Perhaps my fault, I was just pointing out that as the P51D was introduced the Me262 was also, just to say it couldn't lay any claim to best fighter in absolute performance though its position as best escort fighter was never challenged.
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Perhaps my fault, I was just pointing out that as the P51D was introduced the Me262 was also, just to say it couldn't lay any claim to best fighter in absolute performance though its position as best escort fighter was never challenged.You got me scratching my head - where did I mentioned P-51D specifically?
The biggest point working against the Bf 109 was the massive number of planes and pilots lost in take off and landing accidents, I have read that if the LW hadnt lost so many planes and especially young pilots they could possibly have won the BoB and from that the whole war. See below for linksA few background points working against the Me-109 include Hitler's decision to rely on FLAK rather than LW interceptors, Doolittle's decision to release the P-51 and other escorts from close bomber escort to wider ranging LW hunting, the mission of the interceptor to engage the bombers and avoid the defending escorts and, as has been mentioned, the need for weighty armor on interceptors.
A confession here, I am 55 years old and was always keen on aviation from the age of about 7 (my big brother made models) I didnt hear about the P51B and C until I was in my twenties. In my teens I got a model as a present of a Mustang Mk1 (Allison engined Raf tactical recon from revell I think) it was so far away from a P51D that was shown in every magazine and TV programme I thought it was a screw up by the model company.Looks to me that P-51B is for some reason pushed aside in this discussion.
IndeedAlso all true, but again this is no indication that the 51 was inferior or superior to the German fighters...
You didn't. I did. But that was the model that mostly served and inflicted losses on the LW.You got me scratching my head - where did I mentioned P-51D specifically?
The reason FLAK was Hitler's favorite by the end of the war was the lack of fuel, pilots, and general casualties inflicted by overwhelming numbers of highly trained US pilots swamping German defenses. FLAK was a low loss way to inflict damage by 1944 compared to fighters.A few background points working against the Me-109 include Hitler's decision to rely on FLAK rather than LW interceptors, Doolittle's decision to release the P-51 and other escorts from close bomber escort to wider ranging LW hunting, the mission of the interceptor to engage the bombers and avoid the defending escorts and, as has been mentioned, the need for weighty armor on interceptors.
Some think that by the time the P51D was fully operational the LW was already close to collapse with operation Bagration in the east and Normandy already successful it was being overwhelmed on all fronts.You didn't. I did. But that was the model that mostly served and inflicted losses on the LW.
You didn't. I did. But that was the model that mostly served and inflicted losses on the LW.
The reason FLAK was Hitler's favorite by the end of the war was the lack of fuel, pilots, and general casualties inflicted by overwhelming numbers of highly trained US pilots swamping German defenses. FLAK was a low loss way to inflict damage by 1944 compared to fighters.
Maybe he was also thinking that the difference between a flak gun and an anti tank gun is really just in the ammunition used, I think Berlins flak towers were among the last places to fall to the Soviet army.The reason FLAK was Hitler's favorite by the end of the war was the lack of fuel, pilots, and general casualties inflicted by overwhelming numbers of highly trained US pilots swamping German defenses. FLAK was a low loss way to inflict damage by 1944 compared to fighters.
Some think that by the time the P51D was fully operational the LW was already close to collapse with operation Bagration in the east and Normandy already successful it was being overwhelmed on all fronts.
Whay do you guys think about this? According to the men on the video Skip Holm said to him he could face 5 or 6 Mustangs in a dogfight in a Buchon.
I had a response to this all typed up but deleted it as I don't want to get banned after being here only a week.
I am minded to quote (or paraphrase) a member here "if it is a fair fight you have done something wrong". However good or bad a Buchon was relative to a P51 it was not superior in the way a B109G was to a Hurricane and no German ace in any Bf109 would take on 5 or 6 Hurricanes, he has 1 pair of eyes in a 3 dimensional combat.
The Tempest was superior to the FW 190 but I remember reading a report by a Tempest pilot, spotting a flight of 4 FW190s he broke the wires on the throttles and got out of the place knowing he couldnt be caught, being in the fastest aircraft means you choose when to fight.
The Me-109 performs very well against the P-51 for takeoff, climb, and moderate cruise, but once the P-51 starts a dive or adds power in a level condition, the P-51 outperforms the Me-109 easily.
These discussions have a habit of of spiraling in many directions. In principle power was the deciding factor, the highest powered Buchon had 1600BHP and was a hybrid. The P51D had 1720 BHP and 6x 0.5in MGs. Anyone volunteering to take on 6 in individual combat is a fool, I recognise that I am not a pilot and especially not a pilot of WW2 AC but that is completely foolish.From Skip Holm's website:
Skip Holm
But again, I guess he is talking specifically about the Buchon here. I guess the late war 109s were more closer to the Mustang in terms of speed than the Buchon was, not to say rate of climb. As for the control forces, I don't know if the Germans improved this in the late war variants, a improvement that if occured makes me wonder if the Buchon also has had. Also: I don't know how the power curves of the 109 and P-51 compare. Because the power output of two aircraft can be different in different altitudes and this of course, will certainly affect the turning radius and rate of climb of an airplane. And in some cases the difference power output of two aircraft can be quite significative (e.g. Fw 190 A series vs Bf 109 in high altitude).
I had a response to this all typed up but deleted it as I don't want to get banned after being here only a week.