the present, American airpower was/is the best" . I said with near impunity - and that comment was incorrect for perhaps 10 missions over Germany from December 1943 through the end of the war

Huh ?? Look up the bomber losses please - I certainly wouldn't refer to that as showing any signs of impunity!

If you wish to deny the statement for the other 400+ missions it is ok with me but you might seem pretty foolish.

Deny ? No need for that, one only has to look up the bomber losses.

As to the carrier fleets - there was no real purpose other than placing a few on convoy duty to assist in the eradication of the U Boat fleet.. ah, you don't happen to have an example of the US Navy losing a capital ship to U-Boats do you, particularly the 'vulnerable' carrier? I guess the German U-Boat wasn't all that effective in late 1943 and 1944 and 1945? Oh, I know - it was all about numbers not 'quality'

Again you don't know what you're talking about - by late 43 to wars end the German U-boats weren't operating near any US carriers.

LOL Soren. So, the USAAF 'merely scratched the Germans compared to what the USSR and UK had done"?? Yes the RAF bombed hell out of Germany and forced round the clock approach to defense. Do you wish to present a thesis that the LW devoted more or even same fighter reaction to RAF bombing as USAAF from late 1943 onward? Do you wish to postulate that even the RAF and VVS COMBINED, destroyed as many German fighters as the USAAF? Go for it. Facts please. I suspect without proof that the P-51 destroyed more German aircraft in the last 15 months of the war than the the VVS and RAF combined -

LoL, the USSR and UK certainly both caused many more German casualties than the US - the USAAF stood for most of the bombing yes, but the damage caused by the bombing wasn't anywhere near as much as that caused by the war on the eastern front, its not even close ! 80 - 85% of all German casualties were on the Eastern front !

I could be wrong but that number is around 9600.

And that figure is made up of pure guess-work and claims, the accurate figure is far less.

No, but it did NOT destroy the Luftwaffe Fighter Arm nor did it inflict as many casualties as USAAF all by itself from Dec 1943 forward.

Combined the RAF VSS certainly did as much damage to the LW as the USAAF.

Excuse me but I haven't yet noticed that quality about you

And I'm afraid I haven't seen that quality about you either - esp. regarding you complete lack of knowledge on the shortage of fuel in Germany by 1944 -45 and its consequences.

Look up the numbers Soren. Just four of 21 Air Forces within just the USAAF dropped more tonnage and destroyed more German A/c than the RAF and VVS combined from Jan 1944 through the end of the war.. but you think it 'close' choice between US and RAF? And you think you are objective?

Its all about numbers again Bill, the USAAF was present in more numbers. And I'd really like to see you back up the claim that the USAAF destroyed more LW a/c than the RAF VSS did combined with reliable sources accurate figures instead of claimed ones.

 

[lesofprimus]

You are correct - and the Fw190D-13 and Ta152H and He277 was flawless in the same timeframe?

No you tell me about these fatal accident please ?? Esp. those suffered by the Dora-13, I'd be very interested in hearing about them please !

Willi Reschke talks about several accidents/crashes during III./JG 301's conversion to the Ta 152H.... Two off the top of my head were deadly for pilots Hermann Durr and Jonny Wiegeshoff, both from 12./301, one at Alteno and the other at Sachau... Both were due to unknown reasons...

 

[drgondog]

Soren sez "No I said that 85% of ALL german forces were deployed on the Eastern Front, and ~80-85% of all casualties were as-well".

That is what you said on this thread - but on a previous thread which I rebutted with Price's TO&E you stated 85% of Luftwaffe - I'll find the quote

It dived well could take alot of punishment, plus it featured very good performance at high alt - thats it - at low alt it was a pig, and I've got German test-flight results to back that up as-well.

What you have is the LW flight tests on P-47D-2RA 42-22490 YF-U "Beetle" captured when Roach ran out of fuel in November 1943 and captured intact. No Paddle blades, none of the hp boost that came with the -12 series and up. If that's what you want to use as 'your' LW tests it explains a lot about your fact based argument style. What 'figures' (facts) do you have to prove your position regarding Tempest and P-38 poor agility versus Fw190 on the deck?

Bad excuse Bill. The B-29 was used because the Russians had a captured example of it, thats why.

Lol - sure, they didn't evaluate the LW bomber types they captured, right?

And why the heck do you think ?!! No fighters to protect them or fuel was available !!

In other words, great potential but short on results?

Sure, the Ju-88 Ju-188 were faster, could carry more bombs, higher ceiling, and had a longer range than the B-26. The Ju-388 was much faster in both cruise and max speed compared to the A-26 could carry a larger payload, plus it had a MUCH higher ceiling - infact all three LW a/c had a higher ceiling than the A-26.

Ah, Soren - how many Ju388K's (the bomber version) were produced-10?? As I recall approximately 1000 Ju188s of ALL types were built near the end of the war. Good ships but? effective as medium bombers? No

The Ju88A-4/R with Jumo211J-1's was basically a 273mph(@17,500ft), 1500 mile range with normal fuel and bomb load- 650miles with max bomb load (2500kg~5500pounds), ceiling ~29,000 feet.

The A-26A w/P&WR-2800-52 was a 355mph (@5000 feet), Cruise 310mph, 1,400 mile combat radius, 4,000pound internal bomb load, 8,000 pound max bomb load and up to 16 50 caliber machine guns in attack config, 6 5-'s in bomber config. With lesser R2800's (w/o water boost) the A26A ceiling was considerably lower but max speed and cruise were about the same.

Pick another production Ju 88 as you wish. At least for this comparison the figures seem to bely your zeal for 'all things German"??

LoL, you're traying to bore me out of this discussion by me having to look up successful missions ! There's too many to cite on this page !

Name five or even 3

Don't be stupid Bill, ONE of each ???? No wonder you see things your way

How could I even imagine to compete with your vast intellect? or logic?

Nope, but it would've happily traded its resources for Allied resources.

My turn to laugh

No you tell me about these fatal accident please ?? Esp. those suffered by the Dora-13, I'd be very interested in hearing about them please !:Rolleyes:
So the fuel pumps was the only problem ?? Dream on.

I'll dig up these next - of course the fuel pump was not the only problem - quality on turbine blades also an issue - but sorted out in February timeframe when the production P-80As started delivery to USAAF

Right back at you ! I cited the facts, cause fact is that the Me-262A-1 out-accellerated, out-climbed and out-maneuvered the P-80 in post-war comparative flights made in the US.

Once again your version of facts relies entirely on what you believe - flight test data please?

No Bill, all you have cited is the number of a/c available to the LW, NOT how many could actually leave the ground ! Remember you need fuel to go fly buddy

The number of a/c available to the LW in the air was FAR less than that available to the Allies, so yes 5:1 - 8:1 scenarios were very common, esp. for the dedicated fighters.

Facts Soren - I presented TO&E of 8th FC, Alfred Price's 'effectives' for all LW units in LuftFlotte Reich and you babble/conjecture your version of 'truth' and facts - cite references please, Soren

Huh ?? Look up the bomber losses please - I certainly wouldn't refer to that as showing any signs of impunity!

Exactly 13 8th AF missions in which Luftwaffe flak and fighters shot down 5% or more of the bomber force from Dec1, 1943 through end of war. None after May 12. Roger Freeman Mighty Eighth War Diary. If you want another definition of heavy losses, specify for point of argument - and this time do your own researchz?

Again you don't know what you're talking about - by late 43 to wars end the German U-boats weren't operating near any US carriers.

In fact US escort carriers were in the Atlantic from 1943 forward and the much vaunted U-Boat were useless against them

Combined the RAF VSS certainly did as much damage to the LW as the USAAF.

Facts, Soren - what reference do you wish to cite?

And I'm afraid I haven't seen that quality about you either - esp. regarding you complete lack of knowledge on the shortage of fuel in Germany by 1944 -45 and its consequences.

BS Alert Soren - do you even know when the USAAF strategic Oil Campaign started or what the production figures were prior to, in the middle of the campaign? Speer certainly understood and published his thoughts, I have repeatedly stated and acknowledged the lack of fuel

Its all about numbers again Bill, the USAAF was present in more numbers. And I'd really like to see you back up the claim that the USAAF destroyed more LW a/c than the RAF VSS did combined with reliable sources accurate figures instead of claimed ones.[/QUOTE]

Do you have a source referencing all LW losses in 1944 and 1945 which is my claim period? My source for all aerial victories is USAF Study 85 plus 8th AF Victory Credits Board for ground destruction and the Strategic Bombing Survey post WWII. Name your sources please?

Regards,

Bill

 

[Soren]

The Ju-88G-7
Top speed: 626 km/h at 9000m
Cruise speed: 560 km/h at 9000m
Ceiling: 10,000m
Range: 2,250 km

Yes, even the Ju-88 is superior to both the A-26 B-26 Bill.

As to your so often claim that the LW had more a/c available in the ETO by 1944, a huge amount of those a/c couldn't even take off as there wasn't any fuel - hence why German pilots say they were out-numbered in the air.

Now as to why the Russians didn't copy the He-277 design, simple, they didn't have any ! - on the other hand they did have a B-29.

Now as to your claim that the Dora-13 suffered many accidents, please prove this claim ! Also only a few Ta-152's suffered accidents.


And as to the Me-262 P-80 debate;

USAAF Conclusion
"Despite a difference in gross weight of nearly 2,000 lb (907 kg), the Me 262 was superior to the P-80 in acceleration, speed and approximately the same in climb performance. The Me 262 apparently has a higher critical Mach number, from a drag standpoint, than any current Army Air Force fighter."

NACA
"Fowler-type high-lift flaps were provided at the trailing edge of the wing, and full-span slats were incorporated in the leading edges. The slats were actuated automatically by surface pressures at the leading edge when the angle of attack exceeded a prescribed value. The use of these devices gave the aircraft acceptable landing and takeoff performance with a wing loading of about 60 pounds per square foot. (Within limits, the higher the wing loading, the smaller the wing area and drag area; thus for a given thrust level, the higher the maximum speed.) In addition to improving takeoff and landing performance, the slats improved the high-g turning capability in maneuvering flight."

Anything else ??

 

[lesofprimus]

Yea Soren, u seemed to ignore my post above Bills....

 

[drgondog]

The Ju-88G-7
Top speed: 626 km/h at 9000m
Cruise speed: 560 km/h at 9000m
Ceiling: 10,000m
Range: 2,250 km

Yes, even the Ju-88 is superior to both the A-26 B-26 Bill.

As to your so often claim that the LW had more a/c available in the ETO by 1944, a huge amount of those a/c couldn't even take off as there wasn't any fuel - hence why German pilots say they were out-numbered in the air.

Well Soren - you haven't posted a reference yet? I suspect 'most' said that because a lot of German pilots were getting threatened with court martial's for simply not closing close enough to be effective against the B-17. As usual I will do the research from GenMaj Schmid's comments contained in Caldwell/Muller "Luftwaffe over Germany" as well as the the average sorties of I. Jagdkorps (coast, northern and central Germany, Berlin

Now as to why the Russians didn't copy the He-277 design, simple, they didn't have any ! - on the other hand they did have a B-29.

BS Alert - once again. Those stupid Soviets! They stuck with what they had and ignored making the quantum leap you proclaim for the He277? Amazing how dumb those oafs were.

Now as to your claim that the Dora-13 suffered many accidents, please prove this claim ! Also only a few Ta-152's suffered accidents.

I'll get the references, I'm still digging - also only a few P-80's suffered accidents


And as to the Me-262 P-80 debate;

USAAF Conclusion
"Despite a difference in gross weight of nearly 2,000 lb (907 kg), the Me 262 was superior to the P-80 in acceleration, speed and approximately the same in climb performance. The Me 262 apparently has a higher critical Mach number, from a drag standpoint, than any current Army Air Force fighter."

NACA
"Fowler-type high-lift flaps were provided at the trailing edge of the wing, and full-span slats were incorporated in the leading edges. The slats were actuated automatically by surface pressures at the leading edge when the angle of attack exceeded a prescribed value. The use of these devices gave the aircraft acceptable landing and takeoff performance with a wing loading of about 60 pounds per square foot. (Within limits, the higher the wing loading, the smaller the wing area and drag area; thus for a given thrust level, the higher the maximum speed.) In addition to improving takeoff and landing performance, the slats improved the high-g turning capability in maneuvering flight."

References silly boy - you are so used to pulling stuff out of thin air that one never knows what you really know?

Anything else ??

Sure - next time don't quote a Night Fighter version of the Ju88 (G-7) when you are trying to make a point about Medium Bomber?

Specification : Ju88G-7b.
Year : 1944.
Type : night fighter.
Crew : four , pilot, observer , radio operator/gunner and gunner.
Power plant : Two Junkers Jumo 213E 12 cylinder , liquid cooled engines each developing 1725 HP.
Dimensions : span 65ft7in. , length 47ft.8in. , height 15ft.11in. , wing area 586.63 sq.ft.
Weights : Empty (equipped) 28,900lb , loaded (maximum) 32,350lb.
Performance : Maximum speed 270 mp/h at sea level ; 402 mp/h at 29,800ft. ; endurance, 3 hr 72 min at economical power ; climb rate 1665 ft per min ; service ceiling 32,800ft.
Armament : six 20 mm MG 151 cannons , four firing forward , two firing obliquely upward.
One 13 mm MG 131 machine gun on flexible mount in rear of cockpit.

Aren't you cute bringing a Night Fighter Version to a Medium Bomber discussion? Well you have to try to win somehow, don't you.

Try again? Sigh

 

[Soren]

Yea Soren, u seemed to ignore my post above Bills....

Sorry Les.

Yes there were some crashes, but most were pilot error IIRC, and some haven't been explained. A few were the cause of technical problems.

Bill,

I didn't realize it was purely about bombing, but since it is according to you the Ju-88R was capable of dropping bombs, and it was just as fast as the G-7. But by 1944 the Ju-88's role had switched from bombing to night fighting, the bombing was mainly carried out by the Ju-188 Ju-388 which were both better medium bombers than any USAAF a/c.

PS: The Ju-88G-7B was even faster than 626 km/h, it would reach 647 km/h at 10,200m with MW-50.

And as to your so called "BS-Alerts", very funny, perhaps I should say that about some the ridiculous stuff you have claimed.

The Russians most likely didn't build the He-277 for a number of reasons:
A) They didn't know about this a/c
B) The manufacturing of this a/c was too complex for their industry (Wouldn't be a first)
C) They already had a B-29

Oh and btw, you can stop your ridiculous digging after sources that claim the Dora-13 suffered many accidents, you'll realize how ridiculous that claim of yours is when you realize just how many were actually made.

 

[Soren]

Oh and as for references:
ch11-2

 

[The Basket]

The order to copy the B-29 was from Stalin not Tupelov. Tupelov would have rather designed his own plane. He wanted B-29s from USA but they wouldn't give him any so he copied the three that he had.

Stalin wanted a strategic bomber force very very quickly. The B-29 was proven and the technology available. Bet on the winning horse for low risk and quick results.

 

[Graeme]

OH NO, Quick Basket, get out of there, you just entered a MINEFIELD!

 

[FLYBOYJ]

The Russians most likely didn't build the He-277 for a number of reasons:
A) They didn't know about this a/c
B) The manufacturing of this a/c was too complex for their industry (Wouldn't be a first)
C) They already had a B-29

And was so complex about the assembly of the He 227? I see it no more complex to assemble than and other large 4 engine bomber of WW2.

 

[pbfoot]

The USAAC had something the Germans never quite mastered and that was the art or ability to strategic bomb. How many bombers could they put up on a consistent basis .They would have been smart to scrap any of their heavy bomber projects and invested the saved money in other endeavours. Let alone freeing up shopspace and trained manpower to enhance their fighter production .
If my info is correct the Steinbock raids of 43/44 were any example they started out with about 427 bombers and within 5 months and 29 raids the RAF had the LW down to 130 bombers .

 

[drgondog]

Sorry Les.

Yes there were some crashes, but most were pilot error IIRC, and some haven't been explained. A few were the cause of technical problems.

Point made on Ta152 but more to come. Your point made on Fw190D-13 - I misspoke and meant Fw190D program but I accept that -13s didn't have troubled history except for 3 stage carb that didn't work very well.

Having said that my comment to you is that the P-80 had some problems but really no more than the Ta152 and Fw190D. Stand by that comment!

Bill,

I didn't realize it was purely about bombing, but since it is according to you the Ju-88R was capable of dropping bombs, and it was just as fast as the G-7. But by 1944 the Ju-88's role had switched from bombing to night fighting, the bombing was mainly carried out by the Ju-188 Ju-388 which were both better medium bombers than any USAAF a/c.

Ju388 - how many ships built? how many missions flown? Ditto for the 'Medium Bomber Choice de Jour version of the Ju188? versus the A26?

PS: The Ju-88G-7B was even faster than 626 km/h, it would reach 647 km/h at 10,200m with MW-50.

Yawn - it was a Niiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiggggggggghhhhhhhhtttttt Fighter with uprated engines heavy forward firing armament designed to shoot down Lancasters

And as to your so called "BS-Alerts", very funny, perhaps I should say that about some the ridiculous stuff you have claimed.

Soren - you went on the tangent to describe that the Ju88 was a better bomber with suprior performance to the A26. I simply rebutted it and then you brought in one of several Night Fighter versions to compare speed - works well in "BS" pot!

The Russians most likely didn't build the He-277 for a number of reasons:
A) They didn't know about this a/c
B) The manufacturing of this a/c was too complex for their industry (Wouldn't be a first)
C) They already had a B-29

Soren - you make me smile. The Soviets didn't KNOW about the mysterious He277. Germany MANAGED to keep this marvelous a/c hidden from USSR. B-29 simpler to copy and tool for than complex, secret, unknown He277?USSR 'children' unable to comprehend the complexities of the he277 so took second (or is it third or fourth) best heavy bomber of WWII

LOL!

In the book "Me-262", Smith and Creek, Volume 4 is a summary of a direct comparison tests done after the war and it suggested the overall superiority of the Me-262 vs the XP-80 .

I assume that this is the test series which the source of your quotes but still can't find the actual tests and flight data that is quoted in the book? Do you have it?

Having said that, it's important to note that that comparsion was allegedly between a stripped recon verson of the Me-262 and the XP-80 (which was dimmensionally smaller and had 1,000 lbs less thrust than the P-80A). This was either one of the XP-80 ships remaining in England or one from Italy that went over in Nov 1944 or Jan 1945

This was the only test that I know of where both planes were present at the same place and time.

Two other comparisons made between the flight test data of the 1946 tests for the Me262 and the P-80A describe the P-80 as "faster, climb faster, higher ceiling, nearly equal roll" - no comment on acceleration

Is this the test you wish to make your case on versus the P-80A (which was not done head to head) which was in production in Feb1945? The pilots that flew both the P-80A and THAT Me262 described the P-80A as the "Best in the world" although proponents of the Meteor 4 could have something to say about that description!

What is the USAAF Report number and date you are quoting from?

Regards,
Bill

 

[Soren]

Point made on Ta152 but more to come. Your point made on Fw190D-13 - I misspoke and meant Fw190D program but I accept that -13s didn't have troubled history except for 3 stage carb that didn't work very well.

Finally..

Having said that my comment to you is that the P-80 had some problems but really no more than the Ta152 and Fw190D. Stand by that comment!

Err, yes it did - the FW-190 Dora didn't suffer any serious problems, and the Ta-512's equipped with the good batch of engines performed excellently with no troubles at all.

Ju388 - how many ships built? how many missions flown? Ditto for the 'Medium Bomber Choice de Jour version of the Ju188? versus the A26?

101 + Ju-388's were produced, and ~1,230 Ju-188's were produced.

Yawn - it was a Niiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiggggggggghhhhhhhhtttttt Fighter with uprated engines heavy forward firing armament designed to shoot down Lancasters

Still, find me a USAAF nightfighter that can go just as fast.

Soren - you went on the tangent to describe that the Ju88 was a better bomber with suprior performance to the A26. I simply rebutted it and then you brought in one of several Night Fighter versions to compare speed - works well in "BS" pot!

The point was to compare the Ju-88's fitted with the BMW-801 G engines which were faster than the A-26, the bombers actually being much faster - the night-fighting equipment robbing around 25 km/h of the top speed.

Soren - you make me smile. The Soviets didn't KNOW about the mysterious He277. Germany MANAGED to keep this marvelous a/c hidden from USSR. B-29 simpler to copy and tool for than complex, secret, unknown He277?USSR 'children' unable to comprehend the complexities of the he277 so took second (or is it third or fourth) best heavy bomber of WWII

I make you smile ??!

Cut the indirect bias accusations, it doesn't get you anywhere other than you being looked upon as a child.

What is it about the fact that the Russians didn't know about the He-277 that you don't understand ?? They never even had a look at one in the air ! And the Russians didn't acquire themselves an example of the He-177 either - they were gone.

And as to the complexity of the He-277 design, well it was likely a very complex design, it was after-all German, and the Germans have a habbit of over-engineering - OT example: The design of the 120mm L/44 Rheinmetall gun had to be simplified in order for US industry to be capable of producing it.

Having said that, it's important to note that that comparsion was allegedly between a stripped recon verson of the Me-262 and the XP-80 (which was dimmensionally smaller and had 1,000 lbs less thrust than the P-80A). This was either one of the XP-80 ships remaining in England or one from Italy that went over in Nov 1944 or Jan 1945

The Me-262 wasn't a recon version, all captured Me-262's which entered comparative testing were fighter versions. But would you be so kind as to tell me where you've heard the rumor that it was a recon.

Also I'd very much doubt that the P-80 was a XP or YP prototype, it was much more likely a A series production model. But the XP YP prototypes were both lighter than the A series production model.

Is this the test you wish to make your case on versus the P-80A (which was not done head to head) which was in production in Feb1945? The pilots that flew both the P-80A and THAT Me262 described the P-80A as the "Best in the world"

I'd have wondered if they didn't cause the captured Me-262's certainly weren't run at full power, and the pilots weren't used to it either, plus there's always some national pride. The German pilots who flew both a/c describe the Me-262 as the best, but again the same factors apply. All in all I believe that an excellent example Me-262 P-80 were overall equal to each other, the Me-262 being more maneuverable at high speed and possessing a higher critical mach number.

although proponents of the Meteor 4 could have something to say about that description!

The Meteor Mk.4 was too slow though - an otherwise fine a/c though.

What is the USAAF Report number and date you are quoting from?

Its the same as yours I'd presume.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

I can allready see this thread is going to be marred with insults and everything and get the thread closed, which is going to ruin it for everyone else because people are going to stop acting like adults.

 

[syscom3]

OK, to get things back on track.....

I was wondering what the rest of you think about how Germany's obvious lead in advanced aerial weapons really counted in the equations of WW2.

I was dwelling on this today as I flew back from Dallas to OC, and came to the conclusion that it shouldn't even be counted, as these were weapons for the future, not for the "here and now" reality of 1939-1945.

For instance, the jet bombers were still a couple of years away from being in production (sorry Soren, but its obvious that the LW was going to rush many prototypes into service before they were fully tested and made ready) and couldn't even be considered weapons of WW2. They flew no missions and had ZERO impact on the war besides scaring the crap out of the allies.

Ditto the same for the rockets...... too little too late. Would have been a big factor had the war in Europe dragged on for another year or two.... but like I said, we're talking about the actual war years, not a "what if or could of" scenario.

I was also thinking about the real impact of the Me-262. Just what did it really do besides showing to the allies that the Germans were in the forefront of jet technology? I dont recall it shooting down masses of bombers, and it seems that the kill per sortie rate wasn't too impressive.

Your thought's?