While researching some info on the Heinkel He 162 ( for an R/C modelling project), I came across an interesting piece of information regarding the quality of Luftwaffe leadership at the end of 1944. Written by a junior officer in 1./JG1, it paints a bleak picture once again of the state of affairs by this time. He states that many of the squadron leaders were not suitable to command, but had been promoted for bravery or combat records. Most of them were "alcoholics", who cared little about their wingmen or inexperienced pilots, and were primarily interested in racking up more personal tallies than protecting their fellow fliers. He goes on to say that many of the German aces were not what they were made out to be. His opinion of course, but he was there at the time. If any one is interested in looking it up, it is in Forsyth and Creeks' book on the He 162, which is acknowledged as being the most comprehensive text available on this aircraft. To answer the original question that started this thread, it is fine to discuss horsepower and operational ceilings etc, but the difference between the P51 and the FW 190 ( in all its variations) was of less importance than the difference between who flew them. Machine Vs machine will always be objective, as these parameters are set, but pilot vs pilot is a whole different world. The number and quality of allied pilots increased, the number and quality of German ones went steadily down hill. U.S pilots had far more training hours, resources and support, as well as the benefit of doing it while not in an active war zone. They were also rotated. By 1944, Luftwaffe pilots had minimal hours, with fewer instructors, out numbered 20-1, with limited petrol and supplies. They learned to fly with the allies above having total air superiority. They also fought until they died or could no longer fly an aeroplane. Little wonder things turned out the way they did.