P-51's vs. Me-109's and Fw-190's

[the lancaster kicks ass]

well that's down to the skill of some of their pilots.......

 

[Soren]

well that's down to the skill of some of their pilots.......

And the quality of their equipment....

By 44-45 the average pilot quality wasnt nearly as good as what it had been.

 

[wmaxt]

8th Air Force escort procedures.
These numbers are a little complicated, for instance a 1,000 bomber raid may have 1,500 fighters total to cover it, that cover was staggered.

Outbound to the border of Germany 250 planes Spitfire/P-47 mix
German Border to target 500 fighters P-51/P-38 mix as the time progressed into late 44 it would be P-51/P-47 mix
Return leg same as above.
Inbound similar to outbound.

All Aircraft in the ETO. 8th 9th Air Forces
Aircraft available to the AAF as follows:
P-38s - 600-700 from Jan 44 to June 44 maintaining +/- 250 from December to the end. Note the numbers of P-38s vrs. their impact.
P-47s - 1,000 by Oct 43, 2,000 by April '44 and mantaining +/- 2,000 to the end.
P-51s - +/- 1,000 from April '44 to September '44 and +/- 1,500 till the end of the war.

Total Fighters Available in the ETO went like this:
1.200 Oct '43, 2,500 Jan '44, 3,000 Feb '44, 4,000 in October '44, 4.600 in April '45.

These numbers are rounded and represent aircraft available on a monthly basis. The source is the AAF Statisticle Digest.

These numbers Don't include British aircraft.

wmaxt

 

[Udet]

I have learned that the generally accepted view of the airwarfare over Europe from mid 1944 until the end of the war is unaccurate; it of course is the view of the victors.

The "non-stop" slaughter of "ill-trained" teenies flying "inferior" craft sent to a certain, unavoidable and completely predictable death. You know, that is a tale. A distortion.

Now, before those over-sensitive creatures burst out in anger (you know who you are), it is important to tell that yes, losses for the Luftwaffe were very high, horrible in some days and specific battles.

What I have found is that the majority of those new pilots in the jagdwaffe in 1944 could find their "out" when engaging the hordes of either P-51s and P-47s.

Finding your "out" in view of such overwhelming numerical inferiority implies having both skill and fully capable fighters.

Had the allied tale of the "absolute supremacy" of the P-51 over "all" German fighters been true, then no less than 95% percent of the new Luftwaffe pilots of 1944/ 45 would have died.

The whole German territory was easily within the reach of virtually every USAAF fighter group by late 1944 and 1945. This is significant, and certainly helps shattering the allied version of an "undisputed supremacy" of the allied air forces over the German pilots and planes. Why was it that they did not shoot them all down?

Hundreds and hundreds of German pilots found their "outs".

Losses for new German pilots of 1944/ 45 were around 38-44%. A very HIGH loss rate; still it was not even the majority of them.

I have also had the chance of seeing records of many young pilots who died in 1944/ 45, and hundreds of them claimed 2, 3 or 4 enemy fighters before their deaths. Confirming kills was kind of disrupted by late 1944 and 1945, but that does not mean, at all, their claims were false.

While the P-51s were not marvels, they were not "sitting ducks" either, and the fact of having returned to base, claim a kill, implied everything but "being ill-trained".

What many would address as "luck" I´d call it skill, sound morale, top aircraft and yes, guts.

I am completely convinced that on the event of a numerically equal engagement between P-51 or P-47s against any German fighter of the late war, could have as an outcome, a butchery of USAAF guys.

 

[P38 Pilot]

I belive that the P51 could beat the me109 easily but have more of a challenge with the focke wulf. We have too remember that there were a lot of skilled German pilots that flew Fokce Wulfs.

 

[Erich]

it's all in accordance with pilot skill..............period. The Fw A did not have the high altitiude perfomance of late mark Bf 109's till the Dora model became available in small numbers.

the point is there were more P-51 than German a/c. wmax your figure for P-47's includes 9th AF Jugs whom were not necessairly involved with bomber escort duties.

not until the month of February 45 did the US have the supremeacy of flying P-51's to the eastern suburbs of the Reich due to the fact that 3/4rs of the Reich defence had been moved to the Ost front.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

I am completely convinced that on the event of a numerically equal engagement between P-51 or P-47s against any German fighter of the late war, could have as an outcome, a butchery of USAAF guys.

In what context? Are you assuming the Luftwaffe skill level was maintained as many of the experten killed years earlier are brought back into the picture? Are we to eliminate the fact that allied bombers are not to included into this thought process and this is a statement based on a fighter-to-fighter scenario?

 

[Sal Monella]

On these huge bombing raids, where did the bombers take off from?

 

[Glider]

UDET. It is an accepted rule of thumb that when losses reach 20% a unit looses its efficiency. Your figure of around 40% for new pilots plus the inevitable drain on the remaining experienced leaders would confirm that the German fighter units would not be very effective. That is probably at least as important as the number of planes shot down.

The Allied forces were trying to escort their bombers, if the German planes are not effective then they are not going to stop the mission and to the allied view, this would mean that the allies control the air. I am not aware of any allied mission that failed to reach its target. My guess is that this may have happened a few times but not many. This implies to me that the German fighter forces had lost their edge.

In fighter vs fighter the inexperienced pilot is at a massive disadvantage whatever plane he is in either German of Allied. However the chances of a German pilot getting the all important first 6-12 missions under his belt would be slim. A new allied pilot would have a better chance of gaining this experience because they have control of the air and their units more effective.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

I belive that the P51 could beat the me109 easily but have more of a challenge with the focke wulf. We have too remember that there were a lot of skilled German pilots that flew Fokce Wulfs.

And a lot of that comes down to the numerical superiority. The P-51D was very overated. I will agree that the P-51D was better then the Bf-109 however the Bf-109G or K would give a P-51D a good run for its money and with an experienced pilot beat him.

 

[the lancaster kicks ass]

On these huge bombing raids, where did the bombers take off from?

England, mainly the East coast........

 

[wmaxt]

If you read my post more closely you will see where I made the distinction between escort and all, including the 9th Air Force aircraft, available aircraft.

I agree the P-51 was overated however it was still compettive and even had a couple of advantages (as did the Fw-190/Bf-109) with a skilled pilot was deadly. Pilot skill would be the determining factor.

On pilot skill - by mid '44 German Training before introduction to combat was ~ 110hrs and a few hours ground instruction. AAF training was 350/400hrs, 50+ ground instruction/tactics directly concerning the P-51 in combat and another 20hrs in the squadron prior to combat.
The majority of expert German pilots were killed in the first half of 1944. The skill level of the average German pilot fell rapidly and there was no possible way to recover in the time/conditions available.

wmaxt

 

[Erich]

wmaxt I see no distinction at all of 9th AF Jugs.

also the majority of Luftw. skilled aces were not killed in early 1944. you forget the Ost front aces were hardly touched till 45, and they must be considered. what was lost was experienced leaders of Staffeln and gruppen the main-point was Unternehmen Bodenplatte on 1-1-45 a total waste of human resources. Ture the Luftw. was pouned by may of 44 but still dealt many death blows, the Sturmgruppen had not been in-force til 7-7-44 and the overall tactics were then replaced with an angrif von hinten

 

[Soren]

I belive that the P51 could beat the me109 easily but have more of a challenge with the focke wulf. We have too remember that there were a lot of skilled German pilots that flew Fokce Wulfs.

And a lot of that comes down to the numerical superiority. The P-51D was very overated. I will agree that the P-51D was better then the Bf-109 however the Bf-109G or K would give a P-51D a good run for its money and with an experienced pilot beat him.

The Bf-109 was a MUCH better pure fighter than the P-51.

The P-51 was out-runned, out-turned, out-rolled and out-climbed by the 109K series, and everything but out-runned by the G series.

With a properly trained pilot in each a/c, the Bf-109 would make mince meat of a P-51 in a dogfight !

However all this being said, the P-51 wasnt "Designed" as a pure fighter like the 109, but as an escort-fighter, at which role it operated nicely.

So the P-51 was by no means a failure, just not the wonder-plane some people thought/think it was.

 

[wmaxt]

[quote="Soren]

The Bf-109 was a MUCH better pure fighter than the P-51.

The P-51 was out-runned, out-turned, out-rolled and out-climbed by the 109K series, and everything but out-runned by the G series.

With a properly trained pilot in each a/c, the Bf-109 would make mince meat of a P-51 in a dogfight !

However all this being said, the P-51 wasnt "Designed" as a pure fighter like the 109, but as an escort-fighter, at which role it operated nicely.

So the P-51 was by no means a failure, just not the wonder-plane some people thought/think it was.[/quote]

The P-51 was designed as a replacement for the P-40 even down to the requirements for the use of the same engine and prop. The merlin and extra fuel came later and worked out exceptionaly well.

I agree it was no wonder plane but it was every bit as good as the Bf-109 and with a better pilot compettitive with the Fw-190. This was proven many times in combat.

wmaxt

 

[wmaxt]

wmaxt I see no distinction at all of 9th AF Jugs.

also the majority of Luftw. skilled aces were not killed in early 1944. you forget the Ost front aces were hardly touched till 45, and they must be considered. what was lost was experienced leaders of Staffeln and gruppen the main-point was Unternehmen Bodenplatte on 1-1-45 a total waste of human resources. Ture the Luftw. was pouned by may of 44 but still dealt many death blows, the Sturmgruppen had not been in-force til 7-7-44 and the overall tactics were then replaced with an angrif von hinten

Erich, The first two paragraphs were on escort duties and the rest was on aircraft availability - I thought it was clear. I have gone back and eddited the post to clarify it - sorry for the confusion.

wmaxt

 

[Udet]

Wmaxt:

That is incorrect.

The "majority" of Luftwaffe experten did not get killed in action. That is another one of the allied tales.

Grab the list of the rough 115 German pilots who shot down 100 or more enemy planes, and you will discover the majority of them in fact finished the war. It can be an illustrative sample.

Also, many of the experten who died during the war, did not so as consequence of enemy action. (i.e. Mölders, Marseille, Lent and a long etc)

I sometimes wonder what the definition of "majority" is in allied depositions.

Finally, and as Erich correctly put it, by late 1944 and during 1945, USAAF losses were everything but "minimum".

As I have mentioned in other threads, it would be interesting to ask the few USAAF guys who survived several Sturmgruppe attacks if German pilots were "ill-trained" by late 1944.

There were cases of German pilots flying Fw 190 A-8s with the extra-armor for sturm attacks that shot down Mustangs.

Now, if a modified A-8, with some 250 kgs of extra-armor could chew a Mustang, think of a "standard" A-8 or of the AS Bf 109s tuned for super high altitude combat, or of the Fw 190 D.


To an important extent they (USAAF and RAF) won due to overwhelming numerical superioriy and not precisely for having had "superior planes, engines, tactics, training...blah, blah, blah..."

 

[wmaxt]

Wmaxt:

That is incorrect.

The "majority" of Luftwaffe experten did not get killed in action. That is another one of the allied tales.

Grab the list of the rough 115 German pilots who shot down 100 or more enemy planes, and you will discover the majority of them in fact finished the war. It can be an illustrative sample.

Also, many of the experten who died during the war, did not so as consequence of enemy action. (i.e. Mölders, Marseille, Lent and a long etc)

I sometimes wonder what the definition of "majority" is in allied depositions.

Finally, and as Erich correctly put it, by late 1944 and during 1945, USAAF losses were everything but "minimum".

As I have mentioned in other threads, it would be interesting to ask the few USAAF guys who survived several Sturmgruppe attacks if German pilots were "ill-trained" by late 1944.

There were cases of German pilots flying Fw 190 A-8s with the extra-armor for sturm attacks that shot down Mustangs.

Now, if a modified A-8, with some 250 kgs of extra-armor could chew a Mustang, think of a "standard" A-8 or of the AS Bf 109s tuned for super high altitude combat, or of the Fw 190 D.


To an important extent they (USAAF and RAF) won due to overwhelming numerical superioriy and not precisely for having had "superior planes, engines, tactics, training...blah, blah, blah..."

Udet, it is correct. The training data is from the records left after the war both German and US I have the British numbers but didn't want to make things more complicated. Majority is defined as more than 50% thats not to say some like Rall, Galland etc didn't make through the war but most didn't (it doesn't matter how). I think all the experts were shot down at least once and were LUCKY enough to live. Their record is no disgrace, looking at the odds its actually quite remarkable that they did as well as they did.

You've said this stuff a lot, Please list the Expert German pilots of mid '43 and show us how many survived to mid '44 and then the end of the war. Then Please list the times the sturm groups decimated the Allies and compare the times it was unable to stop the Allied aircraft.

Minimum in a case like this would mean that there are not enough losses to require different Stratagy or Tactics. BTW I never mentioned "minimum" anything.

I'm not sure which pilot/s said this but the saying was ~ closing my canopy was like closing my coffin and We fly till we die. Those are fatalistic views and the records verified them. The German pilots didn't get to leave combat when they were worn out resulting in 1. losses due to exaustion 2, denied the opportunity to pass their experiance on. The Allies had the luxury to use both. The high personel scores in the German Air Force are often due as much to the fact they were in combat sometimes over 1,000 sorties that's Twenty times the opportunities that AAF pilots had, why wern't they higher if thier skill and aircraft were vastly superior?

As for the Vastly superior Bf-109/Fw-190,s they were shot down in 1:1 combat with Allied aircraft often enough.

Again there is no disgrace here they fought bravely against what ended up as insurmountable odds. but the Facts are the Allied Forces had aircraft of comparable performance, better training and better resources supplying more of everything.

wmaxt

 

[Soren]

The P-51 was designed as a replacement for the P-40 even down to the requirements for the use of the same engine and prop. The merlin and extra fuel came later and worked out exceptionaly well.

It was designed and intended as an escort fighter aswell.

I agree it was no wonder plane but it was every bit as good as the Bf-109 and with a better pilot compettitive with the Fw-190.

As a dogfighter, the P-51 falls awfully short compared to the Bf-109.

This was proven many times in combat.

No, far from it... What was proven was that the P-51's 8-1 ratio in numbres was effective. There's a big difference

 

[wmaxt]

The P-51 was designed as a replacement for the P-40 even down to the requirements for the use of the same engine and prop. The merlin and extra fuel came later and worked out exceptionaly well.

It was designed and intended as an escort fighter aswell.

I agree it was no wonder plane but it was every bit as good as the Bf-109 and with a better pilot compettitive with the Fw-190.

As a dogfighter, the P-51 falls awfully short compared to the Bf-109.

This was proven many times in combat.

No, far from it... What was proven was that the P-51's 8-1 ratio in numbres was effective. There's a big difference

No. the P-40 was never intended to escort and the P-51 was originaly to be P-40s untill NAA convinced them to try a new design. Escort was not contemplated even by the AAF. At that time self escort was the stratagy. I've also never read escort mentioned in reference to the P-51 until the Merlin conversion showed low fuel consumption in early '43. This includes imterviews with the P-51 designers. In fact the A-36/Mustang I version stopped production for two months in early '43 because it was not enough of an improvement over anything else - the Merlin/realization that escort was required saved it.

Numbers, tactics and pilot training/experiance do to. I think the P-51 is way overated (the P-38 is quite a bit better in virtualy every respect) but it could and did hold it's own in combat, with/without numbers, even with the majority of Fw-190 encounters and I consider the Fw-190 quite a bit better than the Bf-109. The 109K was a better match to the P-51 but they were late and few.

wmaxt