Fw 190D and Me 109K vs. Yak-3 and La-7

[BiffF15]

Bomber pilots never spent much time hard-maneuvering and almost zero time inverted, even in a split-S, loop, or simple peel-off, so they weren't exactly up to par when it came to basic fighter maneuvers. But I'd bet former-bomber pilots turned fighter pilot survivors of air combat got better at pretty quickly, even if not exactly turning into "experten." The problem was surviving for 7 - 10 combat missions. Atfer that, you'd generally pretty much know what was goping to happen and be fairly ready for it.

Getting through the first several combat missions was likely a 20 - 40% survival thing late-war. Not really glowing future prospects.

Post Vietnam the USAF realized that once a crew has 10 combat sorties under their belt the odds for survival go up tremendously. So Red Flag was established. I attended all through the 90's and will say not only was it fantastic training but a lot of fun, both in the air and on the ground. Lots of adversaries, SAMs, peer pressure as well as nights in Viva Las Vegas. Interesting to note was the majority of fatalities / accidents occur on the second Monday. The second Monday briefs always started with videos of midair collisions, as well as flight into the ground (very sobering).

Cheers,
Biff

 

[pbehn]

Post Vietnam the USAF realized that once a crew has 10 combat sorties under their belt the odds for survival go up tremendously. So Red Flag was established. I attended all through the 90's and will say not only was it fantastic training but a lot of fun, both in the air and on the ground. Lots of adversaries, SAMs, peer pressure as well as nights in Viva Las Vegas. Interesting to note was the majority of fatalities / accidents occur on the second Monday. The second Monday briefs always started with videos of midair collisions, as well as flight into the ground (very sobering).

Cheers,
Biff

Second Monday after what?

 

[Husky]

Target fixation.

Why second Mondays???

 

[BiffF15]

Sorry about that. Red Flag is two weeks long (2 Monday to Friday periods of flying) and most of the accidents occurred on the second Monday. You make it through the first week, are feeling comfortable, went out partying all weekend, and Monday you are ready to kick some arse. The difficulty level also goes up the second week. Over confidence, increased difficulty and threats, may combine for a bad mix.

Cheers,
Biff

 

[Juha3]

Vasiliy Golubev, I guess. His books were better than many others. But, still, they were all written in the Soviet period. That meant censorship, political bias, etc.

Yes, I know, I have read several Soviet time books, thanks to "Progress" publishing house, and know the problems with them

 

[Juha3]

Reading soviet tests of the fw190, all the time say how much superior their fighters were. And indeed the Fw190A was obsolete by 1945. However , in Kurland pocket , just two gruppen of Jg54 , fought for six months against thousands soviets aircraft, and managed to keep the ports operating. And at the end they escaped to the british occupation zone. I dont see much sovier fighter superiority there
Until the last day luftwaffe was flying missions against the soviets, if fuel was available with any type of aircraft. From training biplanes to jets . Lipfert was even flying in his own initiative in order to get his 200th kill. Against the western alleis they could not even take off. Soviet superiority was basically in numbers, LA7 and yak3 were good but we should not exaggerate their abilities

I agree with the first part but calling 190 As obsolete, it clearly was still useful in 1945, and anyway Soviets still used Yak-9Ms and British Spit IXs and XVIs.
But it is not true, that LW was powerless in the ETO in 1945, air combats continued to the end, the LW even used Ju 87s at daytime time to time, e.g. at Stolzenau on 5 April 1945 against British ground forces.

 

[pbehn]

I agree with the first part but calling 190 As obsolete, it clearly was still useful in 1945, and anyway Soviets still used Yak-9Ms and British Spit IXs and XVIs.
But it is not true, that LW was powerless in the ETO in 1945, air combats continued to the end, the LW even used Ju 87s at daytime time to time, e.g. at Stolzenau on 5 April 1945 against British ground forces.

To what end? A Ju 87 is airborne artillery only useful when used with the ground forces or perhaps sinking ships. An Fw 190 was still a potent aeroplane in 1945 but what can one achieve, or a squadron or even 1000 with all the backup they need?

 

[GregP]

After you explain it, second Monday blues makes perfect sense. Once someone is "familiar" with a difficult task, they tend to get a bit complacent about it. I read in the NTSB Reporter in the 1980s that pilots with 500 - 700 hours were most likely to have a gear-up landing becasue they were familiar with the airplane and tended to not use checklists. They almost all returned to using checklists after the "big scare" or the accident ... at least accoirding to the article I read. Wonder if it is still true ...

We found the same tendencies when I went to high performance driving school at Bob Bondurant in the early 1990s. After 2 - 3 days of training, the drivers all seemed to forget to warm up the tires and brakes on the 4th day. That made teh 4th day hot lpas VERY interesting.

I was almost one of them but fortunately refrained from trying to set my fast time on the first lap. One thing those of us who were driving our own cars NEVER forgot was to cool down the engine and brakes with a slow lap at 2500 - 3000 rpm. The guys and gals who were driving school cars (Jack Roush Mustang GTs) almost always forgot that on day 4 and had to be reminded. But if you are paying for tires, brakes, and water pumps yourself, you don't tend to forget that stuff unless you are rich enough not to care about the expense. I wasn't.

About post #86, I don't believe anyone said the Luftwaffe was powererless in April 1945. I said they collapsed as an effective fighting force durign April 1945. The airplanes that got airborne with good pilots in them weren't magically rendered ineffective. They were just wildly outnumbered on the western front and didn't have much chance if they DID get airborne.

In the ETO, we lost 274, 299, and 419 fighters in Jan, Feb, Mar 1945. We lost 343 in April 1945 against 4,257 Luftwaffe losses. The Luftwaffe losses in May were 750. That's a difference of 3,507 losses. The combat reports I've read indicate to me that the ground losses dropped off because there was nothing new and undamaged to shoot at. So, sometime in April 1945, the Luftwaffe ceased being a good fighting force. We only lost 36 fighters in May 45, and 16 of those were to AAA. Of course, VE Day was 8 May ...

 

[Juha3]

La-5/7 vs Fw 190 Eastern Front 1942-45 by Dmitriy Khazanov & Aleksander Medved
Page 5:
"Although the Focke-Wulf would remain a significant threat to the VVS-KA into
early 1944, by then Soviet pilots had come to realize that most of the fighter units
equipped with the Fw 190 had been posted back to Germany to defend its cities
against daylight bomber raids being mounted by the USAAF's Eighth and Fifteenth
Air Forces. Indeed, by the spring of 1944 most Fw 190-equipped Gruppen on the
Eastern Front were Schlacht (ground attack) units. These machines were not flown by
Experten who had amassed vast experience engaging Soviet fighters, but by ex-Ju 87
and Hs 129 pilots with only limited knowledge of aerial combat. The Focke-Wulf
gradually became a less dangerous foe for the Soviet fighter pilots as a result, although
the Bf 109G/K remained a threat through to war's end."

Might be but according to the LW OoB on 9 April 1945 in Courland Stab, I. and II./JG 54 (84 Fw 190s); In East Prussia Stab/JG 51 (20 Fw 190s); Eastern Germany Stab and IV./JG 3 (65), I. and II./JG 6 (120), Stab, I. and III./JG 11 (113), so 402 Fw 190 fighters, and at least part of JG 301 also fought against VVS.

 

[Juha3]

what configuration? combat loaded? full fuel? gap sealed? what engine condition? - should i proceed with more questions???

Out of production line and acceptance tested, weights declared in test reports, cannot say anything on whether gaps were sealed or not, but because test were made by the Scientific Institute of the VVS (Air Force) my guess is that they were as in those sent to the units, the idea was to monitor the quality of production aircraft, not to produce some nice procure figures, VVS was the customer.

 

[Milosh]

Might be but according to the LW OoB on 9 April 1945 in Courland Stab, I. and II./JG 54 (84 Fw 190s); In East Prussia Stab/JG 51 (20 Fw 190s); Eastern Germany Stab and IV./JG 3 (65), I. and II./JG 6 (120), Stab, I. and III./JG 11 (113), so 402 Fw 190 fighters, and at least part of JG 301 also fought against VVS.

Lw OoB www.oocities.org/sturmvogel_66/LWOB45.html

 

[Juha3]

Lw OoB www.oocities.org/sturmvogel_66/LWOB45.html

Immediately noticed one typo, IV./JG 3 was a Fw 190 Gruppe.

 

[CORSNING]

[QUOTE="GregP,

I'm under the impression the D-13 used the Jumo 213EB engine and an MG151 cannon instead of a Mk 108.

Greg, just to be precise:
Fw 190D-13: Jumo 213F-1, 2050 ps.
Armament: 1 x Mk 151 + 2 x MG 151

Fw 190D-12: Jumo 213F
Armament: 1 x MK 108 + 2 x MG 151

The proposed Fw 190D-12/R25 was to have the Jumo 213EB installed.

I sometime get the MK 151 and 108 mixed up, so I am 90% sure the above is correct.
, Jeff

 

[Juha3]

To what end? A Ju 87 is airborne artillery only useful when used with the ground forces or perhaps sinking ships. An Fw 190 was still a potent aeroplane in 1945 but what can one achieve, or a squadron or even 1000 with all the backup they need?

Stukas were attacking the British 11 Armoured Division which was crossing the Weser, they bombed both the British bridgehead and troops preparing to cross, they were supporting German counterattack.

 

[Juha3]

After you explain it, second Monday blues makes perfect sense. Once someone is "familiar" with a difficult task, they tend to get a bit complacent about it. I read in the NTSB Reporter in the 1980s that pilots with 500 - 700 hours were most likely to have a gear-up landing becasue they were familiar with the airplane and tended to not use checklists. They almost all returned to using checklists after the "big scare" or the accident ... at least accoirding to the article I read. Wonder if it is still true ...

We found the same tendencies when I went to high performance driving school at Bob Bondurant in the early 1990s. After 2 - 3 days of training, the drivers all seemed to forget to warm up the tires and brakes on the 4th day. That made teh 4th day hot lpas VERY interesting.

I was almost one of them but fortunately refrained from trying to set my fast time on the first lap. One thing those of us who were driving our own cars NEVER forgot was to cool down the engine and brakes with a slow lap at 2500 - 3000 rpm. The guys and gals who were driving school cars (Jack Roush Mustang GTs) almost always forgot that on day 4 and had to be reminded. But if you are paying for tires, brakes, and water pumps yourself, you don't tend to forget that stuff unless you are rich enough not to care about the expense. I wasn't.

About post #86, I don't believe anyone said the Luftwaffe was powererless in April 1945. I said they collapsed as an effective fighting force durign April 1945. The airplanes that got airborne with good pilots in them weren't magically rendered ineffective. They were just wildly outnumbered on the western front and didn't have much chance if they DID get airborne.

In the ETO, we lost 274, 299, and 419 fighters in Jan, Feb, Mar 1945. We lost 343 in April 1945 against 4,257 Luftwaffe losses. The Luftwaffe losses in May were 750. That's a difference of 3,507 losses. The combat reports I've read indicate to me thath the ground losses dropped off because there was nothing new and undamaged to shoot at. So, sometime in April 1945, the Luftwaffe ceased being a good fighting force. We only lost 36 fighters in May 45, and 16 of those were to AAA. Of course, VE Day was 8 May ...

As you see from my post #86 I was answering to Dedalos who's post was quoted in the post.
The LW losses, are they all LW losses or are they USAAF claims? If former, there were other main players like RAF, VVS etc. which made their contributions to the LW losses. And claims are only claims even if USAAF fighter pilots' claim accuracy in air-to-air combats was generally good in the ETO.

 

[GregP]

Hi Jeff,

The MG 151/20 was a 20 mm cannon using 20 x 82 ammo with a 105 g projectile at 700 - 750 rpm. It wasn't as good a cannon as an Oerlikon FF L or a Hispano Mk V, but it was reliable. The shell had a fairly slow muzzle velocity compared with the best.

There was also an MG 151/15 MG using 15 x 96 ammo with 64.5 g projectile at 700 rpm. It was a pretty decent machine gun.

Hi Juha3. The German losses were from the Statistical Digest of World War II and were USAAF. If I am not mistaken, the Digest was based on claims vetted after WWII, but was likely still based largely on claims. There is an entire book that can be written about what constitiues a "victory," and I have addressed that before. However, there were an extraordinarily large number of aircraft destroyed on the ground in April 1945 by the USAAF no matter how you look at it. It was five or more times greater than any months in 1943-1944 and the first 3 months of 1945. That could only happen if either the AAA was dropping off, the airborne German fighter force was dropping off, or both. It was NOT going to happen if everything was running along as it had for the previous several years.

I am not wanting to make anything of it. I am just observing when the statistics say the aerial war was essentially won. April 1945 jumps out from the statistics as that time. I don't think the Germans "gave up," or that their pilots and/or aircraft were somehow less effective in April. I think the number of defenders was materially less than it had been. There were fuel shortage and propeller shortages, too. The Germans were not particularly short of fuel or props, but the airfields where the airplanes were based WERE short of fuel and parts because marauding Allied fighters were straffing anything that moved at that time. That made fuel deliveries and parts deliveries a problematic affair. If it was moving, it got straffed in April 1945, making effective defense a tough cookie to bake.

 

[tomo pauk]

Hi Jeff,

The MG 151/20 was a 20 mm cannon using 20 x 82 ammo with a 105 g projectile at 700 - 750 rpm. It wasn't as good a cannon as an Oerlikon FF L or a Hispano Mk V, but it was reliable. The shell had a fairly slowq muzzle velocity compared with the best.

MG 151/20 was a probably a better cannon than the FFL. Belt-fed from the get-go, earlier in actual service (despite the FFL being marketed even before ww2), ~50% better RoF, can be synchronized. 92-95g M-shell went at 800-790 m/s, the 117g shells were doing at 720-730 m/s; there was no 105g shell. FFL was firing the 130g shell at 750 m/s.
Hispano V was better than 151/20, but it was later by 3 years, and could not be synchronized.

There was also an MG 151/15 MG using 15 x 96 ammo with 64.5 g projectile at 700 rpm. It was a pretty decent machine gun.

It was very powerful, but it was also heavy and bulky, even when compared some 20mm guns. FWIW, Germans quickly introduced the /20 version.

 

[CORSNING]

For comparison, the main aerial guns of Yak-3 & La-7 at the beginning of 1945 were:
UB: 12.7 mm, muzzle speed: 860 m/s, Rof: 800/1000 non-sync/sync. 48 g projectile.
Penetration: 20mm @ 350 meters.
ShVAK: 20 mm, Muzzle speed: 800 m/s, Rof: 800 rpm. 96 g projectile.
Penetration: 25mm @ 150 m & 90 degree angle. 15 mm @ 300 m. & 90 degree angle.

Russian Yakovlev fighters of WW2

 

[Vincenzo]

It's strange that UB has better penetration of ShVAK, something is not right

 

[pbehn]

Stukas were attacking the British 11 Armoured Division which was crossing the Weser, they bombed both the British bridgehead and troops preparing to cross, they were supporting German counterattack.

Did they stop anything? How many? How many bombs were dropped?