wmaxt
Staff Sergeant
Here is an excellent comparison of the two aircraft.
http://home.att.net/~historyzone/F4U-4.html
wmaxt
http://home.att.net/~historyzone/F4U-4.html
wmaxt
P-51 Mustang or F4U Corsair
- Thread starter elmilitaro
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Hardly an excellent comparison...
The F4U-4 Corsair wasn't just a little better than the P-51, it was ALOT better ! And regardless of what that site says, the P-51 experienced severe compressibility problems at very high speeds, something the Corsair didn't.
The only fighter I would feel confident in going up against a F4U-4 Corsair would be the Fw-190 Dora-9, in anything else I'd be pretty nervous !
The F4U-4 Corsair wasn't just a little better than the P-51, it was ALOT better ! And regardless of what that site says, the P-51 experienced severe compressibility problems at very high speeds, something the Corsair didn't.
The only fighter I would feel confident in going up against a F4U-4 Corsair would be the Fw-190 Dora-9, in anything else I'd be pretty nervous !
syscom3
Pacific Historian
Lets see some figures for roll rate's
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
OrionIFT said:
Welcome Orion! An AD2 here, formally with VP-65!
Camarogenius
Airman
- 36
- Dec 2, 2005
I Agree with this for the most part, but I find my self looking at the P-51 and saying to myself," Yes it was a great plane, but so what!"Twitch said:Well at least this isn't the bogus "which one could 'out dogfight' the other?" sillyness I've seen people taking seriously around here. I like both these planes depending on the mood I'm in. I'd certinly defend either as excellent due to their combat histories. And as the Air Force and Navy have laid down the requirements that make sense I'd go with- The P-51 in combat over land masses and the F4U for use over water against any enemy of the era.
I don't know why, I admit the Mustang is certainly one of the finest, it just hasn't endeared itself to me. I'll even say that the Mustang prettymuch won the air war over europe. I still don't care for it. I'd much rather shine my enthusiasm on a P-40 or F-4U, or an FW-190, preferably the Anton, but the Dora is equally sweet.
Just my random thoughts.
the lancaster kicks ass
Major General
- 19,937
- Dec 20, 2003
i can see what you're saying Camarogenius, i think it's because as a fighter the P-51 wasn't anything special, the most special things about it were it's range and that she was avialable in large numbers, other than that on a level playing feild most late war fighters could atleast match her, fighters like the -190D were better, but wasn't around in as large numbers or did she get all the propaganda the P-51 did.........
syscom3
Pacific Historian
The P51's speed was always excellent. Range, speed and ceiling plus generally good all around handling makes for a great aircraft.
wmaxt
Staff Sergeant
Both Jank and Lanc are right on. Sys, it was a great plane for that time and place.
wmaxt
wmaxt
wmaxt
Staff Sergeant
Soren said:
That site is very close. Your right the P-51 did get out of hand at very high speeds but the F4U sometimes lost wing fabric to. Also that comparison was very fair and accurate to all sides, note also that the P-38L met or exceeded virtually all performance categories.
I would also take a P-38J/L against the F4U-4 and a few Spits.
wmaxt
syscom3
Pacific Historian
Results speak for themselves. As much as the late model Spits looked good in performance figures, they had no impact on the war effort. The P51D brought the fight to the Luftwaffe (not enough P38 groups to have made a big difference) and simply swept the skies.
The P51 was good in so many catagories that is does deserve the honors.
When you start looking at the figures of all of the late model fighters, most of the figures of their performance is quite evenly matched. The only catagory that seperates them all is endurance. And thats where the P51 dominates that catagory.
The P51 was good in so many catagories that is does deserve the honors.
When you start looking at the figures of all of the late model fighters, most of the figures of their performance is quite evenly matched. The only catagory that seperates them all is endurance. And thats where the P51 dominates that catagory.
wmaxt
Staff Sergeant
syscom3 said:
The P-38s numbers were only matched by the P-51s in March '43 and remained pretty equal until late May when some of the P-38s were diverted to G/A in preparation for D-Day and D-Day coverage/support. When the P-38s started in Oct. '43 they were always outnumbered by 5:1 or more by the more experienced German pilots, by the time the P-38s were diverted the worst was over and both numbers and experience were now in the Allies hands. There were still some severe battles but the balance had shifted already. The P-38s deserve at least half the credit for that shift from German air dominance to Allied control. There were still two P-38 FGs flying when the Allied control became Allied Dominance.
The P-51 was a very good escort fighter - it did not do it alone, further it was OK everywhere else. The P-40 was a better G/A fighter sturdier, same armament, and could carry three bombs to two of the P-51. In all but speed and range the P-51 was average, in quantity and with a wingman it was a great escort fighter.
As for endurance, The P-38 even Flew a 2,300mi mission. In the ETO the P-38s were limited to a 165gal drop tank, with 300gal drop tanks a P-38F flew 3,000mi in '42. Both the P-47D and N exceeded 2,000mi range. The P-51 was the First single engine fighter with that kind of range.
I like the P-51, but its abilities and exploits have been blown way out of proportion.
wmaxt
wmaxt said:
You can't be serious ?! I totally disagree."The Americans had the P-47, P-38 and P-51. All of which were very fast and at least a match for the German fighters in maneuverability."
- Total BS, the Bf-109K-4 and Fw-190D-9 could both out-turn and out-climb any of the aircraft mentioned above.(Although the P-51 was indeed a match up high)
"Especially the P-38 which could out-turn anything the Luftwaffe had and could give the Spitfire pilot pause to consider his own mortality."
- Utterly untrue, laughable infact.
wmaxt said:
Yeah I did note that the site claimed this, and I think you know what I think about that - Total Hogwash.
A F4U-4 would make mince meat out of a P-38J/L, and so would a Spitfire Mk.XIV. (As-well as virtually all other late-war single engined fighters)wmaxt said:
The only two fighters I would rank above the F4U-4 Corsair is the Fw-190 Dora-9 and Spitfire Mk.XIV. But then again when you count in all the extra duties the Corsair could carry out, you start to realise how great that aircraft really was. (But pretty it wasn't though)
F4U for me too.
syscom3
Pacific Historian
The P38 had a tremendous climb rate. Among the fastest of the war. Are you forgetting that its origional role was as an interceptor?
Youre also forgetting one thing that the P38, P47 and P51 could do better than the German fighters, and thats dive out of trouble. Maneuvering also includes the vertical, and the three of those fighters were good at all of them.
Youre also forgetting one thing that the P38, P47 and P51 could do better than the German fighters, and thats dive out of trouble. Maneuvering also includes the vertical, and the three of those fighters were good at all of them.
syscom3 said:
Not when compared to the climb rates of the Bf-109K-4 and Fw-190 Dora-9.
syscom3 said:
I wasn't forgetting anything, I was just addressing the comment about the maneuverability. And yes the P-38 and P-47 could both out-dive the German fighters, however the P-51D would find diving pretty useless against a Fw-190D-9.
syscom3 said:
If the fight starts up high, with enough room for the three american fighters to dive for speed, then yes they would be good in the vertical. But if the fight starts down low, all three american fighters would be in big trouble if faced by the Bf-109K-4 or Fw-190 Dora-9.
wmaxt
Staff Sergeant
Your certainly welcome to your opinion Soren.
If the Fw-190D-9 and Bf-109K-4 had the fuel, time and numbers together with pilots that could utilize all their performance, maybe. As it was the American aircraft did fine, even with those that were there.
The P-38 (not even an L) took on a Spit XIV (Griffon engine) and took the match. Go to the Pro Docs page and there is a test of a Spit IX and P-38F.
wmaxt
If the Fw-190D-9 and Bf-109K-4 had the fuel, time and numbers together with pilots that could utilize all their performance, maybe. As it was the American aircraft did fine, even with those that were there.
The P-38 (not even an L) took on a Spit XIV (Griffon engine) and took the match. Go to the Pro Docs page and there is a test of a Spit IX and P-38F.
wmaxt
KraziKanuK
Banned
- 792
- Jan 26, 2005
The only K-4 that had a high climb rate was the one that was boosted to 1.98ata and these only showed in very small numbers from mid March 1945. Of some ~140 onhand in early April, only ~70 were operational. (50%)
At 1.80ata it was slower (RoC) than the 25lb boost Spit IXs and 21lb boost Spit XIVs.
You got data to back up your Dora claim? Not the data for the few 'specials' either.
At 1.80ata it was slower (RoC) than the 25lb boost Spit IXs and 21lb boost Spit XIVs.
You got data to back up your Dora claim? Not the data for the few 'specials' either.
wmaxt said:
I'd like to know where I can see this test, urban myth, or whatever it is.
wmaxt said:
I did, and whats so special about it ?
All I see is a very lightly loaded P-38 being slightly behind an early version Spitfire IX in climb.
The weight of the P-38F in question is only 15,000 lbs fully loaded, thats a wing-loading of just 45.8 lbs/sq.ft, now when you add the fowler-flaps at slow speed thats a very low lift-loading for such a big aircraft.
_____________________________
Krazi,
What is it with you ? Are you just looking for a fight or what ? I mean why else would you bring the Spitfire into this discussion ??
But ok, I'll take the bate then...
KraziKanuK said:
142 were on hand, and 79 were serviceable.
Anyway please let us know how many Spit XIV's and IX's were running at 21-25lb boost by comparison then. Or better yet let us know how many Spit XIV's were on hand in total, regardless of what boost they used ?
Also perhaps you have forgotten that the 109K-4 was allowed to run at full boost for 10min at a time, where-as the Spit XIV and IX were only allowed to run at full boost for 5min ?
KraziKanuK said:
If you go by Mike Williams figures for an overweight K-4 which is equipped with gun-pods and therefore not only exhibits more drag that usual, but is also alot heavier than usual - then yeah sure, eventhough at 1.8ata it still climbs at 4,400 ft/min with that setup. I'd like to see how a Spit XIV equipped with a 300L drop tank climbs compared to that
But to give you abit of an Idea of how fast a "clean" Bf-109K-4 would be climbing, please note this:
Bf-109K-4 Power-loading at 1.8ata (1,850 HP): 1.8 kg/hp
Bf-109G-2 Power-loading at 1.3ata (1,475 HP): 2.1 kg/hp
Bf-109G-2 climb rate at 1.3ata - 24 m/sec (4,724 ft/min):
So we can expect a cleanly loaded K-4 flying at 1.8ata boost to be climbing at over 5,000 ft/min, not bad huh ? Makes one wonder how fast it was at 1.98ata doesn't it ?
Not convinced ? Take a look at the HA-1112-MIL Buchon then, it has a slightly higher wing-loading than the G-2, but its power-loading is pretty low:
Loaded weight: 3,180 kg
Engine power: 1610 HP
----------------------------
Power-loading = 1.9 kg/hp
Max Climb rate: 5,580 ft/min.
Franz Stigler, German fighter ace:
"The K-4 was very much like the 109G, yet could leave all other fighters behind in climb. "
KraziKanuK said:
And what "claim" would that be ?
KraziKanuK said:
Haha
And what the heck is that supposed to mean, huh ? A moment ago you were talking about 25lb boost Spit IX's and 21lb boost Spit XIV's ! 
But ok I'll explain why a P-38L/J will never out-climb a Fw-190 Dora-9:
Fw-190D-9 normal loaded weight: 4,270 kg (9,414 lbs)
P-38J lowest Gross weight: 7,937 kg (17,500 lbs)
P-38L lowest Gross weight: 7,937 kg (17,500 lbs)
Fw-190D-9 Wing-loading: 233 kg/m2 (47.7 lbs/sq.ft.)
P-38J Wing-loading: 260 kg/m2 (53.4 lbs/sq.ft.)
P-38L Wing-loading: 260 kg/m2 (53.4 lbs/sq.ft.)
Fw-190D-9 Power-loading: 1.9 kg/hp (4.2 lbs/hp)
P-38J Power-loading: 2.48 kg/hp (5.46 lbs/hp)
P-38L Power-loading: 2.48 kg/hp (5.46 lbs/hp)
This is more than enough proof that the P-38 never even approached the climb rate of the Dora-9, but I bet you aint satisfied yet, so I'll continue;
Fw-190 D-9 climb rate using "Sonder-notleistung" (2,100 PS), with ETC-504 rack - 21 m/sec (4,133 ft/min) :
http://img230.imageshack.us/img230/9339/d9climb8yo.jpg
That ETC-504 belly rack takes away approx. 10-15 km/h of the top speed, so you can pretty much expect it takes about 0.5-1 sec away in climb rate as-well.(I bet thats what that partly erased line reaching 22m/s is supposed to represent) And remember this is only using "Sonder-notleistung" (Special emergency power), with a output of 2,100 PS, but it can do even better than that;
Max level speed and power output using "Sonder-Notleistung mit A Lader als Bodenmoter" (Special emergency w/ Compressor, C3 and MW50), with ETC-504 rack - output = 2,250 PS, 640 km/h at SL: http://img482.imageshack.us/img482/3160/d9speed2chart2cy.jpg
http://img482.imageshack.us/img482/6613/jumo213a10cn.jpg
Without the ETC-504 rack you can expect a top speed at SL of 650-655 km/h, and the climb rate can be expected to be around 23-23.5 m/s (4,500-4,600 ft/min).
Now about the P-38;
According to the Pilots manual the P-38J/L's climb rate at its lowest gross weight of 17,400 lbs is around 3,200 ft/min at 54" manifold pressure. However according to a test with various american fighters(F4U-4,P-51B,P-38J,F4U-1), the P-38J with a 50% fuel load and running at 60" MP could hit ca.3,775 ft/min. Now thats at the high end of what I would expect from the P-38, but considering the weight of the aircraft it sounds plausible. (The F4U-4 climbed at 4,500ft/min in that test btw, now thats smoken !)
From the P-38L pilots manual: http://img239.imageshack.us/img239/1029/p38ltclchart2op.jpg
So there you have it, the P-38 could not follow the Fw-190 Dora-9 in a climb, not even when the Dora-9 was flying at its second best power rating and the P-38 at its highest, it simply didn't have the power or the lift necessary.
