Most Overrated aircraft of WWII.....?

[Milosh]

Range is not combat radius. Ballpark for combat radius is 1/3 range.

 

[pbehn]

I'm sorry i guess i left out the most critical piece of data. The range it gives for the p47 d23 qith 300 gal external fuel stores is 670 under these conditions.

What is the range under the same conditions of a P51 B with max fuel as of Mar 1944?

 

[michael rauls]

Range is not combat radius. Ballpark for combat radius is 1/3 range.

Well it gives the p51s under the same conditions. With lesser external fuel( which i think is lagit as couldn't or at least didn't cary as much external stores) as 750 miles which would fit with the p51 max one way range often quoted of 2000 miles and what they eventually got the p47 s max one way range up to which was just shy of 1800 miles percentage wise and yes i guess thats about a third so perhaps i used the term range incorrectly. So at least according to rhis source which seems to have quite the reputation as far as i can tell whatever is the correct descriptive word itr 5 min warm up take of , climb to 25000 cruise at 25000 there 10 min military power, 5 min war emergency power, cruise back at 25000 feet, and 30 min reserve on minimum cruise. 670 miles dor the p47d23 and 750 miles for the p51d.

 

[michael rauls]

Even if i used the term range incorrectly( verry posible) as long as the crteria for both are the same the comparison is lagit.

 

[michael rauls]

What is the range under the same conditions of a P51 B with max fuel as of Mar 1944?

I would have to go dig out the book again to get the b but the d was 750 under the same conditions.

 

[michael rauls]

Range is not combat radius. Ballpark for combat radius is 1/3 range.

I went and got the book again and yes in both case p51d and p47d23 the term used is combat radius. You are right about that, my bad. The combat radius given for the p51d with 150 gal external fuel is 750 miles. For the p47d23 with 300 gal of external fuel its 670 miles making Berlin a stretch but as was the case later certainly doable.

 

[michael rauls]

I would have to go dig out the book again to get the b but the d was 750 under the same conditions.

I felt bad about kinda brushing off your request for the info on the p51d combat radiusso i went and got the book again but alas the only p51 figures on combat radius it gives is for the d model. I would suspect given the b models lesser drag and given equivalent fuel it would have a slightly greater combat radius. Maybe 780 miles? But thats just a reasoned guess on my part.

 

[michael rauls]

I went and got the book again and yes in both case p51d and p47d23 the term used is combat radius. You are right about that, my bad. The combat radius given for the p51d with 150 gal external fuel is 750 miles. For the p47d23 with 300 gal of external fuel its 670 miles making Berlin a stretch but as was the case later certainly doable.

I meant p51b sorry

 

[fubar57]

Thanks, not a problem. I'm sure I'll get the book eventually and the info would have come in

 

[michael rauls]

Michael,

Chapter or page from America's 100k, source you use to pass along Gallands perspectives?

Also you mentioned that the Mustang was not the only plane that could go the distance, you are correct and Drgondog concurred. However he gave solid data of why it wasn't optimal (roll authority, limited max Mach) which the Germans could easily use against it in combat.

The "P38/P47 could have done the job" is not a known fact, and therefore not a fact to be used to forward your opinion. It is an opinion. I agree there is potential the Allies could have got the job done without the Mustang. However they didn't, which lends more credence to the quality of one airframe over another.

Do I think the Mustang is overrated, it can be depending on who is saying what. I used to think it was, but then I came in here and got some serious tutoring and have since changed my mind.

Cheers,
Biff

First paragraph: other planes could go the distance but were not optimal: I myself stated this several times in my posts if you read them. That is kinda one of my points. To say that the p38 was less than optimal compared to the p51 is acurate however to say that its shortcomings were easily exploited by the germans is one of those stetements that is technically corect but doesn't tell the whole story. Example yes dive speed limits are exploitable by german aircraft but climbing right hand turns( propeler torque and climb rate) are exploitable by the p38. Admitadly I think the dive speed and higher mach limitations are more important but the 38 also had an easy out if it was awear the german ane was there so its not as simple as saying the germans had this particular advantage so its game over. And I think all 3 planes ultimately did the job in total. The p51 certainly has the best record of three. Is some of that because of more pilot training, a lesser oposition from the time the p51 became the dominant fighter in Europe( certanly from mid 44 on), clober college(only p51 pilots got this training so I read) , the k14 gunsight, and new tactics ie freed up from the bombers that just happened to coincide with the p51 arival in numbers. Ya some but certainly not all. It was a be2 design overall( although certainly not for all fighter missions) but that is what you would expect from alatter model. And in closing that if there is one specific thing that constitutes " doing the job" i would contend that winning air superiority is that thing( yes other aspects were very important) but if you have to pick just one air superiority has to be it, at least in my mind( yes others may differ, your millage may vary, and coupon expires in March) . So at least by that criteria the p38/p47 combination did get the job done. There is no conjecture about it.

 

[michael rauls]

Thanks, not a problem. I'm sure I'll get the book eventually and the info would have come in

Your welcome. I am certainly no expert but I am always eager to help with i at least believe to be accurate information

 

[GrauGeist]

Your welcome. I am certainly no expert but I am always eager to help with i at least believe to be accurate information

But you've been provided extremely accurate information from several credible sources and yet balked at that, prefering instead to argue your position, which mainly appears to be opinion-based.

As a matter of fact, you've been arguing with a published historian, who's specialty happens to be not only the P-51, but it's operations in the ETO from introduction to the war's end; spanning losses, wins, ratios, attrition, modifications, etc.

Think about that for a moment...

 

[Clayton Magnet]

I think a factor that plays into the P-51 potentially being overrated, it the misconception that because it was arguably the best fighter of the war, it was therefore superior in ALL perimeters. The concept that a Bf 109 might out-climb one, or a Spitfire could out-run one, ect.., is sometimes laughed off as inconceivable.
For a frustrating experience, try following the Facebook page, "I Love WWII Planes".

 

[GrauGeist]

...For a frustrating experience, try following the Facebook page, "I Love WWII Planes".

There's several WWII groups/pages on facebook that generate some interesting "facts".

I had a thread going here several years ago that was titles "history according to random people" that provided some of those "interesting" facts...

 

[michael rauls]

But you've been provided extremely accurate information from several credible sources and yet balked at that, prefering instead to argue your position, which mainly appears to be opinion-based.

As a matter of fact, you've been arguing with a published historian, who's specialty happens to be not only the P-51, but it's operations in the ETO from introduction to the war's end; spanning losses, wins, ratios, attrition, modifications, etc.

Think about that for a moment...

I think this is where the phrase talking past each other is appropriate. I don't thin I argued any one of his points. And i don't think he or anyone rebutted mine. I am simply giving the reasons for my pick of overrating. No one has rebutted those reasons. The first the berlin and back thing several of my critics here i guess we could say, agreed this is true making the statement. " the only fighter Berlin" etc untrue and a case of overrating at least as it pertains to that. The other the whe when was air superiority achieved is not so cut and dried but thats why I said I am certainly open to differing views on this but nobody quoted anyone or even just asserted themselves that this was not the case and if so is another case of overrating. If you go back through my posts you will see that yes in one post i got dragged into the wich is better debate in which i largely concurred with others by the way.but for the most part i am simply giving the reason behind my overrating pick. Nobody has challenged either of those two reasons and i have not challenged your or anyone elses contentions about the sterling qualities of the p51. I have in fact largly concurred. Let me say it one more time since some seem not to ba able to read these words, at least not when I type them: The p51 was the better of the three major types in the European theater. It is however still overrated beyond even how good it was and I simply gave examples of my reasoning( yes others may dissaree) and I would certainly be open to discussing something like someone saying i believe your wrong about the date of air superiority and herres why..... That however didnt happen just lists of the p51s accomplishments(whew thank god for spell check) which i do not and did not in any way disparage. I'm not sure why a few of you feel compelled to try and put me an anti p51 camp as I said several times if it were up to me i would have mostly chosen to go wth the p51 myself. You know it is possible for a plane to be great and still be overrated and that's all any of my posts have been about.

 

[michael rauls]

But you've been provided extremely accurate information from several credible sources and yet balked at that, prefering instead to argue your position, which mainly appears to be opinion-based.

As a matter of fact, you've been arguing with a published historian, who's specialty happens to be not only the P-51, but it's operations in the ETO from introduction to the war's end; spanning losses, wins, ratios, attrition, modifications, etc.

Think about that for a moment...

As to my comments being opinion based. I think thats unfair. I did give several what i believe at least to be credible sources for my thoughts and also said i am certainly open evidence to the contrary about air superiority date for example but no one wanted to debate that. Just lists of the p51s accomplishments which are factual and i am not arguing and have nothing to do with the reasons i picked the p51 for overrating. Was the p51 great and was the p51 overrated as it pertains to the to examples I gave. Those are two different subjects. I cant recal an single example of an p51 kill ratio or statstic that I have argued with. I hope that makes clear my position but somehow I am not hopefull.

 

[michael rauls]

There's several WWII groups/pages on facebook that generate some interesting "facts".

I had a thread going here several years ago that was titles "history according to random people" that provided some of those "interesting" facts...

One more attempt at explaining my pick/ comments. You are poking fun at " i love ww2 aircraft" with made up facts and rightfully so. If you head on over there I'll bet you can find " the p51 the only fighter that ever took the bombers to Berlin and back" right now. Maybe that will help you see things fom my angle a bit. I have certainly made an effort to see things from yours ie concurring with most if not all the p51s listed accomplishments.

 

[pbehn]

I went and got the book again and yes in both case p51d and p47d23 the term used is combat radius. You are right about that, my bad. The combat radius given for the p51d with 150 gal external fuel is 750 miles. For the p47d23 with 300 gal of external fuel its 670 miles making Berlin a stretch but as was the case later certainly doable.

That means the P-51 can cruise for 160 miles once it has reached the maximum range of the P-47, that is the difference.

 

[michael rauls]

There's several WWII groups/pages on facebook that generate some interesting "facts".

I had a thread going here several years ago that was titles "history according to random people" that provided some of those "interesting" facts...

You know what just struck me as funny about this " argument" i accept pretty much every fact you p51 defenders are quoting and i think all of you accept at least one of mine( the Berlin and back thing ) and at least some of you accept the other(the approximate air superiority date thing?) ( no one has really challenged it so i assume at least some agree yet somehow we still have an argument i guess thats whats meant by talking past each other.

That means the P-51 can cruise for 160 miles once it has reached the maximum range of the P-47, that is the difference.

Yes thats an 80 mile longer reach. Certainly significant. But my point wasn't absolute range or combat radius. I think everyone knows the p51 had it over the p47 in this department. My point was that both the p38 and p47 could and did also reach Berlin thereby making the ofter used " fact" about the p51 that it was the only fighter to take the bombers to Berlin and back" untrue and thereby a case of overrating. Disclaimer: overrateness does not in any way reflect on the actual abilities, assets, accomplishments of the aircraft in question. Individual millage may vary. See your doctor if overratedness lasts more than 4 hrs. One to a customer.

 

[YF12A]

I can only repeat what I was told in many enjoyable and enlightening conversations with my neighbor who flew, as far as we can tell, 72 missions from 1942 in the 306th B/G until he became the C/O of the 303rd B/G in Oct. 1944 until the end of the War, then Col William Raper. It was his belief that the P-51 was the game changer. Was it the best at everything? Of course not, no plane was, but it could and did do what needed to be done. When it needed to be done. This coming from a pilot who flew everything he could get his hands on, including all the fighters, and he even had a personal, lightened Razorback P-47 when he was the 303rd C/O that he flew Ramrods with when he wasn't leading his group. Some interesting stories there! Somewhere in storage I have a picture of it and you can clearly see the Group triangle on the aft fuselage.