What Criteria should be used for determining the best land based piston fighter

[Lighthunmust]

I agree, and that is why I asked.

I knew you did. I was just elaborating on your point. It would great for a Moderator, pilot, and military crew chief to weigh in with their criteria and detailed explanation of their choice. How about it?

Off topic. Have you seen the simulation running today on CNN of the Air France crash? What a nightmare for an air crew poorly trained for this event. The big question: why didn't they recognize the stall and drop the nose? I wonder how aware the passengers were of something very wrong. Some reports are that they would be aware of it.

 

[jim]

Air france accident appears to be very tragic and very embarassing. With full respect to the crew, i feel that-sometimes- commercial pilots in their high tech ,everything automatic comfortable cocpits , eventually lose the "feeling" of flying , they transform from pilots to train drivers . Their world is the colour tft screens , and the buttons . Simulators are good, training is good, but perhaps from time to time should practise basic flying in low tech aircrafts

Ps if such accidents happen to modern fully equiped planes, i can not speculate what accidents rates sufferd the poorly equiped russian fighters in the russian winters

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

I knew you did. I was just elaborating on your point. It would great for a Moderator, pilot, and military crew chief to weigh in with their criteria and detailed explanation of their choice. How about it?

I was never a pilot in the military, only a UH-60 crew chief.

As for the topic of the thread, I have not decided on any criteria as of this time. I have however enjoyed reading the thread. I will eventually chime in with my thoughts however, after I have thought about it some more.

 

[davparlr]

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?

 

[pbfoot]

A question from a "dummy" are these flight test results taking into account all the variables that affect flight such as temp, humidity etc?
Also as mentioned in other threads is fit and finish of the aircraft was it polished or painted. there are so many variables I find it hard to believe a Russian/LW/RAF/ USAAF test results would concur with other as they are all using different aircraft with different engines with different hours

 

[Lighthunmust]

I was never a pilot in the military, only a UH-60 crew chief.

As for the topic of the thread, I have not decided on any criteria as of this time. I have however enjoyed reading the thread. I will eventually chime in with my thoughts however, after I have thought about it some more.

Some how I got the impression you also had a license or were working on the hours to get one.

I took a few rides on the crashhawk in the 80's.

Glad your enjoying the thread and really appreciate the input.

Great post davparir!

A question from a "dummy" are these flight test results taking into account all the variables that affect flight such as temp, humidity etc?
Also as mentioned in other threads is fit and finish of the aircraft was it polished or painted. there are so many variables I find it hard to believe a Russian/LW/RAF/ USAAF test results would concur with other as they are all using different aircraft with different engines with different hours

This is so true. Even today when any type of equipment is tested, the variation in test parameters between manufacturers in the same country sometimes makes comparison very difficult.

Air france accident appears to be very tragic and very embarassing. With full respect to the crew, i feel that-sometimes- commercial pilots in their high tech ,everything automatic comfortable cocpits , eventually lose the "feeling" of flying , they transform from pilots to train drivers . Their world is the colour tft screens , and the buttons . Simulators are good, training is good, but perhaps from time to time should practise basic flying in low tech aircrafts

Ps if such accidents happen to modern fully equiped planes, i can not speculate what accidents rates sufferd the poorly equiped russian fighters in the russian winters

Bold added for emphasis by Lighthunmust

This situation you bring up supports the high priority for better than average inherent crew survival qualities to be built into a fighter, without them I do not see how a fighter could be considered the best. Wartime pilots crash alot, and are more often targets than shooters.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Some how I got the impression you also had a license or were working on the hours to get one.

I took a few rides on the crashhawk in the 80's.

I unfortunately have not done any private flying in years...

The "Crashhawk" is a great aircraft. I really miss her, but that unfortunately does not pertain this topic...

 

[Lighthunmust]

I unfortunately have not done any private flying in years...

The "Crashhawk" is a great aircraft. I really miss her, but that unfortunately does not pertain this topic...

It most certainly is great. I had a Blackhawk crew chief as friend when I was at Bragg in the 80's and he liked to refer to it as such. They were still working out the "bugs" back then and there was fond sentiment for the Huey. Same with me regarding the private flying.

 

[Lighthunmust]

That's what i have been saying all along.

@Lighthunmust : I have no problem admitting the superiority of the P-47 and P-51 in high altitude against the standard Bf109 and Fw190.Against the Bf AS the difference is very small and in the field it would not be noticed.But neither do I forget what happens at lower altitudes.If the American aircraft were given to Germany they would not do well simple as that.

Set your TiVo to TCM HD for Sunday 1:00AM MST so you can see Germany using P-51s to shoot down P-47s.

 

[ctrian]

@davpalr : i generally agree with what you wrote ,note that people were quick to attack me but noone bothered to actually check your data.I don't think you made a deliberate mistake but i will tell you again that WEP is not the best way to compare power.Best if you use combat.Now you mentioned numbers. For the Bf109AS in this or another forum someone posted the number of new and converted AS in 1st half '44 as 846.That's not an insignificant number.However the numerical difference between Allies and Luftwaffe was so great that even if ALL Bf 's were of the AS type it would make no difference .The air war was pure attrition.
For the P-47 -Bf weights: maybe then we need to see what the weight would be at the point of battle.Both aircraft would have burned a lot of fuel.
For sims: I never suggested that someone limit himself to only one source.But these people have a financial reason to use the most accurate data available and their audience demands it.

 

[ctrian]

Set your TiVo to TCM HD for Sunday 1:00AM MST so you can see Germany using P-51s to shoot down P-47s.

Huh?

 

[Njaco]

For sims: I never suggested that someone limit himself to only one source.But these people have a financial reason to use the most accurate data available and their audience demands it.

I would suggest that is not the best criteria for determining accurate data. The truth would be much better.

 

[Lighthunmust]

Huh?

The movie "Fighter Squadron" will be shown on Turner Classics Movie channel. It was filmed right after the war. There were lots of P-47s and P-51s in ANG units. The movie uses P-47s for the Americans and P-51s to represent German fighters. It is pretty corny, but has great shots, no pun intended, of the aircraft.

 

[ctrian]

I would suggest that is not the best criteria for determining accurate data. The truth would be much better.

What is the truth?

@Lighthunmust : Ehm you know that we don't have that channel in Greece right?

 

[Njaco]

Thats what research and good sources are for. Its just my opinion but money shouldn't be an incentive for research. And Flight Sim sites - again, in my opinion - are not the place to look for data.

Lighting - can you list what criteria so far (that everyone has agreed) that would be acceptable? Don't want to add something already posted.

 

[ctrian]

Thats what research and good sources are for. Its just my opinion but money shouldn't be an incentive for research. And Flight Sim sites - again, in my opinion - are not the place to look for data.

Lighting - can you list what criteria so far (that everyone has agreed) that would be acceptable? Don't want to add something already posted.

So you think people who create a whole physics engine and have to feed it with data ''make'' up the numbers? and their customers some of whom have whole rooms filled with wartime reports say nothing? I don't agree .If you find something wrong with the data they have go post in their forum and the mod will check it.It doesn't get more ''open'' than that.

 

[fastmongrel]

Sims are not real life they are a bunch of 1s and 0s. I used to race motorbikes and rally cars. While I was never very succesful I did put a lot of laps on various tracks throughout the Britain, Ireland and the Isle of Man so I do know a bit about racing motorbikes and cars (and crashing them but we wont go there )

I have played on motorbike racing, rallying, formula 1 and CART sims and they are not like it really is anyone who thinks they can practise and then go out and race in real life is in for a really short painful sharp shock. Sim racing vehicles dont handle like the real life they dont respond to the throttle like real life and you cant red line an engine for 30 mins without it going bang.

Sims are just that a simulation not real.

 

[davparlr]

@davpalr : i generally agree with what you wrote ,note that people were quick to attack me but noone bothered to actually check your data.I don't think you made a deliberate mistake but i will tell you again that WEP is not the best way to compare power.Best if you use combat.

I will have to disagree with you on this. Less that max power may be what you would want to use for maneuvering for combat, but when it comes to yanking and banking and the bullets flying are not virtual, all the power you can get is life or death to you and victory or defeat in combat.

Now you mentioned numbers. For the Bf109AS in this or another forum someone posted the number of new and converted AS in 1st half '44 as 846.That's not an insignificant number.

Please clarify this statement. Is 846 an airspeed number of some sort?

However the numerical difference between Allies and Luftwaffe was so great that even if ALL Bf 's were of the AS type it would make no difference .The air war was pure attrition.

An undeniably true statement, but to dismiss allied aircraft as being inferior to German aircraft and won only because of numbers is incorrect. Except for the jet, all the advanced German propeller driven aircraft could be matched by Allied aircraft of equal or better performance, except maybe the Ta-152H at altitudes above 35k ft. But then I don't thing nitrous was particularly rocket science.

For the P-47 -Bf weights: maybe then we need to see what the weight would be at the point of battle.Both aircraft would have burned a lot of fuel.

This is a valid point and one I have pondered for quite a while. In my mind there are only two useful comparisons between aircraft. One, which I did above, is to compare the aircraft under similar load levels, which provides capability of the aircraft design itself. This is certainly the easiest do and certainly tends to represent parity of combat in some scenario, though maybe fleeting or rare, of battle. The one you describe is the conditions likely at the onset of battle. This one is quite variable and tends to take a lot of work. Just looking at the P-47D-25. If we took it at a long distance escort and combat starts right after external tank jettison, then the combat weight of the P-47 would be close to the 14,000 lb point that you indicated, while the Bf-109 would be at a bit less, burning off climb fuel, than published loaded weight. However in the summer of '44 and later, when mainland European fields became available, then the P-47 would be more likely to have the smaller fuel weight.

For sims: I never suggested that someone limit himself to only one source.But these people have a financial reason to use the most accurate data available and their audience demands it.

Again, industry, trying to model aircraft for operations simulator purposes, spend millions of dollars on software and hardware, something I do not think game people can do or have the expertise to do. This is not to say that video game software is not a valid tool for training pilots, it is, just that it is not a precise copy of aircraft aerodynamics and environment. And whatever you do, do not believe that if you are good in a video simulator, that you would be good in an aircraft. The environment is totally different with g loads, vertigo, vibration, noise, aircraft physical communications with the pilot, physical exertions, FEAR, etc., etc., etc.

 

[tyrodtom]

I race too, with some sucess, the feedback thru the wheel, brakes , your butt, etc. your awareness of them,and what they mean are the MOST important part of driving at the edge and getting the most out of a car. I've yet to find a racing sim that even comes close to a realistic feel or response.

I'm just a low time pilot , but i'm enough into it to see that feel thru the controls is a very important part of flying, even more so when you're at the edge of the aircraft's performance envelope. The sims i've seen can show you very little of this, and nothing realistic. Graphs and charts can only tell you so much, the pilot is the determining factor, and his need for feedback can't be supplied by a sim. A little buzz or shake, in the hand controls doesn't cut it.

 

[Lighthunmust]

What is the truth?

@Lighthunmust : Ehm you know that we don't have that channel in Greece right?

It may be available in Greece from a residential satellite dish. I will be recording from Dish Network. This satellite TV provider also provides residents of the U.S. with programing from other nations. Perhaps a Greek provider has this channel from the U.S.