Most overated fighter

[Catch22]

Throw the Corsair into Europe and see what happens. While I like the Mustang, Soren nailed it on the head. Yes it had the range, but so did the Hellcat and Corsair, which people seem to forget. They could have easily done what the Mustang did, but they were only used (in large numbers) in the Pacific. Let's look at some of the statistical info differences between the Corsair and the Mustang, shall we?

P-51D Mustang

Max Speed: 716 km/h (445 mph) at 7620 m (25 000 ft)

Range: 525 km (326 mi) on internal fuel; 1210 km (752 mi) with two 491 L (108 gal) drop tanks

Service Ceiling: 12 770 m (41 000 ft)

Payload: two 227 kg (500 lb) bombs OR eight 75 mm rockets, but not drop tanks

F4U-1D

Max Speed: 684 km/h (425 mph) at 6100 m (20 000 ft)

Range: 1 633 km (1 015 mi) (I don't know if this is with or without tanks)

Service Ceiling: 11 280 m (37 000)

Payload: 1 800 kg (4 000 lbs) of bombs or rockets without tanks

As you can see, the Mustang has a slight edge in 3 of 4 categories. I don't know how much the altitude figures in with excorting bombers, as I'm not aware of the alt they usually flew at, and speed doesn't win dogfights, plus I would hazard to say the Corsair was better in a dive. But the Corsair could carry 3 500 lbs more than the Mustang, which makes it a much better multirole fighter. For range, the distance between London and Berlin is 581 mi, so they could both do it. And I don't know who voted for the Corsair, but I would call it one of the more underrated planes.

 

[Soren]

It can't possibly the 51 as it's the aircraft that neutered the LW

Yes it can cause it wasn't the best like so many believe. The thing that neutered the LW was that the Allies had a fighter which could escort the bombers right into the heart of Germany, staying above the bombers and dropping down on the interceptors busyt trying to shoot down the bombers. And the LW's lack of trained pilots fuel also played a big part in the Mustang's success.


Like Bill has pointed out as well, the orders to concentrate solely on the bombers really hurt the LW, had they been allowed to attack the escorts the war could've been significantly prolonged.

The attack on the bombers should've been left to the Zerstörrers while the fighters would concentrate on the escorts. Göring however ordered the LW fighters to concentrate solely on the bombers, a big mistake. (Along with Hitlers decision to delegate the Me-262 the role of fighter bomber)

 

[pbfoot]

The 51 was just fine for the task it did and it did neuter the LW whatelse needs to be said , I'm sure it was not the best in everything but it had enough of everything to do the job. Talked to a gent that flew 2 tours in Spits and the Mustang IV in post war RCAF and he said the Spit was a better flying aircraft and dogfighter but when was the last time you heard of a Spit, 109, 190 etc flying 8 - 9 hour missions

 

[kool kitty89]

Those range figures for the P-51 are combat radius, not range. ANd that figure for the F4U-1D (which I've seen before) is nonspecific in more ways than just configuration.

However, the point that the P-51 was not the only fighter capable of performing escort is still correct. (though it was probably the best for this role, particularly with cost included)

We have a good thread on comparing possiblilities of alternative escorts.

http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/aviation/battle-over-germany-january-1944-a-13336.html

 

[Catch22]

Those range figures for the P-51 are combat radius, not range. ANd that figure for the F4U-1D (which I've seen before) is nonspecific in more ways than just configuration.

However, the point that the P-51 was not the only fighter capable of performing escort is still correct. (though it was probably the best for this role, particularly with cost included)

We have a good thread on comparing possiblilities of alternative escorts.

http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/aviation/battle-over-germany-january-1944-a-13336.html

Thanks for pointing that out, I have limited resources, and I'm sure there are far better sources out there, I just wanted to make my point. I didn't realize there was a differece between radius and range.

 

[ponsford]

HoHun has made a very convincing case of the F4F being overrated and the weak counter arguments lead me to cast my vote for the F4F as the most overrated fighter. That said, my view is that the Ta 152 is easily the most overrated fighter in this forum, however, that aircraft is not on the ballot.

 

[Soren]

Ta-152 overrated ? How so ponsford ?

 

[Soren]

The 51 was just fine for the task it did and it did neuter the LW whatelse needs to be said , I'm sure it was not the best in everything but it had enough of everything to do the job. Talked to a gent that flew 2 tours in Spits and the Mustang IV in post war RCAF and he said the Spit was a better flying aircraft and dogfighter but when was the last time you heard of a Spit, 109, 190 etc flying 8 - 9 hour missions

Well Pbfoot that's not how many people see it, they think the P-51 is the best thing to ever fly. Truth be told the P-51 wasn't anything special, it just had the range speed to do the job needed be done, and like already explained many different factors attributed to its success.

 

[Haztoys]

Ta-152 overrated ?... ?

I could be wrong ...But did it even really get used in the war...

 

[Haztoys]

Truth be told the P-51 wasn't anything special, it just had the range speed to do the job needed be done,

Nail on the head... Range and speed thats what made it special...And I would not be a big P-51 fan...

 

[Oreo]

I could be wrong ...But did it even really get used in the war...

(Re the Ta 152) imo, the volume of an a/c's use in service or combat does not contribute to its worth, value, capacity, or overratedness. I speak of aircraft in terms of the merits of the plane itself, and how it compared to other planes, and its ability to do the task(s) it was designed or ordered to do, particularly in the face of opposition. The Ta 152 did see service, and so its service can be evaluated, whereas something like the Boeing F8B can not, since it never made it past prototype stage and certainly never got into combat. I don't think the Ta 152 is overrated, it was an extremely capable aircraft, and we could debate its merits exhaustively when compared to other types, such as Me 109K, Spit 14, P-51H, Hawker Sea Fury, P-47M. What would be over rated would be if people carried on and made a huge fuss about the Boulton Paul Defiant, and how great it was, and how Britain could have won the war in 1941 if they had just had twice as many Defiants instead of Spitfires, and were constantly praising it and talking it up and doodling pictures of it all over the place, and making exuberant movies about it, and so on, like they actually do about such planes as the p-51 and Spitfire, which may deserve it, but if they carried on like that about the BP Defiant, then THAT would be overrating an aircraft. The excitement and exuberance about the Ta 152 is, I think, more or less merited based on the fact that it was one of the greatest piston engined fighters ever fielded, in terms of performance, and it is also true that the very fact it saw so little combat lends to the popular mystique about the type. Just my opinion, and no, it isn't my favorite plane. Neither is the Defiant.

 

[Kurfürst]

Mosquito IMHO.

When I read fans of the airplane, the overall impression I get from the descriptions is an early example of a supercruising stealth bomber-fighter-interceptor, all in one, capable of delivering bombloads that make a B-29 shy, at accuracy levels that would make Stuka crews envious, while Hitler, Göring and Göbbels would stand on a pulpit at a big nazi rally and furiously shaking his fist towards the sky.

In other words, its image is that of a mix of an Aurora bomber, the Blackbird and the F-22 Raptor. And while the historical aircraft was sound and very useful, the post-war mythicism blown that all out of proportion.

P-51, Spitfire, Ta 152H, He 219 are all good contenders for the title too. I don think the Me 262 can be overrated - it was simply in a class of its own, and punished American bomber formations with near-inpunity to its speed at the time the USAAF's numerical superiority grew so depressing that conventional LW piston engined fighters simply did not stand a chance.

 

[drgondog]

Throw the Corsair into Europe and see what happens. While I like the Mustang, Soren nailed it on the head. Yes it had the range, but so did the Hellcat and Corsair, which people seem to forget. They could have easily done what the Mustang did, but they were only used (in large numbers) in the Pacific. Let's look at some of the statistical info differences between the Corsair and the Mustang, shall we?

P-51D Mustang

Max Speed: 716 km/h (445 mph) at 7620 m (25 000 ft)

This is approximately true for the P-51B-15 with full internal fuel, TO Gross weight at 9,300 lbs and a combat radius capability of about 500 miles (no external tank - 269 gallons internally) -3000rpm/67"

The P-51D-10 thru -25 is closer to 438 mph in similar config and 67"/3000 rpm

For about the same fuel configuration and 6x 50's intead of four in P-51B, and combat radius 540 mi with internal fuel, the P-51H with external racks is about 460mph at 24K and a TO weight of about 9400 pounds - 3000rpm/80"boost

Range: 525 km (326 mi) on internal fuel; 1210 km (752 mi) with two 491 L (108 gal) drop tanks

This is nearly correct for internal wing tanks of 184 gallons and empty 85 gal. fuse tank but not correct for full internal fuel.

The radius of all three with 75 gallon tanks is about 880 miles (B/C/D/K) and 930 miles for H

The radius of all three with 108 gal tanks is 1000 miles (B/C/D/K) and 1100 miles (H)

Service Ceiling: 12 770 m (41 000 ft)

Payload: two 227 kg (500 lb) bombs OR eight 75 mm rockets, but not drop tanks

Pay load is two 1,000 pound bombs or 8 - 5" HVAR or two 110 Gallon drop tanks (~ 800 pounds each) for P-51D/K) ' The B/C could carry the 110 gal tanks but sway bar/rack not designed to carry the 1000 pound bomb as modified on D/K and H. They all could carry two 165 gallon Ferry Tank ~ 1150 pounds with strict manuever restrictions.

F4U-1D

Max Speed: 684 km/h (425 mph) at 6100 m (20 000 ft)

Range: 1 633 km (1 015 mi) (I don't know if this is with or without tanks)

Service Ceiling: 11 280 m (37 000)

Payload: 1 800 kg (4 000 lbs) of bombs or rockets without tanks

As you can see, the Mustang has a slight edge in 3 of 4 categories. I don't know how much the altitude figures in with excorting bombers, as I'm not aware of the alt they usually flew at, and speed doesn't win dogfights, plus I would hazard to say the Corsair was better in a dive. But the Corsair could carry 3 500 lbs more than the Mustang, which makes it a much better multirole fighter. For range, the distance between London and Berlin is 581 mi, so they could both do it. And I don't know who voted for the Corsair, but I would call it one of the more underrated planes.

The Corsair is a great ship - but when making comparisons you need to document the weight and model number of the a/c and the fuel load for the speeds and ranges you are quoting... as well as boost and fuel.

The altitude was huge for the ETO and escort duties were right in the strike zone of the P-51 best performance for B/C/D/K and H.

Speed is huge also. The ability to choose to fight or run given the ability to spot the adversary first is very important - but both of these aircraft are very close in overall performance and it really depends on the models if you wish to cite an advantage in turn, climb, dash and acceleration for either one.

I haven't seen the dive comparisons. .75 Mach is recommended do not exceed for 51 but a/c exceeded .83-.85 in tests and probably in combat with popped rivets and wrinkled skin on return. As the 51 was cleaner than the F4U it should dive faster - but I haven't seen the data.

 

[drgondog]

Well some war documentaries are pretty fond of the P-51, way too fond to be specific. Yes the P-51 did a lot, and it was a great fighter, esp. when it first entered service. BUT by mid 44 there were so many other fighters which outperformed it that it only stayed effective because the circumstances of the war allowed it to be. In short by mid 44 the P-51 was no more the fastest fighter in the skies, which is what made it so special when it arrived (Plus the range). However the fact that the Germans lacked both fuel trained pilots plus were forced to concentrate on the bombers allowed the P-51 to be useful till the end.

Curiosity compels me to ask enumeration of 'so many other fighters that out performed it'? in Mid 1944.

Curiosity further compels me to ask for citation of operational statistics demonstrating that thesis.

in Mid 1944, which of the numerous examples of production aircraft were specifically out performed say the P-51B-15 at 20-30,000 feet? say over Berlin?

 

[drgondog]

Nail on the head... Range and speed thats what made it special...And I would not be a big P-51 fan...

Range and speed made it special but it appears a lot of folks miss a point that, for example, a 51B-15, had exceptional climb rates at both low and high altitude until it got over 30,000 feet, and would roll well, turn well, dive well and accelerate - Usually one of those would work for you in combat.

I tend to think the Mustang is over hyped by media types that don't understand every aircraft is a collage of compromises and the Mustang was no different - it was not the best in every category against all comparisons but it was good to exceptional against each conventional fighter in significant combat ops during WWII.

 

[kool kitty89]

Bill, if you notice, I already directed Catch-22 to some better info.


And the P-51 would need a heavier armament to be a good interceptor. (though as the Mustang Mk.IA and P-51/F-5 were armed with 4x 20mm Hispanos this is already a prooven possibility)

 

[Soren]

Curiosity compels me to ask enumeration of 'so many other fighters that out performed it'? in Mid 1944.

Well in terms of speed there were the Me-262, Dora-9 Bf-109 K-4, and in terms of climb rate there was the Me-262, Dora-9, Fw-190A7, Bf-109 G-10/14 K-4. However the crucial part is that in August 44 the Mustang wasn't the fastet fighter in the air anymore.

Curiosity further compels me to ask for citation of operational statistics demonstrating that thesis.

What do you mean ? Like I said it stayed effective because a numbers circumstances of the war allowed it to be, such as the quality of the average German pilot, Germany's accute fuel shortage and the situation in the air where the LW fighters were ordered to concentrate on the bombers AND the P-51's great performance at bomber alt.

in Mid 1944, which of the numerous examples of production aircraft were specifically out performed say the P-51B-15 at 20-30,000 feet? say over Berlin?

Billyou make it sound like I'm criticizing the P-51, I aint, and I never said the P-51 was obsolete. What I said and is saying is it was a great fighter with great speed range and esp. good performance at the alt of the bombers at 25 to 30,000 ft. However it wasn't the best thing in the air as some believe,. that's all.

 

[Soren]

Range and speed made it special but it appears a lot of folks miss a point that, for example, a 51B-15, had exceptional climb rates at both low and high altitude until it got over 30,000 feet, and would roll well, turn well, dive well and accelerate - Usually one of those would work for you in combat.

The P-51B-15 and Fw-190 A-5 were about equal in climb rate, while the Fw-190 turned better at low to medium alt and rolled much better, however the P-51 was faster at all alts.

I tend to think the Mustang is over hyped by media types that don't understand every aircraft is a collage of compromises and the Mustang was no different.

Exactly Bill! I couldn't agree more!

 

[drgondog]

Well in terms of speed there were the Me-262, Dora-9 Bf-109 K-4, and in terms of climb rate there was the Me-262, Dora-9, Fw-190A7, Bf-109 G-10/14 K-4. However the crucial part is that in August 44 the Mustang wasn't the fastet fighter in the air anymore.

Of those, the Me 262 is clear - and the first time the Allies were seeing it was September - which to me was stretchin Mid 1944.

As to the rest - here is the flight test climb results in May 1944 with 1650-7 3000rpm at 67" and 75", 9335 pounds at TO which id 125 pounds more than combat config of full ammo, full wing tanks and empty fuselage tank
http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/mustang/p51b-44-1-climb.jpg
Summary - This flight test at 75"
SL = 376mph and 4175 fpm climb
7400 ft = 395 Mph an 3900fpm
21000 ft = 431mph and 3400 fpm

What is the A-5 and 7 and 109K-4 at those same altitudes and max boost at that time (May-July 1944- Mid 44).. when did G-10 and K-4 equip operational squadrons in multi Gruppe quantities?



What do you mean ? Like I said it stayed effective because a numbers circumstances of the war allowed it to be, such as the quality of the average German pilot, Germany's accute fuel shortage and the situation in the air where the LW fighters were ordered to concentrate on the bombers AND the P-51's great performance at bomber alt.

Bill you make it sound like I'm criticizing the P-51, I aint, and I never said the P-51 was obsolete. What I said and is saying is it was a great fighter with great speed range and esp. good performance at the alt of the bombers at 25 to 30,000 ft. However it wasn't the best thing in the air as some believe,. that's all.

Nah - I just rresponded to the 'so many other fighters out performed it in mid 1944' when the reality is that this particular Mustang was competitive against all the German prop jobs through out the last year of the war.

It was out performed by the Ta 152 in most important air combat comparisons but the skill of the pilot would have been more of a factor than the raw performance - essentially true for all the above comparisons.

 

[drgondog]

Bill, if you notice, I already directed Catch-22 to some better info.


And the P-51 would need a heavier armament to be a good interceptor. (though as the Mustang Mk.IA and P-51/F-5 were armed with 4x 20mm Hispanos this is already a prooven possibility)

It would have been easy to reconfigure the 51B-H to 4 20's, but the 51 did just fine against every bomber it faced so the six 50's were effective enough