Late war fighter competition

[davebender]

Grumman F8F Bearcat and whip everyones' tail feathers!

The F8F will be deployed on USN aircraft carriers. Unless the USN enters the Baltic I don't see much scope for it to engage the Luftwaffe.

 

[tomo pauk]

North Sea, or Norwegian waters perhaps? Or Northern Adriatic deployment for Bearcat vs. Luftwaffe?


Sea Fury is my bird again, or P-47N if one wants great performance durability combined with great range (but no carrier landings obviously).

 

[MikeGazdik]

Lets not worry "how" the naval fighters get there. Lets just put them in the fight, maybe land based naval units.

Maybe Soren or someone with similar talent, can come up with some performance tables of some of the main players we have spoke about.

I know on paper the Bearcat doesn't have all of the best statistics, but I think it would be an overall exceptional fighter, in Fighter vs Fighter confrontation. I would be interested in finding out how well it was able to turn.

The Hawker is very good too. I think though its slightly heavier weight would make it tough to out fight the F8F. Same as the P-47N, which is even heavier.

I still wonder how the twin engines planes such as the F7F and the Hornet would compete against some of these great single engine fighters?

 

[davebender]

It appears to me the Bearcat is a dogfighter. Which makes sense since CV aircraft typically operate at medium and low altitude. It might not fare too well at 30,000 feet against 500 mph aircraft using boom zoom tactics.

 

[Soren]

The Ta-152 was probably the best dogfighter of the lot, it featured a very high lift wing design very well suited for turn fighting. And with 2500 hp performance at all alts would've been extreme.

 

[davebender]

Perhaps so. However if I have a speed advantage of 25 to 50 mph I would probably boom zoom. It's inheritly safer then entering an aerial furball. Erich Hartmann scored 352 kills this way and lived to write a book about it. 8)

 

[Guns'n'Props]

Perhaps so. However if I have a speed advantage of 25 to 50 mph I would probably boom zoom. It's inheritly safer then entering an aerial furball. Erich Hartmann scored 352 kills this way and lived to write a book about it. 8)

I daresay most WW2 kills were done this way - very unsporting. Does anyone have any statistics on boom zoom vs other successful tactics please ?

 

[Erich]

remove the Do 335, the comparisons as a what if cannot be used, no operational experience, but maybe that is ok with the members ........ ?

 

[lesofprimus]

I agree Erich, the 335 in my mind wasnt a fighter, but a destroyer....

Take it off the list and Im still in the 152's corner....

 

[davparlr]

The Ta-152H powered by the Jumo 213EB takes the prize IMHO. With 2500 hp and a top speed of over 500 mph there was no other piston engined fighter which could rival it.

The P-47M/N with a flat rated 2800 hp from 10k to 33,000 ft easily out-powers the Ta-152 even with the EB, up to the P-47 ceiling and at 35k this power difference is probably about 1500 hp providing a substantial power to weight advantage (over 100% more power)! For 1945 Europe, the P-47 could easily be lightened (less fuel carried since no long range escorts and reduced armament) and, if required, I am sure Republic could re-wing the P-47 (already done for the N) as easily as the Focke-Wulf did for the 190/152. According to your chart, the EB performance is still considerably below the P-51H and the Tempest II in speed below 25k ft and at a disadvantage in climb below 20-25k. Of course I am not even looking at the -11 engine in the P-51, which has higher altitude performance. Above 20-25k the Ta would dominate these planes, but then there is that doggone P-47. The P-47J already had achieved 500 mph. Your chart appears never to show the EB generating more than about 172 mph and it looks like nitrous is not used. Am I misreading the chart, I have done that before? Unfortunately I cannot even mention the P-72 which already had a year in development and was in production before being cancelled in favor of jets.

Kurt Tank, the designer of the Ta-152, when interviewed, claimed to have evaded siz Mustangs while flying the Ta-152, by virtue of its superior speed. He revealed that a planned version of the aircraft featuring a Jumo 222 engine would reach 500 mph.

Since the Ta-152 has a clean top speed of about 370 mph at SL and a 1945 fighter-weight P-51D has a clean top speed of about 380 mph at SL, it is unlikely Kurt could evade the P-51s using superior speed. Now if the Ta had no racks and the P-51Ds did, then the Ta probably could slowly ease away. Most likely, the P-51s never saw the Ta. Did the 222 engine ever work?

 

[Erich]

as Tank did not fly an H model it is not known 100 % if he had MW-50 installed in his C-0 variant he was flying,, if so yes he would of sped away. but to confirm that he had 6 P-51's on his butt is a bit much. there is of course the possibility that this story is nothing but myth to help promote the qualities of the little know to be fighter

 

[lesofprimus]

I would go with the myth part rather than reality, Tank was a salesman as much as he was a designer...

Phenominal mind in both aspects..

 

[NZTyphoon]

Heh, as a member of the Commonwealth, I've gotta stick my oar in for the Commonwealth CA-15 "Kangaroo"
Commonwealth CA-15

CAC also built an advanced piston fighter named the "CA-15", powered by the Rolls-Royce Griffon engine, that clearly had Mustang influence though it could hardly be confused as a variant of the type. It looked something like a mutant Mustang on steroids.

The CA-15 began life in 1942 with studies for a follow-on to the Commonwealth Boomerang, a fighter that the Australians had put together hastily at the beginning of the war, using the North American T-6 Texan trainer as a starting point. The Boomerang was a much better machine than could have possibly been suggested by its humble origins and provided excellent service in the South Pacific theater, but there was no way to make much more of it than it was.

Further studies on a next-generation fighter continued through 1943, though as CAC was working towards Mustang production at the time, the company didn't have many resources to spare and the investigation didn't go anywhere in a hurry. The RAAF finally issued a specification in 1944, calling for a much more capable machine than the Mustang.

Commonwealth originally considered using a turbocharged Pratt Whitney R-2800 Double Wasp air-cooled double-row radial engine, but there were doubts that the Australians could get their hands on such engines in adequate numbers. CAC then turned to the Rolls-Royce Griffin water-cooled vee inline engine. In 1945, CAC decided to build a prototype of the "CA-15" with a turbosupercharged Griffin 61 engine with 2,035 horsepower at altitude, and obtained two Griffin 61s from Britain on loan. Production was to use the more powerful Griffin 125, then under development,

A general verbal description of the CA-15 matches that of the P-51D almost perfectly. The CA-15 was a low-wing, all-metal fighter with a vee inline engine driving a four-bladed prop; taildragger landing gear, with the main gear pivoting in the wings toward the fuselage and a retractable tailwheel; a cooling scoop under the fuselage; and a bubble canopy.

Armament fit was to be three 12.7 millimeter Browning machine guns in each wing, for a total of six guns, though other gun fits were considered; a single stores pylon under each wing for a 450 kilogram (1,000 pound) bomb or a drop tank, for a total of two stores pylons; or five rails under each wing for rocket projectiles, for a total of ten rails.

However, the CA-15's proportions were entirely distinct from those of the Mustang, and in fact the CA-15 also had a certain resemblance to the Republic XP-72 derivative of the P-47 Thunderbolt. One of the most noticeable oddities was the undersized bubble canopy, which looked like something that would be fitted to an air racer.

Initial flight of the CA-15 was on 4 March 1946, with test pilot Jim Schofield at the controls. Trials showed the machine, which was informally named the "Kangaroo", possessed excellent performance, though its controls were on the heavy side and it unsurprisingly demonstrated strong propeller torque on takeoff. Trying to get up into the cockpit to fly the thing in the first place was a bit of chore as well.

COMMONWEALTH CA-15 "KANGAROO":
_____________________ _________________ _______________________

spec metric english
_____________________ _________________ _______________________

wingspan 10.97 meters 36 feet
length 11.04 meters 36 feet 2 inches
height 4.32 meters 14 feet 2 inches

empty weight 3,420 kilograms 7,540 pounds
max takeoff weight 5,597 kilograms 12,340 pounds

max speed at altitude 720 KPH 450 MPH / 390 KT
service ceiling 11,900 meters 39,000 feet
range, internal fuel 1,850 kilometers 1,150 MI / 1,000 NMI
_____________________ _________________ _______________________


A mechanical failure led to a wheels-up landing on 10 December 1946. The pilot, Lee Archer, was unhurt, but the aircraft was badly damaged. By this time, jet fighters were clearly the way of the future, and CAC didn't get the CA-15 flying again until the spring of 1948. On 25 May, Archer dropped the Kangaroo into a dive and then leveled out, to set a speed record of 808.2 KPH (502.2 MPH) for the machine.

Performance would have been even better had the Double Wasp or Griffon 125 been fitted, but even at that any leading-edge jet fighter of the time could leave the Kangaroo in the dust. The CA-15 performed limited further test flights until the spring of 1950, when it was finally grounded due to lack of spares and then dismantled. The Griffon engines were returned to Britain.

There were drawbacks; light armament and 448 mph was not a great deal better than the P-51D. Still, worth throwing in as something different to the usual run of Bearcats etc.

 

[MikeGazdik]

Ok, so your fighter command has the task of performing fighter sweeps and escorting medium bombers into North East Germany around the North Sea. Allied positions are flying south from Sweden. You know the Luftwaffe is operating several groups of Ta 152's in the area. The allied advance has slowed and not yet gone into Germany proper, so the fighter sweeps are intended to soften the Luftwaffe, along with medium bomber escorts that are tactical in nature, attacking the German ground forces that are preventing continued invasion. The Me262 factories have been hit hard by 8th AF bombers so they have a minimal affect, and when deployed are going after the heavies from England. So they are not a factor in this area.

You are the commanding officer of the theatre, and you have the choice of several new allied fighters to deploy in the area.

Which of these aircraft do you chose. I put this scenario in place because it does seem that the Focke Wulf appears to be favored by many, and respected by all as at least 1 of the best.

 

[davparlr]

as Tank did not fly an H model it is not known 100 % if he had MW-50 installed in his C-0 variant he was flying,, if so yes he would of sped away. but to confirm that he had 6 P-51's on his butt is a bit much. there is of course the possibility that this story is nothing but myth to help promote the qualities of the little know to be fighter

Okay, I'll buy that. Soren's chart shows a C-1 (I'm assuming the C-0 is similar) with SL speed of 388 mph while the P-51D's speed is 383 mph and the P-51B is 386 mph. All, I'm sure, is within the error of testing. I wouldn't say he "sped" away.

All in all, not a bad showing for a plane that had been flying and fighting since '43 against the best of the enemy could field in '45 (not including jets).

 

[VG-33]

Right. I don't want this to be an "X" plane competition. THIS HAS BEEN EDITED. Lets keep all of these plane in the mix.

As I see it right now; Ta 152
F7f
F8f
P-51h
P-47N
Yak 9U
Spiteful
Sea Fury
Do 335

That is some serious hardware! Any would be a fine aircraft. I think the sleeper may well be the Yak, it was a real performer.

Hello
Your Ta 152 seems to be overquoted. It's power was about 2050 hp with MW-50 and Jumo 213 from various sources, not 2500. Moroever it's not proven that is was a better fignter than the usual D-9 at low and middle heights.

In that sense i think La-7 was more impressive than the Yak at low heights (635 km/h at SL and about 665 at 2600m with 1850 hp only). With an american/british 100 LL instead of its standard soviet benzine a simple Yak-9D was gaining about 20km/h IAS. Probably more for a La-5FN /La-7 family, by extrapolation.

Regards

 

[davebender]

How long are you expecting the European war to last? After another year of fighting the entire continent will be rubble and no longer worth fighting over.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

I daresay most WW2 kills were done this way - very unsporting.

There was nothing unsporting about it. The job of a fighter pilot is to shoot down the enemy and fly home to fight another day. If that means hitting your enemy before he knows you are there, then so be it. That is smart flying...

 

[MikeGazdik]

How long are you expecting the European war to last? After another year of fighting the entire continent will be rubble and no longer worth fighting over.

Long enough for us to argue about it!! LOL

I am glad a defender of the Russian aircraft has joined the debate. I really like the Lavochkin La-7 too, maybe we can stretch and figure the La-9 would have been hurried into production.

My little mock layout of where the battle is fought works out for the Russian aircraft, coming from Poland.

With my scenario, it would be real easy to put the P-51H into the theater. The plane was already proven with the 8th AF. But that would be the logical choice, I rather prefer illogical.

 

[renrich]

In an earlier post I stated that F4U5 was nearly in production in 1945. I was wrong as the prototype F4U5 did not fly until 1946.