Wild_Bill_Kelso
Senior Master Sergeant
- 3,231
- Mar 18, 2022
Do I look excited? Apparently Kurt Tank was though.
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Spitfire Mk XIV was not far off, 448 mph at 26 000 ft according to its Aircraft Data Sheet. See: http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/Spitfire_XIV_ADC.jpg...I'm not too sure anyone was going 450 mph in 1944, except in testing. As I've argued before, using WER on a regular basis just wasn't part of normal operations. Nobody who wanted to get home cruised at max power for too long. The engines just weren't designed for it. WER was a thing used in factory testing and wasn't normally used except to save your own life when you were about to die. P-51D mustangs were supposed to have a top speed of 437 mph and that was at WER and 26,000 feet. Everywhere else it was slower than that. Merlins were very good at making continuous power but were never very good at running at high power for long periods without getting heat-soaked.
I have no doubt they could cruise at 315 mph TAS, but they weren't flitting about at 430 mph unless they were diving from altitude. If they did that, they were in pursuit or the escort was terminated and they were going to the deck to strafe on the way home.
..
I suppose at max charitability, WER is the "max climb, max dive" rating, not the "max speed". The "plane's dead either way, but I wanna go home" setting on the throttle, thus why it had a wire to stop it in the MustangYeah, that's max speed with the engine about to explode ... at WER. Hardly anyone used that as a regular matter of course. If they did so frequently, they were likely a POW soon thereafter. WER was saved for really bad circumstances, when you needed to escape.
Again, a quote from a real WWII pilot, "WER was for test pilots over the home airfield and company sales pitches."
That expression comes from Horse Racing.…wait, is THAT where the expression "down the wire" came from? That the fight came so close, that you had to break open that wire finally to make it out?
Ah, that makes more sense. I could imagine at least one pony pilot out there with some knowledge of horse racing having made that mental connection and having a quick chuckle, though, and that makes me happyThat expression comes from Horse Racing.
In the 1800's, a thin piece of wire was strung across the track at the finish line in order to help the judges determine who crossed first.
As far as I can tell, the Re.2005 was VERY competitive when it came out .. all 48 or so of them. There were never enough to really do anything with other than maybe a combat evaluation. They were introduced in April / May 43 and the armistice was signed in Sep 43, so they didn't fight long for the Axis. I have never seen how many of what Italian aircraft the Germans retained when Italy dropped from the ranks of their allies, but the Re.2005 could not have been a significant number of them. They might have had more luck with MC.205s than Re.2005s.
Basically the Japanese were using 1940 airplanes in 1942.
Of course much of the Allied air forces in Pacific were using 1940s fighters in Dec 1941 and early 1942.
Now there is quite a bit of room in either year for improvement/change. Planes did not automatically change on Jan 1st of every year and all air forces/used planes that were past their best use date. The Spitfire I went through a number of changes in 1940 even before you get the MK II. The MK V showed up in March of 1941.
Compare the Ki-43 I (single speed supercharger) to the Italian G 50 or Macchi 200 for example. Italian planes carried the pretty much the same armament except about 50% more ammo.
Yes they had shorter range.
The P-40/Tomahawks were basically 1940 fighters, problem was they didn't show up until 1941 and it was mid way through 1941 before they were really combat capable.
A P-40B might have done OK during the BoB (or not much worse than a Hurricane I) IF the engines had worked properly, if the .50 cal machine guns had worked (even in the spring of 1941 they could only count on the four wing machine guns) and other problems (oxygen equipment etc) Problem for the US was that the P-40C/D/E/K got worse over 15,000ft during 1941-42. They got better at lower altitudes and they could hit harder and take more punishment but they could not fight at the higher altitudes.
The Zero was carrying the same armament as a mid 1940 Bf 109 and was slower, yes it had more range and it turned better. But in 1942 is was not really in the front rank.
Dieppe Aug 1942, The British had 4 squadrons of Mustangs, 4 squadrons of Spitfire IXs and several squadrons of Typhoons. Germans had 109Fs and were introducing the 109G (yes there were problems) and 190s.
Ki-43s don't get two speed superchargers until the winter of 1942/43. First Zeros with 2 speed superchargers show up around the time of Dieppe. The Ki-61 entered production in late 1942 and the 1st conversion unit wasn't formed until Feb 1943( just after the first squadron of F4Us goes into combat).
The Japanese were behind and they never caught up.
It wasn't hard to beat the 109E, the thing was about as aerodynamic as brick, as can be seen by the early 109Fs which used the same engine.
The 109G wasn't all that hot either. The G, even when they got the engine straightened out, wasn't that much faster than the F. In part because they kept adding lumps and bumps to it, like bigger bulges on the wings for bigger tires and the canopy frame looks like something from apprentice blacksmiths.
18 lbs boost/67 in/hg was what the Merlin was rated for as far as WEP until 115/145 and 150 octane fuel became common in 1944 (second half the year). This allowed Mustangs to run to 72in/hg/21 lbs, later 75 in/23 lbs, and later 80 in/25 lbs.
Point is that the Griffon with 18 lbs boost was still WEP. WEP/Combat power was intended primarily for that, emergency or combat. IE, evading an enemy, engaging and enemy, or carrying out an interception.
For instance, at P-51B or D flying with half fuel on 75" was able to get as high as a 4900 fpm climb rate and 450 mph. But that was with 75" (WEP/Combat), and flying light (half fuel, probably reduced equipment not needed for longer ranged flight). The XP-51F/G and P-51H programs were aimed at improving rate of climb by reducing weight where necessary, though the G and H also got more powerful engines as well (RM 14SM Merlin for the G and V-1650-9 Merlin for the H; the F used the V-1650-3 from the B and early D models).
Ki-43 I's or Ki-43 IIs?But MC.200 was done as a fighter by mid 1942, whereas Ki-43 was still scoring victories in 1944.
Try figuring out if the A6M2 would have worked over Europe in the summer of 1942.I would disagree with that.
That's correct. The horse with it's head cut off was deemed the winner.That expression comes from Horse Racing.
In the 1800's, a thin piece of wire was strung across the track at the finish line in order to help the judges determine who crossed first.
lol - the wire was actually quite fragile.That's correct. The horse with it's head cut off was deemed the winner.
The bottom line with the G.55 (and probably the Re 2005) was as good as it was, was it worth two Bf109G-6? I'm not sure about that honestly. Later model 109s are starting to be more and more compromised. G.55 could probably give you a better chance against a P-47 or P-51 or Spit XIV. Not sure if as much as two 109G though.
Ki-43 I's or Ki-43 IIs?
The MC 200 never got a better engine than the 840hp at 3800 meters version.
Ki-43 II had 1150hp/2,450m and 980hp at 5,600m.
The Ki-43 II had armor and fuel tank protection.
They only built about 725 of the Ki-43 Is and stopped in Feb 1943.
They built over 5,000 of the Ki-43 IIs so it is not hard to figure out which Ki-43 were scoring victories in 1944 and it is not the 1941-42 version.
Due to a shortage of engines the Italians did build MC 200s for quite a while but they were sending MC 202s to front line units in the 2nd half of 1941.
About 1 1/2 years before the Ki-61's show up.
Try figuring out if the A6M2 would have worked over Europe in the summer of 1942.
on either side.
Spitfires aren't dealing with 9lb boost limit or the tropical filters or the tropical radiators.
A6M2s vs 109F-4 and early 109Gs?
The A6M2 still has better range, but not as good over Europe where flying at the A6M2 economical cruise would be throwing planes away.
We have argued about this before, the facts have not changed.
The Darwin Spitfires were dragging anvils behind them, do not confuse their performance with European versions.
Because the way to get out of a situation where you're pitted against a plane and/or pilot with superior manuverability/skills is to exit, post haste, so you want an airplane with superior top speed to your opponent's.Remember that the Zero, which was considered in 1942 to be an amazing plane that outclassed its "inferior" opponents, did not actually do all that well in the real world. The Zero was always a "one trick pony" that had extraordinary maneuverability, but little else (except range, which didn't matter during actual combat). Even though our American pilots were initially impressed by the Zero's aerobatic capabilities, they did figure out ways to shoot it down, and those ways leaned heavily on teamwork, training, and the Wildcat's superior speed in a dive. Those "inferior" Wildcats actually gave better than they got, and the ratio became more and more in favor of the Wildcat with the passage of time, approaching 6:1 toward the end of the Guadalcanal campaign.