- Thread starter
- #81
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
The Spitfire Mk.XIV if its for country defense, and the P-51 if it's for escort duties.
Whenever a "Dora" was in the proximity, the escorting P-51's should be very careful not to attract attention ! If seen the P-51 could forget all about dogfighting the "Dora", as the "Dora" was superior in every aspect of flight except diving !
The average P-51B wasn't much faster above 20kft Davparlr, and maneuverability still wasn't as good as that of the Dora. The fw-190Dora-9 held clear advantages in speed, climb rate maneuverability up to 25 kft, after which the P-51B was slightly faster and started climbing faster as-well. However caliming it was no contest is wrong, as proven during actual dogfights at bomber alts where the Dora's were causing the escorts some real trouble.
Sadly for the Germans there were never enough Dora-9's to go around and they were always grossly outnumbered by the Allied escorts.
The real champ at all alts was the Dora-13 which was superior to any Allied fighter in service from SL and up.
But are they cross-checked with German losses?The Dora never had enough numbers to do any damage, and yes they were an equal to the 51. Having said that, 8th AF pilots chased them and shot them down with the same entusiasm as the Anton.
This was all about relatively equivalent aircraft and inferior pilots, The 355th, which only number five in air to air awards for 8th AF, lost one shot down and one hitting the ground chasing a Dora for 9 awarded. This was actually a lower air ratio than against the 262.
But are they cross-checked with German losses?
I'm sure by the time the Dora arrived in any relevant numbers it simply was too late to get the recognition it might have gained if available in late '43 or early '44. It's funny though how it is seen as the ultimate German piston fighter in modern public opinion. In the end it only equalized the advantage the Allies had gained with the P-51. Back in its best days the Anton did far better than the Dora. Because it gave a performance advantage and didn't just equalize one.
The average P-51B wasn't much faster above 20kft Davparlr, and maneuverability still wasn't as good as that of the Dora. The fw-190Dora-9 held clear advantages in speed, climb rate maneuverability up to 25 kft,
However caliming it was no contest is wrong,
Their best use would have been for protecting the Me-262s, more of which were really needed by the Luftwaffe.Sadly for the Germans there were never enough Dora-9's to go around and they were always grossly outnumbered by the Allied escorts.
The Dora-13 looked like an impressive aircraft, out performing the Ta-152H up to 37k. It makes one wonder why they spent resources on the Ta-152H when there was no threats up there. I've commented on this before. It still would have been outperformed by the P-51H up to 25k, which, by the way, was in service, as was the Tempest II, which would have outperformed the Dora-13 to 20k.The real champ at all alts was the Dora-13 which was superior to any Allied fighter in service from SL and up.
The Dora-9 was faster than the Allied fighters at low to medium alts, climbed faster
Sadly for the Germans however there were never enough proper trained pilots, fuel or Dora's to allow it to have any significant impact.
We had this a couple of times now and there is no "truth" in neither what you or Soren say, because it's all just seculation. Besides that, the Tempest II never seeing any action was due to a pretty messed up production planning not because it wasn't needed. It also makes more sense to evaluate the Dora vs. the P-51 D because the transition had progressed well when the Dora arrived in numbers and I highly doubt the USAAF would've ever switched back because of the B's small performance advantage.The truth is that by fall, 1944, the Allies considered that the war in Europe could be won with the aircraft on hand and did not pursue advanced aircraft, except for performance evaluation like the P-80, in the theater. Had the threat changed, this would have changed.
We had this a couple of times now and there is no "truth" in neither what you or Soren say, because it's all just seculation. Besides that, the Tempest II never seeing any action was due to a pretty messed up production planning not because it wasn't needed. It also makes more sense to evaluate the Dora vs. the P-51 D because the transition had progressed well when the Dora arrived in numbers and I highly doubt the USAAF would've ever switched back because of the B's small performance advantage.
I think the "had this happened had that happened" game has been played to death. Let's focus on the things that actually fought.
I know but just because the B and C had some better performance figures doesn't make them the overall better planes and I think the D would be a better comparison to the Dora.
For a similar case: Some of the early 109 Gs also had better performance than the G-6 and were used for a long time after the latter had been introduced, still it makes more sense to take the G-6 if you want to compare '43 fighter aircraft.