The Best Fw-190 Variant...?

[Anonymous]

The V21 had the same rad as the D-9. The D-13 had the other type.

How do you know this. The first Dora's prototypes and I think the first try at production had the segmented ring radiators. They then tried to produce and field these but found they were too expensive to build and imposible to maintain. I doubt the D-13 had the segmented ring radiator, by then they'd given up on it.

Well you can go through StH and count the number of Spit XIVs produced, for I am not.

956 were produced. How many were accepted, delivered, and deployed before VE day I do not know, but 700-750 seems reasonable.

As for you references on Dora production, they are out of date. It was a posted on another board, taken from a German book, pg 438.

Page 438 of what book? That someone posted such info on another board out of an unknown book means exactly what?

The problem is that some people think assignment of werknumbers signifies production. It is clear this is not valid. Then their are acual records of units charged for, but this is not valid either. What counts is units actually accepted, delivered, and deployed.

=S=

Lunatic

 

[Anonymous]

As for you references on Dora production, they are out of date.

Thats probably because they are from History Channel

Bite me Soren!

The only info I quote from THC or TMC are comments from actual WWII pilots and soldiers. I never quote their historian's analysis as it is often flawed.

So now you think we should take your word over an actual Luftwaffe Ace and a Tiger I crewman? Ha ha ha!

 

[Anonymous]

That's total BS. The P-51 was simply a whole lot faster than the Butcher Bird. As long as they stayed fast they had the advantage, and there was no way the FW190A could overcome it.

The P-51 was made to "bounce" the enemy. You're trying to diminsh this by implying that "other than that" the P-51 was inferior is silly. P-51's flew over 500 miles into German held territory and beat the FW's over their own ground. That is the definition of superiority.

And Udet, have you ever actually seen one of these glowing test reports of the TA152? Or have you simply read second and third hand comments about what the test pilots are supposed to have said about it?

I have tried to aquire those test reports, w/o any luck. I even paid for an FIA search for them - no meaningful results were forthcomming.

 

[KraziKanuK]

How do you know this. The first Dora's prototypes and I think the first try at production had the segmented ring radiators. They then tried to produce and field these but found they were too expensive to build and imposible to maintain. I doubt the D-13 had the segmented ring radiator, by then they'd given up on it.

956 were produced. How many were accepted, delivered, and deployed before VE day I do not know, but 700-750 seems reasonable.

Page 438 of what book? That someone posted such info on another board out of an unknown book means exactly what?

The problem is that some people think assignment of werknumbers signifies production. It is clear this is not valid. Then their are acual records of units charged for, but this is not valid either. What counts is units actually accepted, delivered, and deployed.

=S=

Lunatic

You think? Oh well. Got any documantation for proof? III./JG54 never commented on overheating, though it did comment on some oil leakage, when converting to the D-9. Test reports by Rechlin of production D-9s don't mention any cooling or maintainance problems either.

If I knew the name of the book I would have said so. The person who posted the production list is involved with White 1 so there is no reason to doubt the numbers. Focke_Wulf alone had produced 1056 Doras by the end of March 1945. To these you can add those produced by the Consortium and Fiesler. (Genst.Gen.Qu.6 Abt (III C))

BTW, the Fw190A production is 13,291.

There was no WNr listed, at all. In the same vain, 750 Spit XIVs were NOT accepted, deleivered AND deployed.

 

[Soren]

Bite me Soren!

And your saying I can't take a joke ! Hahaha !

So now you think we should take your word over an actual Luftwaffe Ace and a Tiger I crewman? Ha ha ha!

Not at all, thats why I brought up all the quotes from WW2 pilots !

 

[Anonymous]

Who said anything about "cooling problems"? It was just the normal operation of the aircraft. Multiple sources report that both the 190 and the 109 had very short full speed performance limits.

As for the number of Spit XIV's deployed, I can only account for a couple of hundred, so I suspect you are right. However, I still have not seen any source reference for deployment of more than a maximum of about 950 Dora's of all types. "Production" figures don't suffice because this does not account for aircraft destroyed by allied bombing in the factory after having been "completed" or those destroyed in transit. Also, the German's often considered a plane as "produced" when it was still lacking critical components, such as an engine, which was to be installed after delivery. Post-war study of production records also show a fair bit of hanky-panky going on in accounting, especially in the last year of the war.

The most valid measure of quantity is the number of servicable aircraft delivered to squadrons.

One thing is for sure - the Dora's were rare. Most Allied fighter pilots flying in 1944 and 1945 never even saw one. This belies the claim of any 1800 operational Dora's.

=S=

Lunatic

 

[Soren]

The P-51 was made to "bounce" the enemy. You're trying to diminsh this by implying that "other than that" the P-51 was inferior is silly. P-51's flew over 500 miles into German held territory and beat the FW's over their own ground. That is the definition of superiority.

Yeah if that definition includes bouncing helpless planes trying to land or take off, then yeah ! Or backstabbing the FW's while their concentrating on the bombers.

The P-51 wasnt even ONE bit superior to the FW-190, no on the other hand the FW-190 was superior to the P-51 ! Now if you take into considderation the situation the Germans were in by 44-45, then you would realize this !

Once they got their hands on the machine, they found out that the "Dora-Nine", as they called it, was a superb aircraft. It was faster, climbed more rapidly, and handled better than an Anton, and almost certainly the best piston fighter to be fielded in numbers by the Luftwaffe. The Dora-Nine proved to be a nasty handful for American P-51Ds and late-mark RAF Spitfires.

Source: "Focke-Wulf Fw 190" by Malcolm V Lowe

 

[Erich]

indeed the Dora or any of it's variants was a rare commoditiy, the RAF probably saw more in action from JG 2 and JG 26 than anyone.

JG 3 and 4 had theirs on the Ost Front and II./JG 301 on both fronts.

JG 6 fought against the US and were slaughtered

I'll have German source figures later..........

♪♪

 

[Anonymous]

Soren - P-51's always attacked. If those German aircraft were landing or taking off they were attacked. If they were attacking bombers, they were attacked. If they were trying to engage the P-51, they were attacked.

The P-51 was equally as fast as the Dora9, and it could sustain its high speeds much longer. It had better range. On paper the Dora9 had a better rate of climb, but that is decieving as it considers the P-51 climbing with full internal fuel (minus 25 gallons from the rear tank) at Military Power (no WEP climb figures are available), which tends to overstate the Dora climb advantage at the point of combat. But climb rate is really irrelevant, as the P-51's generally started with the alt advantage anyway. The P-51 was superior at all zoom manuvers, the Dora probably had the edge in non-zoom manuvers.

P-51 pilots consistantly report that at high speeds they had no trouble out-turning either the 190 or the 109, though the 190 was not as easy. On the otherhand, 109 and 190 pilots make the same claim - so in the end we must assume they were relatively even in terms of combat manuverability.

And the P-51 had more firepower, usuable at a longer range, and a much better gunsight. On the otherhand, the Dora was more durable.

Overall, they were very well matched opponents.

However, the original comment was w.r.t. the Anton, not the Dora. And in that matchup, the P-51 has most of the advantages.

=S=

Lunatic

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Well every source that I have found says that 674 Doras were built but something like 13000 A were built and I am not sure of the F or the G varients.

RG as for you post about the "extreme high alltitude" label. What makes you think I labeled it that. I never said that. As for the P-51H and the Ta-152H Im sorry but atleast the 152 saw service and as far as I am concerned with everything I have studdied on it and what pilots have said there was nothing finer in the sky then the 152H and nothing could match it. Unless the 51H saw service against it (which it did not) you can not convince me that it was the best thing ever built and that it would outfly a 152H. As for the 51D's and 47's beating the Luftwaffe you are wrong my friend. The Hitler, Goering, and the Luftwaffe beat the Luftwaffe.

 

[cheddar cheese]

As for the 51D's and 47's beating the Luftwaffe you are wrong my friend. The Hitler, Goering, and the Luftwaffe beat the Luftwaffe

The irony being thats probably actually true.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

It is actually.

 

[Anonymous]

Well every source that I have found says that 674 Doras were built but something like 13000 A were built and I am not sure of the F or the G varients.

RG as for you post about the "extreme high alltitude" label. What makes you think I labeled it that. I never said that. As for the P-51H and the Ta-152H Im sorry but atleast the 152 saw service and as far as I am concerned with everything I have studdied on it and what pilots have said there was nothing finer in the sky then the 152H and nothing could match it. Unless the 51H saw service against it (which it did not) you can not convince me that it was the best thing ever built and that it would outfly a 152H. As for the 51D's and 47's beating the Luftwaffe you are wrong my friend. The Hitler, Goering, and the Luftwaffe beat the Luftwaffe.

More P-51H's were available for WWII than TA152's. The fact that Germany was so badly on the ropes that it threw its prototypes into the air as they came off the production line, rather than methodically introducing them into service should not exclude contemporary designs from consideration. Besides, it was you who brought up the P-51H for comparison this time, so your objection is totally without merit on all grounds.

I agree the German high command hurt the Luftwaffe', but the P-47 and P-51 did their part too. It was the ability to put competitive fighters in the air, over Germany, more than anything else that beat the Luftwaffe'.

=S=

Lunatic

 

[KraziKanuK]

Who said anything about "cooling problems"? It was just the normal operation of the aircraft. Multiple sources report that both the 190 and the 109 had very short full speed performance limits.

As for the number of Spit XIV's deployed, I can only account for a couple of hundred, so I suspect you are right. However, I still have not seen any source reference for deployment of more than a maximum of about 950 Dora's of all types. "Production" figures don't suffice because this does not account for aircraft destroyed by allied bombing in the factory after having been "completed" or those destroyed in transit. Also, the German's often considered a plane as "produced" when it was still lacking critical components, such as an engine, which was to be installed after delivery. Post-war study of production records also show a fair bit of hanky-panky going on in accounting, especially in the last year of the war.

The most valid measure of quantity is the number of servicable aircraft delivered to squadrons.

One thing is for sure - the Dora's were rare. Most Allied fighter pilots flying in 1944 and 1945 never even saw one. This belies the claim of any 1800 operational Dora's.

=S=

Lunatic

Your the one who keeps insisting that the cooling system/rad of German a/c was not very efficient. In fact, you are the only source I have seen that states that high speed level flight was only a reality for a very short duration. No documentation from you to back it up your statement, though.

So now you squirm with excuses. From the beginning I said ~1800 produced and you said very much less than that. I never claimed ~1800 'operational' Doras. Doras were not as rare as the P-47M and P-80s. All German fighters were rare from the fall of 1944. There was 1400-1500 servicable in early Jan 1945.

There was 910 Anton 9s produced so looks like people like W Green, of 109 cowl mounted MG151 fame, have their troubles reading.

 

[Anonymous]

Read the Soviet Fighter Tactics manual concerning the 190 and 109 cooling problems. I've posted it before, and it's on RING's website (see my post of that source for data). I've seen comments about limited full speed performance from other sources too, I'll try to locate them and post them for you.

No other prop fighter, before or since used annular radiators on a liquid cooled fighter engine. Tank did so because he had no choice, he had to fit the Jumo into his existing 190 design.

As for the 1400-1500 figure... where do you come up with these numbers from? You keep repeating higher numbers and disputing Green's data, but you still give no source.

=S=

Lunatic

 

[Erich]

the 910 FW 190A-9 figure comes from my quote of the Peter Rodeike Fw 190/Dora/Ta 152 buch, still the classic and the authority on the Fw series.........

 

[Udet]

RG_Lunatic:

It gets to the point when one should say to hell with this.

You have a clear and very massive conflict of interest when debating here. Also you are highly influenced by the propaganda of your country.

You are blidnfolded then uncapable yourself of seeing the whole photograph.



Of course am i trying to diminish the Mustang, placing it where it belongs.

A very fine and capable plane for sure. But it had its limitations, none of which appear to be part of your knowledge, RG.

Unless facing the Butcher at very high altitude, the Mustang is inferior to the Fw190.

A short burst of the Fw190 hitting the P-51 is way more lethal to Mustang, than a Mustang´s short burst hitting the Butcher.

Many many Butcher Bird pilots, even rookie pilots, swallowed the Mustangs.

It is clear everywhere, survability of the P-51 is a midget by the side of the 190´s.

Emil Lang for instance found the P-51s appealing and turned them into Golden VIP clients of his cannons (frequent fryer program members).

Whethere you like it or not, that is how the USAAF and RAF won the air war: by bouncing the German formations climbing to altitude or trying to land short of fuel after the flown sortie.

And even when bounced -numerically surpassed- the German pilots reacted accordingly and still managed to shoot down numbers of bouncers, proving they were not "ill-trained" and that their fighters were in equal terms, if not superior, to their enemy´s.

I ve read lots of books, articles and papers and the USAAF pilots gladly state "we bounced..." like hell, apparently forgetting for one moment, that bouncing does not require the skill a dogfight does, and also that bouncing does not put the aircraft capabilities at full test.

If my enemy is of my same height, weight and muscle mass, is easier for me to knock him out if a approach him from the rear with a baseball bat in my hands while he walks than to place myself right in front of him and challenge him.

Bouncing, whether you like it or not. In the end, it is your own business RG.

You want the whole cake, the typical anomaly observed on individuals suffering the victor´s drunkness syndrome.

"We had better pilots, better training, better tactics, better engines, better ammo, guns, cannons, gunsights, fueselages, intelligence.." that is a pathology.

You are a piece of a megalomaniac aren´t you? )

That your beloved country won is true, but it did not happen the way you were taught.


It also appears you conduct a deliberate avoidance of issues: why do you stick to your vision USAAF pilots did not know of the Doras?

The Ta152s never met USAAF fighters? What of the recorded fact of victories at very low altitude over Yaks during the last weeks of the war?

Well, many of them should be glad they did not meet them in numbers for many more of them would not have survived the war.

 

[KraziKanuK]

Read the Soviet Fighter Tactics manual concerning the 190 and 109 cooling problems. I've posted it before, and it's on RING's website (see my post of that source for data). I've seen comments about limited full speed performance from other sources too, I'll try to locate them and post them for you.

Like you did for that 152 data you were supposed to post.

No other prop fighter, before or since used annular radiators on a liquid cooled fighter engine. Tank did so because he had no choice, he had to fit the Jumo into his existing 190 design.

Sure he had a choice, like putting it under the nose like the P-40/ Typhoon/Tempest.

As for the 1400-1500 figure... where do you come up with these numbers from? You keep repeating higher numbers and disputing Green's data, but you still give no source.

Do you have some troubles? What the 1400-1500 figures are for are all LW fighters. (A. Price) For someone who claims to be so knowledgable, you do have a lack of basics.

 

[KraziKanuK]

On the 190, from Rings site:

"It can only work at full throttle for no more than 1 minute."

Yes and this is for early versions of the A @ 1.42. Later models could operate at 1.65 for extended periods of time.

Simular for the 109.

You really should expand your knowledge base of German fighters.

To get you started, here is one on the 109F-4, http://www.beim-zeugmeister.de/zeugmeister/index.php?id=12&L=1

 

[Anonymous]

RG_Lunatic:

It gets to the point when one should say to hell with this.

You have a clear and very massive conflict of interest when debating here. Also you are highly influenced by the propaganda of your country.

Hmmm... I see it the other way. You and a few others keep trying to tout about how great German technology was. It had its strong points and its weak points, but for the most part it was inferior to Allied technology. Some German technology was more advanced, but when looking at the big picture, in the most important technologies such as radar, industrial process technology, and of course nuclear physics, the Allies had the significant advantage. But more than that, the German's just didn't seem to understand that at some point you have to stop striving for the ultimate in quality and focus on quantity and servicability - two things that never sunk into Germany's WWII thinking.

You are blidnfolded then uncapable yourself of seeing the whole photograph.

No, you sit right up next to the part of the photo you like and think you are seeing the whole thing when you're not!

Of course am i trying to diminish the Mustang, placing it where it belongs.

No, you are trying to elevate German aircraft to a stature they did not attain.

A very fine and capable plane for sure. But it had its limitations, none of which appear to be part of your knowledge, RG.

Sure I do. But it is all relative.

Unless facing the Butcher at very high altitude, the Mustang is inferior to the Fw190.

Hmmm really... Well, how about speed?

(for full scale A-8 doc and P-51B test doc click here)

As you can see the P-51B was faster than the FW190A-8 at all altitudes. Between 7000 and 16000 feet it is about 28 mph faster, then for a brief span between 18000 and 22000 the advantage drops to about 20 mph, and above 22000 feet the P-51 is so much faster there is really no comparison. The P-51D was about 6 mph slower than the B, but its peak performance altitudes were lower due to a change in the first stage blower gearing, so its performance in the relevant altitude bands was about as advantagous over the A-8 as the B model.

For climb rate, the A-8 is taking about 40-50 seconds longer than the P-51B to reach 20000 feet (about the same as the P-51D when fully loaded with fuel). If you remove the outer guns the climb rate would be slightly better, but not much (2 x MK108 instead of MG151/20's increase climb time to 8000m by just 12 seconds).

So where is this supposed superiority?

A short burst of the Fw190 hitting the P-51 is way more lethal to Mustang, than a Mustang´s short burst hitting the Butcher.

Well sure. If the cannon hit. But lets look at it realistically. The Anton armed with cannon in the outer panels was not much of a dogfighter, roll rate and turn rate were compromised. For those with only the two inner MG151/20's, the volume of fire is horrible by comparison:

2 x MG13 13mm's firing at 840 rpm sync'd = 1680 rpm = 28 rps.

2 x MG151/20 20mm's firing at 505 rpm sync'd = 1010 rpm = 17 rps

6 x .50 BMG's firing at 800 rpm = 4800 rpm = 80 rps.

The 13mm were weak, the 20mm fired slowly when sync'd through the prop. The total volume of fire was bad and the effective volume of fire was very bad. The P-51 had almost twice the volume of fire, and more than four times the volume of fire as compared to the 20mm.

And the .50's had much much better ballistics. P-51's using the K-14 gunsight could score on FW's at beyond 500 meters, where the FW max effective range was more like 200 meters. So sure, it took more .50 hits to finish off a FW than 20mm hits vs. the P-51, but they were much much easier to score. And once the FW had taken a few hits, it was probably going to be pretty easy to score more and finish it off.

Many many Butcher Bird pilots, even rookie pilots, swallowed the Mustangs.

And visa versa. Didn't Yeager bag a few FW's on his seventh combat sortie?

It is clear everywhere, survability of the P-51 is a midget by the side of the 190´s.

Yes, the P-51 was more vulnerable to enemy fire than the FW's. On the otherhand the P-47 was much more survivable than the FW.

Whethere you like it or not, that is how the USAAF and RAF won the air war: by bouncing the German formations climbing to altitude or trying to land short of fuel after the flown sortie.

The USAAF attacked the German fighters where and when they could be found. They did not turn and run, even from larger formations of fighters that had altitude on them, when they should have.

And by the same token I could point out that many German kills were scored against USAAF fighters that were low on fuel and ammo and headed home.

And the Luftwaffe' fighter pilots had the advantage of being directed to the US fighters (and bombers) by radar and ground spotters.

And even when bounced -numerically surpassed- the German pilots reacted accordingly and still managed to shoot down numbers of bouncers, proving they were not "ill-trained" and that their fighters were in equal terms, if not superior, to their enemy´s.

But in 1944 the Luftwaffe' outnumbered the P-51's, and they still got torn to shreads. During "Big Week", the Luftwaffe' was crushed by the USAAF and the USAAF did not have numerical superiority of fighters.

And I never said the Luftwaffe' pilots were ill trained, except perhaps at the very end of the war after all the vetrans had been killed off.

I ve read lots of books, articles and papers and the USAAF pilots gladly state "we bounced..." like hell, apparently forgetting for one moment, that bouncing does not require the skill a dogfight does, and also that bouncing does not put the aircraft capabilities at full test.

If my enemy is of my same height, weight and muscle mass, is easier for me to knock him out if a approach him from the rear with a baseball bat in my hands while he walks than to place myself right in front of him and challenge him.

Bouncing, whether you like it or not. In the end, it is your own business RG.

And German pilots, especially Galland, were known to pass by attacking enemy fighters which spotted him, even if he had the advantage in altitude and position. The German's were the masters of bouncing the enemy - that's how most of the Experten got to be Experten!

You want the whole cake, the typical anomaly observed on individuals suffering the victor´s drunkness syndrome.

"We had better pilots, better training, better tactics, better engines, better ammo, guns, cannons, gunsights, fueselages, intelligence.." that is a pathology.

You are a piece of a megalomaniac aren´t you? )

I never said all of these things. All I've said is the P-51 was more than a match for the Anton and the approximate equal of the Dora9.

But many of the things you list are true. The USA/British did have the better gunsights, did have better training for new pilots, and certainly did have better inteligence. About these things there is really no question.

You have it backwards, you are suffering from vanquished syndrome. "Our leadership was bad", "We didn't have any fuel", "We were outnumbered", etc..., etc..., excuse, excuse, excuse.

The only way you can bolster your ego is to try to claim the German's were superior engineers and scientists. Well, I have two words to say to that - "ATOMIC BOMB"

It also appears you conduct a deliberate avoidance of issues: why do you stick to your vision USAAF pilots did not know of the Doras?

I didn't say that. Some reports of the "long nosed FW" were indeed made. But most USAAF fighter pilots in the ETO in late 1944 and 1945 never saw one.

The Ta152s never met USAAF fighters? What of the recorded fact of victories at very low altitude over Yaks during the last weeks of the war?

And just when did USAAF pilots fly Yaks?

Well, many of them should be glad they did not meet them in numbers for many more of them would not have survived the war.

The Ta152, just like almost all the German late-war designs, was self defeating. The Germans just "lost the plot". The didn't need the between 35 and 75 Ta152's that came out of over 2 years of design effort and substantial retooling, they needed a lot more Dora9's and 109G/K's.

You just don't get it. Sure the German's deployed a few very good weapons systems late in the war. So what? They were deployed in such miniscule numbers they were irrelevant. And the USA certianly had newer and better planes ready to go in small quantities at the same time, but unlike Germany we didn't throw them into the meat grinder as soon as they came off the production line. By about Fall of 1944 it was pretty clear Germany was beaten and no new technologies were deployed against it. Certainly there were more P-51H's ready to go in April 1945 than the sum of all TA production. It was just not worth it to deploy them along with the required logistics given that Germany was no longer a contender anyway.

The German's were obsessed with the idea that they would build tanks and aircraft that were so good that even a few of them would defeat the masses of only slightly inferior enemy weapons. The height of Ego, that they would use their superior intelects to make up for their inferior focus.

As for your comment about had their been more Ta152's - that would have required the war to last longer. The longer the war lasted, the worse things would have become for the Germans. For every additional pilot killed by a Ta152 hundreds more Germans would have died from Allied bombing. Is that what you wish had happened?

And on the off chance that the Germans had managed to start to stage some kind of a late-war comeback...

... it would have been even worse.

=S=

Lunatic