Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
I understand that many of the olders members have much more years of research , Mr Drgondog for example , as they are much older than the younger members, and their opinion is more important but let us the youngers too have an opinion. We too spend A LOT of money in books- ask my angry fiance.
1)German controllers during the deep penetration missions had to deal with a lot of feints attacks , bombers courses changes , weather limitations over german airfields, diferent flight performances of various types of intercepting fighters. So never did the defending fighters attacked at once. p51 faced them in turns.
4) Some people insist not to consider the bombers part of the air superiority. Firstly bombers were credited with douzens of german fighters after each missions according to western mythology. Secondly if the bombers were not there P51s would have suffered the fate of the Spitfires over France in 1941/42.
I understand that many of the olders members have much more years of research , Mr Drgondog for example , as they are much older than the younger members, and their opinion is more important but let us the youngers too have an opinion. We too spend A LOT of money in books- ask my angry fiance.
1)German controllers during the deep penetration missions had to deal with a lot of feints attacks , bombers courses changes , weather limitations over german airfields, diferent flight performances of various types of intercepting fighters.
True
So never did the defending fighters attacked at once. p51 faced them in turns.
Definitely not true - particularly for 1st half of 1944 when it was rare for two long range escort groups to even see another one (USAAF P-38/51 Group). Look to Feb 20 South of Hannover, March 6, 1944 around Berlin, March 8 Berlin to Magdeburg, March 18 around Ulm/Augsburg or Mar 29 near Brunswick/Celle, April 8 Celle/Gifhornem or May12 (Rall) near Frankfurt, June 20 near Rugen Islands, July 7 near Halle/Bernburg, - In every case there were at least 2 Gruppe's concentrated in a small airspace defended by no more than one FG of Mustangs
2) The MISSION PROFILE of german fighters was to engage the bombers or face execution so always P51s entered the fight with great altitude advantage. Even 8 P51s versus 30 Fw190, is not equal if p51 are 3000ft higher and the Fw 190s are concentrated to attack the bombers . And one bounce is enough to destroy the attack as every german fighter dived away.It took a lot of time to reorganize a gruppe even in the days of unescorted raids. And only massive attacks were effective.
And 'massive attacks, developed in 1943 were the rule in 1944... hence the opportunity to engage a bomber box combined with fighter escort of one squadron to one Group to defend locally.
The LW developed tactics to place Me 109G-6s at 33000+ plus as high cover escort to Fw 190 forces - and initiated tactics where the Fw 190s entered combat from 28-29000 feet to avoid having an inferior position to the Mustangs which were frequently escorting from 25-28000 feet (depending on whether they were covering B-24s or B-17s. Gunther Rall gives an excellent account of his battles with the 56th FG on May 12.
Fighter pilots resort to attacks from high by climbing and meeting their foe head on - at least US pilots did. Nor did US pilots commonly use a Split-S and dive when confronted by larger numbers from high altitude. The reverse was commonly true for the LW counterparts - who quickly lost the initiative and tried tactics that worked against Spitfires and P-38s but not P-51s or P-47s.
3) German controllers were bad . Never warned german leader formation of approaching alleid fighters . No equal combat took place.
The skills of the Contollers varied as much as the skills of the Fighter leaders - you cannot say that all were bad or all were good. What is your definition of 'equal'? When superior numbers of German fighter constantly dove away from US fighters - they gave awy the initiave and became the hunted, even if attacked by small numbers of American fighters.
Most german formations were attacked from higher altitude approachingbombers or during their attacks . in such conditions not even experience could help. Galland of II/JG26 deid that way 17/8/43 ,Egon Mayers February 44, Philip fall 43 ( excuse me, i write from memory) all the same way , attacked from above without warning during their attacks in bomber formations.
Egon Mayer was killed March 2nd 1944 when he was attacked head on se Charleroiand following the merge he continued toward Fumay. Walter Gresham who no kills chased him, with his two remaining flight members, and shot him down somewhere past Fumay. His wingmen shot down Mayer's wingman. The combat film shows the Fw 190 believed to be Mayer's hit near the 20mm ammo in the left wing blowing off half the wing. Mayer's wingman described the chase and the hit which agrees the Report and film.
In some cases, particularly against P-47s during 1943 and early 1944 - the 47s entered escort space at 30,000 feet where their performance was superior. In early 1944 forward, the escorting fighters were lightnings and Mustangs - and the P-38 G and early J had issues with low ETO temperatures and stayed in the 26,000 foot range - losing altitude initiative to the LW.
As noted above Egon Mayer was shot down in a 3:2 fight with 358FS/355FG
4) Some people insist not to consider the bombers part of the air superiority. Firstly bombers were credited with douzens of german fighters after each missions according to western mythology. Secondly if the bombers were not there P51s would have suffered the fate of the Spitfires over France in 1941/42.
If the German fighters chose to not attack the bombers which will never manuever to attack the fighter when in formation, the initiative belongs to the German fighter leader to attack bomber or fighter escort.
You noted that bomber claims were hugely overstated - true. LW claims as represented in Tony Woods list are consistently ~2:1 when comparing actual 8th AF losses, but I do not know whether that recording experience was relevant only to the battles over Germany. The 8th BC probably averaged 10:1 claim to actual and 8th FC probably overclaimed 10-15%
Given that the Luftwaffe NEVER shot down more than 9 of the USAAF opponent in the ETO (4th FG - August 18, 1944 near Beauvais and Les Andylis for credits of 8 German fighters) it would be hard for you to draw an illustrative example where the LW could punish the P-51s "like Spitfires over France 1941/42" - If you have examples please trot them out and compare against the whippings for each of the missions I named above?
5) Escort fighters were never attacked . It was not nessecary to score kills. Just force them to jettion early the drop tanks and disrupt their randevous programme. It was proposed but was rejected.
Would have helped as a consistent tactic but there are many examples of LW attacking the bombers early near the German border and the tanks were dropped always - so the effect was the same. That would frequently mean that the squadron which dropped its tanks could not fly say to Berlin for that mission but the other two that were not engaged were unaffected.
6) Several of the mentioned units did fought in areas that could not be reached by P47s/ Spitfires but had to take off from airfields within range of medium bombers and sometimes short range fighters.
Most of LuftFlotte Reich were out of range of all fighters except the Mustang and P-38 until after the Invasion... the random odd Mark II Mustang and occasional Intruder Mossies were the exception.
7)bmw 801 was useless at altitude (irrelevant!)
In my country there is a moto. The best way to lei is using the numbers. We all do it more or less. But to claim that LW had numerical superiority ?!?!
Just my opininon , i may be wrong.
Hi and welcome Jim.
What was the fate of the Spitfires over France in 1941-2? Much is made about the losses they sustained, and in the latter half of 1941, it really did get quite bad. However this is to overlook the conditions that they were forced to fight under.
I will acknowledge that my position is disputed, but evidence to disprove what I support is yet to be posted. In a related thread, I have posted that the LW took heavy losses up to June 1941, when its bombers were withdrawn. Thereafter the balance of losses tipped in favour of the LW, and remained in favour of the LW throughout 1942, but was less one sided. Plus these Allied losses achieved something, ultimately the LW losses only weakened their defences.
Beginning in April 1941, anbd continuing right through to the end of 1942, the RAF began a program of gaining the upper hand in Western European skies. This followed a planned deliberate and staged program. It began by denying access to the LW to British skies. This had been achieved by the beginning of June (well apart from some minor nuisance raids). It also included denying the Germans the ability to interfere with channel maritime traffic. This was achieved also by mid 1941 (again, some nuisance raids are an exception). Then it proceeded to deny the germans control of French airspace close to the channel. This was a much longer and more difficult process. Although the German bombers were quickly pulled away from the Coast, German fighters simply refused to come up unless they could attack from a position of numerical and tactical advantage. The RAF was forced to attack at known disadvantage in order to entice the LW into the fight. Results were often against the RAF as a result, but strategically this was still a victory. Gradually German losses mounted, less and less were they able to come up and defeat the British sweeps. Last big Hurrah for the LW along the channel was Dieppe, and this was not quite the one sided affair it is often made out to be.
By the time all this had ended, RAF was left in control of channel, British airspace, French coast....everything they had set out to do in other words. it was a very hard fought for set of preconditions that made cross channel invasion a possibility as early as 1942. Germans came away from this long, unsung series of clashes with a big material victory, but had lost all the key objectives that caused those clashes.
Plus, I cannot make the connection between this fight, and a possible fight between Mustangs and the LW.
War is a very sad story.
Also notable is that the Germans picked up the H2X frequencies and used them as target ranging for flak - which was very accurate and effective.
Freeman's Mighty Eighth War Diary - I would have to look up mission but believe Stettin/Posnan in summer of 44
I would like to support Parsifals comment about having control of the air. I have a copy of No 2 Group (which I would recomend to anyone) and what I didn't expect were the number of raids which resulted in few or even no losses to German fighters, even using the Ventura which wasn't liked by the Group.
Its not quite true to say that No2 Group could bomb at will but they did have a lot of flexibility and freedom.
Mr Drgondog
P51s would have suffered without the bombers simply because they would be the target and LW would choose how and when to engange them. In equal combat P51 is not superior to the Bf109 with MW50
4) Some people insist not to consider the bombers part of the air superiority. Firstly bombers were credited with douzens of german fighters after each missions according to western mythology. Secondly if the bombers were not there P51s would have suffered the fate of the Spitfires over France in 1941/42.
Jim, you are kind of being ganged up on but I must comment on your statements regarding the P-51 including the one above and this one.
While there is a general consensus and, good reason to believe, that the P-51 is overrated as the best fighter of the war, there also tends to a belief that the only reason the P-51 was successful was because of its range and quantity. This opinion does not hold up to scrutiny. When compared at equivalent fighter weights, the P-51B with the -7 engine and pulling 67" Hg boost (late '43 to May '44) was faster than any Bf-109F or G from SL to ceiling, often significantly so. This includes the Bf-109G -14 with both the ASM and AM engines using MW50. In climb the P-51B was generally superior to the F and roughly equivalent to the G. Against the later model Bf-109G-14 with MW-50, the P-51B had slightly less climb capability up to about 20k ft where it started to perform better than its rivals. Post May, 1944, with higher octane fuel, the P-51B /D, pulling 75" boost, was significantly superior in speed averaging maybe 30-40 mph faster to any model Bf-109G from SL to ceiling. In climb, the P-51B has the advantage from SL to ceiling of all Bf G models. The P-51D is at a slight disadvantage to the G-14 up to about 15k ft. where it starts to perform better. In general, the P-51 will out dive the Bf models and roll better. Turning is competitive and acceleration favors the Bf. Endurance easily falls to the Mustang. The only Bf model that was competitive to the P-51B/D is the K, and it is only roughly equal in performance to the P-51B with 75" boost.
I think your statement that the P-51 is not superior to the Bf-109 with MW50 is quite debatable since the P-51 is faster, generally climbs better, dives better, rolls better, and only gives up a few areas including acceleration. And can do this while running the Bf out of fuel, shooting it down on landing and flying home several hours. In my opinion, the P-51 is the better performer against any contemporary Bf-109 and the post May, "44 version is overpoweringly better than any Bf model except the K.
This has already been disproven, right? According to DerAdler, the Naval version was the Bf-109T, which used the conventional Bf-109 gear, which was strengthened, not the revised swing shown on the V-31.