davebender
1st Lieutenant
Compare number of German aircraft during 1944 with number of German aircraft during 1940 and magnitude of the problem becomes obvious. There was far less fuel available per aircraft during 1944.
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Compare number of German aircraft during 1944 with number of German aircraft during 1940 and magnitude of the problem becomes obvious. There was far less fuel available per aircraft during 1944.Germany had almost 600,000 metric tons in stock at the beginning of May 1944. This was the highest it had been since the BoB when it was almost 700,000 metric tons.
Can we say the P47s were better at taking damage? Tell me about the P51s armor.[...] despite being heavier and physically larger than many of their contemporaries [...]
P51 advantages, in my opinion
1) 2-stage supercharger
2) superior fuels allowing higher boosts
3) better building quality beacause no bombing raids in America
Better built because the American mass production techniques and quality of training - and more skilled workers in 1943
4) vastly superior numbers
Not over Central/East Germany until 1945 when Germany shifted much of western defense to Berlin to Leipzig to Munich. In late late 19 44 the Allies had bases in Belgium and France from which all shorter range fighters like Tempest, P-47 and Spitfires had ability to go deep into Germany.
5) better trained pilots
6) Bad LW tactics, P51s always had altitude advantage
Poor quality of pilots led to fewer experienced flight leaders requiring the low time pilots to be formed in gaggles with poor formation discipline in late 1944 - but often had altitude advantage, even with FW 190A-8s. Most encounter reports of large formations attacking bombers downhill are from German formations coming into bomber stream at 27-29000 feet with high cover 109Gs at 32-35000 feet.
7) Alleid units knew about LW moves because of the Ultra
Wasn't a factor in 8th/15th AF tactical operations.
8) german aircraft factories, mid war, had to trade quality for quantity
9) Excellent designed cooling system low drag wing= excellent range speed (but not acceleration!)
Acceleration was excellent, slightly lower than FW 190 and Bf 109. Slightly lower than twin engine P-38, but higher than all other US fighters depending on weight conditions and altitudes. Acceleration is certainly important in going from medium speed to high speed but the differences are insignificant in most air combats - similar to the differences in climb.
The P-38 under medium weight conditions at middle altitudes and middle cruise speed was about 2.3ft/sec/sec and the 51 was about 2.15 ft/sec/sec. Explain how 0.15 ft/sec/sec is going to make a difference in the middle speed range while accelerating to top speed, particularly since it is only relevant until the higher drag of the other ships retards acceleration near top speeds and 51 keeps accelerating?
10). The Mustang had great maneuverability combined with great speed. Less in certain points, greater in others compared to FW 190 and Bf 109. This is an important factor because many victory credits were scored in maneuvering fights in which both pilots were aware of each other and maneuvering for tactical advantage.
I believe P51 has a great record,not because of being a superior design, but because the lucky combination of all the above factors. From these factors only the number 9 has to to with the airframe design itself
Fw 190A8 w MW50 (1945), Fw190D9s, late 109s were superior in close combat at low/mid altitudes if numbers were equal
Record doesn't reflect this, primarily because of relative pilot skill. Look to January 14, 1945 in 357FG engaging superior numbers over Berlin and scoring 56 for 3 losses. While battle started at bomber altitudes, the fights ranged to the deck.
A Fw 190 with 2 stage supercharger (eg D13) , equal building quality, SAME FUELS and equal pilots ,was superior at eveything but range
Germany had almost 600,000 metric tons in stock at the beginning of May 1944. This was the highest it had been since the BoB when it was almost 700,000 metric tons. It is also about 3 times what the consumption was.
Yeah, that's true. Still, there are aircraft that have been know to be torn apart on just being hit by a wing of .50s. It's hard to tell in the film, but sometimes you can see it. Just a line of .50s, and pieces are flying all over the place. Of course these German fighters brought a little more to the conflict than just lines of .50s.The armor pretty much saves the pilot (things like the IL-2 excepted) , it doesn't do much for the aircraft.
It saves aircraft by cutting down on "golden BB" hits where just a couple of hits kill or injure the pilot without hitting (wrecking) anything else.
The plane cannot carry enough armor to protect the engine, fuel, oil, coolant and control systems. And with 20mm and larger shells (or large numbers of .50/12.7mm/13mm) the possibility of structural failure was present.
The 51 was no more, or less durable than the Fw 190 or bf 109..
Did they have self-sealing tanks? And, while on the subject, just how did those work? I know the later A6Ms had them, and tipped the scales a little higher for them. I assume the P47s and P51s also had them.I don't know about the Fw 190. It had a reputation for being able to take damage (somewhat like the P-47). Whether that is borne out in statistics I know not.
It was certainly designed to be more durable, radial engine, electrically operated undercarriage etc.
Late war versions were very heavily armoured. The A-8 fighter carried 145.7 Kg of armour, the heavy "sturm jager" carried an extra 191.6 Kg, a total of 337.3 Kg.
I don't know how that compares with a P-51.
Cheers
Steve