P-47 versus FW-190

[MIflyer]

The attached is from the 1976 book, "P-47 Thunderbolt at War" but obviously repeats material from some USAAF official report. The results of the flight tests seem quite surprising to me. Everyone "knows" that a P-47 can't win a dogfight with an FW-190 except perhaps over 25,000 ft. But that is not what the test flights show.

 

[Admiral Beez]

Lots of good past discussion here.

Which is better: P-47 or Fw-190?

The size difference between the two aircraft is immense. I can see at low level and slower speed the smaller, agile Fw-190 having the advantage.

 

[fubar57]

Doesn't say which model the 190 is

 

[Juha3]

The weight indicates that it might have been a 190G-3, the G-3 EB-104, later FE-104, was tested at a take-off gross weight of 8535 lbs. But also A-5 weighted 3855 kg (8500 lbs). And the plane had 7.92 mm nose mgs, so more likely it was A-5. One possibility is also 190F-3. It also had 7.92 mm nose guns and only the wing root MG 151/20s.

 

[pbehn]

It seems like a moaral boosting exercise, "don't worry about the Fw190 lads, just turn on the water injection and its problem solved"

 

[Juha3]

^Maybe partly, based on the description of the pilots, one with 17 months of combat experience, surprisingly flying the P-47 , the other with none flying combat simulations. Without more background info IMHO it seems that the P-47 pilot had some advantages,

 

[fubar57]

^Maybe partly, based on the description of the pilots, one with 17 months of combat experience, surprisingly flying the P-47 , the other with none flying combat simulations. Without more background info IMHO it seems that the P-47 pilot had some advantages,

I found that odd as well

 

[MIflyer]

The date of the tests was not provided. But since the P-47 had water injection I assume it was late 1943 at earliest.

In the same book I read of where a P-47 engaged a bunch of FW-190's all by himself. He used water injection and although hit a number of times did finally succeed in escaping into the clouds and making it home.

 

[SaparotRob]

The date of the tests was not provided. But since the P-47 had water injection I assume it was late 1943 at earliest.

In the same book I read of where a P-47 engaged a bunch of FW-190's all by himself. He used water injection and although hit a number of times did finally succeed in escaping into the clouds and making it home.

That incident was recreated by the same folks who made the Swede Vejtasa vid. I have it on vhs. Don't have a vcr anymore though. BTW The FW-190's engaged him, not the other way around.

 

[GregP]

Most of the "comparative" tests I have read show the same disparity in pilots, with one being a combat veteran and the other being, say, a factory test pilot with no combat experience. To me, that means the combat veteran has a LOT more experience getting the best from his airplane somewhere near the flight envelope, possibly even using a 1/2 snap roll to reverse a turn. The non-combat pilot likely has more testing / training experience, but doesn't get near the flight envelope much in training ... perhaps moreso in flight testing.

However, I am intrigued by the P-47 out-turing the Fw 190 and out-climbing and out-diving it, though not initially. That makes me wonder about many so-called comparisons of these two airplanes and helps explain why so many P-47 pilots sang its praises.

Another "trick" often used is to restrict one airplane's power to some arbitrary low level. I've seen Spitfire versus P-51 tests that allowed the Spit to use full power and restricted the P-51 to some level below authorized levels in the flight manual. That is especially funny when using a P-51 with a Merlin engine and Spitfire also with a Merlin engine.

Unrelated, one thing that I had to laugh about in the 1944 Fighter Conference summary was the rating of the Mitsubishi Zero. They used some 29 airplane in the Conference, and the Zero (A6M5 Model 52) was ONLY aircraft that didn't break the entire time and didn't suffer from restricted engine performance in any test!

Incidentally, the Zero used in the 1944 Fighter Conference is the same one currently flown by the Planes of Fame, and it is STILL dead reliable.

 

[pbehn]

Another "trick" often used is to restrict one airplane's power to some arbitrary low level. I've seen Spitfire versus P-51 tests that allowed the Spit to use full power and restricted the P-51 to some level below authorized levels in the flight manual. That is especially funny when using a P-51 with a Merlin engine and Spitfire also with a Merlin engine.
.

I can see a valid reason for those tests. Take the Spitfire as a "stand in" for a German fighter of the time, it could determine how competitive the P-51 was without using full boost in order not to waste fuel.

 

[MIflyer]

"That incident was recreated by the same folks who made the Swede Vejtasa vid. I have it on vhs. Don't have a vcr anymore though. BTW The FW-190's engaged him, not the other way around."

I checked and you are right! It is the the History Channel "Dogfights" series "Thunderbolt - The Race for the Clouds" George Suttcliff, 9th AF, 368th Ftr Grp, 397th Ftr Sqdron on 14 Jun 1944. But it turns out he was fighting 20 BF-109's.

The Luftwaffe was very unimpressed with the P-47 initially, and it seems that those brand new 8th AF fighter units were just learning the basics of formation flying and bomber escort and engaged only on favorable terms, hit and run. But once they got the basics down they were hell on wheels.

By the way on the first tests using Koga's Zero captured in the Aleutians they got the same results; the Zero never broke down or had problems attaining full power.

 

[GregP]

Hi pbehn,

I'd agree except all the British tests I have seen restricted the P-51, not the Spitfire. In fact, most of the British test I've seen restrict the engine in non-British aircraft. Ditto US tests restrict the captured aircraft. It well might be that the captured aircraft is the ONLY one they have, and they don't want to do any damage before getting more than just a handful of assessment flights in.

Or, perhaps that's like when Chuck Yeager flew the captured MiG-15 and said," I'd take a Sabre any day!" What was he going to say and release to the USAF, "O shit, we're in trouble!" ?

That doesn't make for reassuring good copy for the troops to read, does it?

 

[MIflyer]

Turns out there was also a WIlliam L Shomo type of action with the P-47. 25 May 1945, two P-47N's were flying over a Japanese base between Okinama and Kyushu. They spotted 30 Zeros, jettisoned the bomb each of them was carrying, climbed up behind the Zeros and attacked. In four min Lt Anderson shot down five Zeros and Lt Kennedy shot down three.

 

[Clayton Magnet]

Is this the same captured Fw 190 as used in the Navy tests against F6F and F4U's? If it indeed was, it was an A-5 if I remember correctly.
But didn't that aircraft suffer from some engine issue, which caused vibration during the tests? But the article states it was in "excellent" condition, and developed 42"Hg, which should be about 1.4 ATA

 

[GregP]

You are very close. 42" is 1.45 ata.

Here's a file I made some years back. Hopefully, I didn't screw it up ... inputs are in coral (pink) border on each line.

 

[MIflyer]

1 inch of HG is 0.491 PSI. Boy, did I use that conversion factor a lot back when I was working on aircraft pneumatics!

1 atmosphere = 14.6959 PSI

 

[pbehn]

Hi pbehn,

I'd agree except all the British tests I have seen restricted the P-51, not the Spitfire. In fact, most of the British test I've seen restrict the engine in non-British aircraft. Ditto US tests restrict the captured aircraft. It well might be that the captured aircraft is the ONLY one they have, and they don't want to do any damage before getting more than just a handful of assessment flights in.

Or, perhaps that's like when Chuck Yeager flew the captured MiG-15 and said," I'd take a Sabre any day!" What was he going to say and release to the USAF, "O shit, we're in trouble!" ?

That doesn't make for reassuring good copy for the troops to read, does it?

But no one is interested in saving fuel consumption in a Spitfire, its could be the difference between getting home or not. I am not saying that's the reason, just speculation on there being a sound reason for such tests.

 

[Clayton Magnet]

Can one assume it was this aircraft?...
http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/fw190/Fw_190_Eng-47-1658-D.pdf

 

[DarrenW]

Can one assume it was this aircraft?...
http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/fw190/Fw_190_Eng-47-1658-D.pdf

Could very well be. There's a website that lists all known FW 190s which were captured during the war:

Focke-Wulf Fw 190

It is obvious that there were quite a few in allied hands during the war but the list should be easy to whittle down after some careful examination.....