Focke Wulf FW 190-D9 "the best fighter of Germany"?

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

when you get a bunch of fighter pilots together the tone of the conversation is a mix of sarcasm, wise cracks, exaggeration, and poking fun...all in good nature. I had the opportunity to be at a gathering or 2 and witnessed it. my father who rarely talked like that chimed right in like it was yesterday since he last talked like that. it did give me a little insight into his humor ( which became family humor ). just to give you an idea of what it was like here is a pretty funny story...

The Flak House Capers
 
The Wright D-9 is not really representive as it is reported with Jumo 213E engine whereas the D-9 was equipped with Jumo 213A. Among other defects (improper maintenance?) the automatic engine control was obviously not properly adjusted to the Jumo 213E.
 
That's problem with speaking in text. You can't always pick up the sarcasm...now if we were there in person to hear the "crusty old bastard" comment, I doubt any of us would've had a problem with it...
 

Hans Dortemnann's diary, after an initially poor impression of the D-9.

"In spite of this I want to state right from the outset that this plane [D-9] cobbled together out of necessity, turned out to be the best fighter plane made in Germany throughout the whole war...It takes quite some time until we are sufficiently familiar with our new birds. But really, even now the machine proves its superiority with every flight. Enormous climbing ability, far better acceleration in a dive, significantly higher cruising speed and definitely improved turning ability compared to a Fw 190 or 109. Slowly we are getting enthusiastic about the Dora 9."

Other impressions from the men that flew the type, and could directly compare it with others they had flown.

Fw. Friedrich Ungar (9./JG54)
"My first reaction was terrible! Because of the long fuselage it would not be able to turn! But this first impression was soon dispelled. I was able to fly 'White 3' three times on this day. I found it much better than the Me 109 and the big wooden propeller gave it terrific acceleration and it climbed much better."

Fhr. Gerhard Frisch (2./JG2)
"As for the Dora 9 it had few shortcomings. I had been flying Fw 190 As with BMW twin radial row engines. There was no conversion training, we just climbed in and started flying! You could feel the power as soon as you opened the throttle, it just sped away."

Fnj.Ofw Heinz Marquardt (IV./JG51)
"The D-9 was the strong one, the safe one. Cruising speed was 600Km but the others were much slower. The power was excellent and it was the most stable in a dive. It landed smoothly at the recommended 220Km, better than the 109!"

Almost every man who flew the type had a very positive impression of it.

Cheers

Steve

I thought I'd add another from Fw. Gerhard Kroll (9./JG54) as he was clearly a young man who planned ahead

"I really liked this new aircraft [D-9], it was much more powerful than the 109 and much better in take off and landings. It was not weighed down with extra equipment like the late versions of the 109. It was equal to any of our adversaries like the P-51 Mustang. One of the small things that made a difference was the backpack parachute of the Focke-Wulf compared for the seat pack style that was used in the 109. It was much easier to handle on the ground and during bail out."
 
Last edited:
Very cool. So it seemed that the pilots at first disliked it but then seemed to love it. Interessting. But good to see that the wright report is wrong. It really baffled and shocked me the first time i read it. Especially because it is overall very negative. I don't quite get this why did they put the wrong engine in the plane and then make a report that says the dora was shi*?
 
So we have one good report that somehow trumps a bad report, when neither one can be verified, and one who says the aircraft the USA flew was not representative of the species. Doesn't seem very definitive to me.

It would be worth looking into Denniss's statements, and I don't dispute them here, but I seriously doubt if US mechanics changed the engine ... it came to us that way. It was a foreign plane and was simply looked at, gone through, tuned up, and tested. What makes anyone think one report is more believable than another one? Especially without any research.

They made a few Fw 190 D-9s, some 1,809 out of 1,850 total D models. So it DID make the war and create a war record. The often-quoted performance numbers show it to be a good, solid mount, but nothing extra special. A P-51D was faster and it wasn't the fastest Allied fighter.

The Luftwaffe aircraft that did the most damage to airborne targets in the war was the Bf 109 by a wide margin. What would raise the Fw 190 D-9 to a status above the Bf 109 that shot down most of the downed Allied planes in the war? The fact that it had fewer weaknesses? Better landing gear? The Bf 109, especially a late model, was faster, climbed better, took off and landed shorter, but had a shorter range and didn't hit as hard when shooting. But it DID manage to cause a LOT of damage.

I respect the Fw 190 D-9 (indeed all Fw 190s) for being solid, good-handling, generally good-performing fighters with many innovative features. But I'd pick the Bf 109 as the most effective fighter the Luftwaffe ever fielded; not the Fw 190.

In an ideal world if we could do it again (No!), I'd pick the Fw 190 series as the plane I'd rather have started the war with, especially the wide-track gear, the single-lever power setup, and outstanding armament, but in the real world the Bf 109 was a more effective mount by long shot. It may have been overshadowed in many ways by the Fw 190, especially late models, but 1,850 Fw 190Ds versus 34,000+ Bf 109s is a "no contest" when fighting starts. The 20,000+ Fw 190s did a great job for Germany. But the Bf 109s absolutely did also, in more places and in greater numbers.
 
It's not about the most effective aircraft, obviously tens of thousands of Bf 109s will trump a couple of thousand 'Doras'. It's what the men who flew the D-9 in combat thought of it, and they almost invariably rated it above either the Bf 109 or A series Fw 190s. There are complaints about the quality of the construction of the aircraft, Sorau built aircraft were sought by the pilots who considered them better made. They, unlike us, or the pilots at Wright Field, had the benefit of being able to make comparisons, having flown the various types in combat, not carrying out a series of test routines with less than realistic engine settings (or even engine).

The British had a similar problem trying to estimate the REAL performance of Pingel's 'Friederich' and Faber's 'Anton'.

Experienced combat pilots will soon find ways to exploit the strengths of their aircraft, Gerhard Frisch of JG 2 discovered for example

"There was one unique manoeuvre the D-9 could perform and that was when, in a climbing turn, it could suddenly flip over and change direction. We were able to exploit this exceptional agility to our advantage."

It is correct to say that the initial impression of the D-9 on many pilots was not great, but they soon came to like it. Obgfr. Werner Molge of JG 26 is typical.

"I finally got to really like the D-9. The turning radius was about the same as an A-8, even though the D-9 was longer. It was faster, better in handling and we could turn into a bank faster. The roll rate was better and climbing speed was faster. Overall the new D-9 gave a feeling of confidence to the pilot."

There's not much not to like there.

Near the end of the war, on 5th May, Molge was upset to deliberately crash his D-9 into a bomb crater to write it off.

Dortenmann alone was credited with 18 victories flying the D-9 between 2nd November '44 and 27th April '45. These include one B-17 and most of the Allied fighter types available, Mustang, Thunderbolt, Spitfire, Tempest, and even a couple of Yaks at the end.
Most, five, were Mustangs, but there were probably more of these around at the time.

Cheers

Steve
 
The question that comes to my mind, is what was the service record of the captured D-9 types?

I hardly think that they were factory fresh and in some cases, may have even had previous combat damage of some sort that had been hastily repaired along the way.

As the war was grinding to a close, many supply and service depots ceased to exist or were increasingly difficult to transport to and from (rail or road), so there was alot of front-line cannibalizing and salvaging going on just to try and keep the Staffels up to strength.

So with this in mind, there may be contributing factors to the poor performance of the captured Doras that the Allied pilots experienced.
 
The Allies just weren't interested in the German piston engine fighters at the end of the war. The first D-9 to fall into British hands (Theo Nibel's) after 'Bodenplatte' was of course examined before being sent to Farnborough where they never even bothered to re-assemble it.
The Anglo-Americans knew they had fighters at least as good as the Germans and that they had little to learn.
The interest after the war lay in the German jet and rocket types, the British alone acquired ten He 162s and twenty Me 163s.
Cheers
Steve
 
The British took quite a few too, but the only one which they tried to fly in a meaningful way was the Do 335, and that crashed, killing the pilot.
Most of the piston engine types taken back at the end of the war ended up at static displays at various events before being ignominiously scrapped. A lot of aircraft that were captured and given AM numbers were never taken back to the UK but scrapped where they were acquired.
As far as I know the British never bothered to fly a D series Fw 190 after the war at all.
Cheers
Steve
 

IMO it was superior because an average or poorly trained pilot could get more out of it. Bf 109 could be lethal in experienced hands, but it had several limitations, including view from the cockpit -much better in 190 series-. Roll rate was also superior, and it seemed more adaptable to heavily armoured version.

It is interesting that such a Fw 190 appeared so late in the war. Fw 190 A struggled at high altitudes, but due to circumstances (DB 603 employed in Me and Ju 213 not getting priority) it appeared in late in 1944.
 
When I posted above, it was in response to the thread title, "best fighter of Germany."

I tend to think about what really happened instead of what might have been, and I zeroed right in on the Bf 109 doing more for the German war effort. Certainly the Fw 190 series, and the D in particular were excellent aircraft, and nothing I said above takes away from that in my mind. It very well could have been the best Luftwaffe fighter at some point in time, probably in 1944.

So at that point in time, the Fw 190 D-9 might well have been the best overall when flown by average pilots. With so few built and accomplishing so little in real life, I can't suggest the Ta-152 at all. The D-9 that were built did a very credible job in the face of overwhelming numbers.
 
Wow, you guys are just too good. "The best fighter of Germany". It is the same old story,...
WHEN! The 262 was not there in 1941. It was not in any way shape or form the best
from 1939 to 1943. In late '44 and '45 it made an impact on those that opposed it, but
that is that. The 262 did not change the direction of the war in any way. The FW-190 and
Bf.109 did in many different theaters that they participated in.
A lot of great views from many a prospective.
 
The 'Dora' series is also yet another demonstration of the woeful inability of the RLM and German aircraft industry to develop an idea. The decision to fit an inline engine to the Fw 190 was taken in November 1941. It was September 1942 before a Jumo powered version flew, though they messed about with various DB powered versions. JG 54 got the first four service versions in September 1944. It took nearly three years to go from concept to service, imagine if the Merlin engine-P 51 marriage had taken that long to consummate
Cheers
Steve
 
soulezoo said:
Does anyone know what the bulges are in the forward fuselage of that first Me 262 in the picture?
Click to expand...

It looks like a reconnaissance version (A-5a) and the bulges cover the magazines for the cameras. The odd thing is I can't work out which aircraft it is, as I can't find a US EB/FE/T2 number to match that sub type.

Cheers

Steve

As explained above it's a U3, the Americans grabbed a couple of these. I'd bet that the one on deck is W.Nr. 500098, given the US number FE-4011. It crashed and burned following a landing accident (brake failure) at the Greater Pittsburgh Airport, Coraopolis, on 19th August 1945. The pilot, Lt. James Holt managed to escape unharmed before the aircraft burned out.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

W
The scarcity of fighter to fighter FW-190A pilot combat accounts...
2 3
Replies
52
Views
3K
GrauGeist
S
Focke Wulf light fighter
5 6 7
Replies
131
Views
13K
spicmart
S
FW-190 and The Battle of Britain
2 3
Replies
40
Views
2K
Admiral Beez
A
S
"Generations" of fighter aircraft
2
Replies
31
Views
1K
SaparotRob
Best piston engined fighter of 1945?
7 8 9
Replies
168
Views
16K
PAT303
P
Menu
Log in
Register