Most overated fighter

[Marcel]

Mustang seems to defeat himself God, as the fellows talk about this hunk-of-junk nowadays. Lot of aircraft were better than that, it was only a fighter what could reach Berlin, and was affordable for Uncle Sam at the same time. I would not trust my ass for a single engined escort fighter deep inside the enemy territory, which is vulnerable for gunfire, too. And it was tricky, slugish and tiring to fly for long hours. Pathetic...

It's always interesting to see new idea's But please care to explain how you got to this conclusion as it would give more value to your post.

How was it tricky (I know about the problems with center of gravity when flying with full fuel-tanks, but which a/c would not have had that problem).

All aircraft are vulnerable to gunfire but I wasn't aware that the P51 was worse than others. Unless you mean that the inline engine was more vulnerable, but in that case it also counts for B109, Spitfire, Hurricane, Yak series, P40 to name a few.

Which other fighter could reach Berlin and do what the mustang do? Some twin engined fighters could do that, but how well did they fare against the B109's and FW190's as compared to the P51?

edit: didn't see you guys already responded, just added mine to the stack

Flying alone, strapped in a seat for many hours is tiring in all high performance a/c, so how was this any different from other a/c?

 

[drgondog]

In the P-51's great numbers, there didn't lay very many killls per plane.


Compared to a Germany's planes.


I am not going to get into an argument now, I know how aeroplane forums are.

So, compare and spend some time citing your findings of LW 'kills per plane' over Germany from Jan 1944 through the end of the war in Europe.

Look into the period when the Mustang did not have 'great numbers' say Jan 1944 through May 1944 when there were 1/10 to 1/2 Mustangs to all LW single engine day fighters in just LuftFlotte Reich - and the LW could choose where to fight.


Show us what you have to back up your claims.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

I am not going to get into an argument now, I know how aeroplane forums are.

Yep, it seems that there are the informed and uninformed, and those who really don't know what they are talking about. Which do you fall under?

 

[parsifal]

Seems to me that the philosophical arguments that brings the knives out against the Mustang are similar in motivation to those that attack the Spitfire and hurricane over Britain in 1940.

The German apologists will do anything to re-write history....but fellas, these are the cold hard truths that need to be faced

1) In 1940, the Me 109 could not get the upper hand over the defending Spitfires and Hurricanes. The Me 109 enjoyed a superiuority of numbers in that fight. I admit there were factors other than the aircrafts performance at work that led to the German defeat, but this also dos not detract from the clearly excellent characteristics of the British Fighters. Please note: I am not denigrating the German fighters. Just that try as some people might, they cannot re-write history and argue that the German fighters were superior. For a myriad of reasons they were not.

2) In 1944, the Me 109s and FW190s could not maintain even air parity in the battle of Germany. They were kicked from pillar to post with increasing ease by the Allies, which in the daytime meant the US, and the overwhelming majority of that action over Germany was undertaken by the Mustangs of the eighth air force. Even some basic research will reveeal that contrary to some of the spurious arguments I have seen in this thread, the P-51 did not enormously outnumber the defending German fighters. It could however, outfly nearly all of them, only a very small number of largely experimental types and the like can lay claim to being able to outperfomr the Mustang, and none had anywhere near the impact on the outcome of the war.

It might be plausible to argue the Mustang was overrated, but it is sheer bunkum to argue that the Mustang was not a great, indeed war winning aircraft.

 

[JoeB]

I would agree that the A6M had a feared mystique that the allied command had to destroy. The legend of the 'zero" was a priority of the allied airforce...

As much time and effort that went into destroying the legend of the A6M...was also put into building the Spitfire up.

Very good points; one of the keys to 'overrated' or underrated is the efforts of war time propaganda and media accounts, the flavor of which still influenced aviation writing in the West (and everywhere else, but let's focus on the West for now) for decades after the war, even now affects attitudes. Most people here have mainly read or started out reading at least in English and other Western sources.

As you imply, during the war itself it was actually important to the Allied war effort that the Zero be talked down, not viewed as 10 foot tall opponent, lest it permanently damage morale, of pilots or general public. The narrative that was selected was one where Japanese fighters as epitomized by the Zero, and as a symbol of the the Japanese military in general, got in a few quick and unfair sucker punches against unprepared Allies, but then the 'good guys' quickly turned things around. The Zero quickly turned to a pumpkin: a story with limited truth to it. As has been discussed on this forum, there are numerous examples of Japanese Navy and even Army fighter units spanking Allied ones even in 1943, later still in some cases. The standard story where the Zero fades somewhere between Midway and end of 1942 into an easy to defeat opponent is a mix of literal interpretation of honest but quite serious overclaims, and just plain warmed-over war time propaganda. It accelerates the truth by 1-2 years. And it ignores how the Allies brought their enormous superiority in resources to bear more effectively as the war went one (the resources to build a multiple as many planes, the resources to carefully train a multiple as many pilots); plus matchups of the Zero increasingly against Allied a/c which entered service considerably later. And those were the main factors bringing down the Zero, not 'tactics'.

The Zero is probably the most underrated major fighter of WWII, certainly among a few candidates for that spot, from Western POV. It might reasonably be called overrated in Japan where accounts based on their own overclaims are sometimes still published as fact, but it's simply an ill informed choice to put it up for most overrated, from a Western POV, to put it bluntly.

Mirror image for the Spit, it was important for the British and Allies to believe strongly in that plane. Its shortcomings, insofar as they were they seen through the fog of overclaims, tended to be glossed over, and that still filters through in British writing especially, and a lot of English language writing about British airplanes is by Brits. The 'Spitfire' is really a series of pretty different airplanes. The early ones were pretty advanced compared to contemporaries (and saw important air combat), so were the later ones (but they didn't see a lot of really important air combat). But the Mid Mark Spits were pretty mediocre compared to most of their opposition, and almost surely had a true kill ratio v German fighters well under 1:1 (even early Spits probably below 1:1 too, but not as much and were accomplishing other important things). The mid Mark Sptis also had a disastrous record v the Zero, but that's a fairly minor footnote. The Spit has to be at or near the top of the list for most overrated WWII fighter from Western POV.

In both cases a lot of the reason derives from the after effects of Allied war time propaganda on English speaking readers.

Joe

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

The German apologists will do anything to re-write history...

So is anyone that prefers German aircraft a "German apologist"?

 

[drgondog]

So is anyone that prefers German aircraft a "German apologist"?

Chris - Just because you admire German aircraft (I think we all do) I don't think anyone remotely thinks you rewrite history which is the other part of the two part qualification

 

[piet]

ME262.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Chris - Just because you admire German aircraft (I think we all do) I don't think anyone remotely thinks you rewrite history which is the other part of the two part qualification

Just trying to understand, because I hear that word floating around quite a bit on these forums these days.

Just my humble opinion as well, but I think if you gave the Germans the P-51, P-47 and Spitfire and gave the Allies the Bf 109, Fw 190, etc.. nothing would have changed. The outcome would have been the same.

 

[Bug_racer]

Just trying to understand, because I hear that word floating around quite a bit on these forums these days.

Just my humble opinion as well, but I think if you gave the Germans the P-51, P-47 and Spitfire and gave the Allies the Bf 109, Fw 190, etc.. nothing would have changed. The outcome would have been the same.

I beg to differ !

germans- lack of raw materials , lack of trained pilots , lack of good quality fuel
US- homeland isnt bombed day and night , ample manpower , lack of resources isnt a real problem

if you did a swap the P51 would be less powerful with far less experienced pilots fighing overwhelming odds !

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

I beg to differ !

germans- lack of raw materials , lack of trained pilots , lack of good quality fuel
US- homeland isnt bombed day and night , ample manpower , lack of resources isnt a real problem

if you did a swap the P51 would be less powerful with far less experienced pilots fighing overwhelming odds !

I think you are missing out on my point.

I said that if the Allies had the German aircraft and the Germans had the Allied aircraft, the outcome would have been the same. The Allies would have still won..

If you don't understand what I am saying, then just ask.

 

[GrauGeist]

I beg to differ !

germans- lack of raw materials , lack of trained pilots , lack of good quality fuel
US- homeland isnt bombed day and night , ample manpower , lack of resources isnt a real problem

if you did a swap the P51 would be less powerful with far less experienced pilots fighing overwhelming odds !

German aircraft had a broad range of powerplants that produced impressive power. But he was referring to a complete swap of machines.

I think the point being made here, is that regardless of the aircraft, the war would have still ended the way it did, even if Germany were producing the P-51D, P-47, etc in their original design and the Allies were producing the Bf109, Fw190 and so on, plus the bombing conditions, wartime shortages and pilot attrition.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

German aircraft had a broad range of powerplants that produced impressive power. But he was referring to a complete swap of machines.

I think the point being made here, is that regardless of the aircraft, the war would have still ended the way it did, even if Germany were producing the P-51D, P-47, etc in their original design and the Allies were producing the Bf109, Fw190 and so on, plus the bombing conditions, wartime shortages and pilot attrition.

Thank you...

 

[drgondog]

Just trying to understand, because I hear that word floating around quite a bit on these forums these days.

Just my humble opinion as well, but I think if you gave the Germans the P-51, P-47 and Spitfire and gave the Allies the Bf 109, Fw 190, etc.. nothing would have changed. The outcome would have been the same.

The outcome may not have been different but the battle for air supremacy would have been over London - not Berlin

 

[syscom3]

The outcome may not have been different but the battle for air supremacy would have been over London - not Berlin

The US industrial power in both production and pilot training would have still swamped the Germans. And just think if we had the Corsair flying from British bases in 1943.

 

[parsifal]

So is anyone that prefers German aircraft a "German apologist"?

No, not all, Adler, and i was at pains to say I was not putting down Geman aircraft per se. But the tone of what some are saying (not everyone, and that includes you.....there are just a few that I have sights on), appear to me to be clearly biasing the debate to say tha Mustang did not have a profound effect. I think that it did....in fact I believe it was THE single most important aircraft to win the daylight air war.

I am not even saying that Mustangs role has not been overrated, but the guy that says the performance of the Mustang was cr*p clearly needs to re-examine his position....it was a war winning aircraft, not a dog.......

 

[tomo pauk]

When Bill, JoeB or Eric talk, I just sit down, listen and learn stuff about WW2 . Thanks, fellas.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

The outcome may not have been different but the battle for air supremacy would have been over London - not Berlin

Don't take me wrong, I completely agree with you there. I just think that some people overlook a lot of things when discussing these topics (tactics, pilots, fuel, etc...). There was nothing wrong with the Luftwaffe aircraft, and with the right pilots and tactics they too could have regained control the air.

I think that it did....in fact I believe it was THE single most important aircraft to win the daylight air war.

I am not even saying that Mustangs role has not been overrated, but the guy that says the performance of the Mustang was cr*p clearly needs to re-examine his position....it was a war winning aircraft, not a dog.......

Agreed on both accounts. It was a marvelous aircraft that took the fight to the Germans. That last bit is something that most fighters could not do.

 

[drgondog]

Chris - I got your point and 100% agree. I was just thinking about the simple difference in US vs European airpower doctrine regarding long range fighters.

Long range escorts were only effective when accompanied by the Strategic daylight bombing doctrine to draw up the opposing fighter forces - and then effective only if one could defeat the defenders.

Simply, that is the prime reason the Mustang made the impact it did. Pilot training and increasing pilot experience combined with entering the fight at its best altitude was huge.

It would have been a nice aircraft for the VVS but not as effective daily battling 190s and 109s on the deck. Ditto for Luftwaffe Mustang if the bomber force they were escorting were operating at 15-18000 feet over Britain.

I love the airplane but I'm not not blind to its 'relative' strengths and weaknesses.

 

[drgondog]

When Bill, JoeB or Eric talk, I just sit down, listen and learn stuff about WW2 . Thanks, fellas.

That was a nice thing to say Tomo - thx