What did the P51s have over the German fighters?

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

Better built because the American mass production techniques and quality of training - and more skilled workers in 1943
Click to expand...

Also IIRC the US had more advanced wind tunnels which was an advantage when optimizing designs. It would be good to go into more detail on the more advanced mass production techniques. USSBS reports that production (in terms of weight) per US worker was far higher than German's. Also, the US had far more experience in mass production as it was the leading car manufacturer.

Finally, a photo of a P-51A. It shows very well the refined design. Ironically, the photo can be found in a book on the P-47.
 

Attachments

  • 6a0x.jpg
    52.9 KB · Views: 700
I have read over the post and most of my opinions have already been expressed, but, I will list them anyway.

1. Excellent high speed. It was mostly significantly faster from ceiling to SL than contemporary Axis aircraft during the critical phase on the Western Front.

2. Excellent range and endurance. Opened penetration raids and bomber missions deep into enemy territory effectively eliminating any place to hide.

3. Good combat capability at all altitudes. Speed and altitude performance allowed it to control combat onset and end game. Good climb at combat weight, good dive capability, adequate firepower against fighters, and good roll and turn rate made it formidable. Gave pilots several superior cards to play and few to no losers.

4. Easy to manufacture and cheap.

5. Relatively easy for novices to master.

As an added note, I have always considered that the time period from the fall of 1943 to end of June, 1944, as the most critical time on the Western Front. In the fall of '43, daylight bombing was almost suspended, in June '44, D-day allowed many more short ranged fighters to become engaged in the tactical and strategic battlefields. It was not the bubble canopied, six gunned, high octane P-51Ds of movie fame, but the sleeker four gunned lower octane, and often overlooked, P-51B and Cs that decimated the Luftwaffe during this period, and eliminated it as a threat to D-day. I think this is the most important contribution the P-51s made to the war, and it was the low octane Bs and Cs. All my opinion.
 
One of the greatest items of scientific WW2 War Reparations for the Allies, and not just the physical size, was the Munchen Aviation Research Institute's High Speed Wind Tunnel located in the Ötz Valley in the Tyrol.

It was code named "Buildfing Project 101".

This plant was almost completed at the end of the war and was at the time the largest wind tunnel facility in the world.

Hydro-electric Pelton Turbines with an output of 76 megawatts or
100,000 HP, could produce wind and airflow speeds of up to supersonic levels in the 18 metre (59 foot) diameter, 140 metre (460 foot) long measuring chamber.

The Americans wanted to ship the facility back to the US, but faced violent opposition from the their French Allies.

After a lot of arguement and controversy as to where the wind tunnel was to be relocated the French won the day and the facility was removed, starting in October 1945 and 13 complete goods trains were used to carry away the contents.

The facility was rebuilt in France at Modane in the Savoy Alps with the help of the German specialists.

The French Aviation industry thereby gained one of the most modern and important advance test facilities in the world.

It is still in use today.

From the book Luftwaffe secret projects, by Dieter Herwig and Heinz Rode.


Messerschmitt in a wind tunnel Retronaut | Retronaut - See the past like you wouldn't believe.

NASA - WWII NACA: US Aviation Research Helped Speed Victory

Supermarine Spitfire, 1940 - Stock Image V320/0178 - enlarged - Science Photo Library
 
Back in the thirties, the Italians had the best wind tunnel in Guidonia, including a supersonic one. They were of course very much into racing aircraft. Also, Italy held 33 out of 84 aviation world records in 1939.



Kris
 
In Guidonia there were seven wind tunnels, five subsonic horizontal, one vertical, and the supersonic one (2500 km/h max wind speed).
however, they were all for scale models (the largest was for max 3m wide models). Some nations had full scale wind tunnels.
It is no coincidence that many Italian aircrafts used NACA airfoils during the war.

On the other hand, the studies in Guidonia served to the first supersonic postwar aircrafts, specifically the X-2.
The concept of the supersonic biconvex airfoil can be specifically related back to Antonio Ferri and his 1939 or 1940 supersonic wind-tunnel tests in Guidonia, Italy. Also associated with the biconvex airfoil, by application of their supersonic pressure distribution theories to Ferri's test results, are the Swiss aerodynamicist Professor Jakob Ackeret (friend and contemporary of Theodore von Kármán) and Germany's Dr. Ing. Adolf Busemann (originator of the swept-wing concept).
...
From this wind tunnel facility Antonio Ferri obtained data for his formal report: Experimental Results with Airfoils Tested in the High-Speed Tunnel at Guidonia, dated July 1940. These tests included a 10 percent thick biconvex airfoil at a Mach number of 2.13. This report was later translated into English and published by NACA as a Technical Memorandum with the designation of TM 946. The first theoretical studies of a biconvex airfoil are believed to have been presented by Professor Ackeret in his 1932 publication titled: Theory of Airfoils Moving at Speeds Greater Than That of Sound.
 
Last edited:
parsifal said:
Messerschmitt in a wind tunnel Retronaut | Retronaut - See the past like you wouldn't believe.

NASA - WWII NACA: US Aviation Research Helped Speed Victory

Supermarine Spitfire, 1940 - Stock Image V320/0178 - enlarged - Science Photo Library
Click to expand...

Also some info on post war NACA research into high speed propellers:

ch4-1

some of it based on German designs for curved "swept back" blades:

ch4-6

A NACA report on propeller design problems for high speed aircraft from 1941:

http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20090015108_2009014215.pdf

Here's a report on a Mustang III fitted with a Merlin 100 by Roll-Royce Hucknall and tested at +25lbs boost, using a 4 blade HS propeller:

Mustang III Flight Trials


Another Mustang III, FX901 was fitted with a Merlin 113 (Mosquito B. Mk 35) with 3 bladed propeller.

(Bonus: Flight Articles on Rolls-Royce's test facility at Hucknall; part 1 starts here

Rolls-Royce Hucknall Part I

Part II:

Rolls-Royce Hucknall Part II )
 
Last edited:
US were more advanced in mass production techniques something Germany in many areas only developed during the war. US machinery was also to a higher degree of more efficient special-to-type equipment than German machinery.
 
I'll chance my arm here, What did the P 51 have,,,,

Being preceded by the P47 - famously good at pilot protection - therefore large numbers of experienced pilots available for aggressive action once the right tool appeared.

Timing - the LW ranks had ben thinned by being forced to fly many hours by long P47/B17 attacks and in combat losses

Picked a good enemy - Goering/Hitler who overcommitted LW to protect political targets, esp. Berlin. Foul, murderous Dictators are necessarily irrational, afraid to appear to be weak or foolish .....

Picked a good partner - B17, almost capable of self protection, very threatening en masse, but looked vulnerable to a mass attack

Picked a good ally(s) - USSR/ UK - took the brunt, set up the table/ maybe helped provoke the daytime over-commitment by vexingly bombing by night and with Dh 98s??

All completely unreferenced speculations. I now await my due thumping.

Oh yes, and P51 B.C/D was singularly effective , and a great plane (a light thumping then). All I'm really saying is context, history, multiple factors, the obscure, the forever unknown - they would all have their place. Not just engineering - because on paper the 51 is not that great?
 

The P-51B did most of the heavy lifting over Germany. P-38s contributed, P-47s were hampered by range only to Stuttgart/Hannover.
 
gjs238 said:
Weight of the workers?
Click to expand...

US workers were better fed - readily available Spam made a big difference and, in Texas, those huge steaks Texas Longhorn Steaks

Anyway what's being discussed is worker productivity - ie; weight of airframe produced by each worker over a given time. Not forgetting many German factories used slave labour = an unwilling workforce under duress, many of whom will have been weakened by a poor work and living environment.
 

I agree with this statement....but....

More importantly, the RAF was largely responsible for establishing the safe haven that made the US escorted deep penetration raids even possible. 1940-42, the LW was still mounting challenges to the control of the vital air space over the british isles and Western Europe. The sustained....and costly....attrition battles played force back on the LW gave control of the vital air space to the allies and inflicted enough attrition on the LW to make them adopt unsafe pilot replacement programs, and suffer chronic fuel shortages from as early as 1942.

This last point was assisted by the VVS where whilst not as dramatic as the attrition battle in the west, still played havoc on Geran reserves of fuel, manpower and hardware. The LW was short of everything because of the attrition battles in the East and West.
 

Luftwaffe losses in 1941 and 1942 in the Eastern front were higher than in the Channel and over GB. After Battle of Britain Luftwaffe adopted a defensive strateegy which suited them much more. The exception were the low lovel raids carried out againt the southern region of the UK.


Decentralization also added cost. By using slave labor the quality dropped and risk of sabotage increased. Not long ago I read about a Fw 190 D-9 Gruppe that carefully inspected every D-9 looking for signs of sabotage.
 

In the west 41-2, it wasnt about the losses, it was about getting control of the airspace and not allowing the germans to recover. German efforts to gain that (air superiority, and later air parity) did not end with the traditional ending point of the BoB (November-December 1940). heavy raids continued through to the end of May 1941, albeit to a differnt operational setting (night raids, but ther wwere still significant dayligt operations through to the middle of April). There were heavy losses both operational and non- operational....By December 1941, the LW, according to murray had lost the equivalent of two full airforces sine 1939....or about 8-10000 a/c. losses in the East from June to December were running at about 2000 a/c. Losses in the BoB were about 1800, and in the period 1939 to the end of June 1940 about 2000 or so as well. adding all that up, the estimated total losses for the LW Jan-December 1941 in the west (and MTO) were in the order of 3000 a/c.

German activity in the west was not solely defensive after may 1941. Two complete KGs were maintained and engaged primarily in various Anti-shipping operations. Later, in '42 they attempted to maintain pressure by mounting nuisance hit and run FB raids across the channel. The LR KG40 remained a serious threat to the end of May, but the shorter ranged Ju88 equipped unit was progressively forced back and denied freedom of manouvre to the extent that losses due to mine operations (its principal employment) fell sharply after April. These are incidental or inconsequential activities to the germans, but for the British, gaining control of its skies and the seas that surrounded Britain was absolutely critical work, and the reason they just kept coming at the germans despite the one sided loss rates in the fighter sweeps over france July to December 1941.

By winning those preparatory battles and inflicting several thousand aircraft losses on the LW (either directly or indirectly), Germany was denied any real chance to rest and recover its air force. this was critical to the later operations taken up by the Americans. The Russians did very similar things in the east.

The pointy end of the victory in 1944 was virtually an all american achievment, but that had a considerable head start due to the relentless attriution operations of 1941-3, undertaken mostly by the RAF and the VVS
 

One of the more interesting facts I discovered while reading up on the US and German aircraft production industries was the success that the US had with women workers and 'unskilled'/new hire labour.

In the US, new hires were more productive after around two months of on the job time than workers who had been employed in the industry in the pre-war period. They generally were more willing to work longer hours and adapted to new production methods more quickly than their 'older' colleauges. They were also more likely to suggest changes that would improve productivity.

Of the new workers, it was found that women were the most productive. Female workers in the same jobs as men, were typically more efficient and faster than their male counterparts. Furthermore, when female workers joined a previously all-male shop-floor workforce, overall productivity for men increase, even if both sexes were segregated from each other.

There was a drawback though - quality. Defect rates with new hires were slightly higher than with experienced workers and with the new processes.
 

Parsifal reading your theories is a true experience
VVS and RAF in 41-43 only provided training for german pilots. The vast majority of german aces began their carrers at this period. It was the happy times. Jg 26 and JG2 in the west suffered minimal losses and even less deaths
The only reason that LW was understrengthed in 1944 was the late mobilaization of her industry for total war effort.
Most losses in the east were aircrafts that could not be repaired due lack of spare parts, and aircrafts that were lost because of the hard operational enviroment
Despite your wishes ,RAF activities in the west was of little nuissance for the germans. Their twins bombers carried too light bomb loads to cause real damage. Training units were established in France by LW with no problems by RAF
The main reasons LW gradually reduced its offencive activities on western front (inclunding the effective night intruders) was 1) fuel. Already from 1941 there were conserns about fuel usage , fighters were often ordered not to engange Raf if no real danger existed for ground targets
2) LW bomber units were needed on the eastern and mediterennean fronts.

Finally , even stating that LW was weak in january 1944,is not totaly true. If remove the american airforce from the battle in january 44 , within 2 monthes VVS would have to face 7-8 fighter wings with disastrous results and the RAF 3-4 fighter wings with no heavy bombers to attract the german fighters attention
LW was weak to face at the same time raf AND vvs AND american heavy bombers AND american escort bfighters
Returning to the topic , if we would like to see the true greatness of P51 we should take 10-20-100
P51s and put them in fight with 10-20-100 german fighters with NO bombers attracting the attention of LW
P51 was a good fighter that was blessed by the circumstances
 
Last edited by a moderator:
VBF-13 said:
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.
Click to expand...

The explanation I've read is that self-sealing tanks were a sandwich, with a layer of unvulcanized rubber in the middle. When it was exposed to gasoline, it would swell and plug the hole. Clearly, this would only work for small holes, not the sort of hole that a decent explosive shell would leave.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

Why did the U.S. navy reject the F6U Pirate?
Replies
10
Views
429
eagledad
E
M
So The Germans Really Did Have Flying Saucers in WW2
Replies
15
Views
2K
GregP
Why did the US ww2 fighters have 50 cals instead of 20mms like their european cousins
2 3 4
Replies
73
Views
7K
BarnOwlLover
The poor performance of the 343 Kokutai against USAAF fighters
2 3 4
Replies
60
Views
7K
GrauGeist
T
Average sorties/kill for German night fighters
Replies
16
Views
2K
Geoffrey Sinclair
G
Menu
Log in
Register