Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Why do you discount what our pilots had to say? As for a P-51 only having range, I doubt any FW-190 pilot would say the same thing Bud Anderson would say about the ME110 and 410.
C.E. "Bud" Anderson
2. Which aircraft, the ME109 or the FW190 was the most formidable in combat?
In aerial combat it did not matter to me which type of enemy fighter I encountered. I felt that the Mustang could out perform both the ME109 and the FW190 and treated them pretty much the same. The FW190 had an air cooled radial engine and could probably take a little more damage than the liquid cooled ME109. I never encountered any of the twin engine fighters such as the ME110 ME 410 but it appeared to me that the guy that got there first shot down the most of them.
this has nothing to do with who made it, the question I am answering is which is the best fighter.
Don't let the door catch your ass on the way out...No colin you are ignorant, you no nothing, just a bag of wind with no experience and no common sense, but a big ego and chip on your shoulder. you probablyhave no life, no friends. grow up little boy, oh, by the way, I also know this is your web site, I could see from the demerit you gave me, how childish, ydo ou also go by DerAdlerIstGelandet?
And then you come to the discussion with "What I did not like is the attitude that you brought into the discussion, as well as making claims that are not true."
mike526mp said:Take a P-51, a FW-190 of the same era, 2 equal pilots, equal amount of fuel (duration), any altitude (and tested at all altitudes), both see each other, object is to destroy the other, same altitude, both at high speed, neither at a tactical advantage, I would bet the P-51 wins 90-100 out of 100.
mike526 said:Just your condescending attitude and your "non superficial understanding of that aspect of the air battle."
You sure convinced me Colin! You win Ace!
No colin you are ignorant, you no nothing, just a bag of wind with no experience and no common sense, but a big ego and chip on your shoulder. you probablyhave no life, no friends. grow up little boy, oh, by the way, I also know this is your web site, I could see from the demerit you gave me, how childish, ydo ou also go by DerAdlerIstGelandet?
did the voices tell you to say that?the someone else is you colin!
...and I'm the new site ownerActually me and Colin are two different people.
I am however a moderator here
With the hazards associated with attacking the enemy from the tail position firmly in mind, Luftwaffe pilots logically shifted their focus to the lesser defended front of the formation. Upon interception, fighters would loiter outside of gunnery range, either abeam or behind, to estimate the speed and altitude of the bomber stream.
The German would then accelerate his aircraft to a point two miles ahead of the enemy and 1000 yards above before turning back towards his foe. With closing speeds approaching 500 mph, there was but a few scant seconds to line up a shot, squeeze off a short burst and break away to avoid a collision. A successful frontal attack required superior flying ability, skilled marksmanship and an iron will on the part of the Luftwaffe pilot.
Aside from the benefit of confronting fewer guns, the nose approach afforded an opportunity to fire directly in the bomber cockpits. A few well placed cannon rounds could at least disable, if not kill, an American flight crew. Later versions of both the B-17 and B-24 featured powered nose turrets to counter this threat.
The tail attack was not totally abandoned. Small numbers of less maneuverable, more rugged twin-engined aircraft such as the Messerschmitt Bf-110 and Junkers Ju-88 were fitted with a 37, 50 or even 75 mm cannon to permit engagement from outside the range of the heavy bombers tail guns. A single round from these weapons was capable of downing any Allied bomber. The appearance of Allied escort fighters later in the campaign chased these plodding aircraft from the skies.
OKput away your flight sim flyboy (colin), it was
Luftwaffe Day Interception Tactics
German Fighter Pilot Methods for Attacking USAAF Strategic Bombers
by Andrew C. Rappold
but with your keen understanding of air warfare, i am sure you knew that
Let me try to comprehend this, please type slow for me. You say it is pointless the views of Bud Anderson and other pilots who actually participated in the combat, the air combat between the 2 aircraft we are discussing, at the time it happened, in the aircraft of the era?
Mike - Colin didn't say that.
Do you want to drag in the LW pilot view who just shot down a Mustang in either a Me 109 or Fw 190 or Fw 190D and pose that as an example of superiority? My Father shot down more German Fighters in the time he was in combat ops than Anderson did in the same period (June 6 to EOW) - does that make him superior? No. But he flew the Me 109G and the Fw 190A and the Fw 190D after the war and considered them very good airplanes.
And Colin, you state, "I think your conclusions are superficial, based on your superficial understanding of that aspect of the air battle." Then I guess you are saying Bud Anderson and other pilots also had a superficial understanding of air battle, but you somehow know it all?
Mike - he said Your conclusions were superficial - not Anderson's
Let me make it simple for you Colin, for your "lack of comprehension". Take a P-51, a FW-190 of the same era, 2 equal pilots, equal amount of fuel (duration), any altitude (and tested at all altitudes), both see each other, object is to destroy the other, same altitude, both at high speed, neither at a tactical advantage, I would bet the P-51 wins 90-100 out of 100.
Facts not entered into evidence.
By the time the Mustang hit the ETO (8th and 9th AF) there probably weren't 100 Fw 190 pilots in the West that had comparable or better skills than the above average Mustang pilot of the 354th, 355th, 4th, 357th or 352nd FG's. BTW that is speculation, not fact, on my part but the s/e fighter strength and pilots available to LuftFlotte 3 and Reich pretty much peaked out in early to mid 1944 at 600+ pilots and up to 1000 per month were getting killed in Feb-May, 1944.
I think it is clear what you never liked is my conclusion. You have no facts other than early reports and figures, nothing of any value after 1943. Just your condescending attitude and your "non superficial understanding of that aspect of the air battle."
You sure convinced me Colin! You win Ace!
put away your flight sim flyboy (colin), it was
Luftwaffe Day Interception Tactics
German Fighter Pilot Methods for Attacking USAAF Strategic Bombers
by Andrew C. Rappold
but with your keen understanding of air warfare, i am sure you knew that