I have heavier weight for the P-47 and lighter for the Bf (it depends on model and source I guess).You are comparing WEP which was 5 min power. '
I always use max power available to the pilot for comparison as explained later. If the value used for the Bf-109 is not the max power available, please let me know.
The Bf109G/AS was available in 1st half 44.
but in what quantity
And you only look at 15.000ft and above? Hmmm why would you limit the comparison there?
Because that is where the bombers were and where the Germans had to operate at to affect the bomber offensive. On the Western front, this is where the air war would be won or lost, not at low altitude as was the Eastern front. Why would you only want to look at just low altitude?
Climb is not trickier check a table for the P-47 it was a horrible climber.
trickier only that the P-47 power advantage doesn't transfer into climb superiority. However, it is not a dog. The P-47D-25 climb performance at these altitudes are superior to the Fw-190A, similar to the Fw-190D-9 and the Bf-109, but noticeably less than the Bf-109K
My point being that you can't just grab some stats keep the ones you like post them online and show that one aircraft or another ''rocked''.
I choose to compare aircraft at best rated hp because this is what the pilots used when they needed it. Whenever combat reports include power settings your read statements that indicated they went full bore, throttle full forward, I was pulling more than 75", etc. Also, I select fuel quantities that are on a more even levels just in order to compare aircraft at similar load factors. As far as altitude goes I usually go from SL to 35k, but in this case, I wanted to emphasis that were it mattered, American aircraft was not constrained by load factors.
All aircraft had their good and bad points and their best altitudes.US aircraft were heavy because they needed to be ( more fuel) this affected acceleration and climb rate.However thanks to their supercharger they had superior energy at higher altitudes.For these reasons they would not be a good choice for Germany or the SU ,since they used their aircraft in lower altitudes.
A good generalized point.
Also the weight of the P-47 does not agree with what i have seen in flight sims and wikipedia (14.500-17.000 loaded).
Internal fuel for the P-47 goes from a design load of 205 gallons to a full internal load of 370 gallons. The 14,500 lbs represent a P-47D-25 with full internal fuel, extra water and oil, on departure for a long escort or strike mission. The Bf-109 carries about 106 gallons. Comparing a Bf-109 with106gallons of fuel to a fully loaded P-47, with 379 gallons of fuel does not seem useful in understanding the full performance of the airframe.
Your weight of the Bf is the one of K4 that is the heaviest variant built.Strange that both differences point to one direction.I think you have taken the performance of the Bf109G6 and divided by the weight of the K4 take a look at the DB605DB/DC with MW-50 .
After checking Kurfurst, which I can't believe I didn't do, I agree with you. Weight he shows is about 3400kg or 7495 lbs. Using theDB605 DB power of 1600 hp at 6000 m, around 20k ft, the load factor is an impressive 4.7, better than even the mighty P-47M. However, it might drop off quickly from there. The Bf-109K was a real hot rod.
I've used Kurfust's site for the Bf data plus what he has posted here .Flight sims have an actual paying audience plus they have to create a whole physics engine so they definitely try to get the most accurate data .If you look at their forums you'll see that many people complain about some performance differences and the producers come in and address those problems.If you're asking me if it's a better source than MW site the answer is yes with a capital Y.WW2 aircraft didn't run on 10% fuel with engine at 110% ,that's not realistic.
You won't get much support from this site on a comment like this. There are just too many members with real flight time and who are familiar with the efforts and risks of simulating aircraft performance. If I were to categorize an aircraft performance to music recordings, I would say a aircraft is an LP (vinyl) in that it is full analog. A simulator developed by a subcontractor would be maybe an MP3 at a 128 kbps, after millions of dollars spent on development and special hardware. I would be surprised if video games would make the 64 kbps level. But this is my opinion. Any other opinions?