P-51D "Mustang" vs. Fw-190 "Dora"

[Erich]

guess we will never know about that post may 45 outcome Bill, yes the P-80 vs the Me 262 with longer range fuel cells already being worked on. JG 300 was to be fully equipped had the war ranged longer and for what though they did not have to go far to meet us escorts whether the future P-51H or the P-80. can't even consider the meteor or the He 162 which was a dismal failure in it's own right. the TA would of been high protection for the Me 262 units, would of made air combat interesting, we can only imagine it's high alt performance which would of been great but only operating at medium to low ranges it even excelled in this reagrd, now I am not saying this was a gift-all for the Lw but it appears it was much better than the Anton and Dora at all alt.'s, but heck as we have said over a hundred times on the forums no-one will ever know.

what did occur operationally is that the Soviets had nothing they could put up with the Dora it outdid everything it battled against in the Soviet arsenal in 45. must do another mention of the very short term and suicidal dive bomber ops by II./JG 301 on the Ost front with their Doras , the crate were shot down too many times by Soviet AA proving the futility in using a higher alt a/c for something it was never intended for.......

2 Fw A-9's and 1 Dora from 6./JG 301, red 5 were lost on the 9th. Jg 300 and 301 were quite active this date, many of the op records of JG 301 have been lost to ? causes, some things were just not recorded. The Dora 9 was lost over Grieben Bill and in fact the pilot survived and actually made a forced landing in his smashed up crate, the pilot wounded. I have a pic of his mount.

 

[drgondog]

i did read the chart actually but i did miss reviewing things when you you changing the speeds i stated 200-300kts to 350 kts the relationship does change. however i am as you may have guessed that a dogfight would sustain altitude and 350kts or be quick in conclusion with two expert pilots in their aircraft.

I didn't 'change speeds' on you. I simply rejected your assumption that a high percentage of such fights would start at that speed and go down to even lower speeds. Most Mustang pilots had a reasonable sense of 'good' vs 'bad' performance envelopes. If you are a pilot you know this. If you are an IL-2 game expert you may have to work harder to gain the insight.

It appears you jumped into this discussion with a preconceived notion, armed with few facts, ignored Dan and Erich that this topic has been cussed and discussed with a full range of just about ALL available data - and then proudly announced that you didn't want to see the same tired old performance comparisons - then belched, farted and sat down - expecting the guys here to gently kiss your ring and say "Gee- you are a genius"!

The air is still perfumed but strangely silent - and it does NOT mean you are wrong - you just don't possess conclusive facts to support your initial belch.

as the fight gets slower and lower the advantage switches to the 190 ...

Well duh - we KNOW that is a fact on the Anton. This may be the number one reason that experienced Mustang pilots lectured green Mustang pilots to NOT go 'low and slow'?

(yes an assumption but no more of one where you express an advantage for the mustang at the initial merge as your statements assume and your historic fights were)

Slooooooooowly, the Mustang simply had a greater speed envelope than the 190D-9 at escort altitudes. It was cleaner. Therefore it could and by inference, did enter combat with at least same and more frequently greater speed if given 'all else being+' as you like to state. Given lower drag and higher speed, you should quickly deduce that the 51D (and fore sure the 51B-3) a.) has greater energy in the merge and b.) retains energy longer in same manuevers.

If you want to talk Aero from here forward state your background or just fire away and whip up the free body diagrams and Drag Polars - and we'll chat. If you are a fighter pilot with ACM experience my hat is off to you - we can talk Energy on engineering terms - but we still need to trot out the facts, please. If you floated in on game sims you need to float out on the same raft and listen rather than let your fingers near the keyboards.

i am taking this as a plane vs. plane as the original poster intended. you have throughout this discussion refused to discuss this on those terms.

If you think so, you have a modest to severe reading comprehension problem or you are being obtuse. I suspect you are a nice fellow so I'll assume the latter.

plane vs. plane you have done little to convince me.

Works for me. Picture my sadness.

however i must agree that the actual historic circumstances are very much in the p51s favor, but that is not the topic is it ?

As I stated I am bored with the circles..

You can't (haven't) gather Fw 190D-9 performance statistics to refute the ones I cited. So far the 51D with 75"hg/150 Octane fuel seems to be as fast or faster from SL to Ceiling based on the published performance tests on new airplanes by Dietmar.

You overlooked the rolling performance issues I cited for the Anton at high speeds, haven't researched and produced either anecdotal or factual data regarding the 190D-9 rolling or turn performance vs either a Fw 190A or a Mustang. Opinions vary, facts scarce

You babble about your likely merge at 200-300kts when the likely merge for these two to even enter in combat is well above 20,000 feet where a shallow dive puts both into near compressibility speeds very quickly. Would you still consider 300kts as 'stretching it' for likely speed of intitial engagement - or suggest that the fight quickly below 250kts? If so, why?

Bored to Death...

Soren - where the hell are you?

 

[Erich]

instead of the same B.S. graphs and staing things that never happened or what-if's........a huge one why not take the time and go research the operations of both sides and flying against one another. you might all be quite surprised what is already in print and will be soon enough.

 

[drgondog]

what did occur operationally is that the Soviets had nothing they could put up with the Dora it outdid everything it battled against in the Soviet arsenal in 45. must do another mention of the very short term and suicidal dive bomber ops by II./JG 301 on the Ost front with their Doras , the crate were shot down too many times by Soviet AA proving the futility in using a higher alt a/c for something it was never intended for.......

Sounds like the Dora and the 51D had the same experience with Sov/NK flak. Thoroughbreds pulling beer wagons so to speak.

2 Fw A-9's and 1 Dora from 6./JG 301, red 5 were lost on the 9th. Jg 300 and 301 were quite active this date, many of the op records of JG 301 have been lost to ? causes, some things were just not recorded. The Dora 9 was lost over Grieben Bill and in fact the pilot survived and actually made a forced landing in his smashed up crate, the pilot wounded. I have a pic of his mount.

Erich - Iknow if you sent the pic to Lyons you would make his day.

Ditto if i could put in new 355th FG/TFW/FW book but I'd settle for Tiger seeing it after 64 years!

 

[drgondog]

instead of the same B.S. graphs and staing things that never happened or what-if's........a huge one why not take the time and go research the operations of both sides and flying against one another. you might all be quite surprised what is already in print and will be soon enough.

Erich - Good advice but always (mostly) subjective and written by survivors.

Additionally IMHO, the track record of the D-9 is below potential simply becaiuse it rarely EVER had tactical equivalency against the 51 at that stage of the war - not situational equivalency or pilot skill equivalency. Few (to zero)Experten vs Ace starting at each other's 12.

As to the graphs and charts - only a handful of the forum contributors (maybe two hands) qualify with weights and config, fuel and boost which also creates a morass of bovine fecal matter streaming from the wikipedia clowns.

Looking forward to seeing your tome. I will definitely buy it. How are you doing health wise?

Maybe I will grace you with a draft of my epic work. Just about done and looking at either Schiffer, one UK firm, or self publishing. The issue is 100, 500 or 2000 photos?

 

[Erich]

I'll dig it out again and try and post here for convenience and for the guys to ooogle over. you can then copy and past off to Bill so he can get a kick out of it. Whomever shot him down, the LW pilot made it through the war with 2 victories, do not see any though while flying the Dora.

yes graphics/schematics must be tempered with op reports, pics and first person accts the latter of course not always available. we get to carried away with using the net as prime focus in our discussion too many do not heed the use of written references except to point out faults....sad

Bill doing better still not settled with Dads accts but we are managing. Hey I just need to get off my fellow buttocks and drive the little car to your abode, will give fair warning to keep the hairy kids off of me as I approach your doorstep. would rather not be licked to death before I can even grace you homestead.

 

[drgondog]

I'll dig it out again and try and post here for convenience and for the guys to ooogle over. you can then copy and past off to Bill so he can get a kick out of it. Whomever shot him down, the LW pilot made it through the war with 2 victories, do not see any though while flying the Dora.

yes graphics/schematics must be tempered with op reports, pics and first person accts the latter of course not always available. we get to carried away with using the net as prime focus in our discussion too many do not heed the use of written references except to point out faults....sad

Bill doing better still not settled with Dads accts but we are managing. Hey I just need to get off my fellow buttocks and drive the little car to your abode, will give fair warning to keep the hairy kids off of me as I approach your doorstep. would rather not be licked to death before I can even grace you homestead.

Would you like another alternative to a lick attack? LoL.

when surrounded by them usually one will lean hard enough, begging for an ear massage, to just roll you up - then 'let the torture begin' with the new plaything on the deck!

Chicken strips are the usual toll fee.

 

[20317]

just to throw my 2c into the fray, i always baulk at Best Fighter! comparisons as just so much staggeringly relevant variables come into play.

at a glance, i consider the following directly produce a result:

fuel consumption, in all scenarios including range, meaning time in and between combat. More is obviously better. Not too many fighter gliders out there.

climb rate at relevant altitudes. More is obviously better.

reversal of roll / change of direction. I understand this is vital to anything calling itself a fighter.

Width of flight envelope. No sense flying a razor blade thats completely blunt until you stumble on the bleeding edge that suddenly kills everything around it including you? Easy to fly means by sheer numbers youre going to have a fighter thats better in the hands of more people than margin dwellers.

Punch. How many of what its got means the fastest coup de grace.

Ease of maintenance. Intelligent build means quicker produced from less resources and more time between sorties.

Ive probably left a few out but generally thats the point. I hope this approach means each plane can be based on its merit not the thousands of mustangs vs the dozens of Fw somehow producing a valid result.

 

[lesofprimus]

All this comparing is tiresome... Ive read countless reports from both sides concerning both crates....

Doras turned inside Mustangs, Mustangs turned inside Doras, Mustangs outdove Doras and Doras outdove Mustangs...

It doesnt really make a bit of difference how a plane can perform at optimum conditions but how it did in combat...

While sitting in the shitter last night reading out of the Dora-9 book, there are many accounts of combat, from both sides.... It all comes down to who had the upper hand at the intialization of combat....

This whole nonsense about going head to head at the same speed to see who wins is horseshit...

 

[Soundbreaker Welch?]

Head on head attacks is like playing chicken with planes!

Could happen, but a lot of times it was the bounces that got a plane.

I think in a head on head attack, I would be a bit scared of the FW 190's cannons. But if the pilot aimed the six fifties on the Mustang better than the pilot in the Dora aimed his cannons, he could still win.

 

[mike526mp]

Which one was the best in airial combat?, one on one, don't care for the number ratio personaly I'll vote for the Focke-Wulf

FW-190 was slow and unreliable, look at WWII Aircraft Performance

 

[mike526mp]

why does everyone have such a high regard for german technology? you guys constantly compare the german prototypes to the allied airplaners in service, the spit, 51 and 47 (especially at high altitude) did much more than hold their own. I have read over and over about the TA-152H, check out WWII Aircraft Performance for actual side by side flight test comparing the airplanes in service, and read what wickapedia says:

Operational history
By fall 1944, the war was going badly for Germany, and the RLM pushed Focke-Wulf to quickly get the Ta 152 into production. As a result, several Ta 152 prototypes crashed early into the test program. It was found that critical systems were lacking sufficient quality control. Issues arose with superchargers, pressurized cockpits leaked, the engine cooling system was unreliable at best due in part to unreliable oil temperature monitoring, and in several instances the landing gear failed to properly retract. A total of up to 20 pre-production Ta 152 H-0s were delivered from November 1944 to Erprobungskommando Ta 152 to service test the airplane. It was reported that test pilots were able to conduct a mere 31 hours of flight tests before full production started. By the end of January 1945, only 50 hours or so had been completed. The Ta 152 was not afforded the time to work out all the little quirks and errors plaguing all new designs. These problems proved impossible to rectify given the situation in Germany towards the end of the war, and only two Ta 152C remained operational when Germany surrendered.[citation needed]

go here to read whole article: Focke-Wulf Ta 152 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[renrich]

mike, very perceptive post. You just said, very well, what I have been thinking. Another point to be considered is that German or Japanese AC near the end of the war could be deployed almost directly from the manufacturer with all the expert ground support readily available. The US aircraft had to be shipped across the Atlantic or Pacific, assembled and then put into service with only a few manufacturer's reps available to help solve problems.

 

[drgondog]

FW-190 was slow and unreliable, look at WWII Aircraft Performance

Mike - you have to be a little careful when selecting one source for a blanket reference concering the 190D. It had gestation problems, but most were due to the early application of MW50.

By same token the 1946 USAAF Test of the P-51H was less than 100% because the 1650-9 engine delivered had some problems with Water Injection - but that wasn't true for 'all' P-51H series.

The post war Allied tests of LW weren't too particularly interested in testing to show 'superior' performance. The Me 262 may have been the exception to that rule, however.

My father flew the 190D-9 post war for about 25 hours at Gablingen but had to rely on a former LW crew chief's judgement and scrounged parts that the a/c was properly rigged and engine performing to spec.

His judgment was that the 190D was an 'excellent' fighter and comparable to the Mustang...each of four different aces flew the 190D against each other's Mustangs in simulated rat races but not in any planned and formal test methodology.

As no comparative tests were performed in any rigorous fashion it is impossible to judge fairly what the 190D would have been able to do with a comparable force of experienced pilots and tactical numbers.

This is one reason why I don't get too excited about this particular debate.

 

[Maximowitz]

Wikipedia as a source? The internet is always correct... phoo..

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

FW-190 was slow and unreliable, look at WWII Aircraft Performance

Slow and unreliable, that is a pretty odd statement. Was it the best? No, probably not, but to say it was slow and unreliable is wrong. Why try and degrade aircraft?

While we are at it though, please provide facts that prove the Fw 190D was "slow".

Mike - you have to be a little careful when selecting one source for a blanket reference concering the 190D. It had gestation problems, but most were due to the early application of MW50.

By same token the 1946 USAAF Test of the P-51H was less than 100% because the 1650-9 engine delivered had some problems with Water Injection - but that wasn't true for 'all' P-51H series.

The post war Allied tests of LW weren't too particularly interested in testing to show 'superior' performance. The Me 262 may have been the exception to that rule, however.

My father flew the 190D-9 post war for about 25 hours at Gablingen but had to rely on a former LW crew chief's judgement and scrounged parts that the a/c was properly rigged and engine performing to spec.

His judgment was that the 190D was an 'excellent' fighter and comparable to the Mustang...each of four different aces flew the 190D against each other's Mustangs in simulated rat races but not in any planned and formal test methodology.

As no comparative tests were performed in any rigorous fashion it is impossible to judge fairly what the 190D would have been able to do with a comparable force of experienced pilots and tactical numbers.

This is one reason why I don't get too excited about this particular debate.

Nice info and summary. I think it is a very unbiased account of the Fw 190D, based off of some first hand accounts. I think that is something that lacks in a lot of peoples arguments.

why does everyone have such a high regard for german technology? you guys constantly compare the german prototypes to the allied airplaners in service, the spit, 51 and 47 (especially at high altitude) did much more than hold their own. I have read over and over about the TA-152H, check out WWII Aircraft Performance for actual side by side flight test comparing the airplanes in service, and read what wickapedia says:

The Germans were in some ways ahead of the Allies in technology and in some ways were behind the Allies in technology. Both sides had their areas of strength and weakness. I don't see what your point is.

Besides to make a true comparison of the aircraft you have to use more than just sheets of paper. Each aircraft (both German and Allied) has its optimal area of operation. An Fw 190D will beat out a P-51D in certain flight characteristics and certain altitudes and conditions, vice versa for the P-51D over the Fw 190D.

Operational history
By fall 1944, the war was going badly for Germany, and the RLM pushed Focke-Wulf to quickly get the Ta 152 into production. As a result, several Ta 152 prototypes crashed early into the test program. It was found that critical systems were lacking sufficient quality control. Issues arose with superchargers, pressurized cockpits leaked, the engine cooling system was unreliable at best due in part to unreliable oil temperature monitoring, and in several instances the landing gear failed to properly retract. A total of up to 20 pre-production Ta 152 H-0s were delivered from November 1944 to Erprobungskommando Ta 152 to service test the airplane. It was reported that test pilots were able to conduct a mere 31 hours of flight tests before full production started. By the end of January 1945, only 50 hours or so had been completed. The Ta 152 was not afforded the time to work out all the little quirks and errors plaguing all new designs. These problems proved impossible to rectify given the situation in Germany towards the end of the war, and only two Ta 152C remained operational when Germany surrendered.[citation needed]

go here to read whole article: Focke-Wulf Ta 152 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I hope you do not use wikipedia as your primary source...

 

[Altea]

My father flew the 190D-9 post war for about 25 hours at Gablingen but had to rely on a former LW crew chief's judgement and scrounged parts that the a/c was properly rigged and engine performing to spec.

His judgment was that the 190D was an 'excellent' fighter and comparable to the Mustang...each of four different aces flew the 190D against each other's Mustangs in simulated rat races but not in any planned and formal test methodology.

As no comparative tests were performed in any rigorous fashion it is impossible to judge fairly what the 190D would have been able to do with a comparable force of experienced pilots and tactical numbers.

And did your father used the MW-50? I'm asking that question because all soviet FW-190D used at LII, NII and regular Baltic Fleet VVS squadron after the war didn'have that device from the mainstream (no serial fitted).
Moroever J Lasserre from Turboméca used to work on water injection systems with Shidlowsky from 1945-46, said that it (the chemical supergarer) provides some big disparity in results, unlike the classical mecanical one with 100/150 grade fuel with stable results. So it was certainly giving increase at power, but varying a lot from an engine to another.He even called it "Lorenzien" phenomenom, from E Lorenz the meteorologist that worked on the "Chaos Theory" for fluids.

May a Dora win a fight on a Mustang in a flight show, might be...Show winners are not always winners on a streetfighting or in real life situation.

That to say in operational condition had no advantage over the Mustang.

At escort flight, it was always higher than the 190D, and was alble to convert hight to speed. Even without that at 4300 kg the wingload of the Mustang was only 198 kg/m² against 230, so it's turn radius was better considering also better power to weight ratios at height 2.75 vs 3.1 kg/ hp at 5000 m.
Moroever in Boom-Zoom fights Mustang was able to keep it's energy margin better than the others WWII planes, due to a better glide ratio.

On a concrete situation, the Mustang was in fine always better.

 

[drgondog]

And did your father used the MW-50? I'm asking that question because all soviet FW-190D used at LII, NII and regular Baltic Fleet VVS squadron after the war didn'have that device from the mainstream (no serial fitted).

I just don't know. There were no comments in the logbook and the memories of the conversations are 55+ years and all the pilots involved (Fortier, Elder, Hovde and my father) are gone. I suspect the former LW crew chief was proud of his 190D and would further suspect he would want it to perform well - but I don't have any facts one way or the other

Moroever J Lasserre from Turboméca used to work on water injection systems with Shidlowsky from 1945-46, said that it (the chemical supergarer) provides some big disparity in results, unlike the classical mecanical one with 100/150 grade fuel with stable results. So it was certainly giving increase at power, but varying a lot from an engine to another.He even called it "Lorenzien" phenomenom, from E Lorenz the meteorologist that worked on the "Chaos Theory" for fluids.

May a Dora win a fight on a Mustang in a flight show, might be...Show winners are not always winners on a streetfighting or in real life situation.

That to say in operational condition had no advantage over the Mustang.

At escort flight, it was always higher than the 190D, and was alble to convert hight to speed. Even without that at 4300 kg the wingload of the Mustang was only 198 kg/m² against 230, so it's turn radius was better considering also better power to weight ratios at height 2.75 vs 3.1 kg/ hp at 5000 m.
Moroever in Boom-Zoom fights Mustang was able to keep it's energy margin better than the others WWII planes, due to a better glide ratio.

On a concrete situation, the Mustang was in fine always better.

You make good points.

The wildcard in these discussions are the drag comparisons (you mention L/D) but equally important is the comparisons of parasite drag and its effect on the rate of change in momentum in high energy manuevers.

 

[vanir]

The test data I have for (werk number?) 210002 is for a D-9 in October 1944 which returns 1.72atm at 2100 metres without the use of MW50 and this should translate to around 1900PS. MW50 use on the same a/c provides 1.81atm at 1800 metres (in excess of 2000PS rated).
The initial climb rates at this height are given as 17m/s without MW50 use and 19.5m/s with use of MW50 (20.5m/s at 1500 metres with MW50 and 20m/s at 1800 metres).

Given that the combat setting (kampfleistung) of ~1.72atm is used for most of the time during engagements (sondernotleistung is listed as used for emergencies only, for short periods and require a long cooldown afterwards).
Most postwar flight testing of captured German a/c did not use MW50 during testing due to concerns about engine damage. In at least one report made at Wright Field (Wright-Patterson AFB) it is noted that speculators were unsure if the Focke Wulf guidelines related for "special boost settings" even related to a specific blower gear (it did not, but at first they thought it was for use in the low blower gear only).
It turns out in particular that Focke Wulf a/c were capable of using "special boost" with MW50 or some other injection (laderdruck) for extended periods of up to 10mins without necessarily causing engine damage, which actually exceeds the typical Allied WEP rating of the 5min maximum all out setting using water injection. But at the time the Dora was evaluated as having inconsistent build quality and whilst high performance by any measure, and contemporary with Allied models of the period, it is written up as being relatively unrefined and subject to the industrial state of Germany and intentional sabotage during construction (one example shipped to the US had to be partially rebuilt before being declared airworthy and featured several examples of minor, but potentially dangerous sabotage performed during its initial construction).
All things considered the celebration of the Dora is quite high both among German and Allied postwar piloting, and a lot of this is without the use of MW50.

So it is a matter of where/how you're going to be pitting a Mustang against your Dora. In the low blower around 2000 metres is good, or in the high around 5000 metres. For the Mustang it would be better at something like 4000 metres and 7000 metres. In any case the Dora is doing pretty good to have an instant 1900PS for 30min straight at around 2000 metres without MW50, that significantly trumps the best power the 'Stang can produce in the low blower for only 5mins.
That and a good armament, good armour and equipment, good pilot setup, great controls (electrical boosted, kommandogerat electromechanical flight computer for one touch flying).

The Mustang is great, I love it, especially in one interesting light. Think of RAF pilot evaluation of the Griffon Spits compared to the Merlin Spits, many say the older 60/70-series Merlin powered MkIX's were much nicer to fly but were losing speed compared to other late war contemporaries. Well the Mustang combines the best of both worlds, a really sweet engine and an airframe which returned contemporary late war performance to it.

But still, the popular consensus among all those who flew the Dora in the West, Axis or Allied is that it was competitive come what may. Doesn't matter the restrictions, the settings, the circumstances, maybe poorer fuel batch one day, maybe the plugs aren't so good another day, all these things. No MW50, mounting the MW50 in a different place (some versions mounted it in the supercharger exhaust, other ones in the supercharger intake). A nice cool afternoon and everything is running superbly. Hot dusty winds and it wants to overheat. And there were many different variations and experiments tried with the Dora during production, the Jumo 213 wasn't particularly reliable and its performance was below expectations. Yet that it was competitive with a/c like the Mustang as a conclusive evaluation, generally made for a late war production example (1945 production) without the use of MW50.

 

[lesofprimus]

Great post vanir, and from what I know, pretty much on the money...