Clay_Allison
Staff Sergeant
- 1,154
- Dec 24, 2008
the one thing I'd most want to fix is the landing gear. I hate planes with poor ground handling.
Do You Have an Illogical Hatred of an Aircraft?
- Thread starter Waynos
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
davparlr
Senior Master Sergeant
FD-190D was basically equivalent to the P-51B/D but with poorer high alitude performance. The Ta was not really a player. The Bf-109K was the most formidable P-51 competition and was clearly superior. However, none of these aircraft arrived early enough. From the advent of the P-51B with -7 engine until Nov-Dec of '44, there was not much competition to the P-51 from the Luftwaffe from SL to 35k. It amazes me that the Germans were unable to field a Bf-109K type aircraft in quantity in early '44. It would have been a much easier to build a point defense weapon able to dominate the P-51 than it was to build a dominating plane able to fly 400 miles, fight for an hour and fly back.
drgondog
Major
Dave - I have talked to enough guys that flew the 109K that I don't believe it was 'dominant'. Certainly equivalent and equal in the 20-30K range. It climbed better but so did the -10, and -14. It was as fast at that altitude but handling qualities according to these guys did not improve at high speed - in fact they said the roll qualities were worse and at best the turn qualities were equal to 109G6.. sooooo I don't know about 'clearly superior' especially when compared against the P-51B-15.
As almost always the pilot and tactical position at the beginning was more important than relative performance of these a/c. IMHO.
- Thread starter
- #144
Yes, Mitchell said 'if it looks right it will fly right' which is what you first posted, same meaning, just different words.
davparlr
Senior Master Sergeant
Hmmm, I was basing my comment on my memory of the airspeed/climb data, which is all I the info I have. However, on examining my data, the difference is not very much, especially to the B, and certainly not enough to say in was clearly superior to either the B or D.
I did see a Dogfight show where one of the P-51 pilots tangled with an unidentified Bf-109 that outperformed his highly tuned aircraft. After escaping, he had no desire to seek out the Bf-109 that had been tormenting him.
Clay_Allison
Staff Sergeant
- 1,154
- Dec 24, 2008
Airshows can see a wide variety of mechanical conditions and pilot skill. It's certainly true that the 109 is capable of potentially beating a Mustang.Hmmm, I was basing my comment on my memory of the airspeed/climb data, which is all I the info I have. However, on examining my data, the difference is not very much, especially to the B, and certainly not enough to say in was clearly superior to either the B or D.
Undergunned? I can understand some of your points, but undergunned? How was it undergunned?
In 1944? I would have no problem taking a Bf 109. It was a competitive aircraft to the end. That does not mean it was the best, but it was competitive until the end. Just like all aircraft, it had advantages and disadvantages over other aircraft.
Clay_Allison
Staff Sergeant
- 1,154
- Dec 24, 2008
If you could pop someone just once with that 30mm, they were toast.
ralphwiggum
Airman
- 76
- Mar 15, 2008
I forgot all about those three planes! I think that any of those three you mentioned would've given the P-51
a hard time especially with a veteran pilot at the controls like Pips Priller or someone else with lots of experience flying against the Western Allies
a hard time especially with a veteran pilot at the controls like Pips Priller or someone else with lots of experience flying against the Western Allies
The Basket
Senior Master Sergeant
- 3,712
- Jun 27, 2007
It was only designed with two machine guns and the F only had two guns and a cannon. To put some guns on it you had to have underwing gondolas...the aircraft was too small for the guns put into it...never saw gondolas on a 190.
By 1944...hmmm...Tempest or 109...Corsair or 109...Mustang or 109....nope...
What are you talking about designed with only 2 machine guns??? Notice below that when I say "built in the wings" that those are not gondolas, they are built into the wings...
Bf 109E-1: 2 MG 17 in the nose and 2 MG 17 built in the wings
Bf 109E-2: 2 MG 17 in the nose, 1 20mm cannon through the hub, and 2 20mm Cannon built in the wings.
Bf 109E-3: 2 MG 17 in the nose, 2 MG FF 20mm cannon built int he wings.
Bf 109E-4: 2 MG 17 in the nose, 2 MG FF 20mm Cannon built in the wings.
Bf 109E-5: 2 MG 17 in the nose, 2 MG 17 built in the wings.
Bf 109E-6/N: 2 MG 17 in the nose, 2 MG 17 built in the wings.
Bf 109E-7: 2 MG 17 in the nose, 2 Mg FF 20mm cannon built in the wings.
Bf 109E-7/B: 2 MG 17 in the nose, 2 Mg FF 20mm cannon built in the wings.
Bf 109E-8: 2 MG 17 in the nose, 2 Mg FF 20mm cannon built in the wings.
Bf 109E-9: 2 MG 17 in the nose, 2 Mg FF 20mm cannon built in the wings.
Bf 109F-1: 1 MG FF 20mm cannon and 2 MG 17 in the nose.
Bf 109F-2: 1 MG 151 20mm cannon in the nose. (yes this variant was underarmed)
Bf 109F-3: 1 MG 151 20mm cannon in the nose. (yes this variant was underarmed)
Bf 109F-4: 1 MG 151 20mm cannon and 2 MG 17 in the nose.
Bf 109F-5: 2 MG 17 in the nose (yes this varient was underarmed)
Bf 109F-6: 2 Mg 17 in the nose (yes this varient was underarmed)
Bf 109G-1: 1 MG 151 20mm cannon and 2 MG 17 in the nose.
Bf 109G-2: 1 MG 151 20mm cannon and 2 MG 17 in the nose.
Bf 109G-3: 1 MG 151 20mm cannon and 2 MG 17 in the nose.
Bf 109G-4: 1 MG 151 20mm cannon and 2 MG 17 in the nose.
Bf 109G-5: 1 MG 151 20mm cannon and 2 MG 17 in the nose.
Bf 109G-6: 1 MG 151 20mm cannon and 2 MG 131 in the nose.
Bf 109G-14: 1 MG 151 20mm cannon and 2 MG 131 in the nose.
Bf 109G-10: 1 MG 151 20mm cannon and 2 MG 131 in the nose.
Bf 109K-4: 1 MG 151 20mm cannon and 2 MG 131 in the nose.
So as you can see the aircraft had more than "2 guns" on almost all variants. Besides the F variant, it was not under-armed. You are forgetting about th 20mm and 30mm cannon that fired through the hub. The 109's armament was just fine.
Are you actually saying the 109 was not competative in 1944? Plenty of Tempests and Mustangs were shot down by 109s from 1944 to 1945. The highest aces on both the eastern and western fronts flew the 109.
Like I said, the 109 was not the best fighter of the war, but she was a damn good one! I am sure if you would go and ask some pilots who actually flew against it and they would tell you that you are dead wrong.
Last edited:
The Basket
Senior Master Sergeant
- 3,712
- Jun 27, 2007
The 109 is an aircraft which I think overstayed its welcome. you dont lke french cars I dont like the 109.
No, don't take me wrong. You are entitled to your opinion. I was just stating that some of the reasons were not true, i.e. the aircraft under armed and not able to compete with other aircraft.
This is a thread about illogical reasons you know, and you can have yours...
davparlr
Senior Master Sergeant
Dogfight is a History Channel show. The person interviewed was a P-51 ace.
E-2 not produced
E-5 only 2 mg 17 on nose was recce
E-6 only 2 mg 17 on nose was recce
E-8 2+2 mg 17
E-9 only 2 mg 17 on nose was recce
F-2 1 mg 151/15 and 2 mg 17 (the Galland plane with mg 131)
F-3 1 mg 151/15 and 2 mg 17
F-5 not mass production (maybe only 1) weaponry not clear
F-6 only 2 mg 17 was recce (only 1)
F-6/U Galland plane 1 mg 151/15 2 mg 17 2 mg ff
G-5 1 mg 151/20 2 mg 131
G-10/U-4 and -14/U-4 with mk 108 (in place of mg 151/20)
drgondog
Major
The 355th FG lost more fighters to 109s than 190s..but probably the P-47 took a higher percent loss rate than the Mustang.
I KNOW my father respected the hell out of the 109. Ialso suspect the P-51 shot a lot more down than any other Allied fighter - but don't know for sure.
Dark Matter
Banned
- 337
- Jun 23, 2009
I dont like the P-51 becuase its overated and I dont like the P-47 becuase its ugly.
GrauGeist
Generalfeldmarschall zur Luftschiff Abteilung
Fw190A5/U12, Black 13 with 20mm (MG 151) gunpods...
Attachments
drgondog
Major
dead meat for the escorts
Catch22
Major
The thing about Fw 190s and gondolas is, they didn't need them at all really. It's only if they had oversized guns mounted on them did they need gondolas, but under normal circumstances they could have 4 cannons inside the wings mounted like normal.
