Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
rastel, you seem to take the word of your aquaintance who flew for the LW and put weight to the fact that a certain 109 pilot made some seasoned 51 jocks look like novices...but in the same breath you discount bud anderson's account as a once in awhile event. 109 pilots knew all the tricks but so did the 51 boys. they knew which turn to get the 109 into so that the torque of the engine would fight the dynamics and make the plane not turn as sharp. they knew to drop flaps, slap the trim tabs, ride the stall to get inside an EA. there were many good pilots on both sides and somedays you fly your best and some you get through despite your flying. in general the 51 could match the 109 Gs in a turning battle and usually after the 2nd or 3rd rotation they would gain ground. all of this of course was dependant on fuel loads of both planes, etc. but it wasnt an isolated incident. if the 109 could out turn to 51 then they would never had gotten into that kind of dogfight PERIOD! russian yaks and LAs could out turn 109s and 190s so the LW pilots were told to never get into a dogfight with them ( gunther rall interview, etc. ). the AVGs P40 couldnt turn with the jap fighters they faced so they absolutely didnt get into a turning dogfight. it would have been the same for US pilots in the ETO were the 109s and 190s simply that dominating in turning battles. they would have taken the fight verticle or down on the deck or use some tactic that they could have used the superior characteristics of their plane. but they continually engaged in turning battles and more than a few times came out on top. i dare say if they hadnt been able to turn with 109s... you wouldnt be talking to a couple members of this forum. here's the words of the boys who did it...raw and uncensored and not embellished by Hollywood or the history channel.... 2/3rds of the way down is a section on turns and after that use of combat flaps.
Mustang Encounter Reports
here's the reports of the P47 pilots...not in sections so you would have to read through to get their take on LW aircraft and how they dealt with them.
P-47 Encounter Reports
The P-51 controversy......
The P-51 was the greatest plane ever. No, the P-51 was only average. The reason they used it was because it had the range. No, the Thunderbolt could have flown the Berlin with drop tanks, the Lightning could have flown to Berlin with drop tanks, the Spitfire could have flown to Berlin with drop tanks. The reason the P-51 was used was because of its lower cost.
Actually a good evaluation is to look for BOTH strengths and weaknesses and then make comparisons. This was done when the US was able to evaluate some "attained" former Soviet Union combat aircraft during the 1980s.If you're test flying enemy aircraft, something Mr. Brown did a lot of, I'd suggest your job is not to look for strengths, but for weaknesses, something you can exploit against the enemy. Unfortunately, reporting of this sort is not as helpful as we would like, when trying compare these aircraft, 65+ years later.
Sorry Barney, you're statements are flawed. First, depending on what version of each aircraft you mention will determine if it was going to make it to Berlin. Obviously a Spit Mk 1 is not going to do it, fight and return. The Mustang had the range, was able to loiter over target and return and it had performance sufficient enough to compete with the Luftwaffe, and I think history shows us that. Yes, it did cost less but in the end its overall performance won out although there were many ETO pilots who preferred the P-38 over the -51.
So the revolutionary thing about the Mustang is that it did a twin engine role as a single engine predator. Contemporaries are the Me-110/210/410 or for Britain the Blenheim and Defiant believe it or not.
Closest contemporary is the Mosquito. But you can't compare it to any other single engine job except the Zero M21. These two birds are just in a class of their own, for the same reasons. Fighter performance exceeding conditions where fighters can be present.
What I'm saying is we've been taught to look at the Mustang as a fighter enthusiast, but the secret of the Mustang is by thinking about it as a military logistical officer, a staff chief to the air force commander. It's not about fighter awesomeness, it's about a tool for a job. The job is very long range escort.Mustang was really a gem.
Stating that it was contemporary of Blenheim Defiant is not true, however. And saying it's a contemporary of Bf-110 barely holds water.