P-47 versus FW-190

[DarrenW]

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. View attachment 592077View attachment 592078

Speaking strictly of maneuverability:

At the test altitudes specified the P-47 could only best the F6F in roll rate, every other flight maneuver the Hellcat was superior. I don't know how the F4U would compare but I believe it's roll rate was at least equal if not superior to the P-47. However, as altitude increased the P-47 would slowly gain the advantage but below 20,000 feet it would be hard pressed to engage either naval fighter on anything close to equal terms.

Similar results were found during comparative testing between the Corsair, Hellcat, and FW 190A, without any advantage being gained by the German fighter as altitude increased.

 

[Deleted member 68059]

Slightly random question, but ages ago I found a combat report, between a P-47 group who encountered some Fw190 D9`s, probably for the first time.

Really annoyingly I didn't write down the source, and I cant find the damn thing now, only a quote from it which
I scribbled down myself.

Does anyone recognise this ? - I was fairly sure it was from M Mike Williams website:

P-47 Encounter Reports

However, I`ve looked through EVERY viable report for 190 D`s in that list (i.e everything after about mid-1944) and cant see it,
however, there are 2 or 3 reports in that list which are coming up as dead-links, maybe it was one of those, example:

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/p-47/er/78-fish-19dec44.jpg

Anyway, if anyone recognizes it, please let me know, cheers! (the graphic is mine, in the actual report its obviously
a 1944 period typewritten memo, this below is just how it appears in a powerpoint I have where I pasted the text in)

 

[Mike Williams]

Slightly random question, but ages ago I found a combat report, between a P-47 group who encountered some Fw190 D9`s, probably for the first time.

Really annoyingly I didn't write down the source, and I cant find the damn thing now, only a quote from it which
I scribbled down myself.

Does anyone recognise this ? - I was fairly sure it was from M Mike Williams website:

P-47 Encounter Reports

However, I`ve looked through EVERY viable report for 190 D`s in that list (i.e everything after about mid-1944) and cant see it,
however, there are 2 or 3 reports in that list which are coming up as dead-links, maybe it was one of those, example:

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/p-47/er/78-fish-19dec44.jpg

Anyway, if anyone recognizes it, please let me know, cheers! (the graphic is mine, in the actual report its obviously
a 1944 period typewritten memo, this below is just how it appears in a powerpoint I have where I pasted the text in)

View attachment 623868

I fixed the link to Frank Fish's Encounter Report for 19 Dec 44: I don't think its the one you are looking for though. I'll check for the one you want when I get a chance.

 

[Deleted member 68059]

I fixed the link to Frank Fish's Encounter Report for 19 Dec 44: I don't think its the one you are looking for though. I'll check for the one you want when I get a chance.

Many thanks !

 

[Zipper730]

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.

Some of this was covered before, such as the fact that one pilot had no combat experience (ironically flying the Fw 190) while the other flew 17 months of combat (albeit in a plane he wasn't trained in, but he still knew some stuff the non-combat pilot wouldn't).

Looking at the figures the Fw 190 generally did better at lower speeds and altitudes with superior acceleration at lower speeds and a tighter turning circle, with the P-47 having an advantage in the controls apparently lightening up (or at least stiffening less) as speed went up. The climb figures seem based on zoom climb rather than sustained climb performance (), with the dive figures being pretty self-explanatory (that said, I'm surprised the P-47 had such a marked advantage in dives as I knew both planes were good).

While roll-rate didn't appear to have been mentioned, I would assume that the Fw-190 had an advantage in that department (though I'm not sure by how much).

 

[Mike Williams]

Some of this was covered before, such as the fact that one pilot had no combat experience (ironically flying the Fw 190) while the other flew 17 months of combat (albeit in a plane he wasn't trained in, but he still knew some stuff the non-combat pilot wouldn't).

Looking at the figures the Fw 190 generally did better at lower speeds and altitudes with superior acceleration at lower speeds and a tighter turning circle, with the P-47 having an advantage in the controls apparently lightening up (or at least stiffening less) as speed went up. The climb figures seem based on zoom climb rather than sustained climb performance (), with the dive figures being pretty self-explanatory (that said, I'm surprised the P-47 had such a marked advantage in dives as I knew both planes were good).

While roll-rate didn't appear to have been mentioned, I would assume that the Fw-190 had an advantage in that department (though I'm not sure by how much).

I'm reminded of this Encounter Report of Col. David Schilling that I was just reading yesterday, where he rolled and dove away from Fw 190s. "At that time two got behind me and were getting set so I did several rolls as I started down, hit the switch and outran them by a mile as I got to the deck."

 

[MIflyer]

In the book by Dr. Price, "Focke Wulf FW-190 in Combat" there is a description of the superior performance of the FW-190D over the earlier version by a German pilot who flew both versions in combat.

 

[GregP]

New versions of a fighter ALWAYS took the opposition by surprise since they were used to the old version and any new capabilities would certainly not be anticipated.

In the case the the Fw 190D, the difference in top speed (mostly published as about 433 mph vs. 426 mph) is well within normal airframe variance. Also, because the P-47D could not lose the Fw 190D does not mean the opposite could not be true. That is, if the P-47D got on the tail of the Fw 190D, I'm not sure the Fw 190D could lose the P-47, either. Depending on altitude, it might be a case of virtual parity, depending on pilot as well.

Most encounter reports seem to favor whoever was able to evade the other or whoever was able to make the kill. And many kills were made when the victim was not aware he was being attached when he died.

I am reminded of the encounter reports of the Ta -152H versus the Hawker Tempest late in the war (willy Reschke). It is likely the Tempest pilots had never seen a Ta 152, did not anticipate its capabilities, and never turned hard enough to get away. Not saying that is what actually happened ... I am saying it is likely since the Tempest pilots had never seen a Ta 152 before. The encounter was al low altitude, not the environment where the Ta 152H was designed for.

 

[Milosh]

and never turned hard enough to get away.

Turned too hard and stalled. Was also a "rookie" pilot.

 

[GregP]

That happened a LOT on the Russian Front, according to the Soviets reports. Bf 109 stalled while trying to follow Yak-3 at low altitude in a tight turn.

But, and here's the catch, the Bf 109 had great stall characteristics.

Makes you wonder, doesn't it?

 

[BiffF15]

New versions of a fighter ALWAYS took the opposition by surprise since they were used to the old version and any new capabilities would certainly not be anticipated.

In the case the the Fw 190D, the difference in top speed (mostly published as about 433 mph vs. 426 mph) is well within normal airframe variance. Also, because the P-47D could not lose the Fw 190D does not mean the opposite could not be true. That is, if the P-47D got on the tail of the Fw 190D, I'm not sure the Fw 190D could lose the P-47, either. Depending on altitude, it might be a case of virtual parity, depending on pilot as well.

Most encounter reports seem to favor whoever was able to evade the other or whoever was able to make the kill. And many kills were made when the victim was not aware he was being attached when he died.

I am reminded of the encounter reports of the Ta -152H versus the Hawker Tempest late in the war (willy Reschke). It is likely the Tempest pilots had never seen a Ta 152, did not anticipate its capabilities, and never turned hard enough to get away. Not saying that is what actually happened ... I am saying it is likely since the Tempest pilots had never seen a Ta 152 before. The encounter was al low altitude, not the environment where the Ta 152H was designed for.

Also you have an experienced Ace setting up and attacking a guy doing strafe (not usually accomplished at best air to air speed). It's just a guess that he didn't start it from a neutral position. If he had lost that engagement it would have been to gross errors.

Cheers,
Biff

 

[GregP]

Great point BiffF15. Had the tables been reversed, perhaps the Tempest would have done the same shooting the other way around.

The Ta 152 had a very modest kill to loss ratio in air combat; 9 or 10 victories to 4 losses. But, to me at least, that record was more due to the war situation at the time when the Ta 152 was released for service prematurely than to any inherent Ta 152 shortcomings. The Ta 152 initially deployed in January 1945 but was not really ready for use until April, when the Luftwaffe basically collapsed as a fighting force within days of the Ta 152's real combat debut. So, the Ta 152 never really got a good trial in combat. It was a last-ditch effort to throw SOMETHING at the enemy that was flying over in 1,000-plane raids and there were never very many available at any one time since only about 47 ever got delivered and there were no spare parts whatsoever. If one went down for any serviceability reason, it WAS the spare parts cache. Doesn't make for a high-percentage happy ending.

 

[MIflyer]

Here are two pages from Dr. Price's FW-190 book.

By the way, I note that the BMW 801 weighed 2700 lb while the Jumo 213 weighed 2024 lb.

 

[drgondog]

It has probably been settled re: which test source but IIRC a 190 was captured in MTO and tested against the D-4. Given WI as stated the test was probably done no sooner than Nov/December 1943 and probably 325th FG as the 15th received the WI kits earlier than 12th AF.

That said, it is always suspicious when a writer describes hours as the determinant for the test rather than combat experience. Would have been more convincing if a.) the Fw 190 was certified as 'properly rigged' and b.) speed runs on the deck were performed to get a sense of actual engine performance, c.) discussion was made re: external racks, d.) pilots switched aircraft and re-ran the combat maneuvers.

Strange that the tested P-47D-2 (former 355th FG ship w/WI captured in 11-43) and D-10 performed dismally versus FW-190A-7 and A-8 at Rechlin - until 22K plus altitude/ Hans Werner Leche contrasts the captured P-51B (vs P-47D) as outstanding.

That said, I am deeply skeptical of performance contrasts under 22K between the 190 and P47D showing 190 as a.) easily out-turned, out-climbed and out maneuvered. Somehow they managed to kick the crap out of Spit V with early 190A-2/3 with a lot less Hp.