Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
That the F-190D series could only "hope" to match the P-51 ??. What is so great or outstanding about the P-51. It looks good – fantastic range, okay – so what else ? Do you have any statistics about F-190D's on P-51 kills or wise versa that makes you so sure to put up that statement?
The Fw 190D wasn't better than the P-51D. You'll find dozens of discussions on the net which of the two was the best. But that in itself proves that both were rather close to each other performance wise.It looks good – fantastic range, okay – so what else ? Do you have any statistics about F-190D's on P-51 kills or wise versa that makes you so sure to put up that statement?
The problem was that the American pilots were the best trained and most confident pilots, and combined with the Mustang a far superior adversary to the average Luftwaffe pilot of 1944.was easy enough to fly that is made a mediocre pilot a good pilot and the end results were the final evidence of this.
The Breda 88....so which was the worst plane in WW2?
I don't think so Adler, 704 kmh? Perhaps you're talking about the D-12? The D-9 had a max speed of around 685 km/h, and that's with MW 50.The reason I ask is because at certain alltitudes I am sure the P-51 is faster and at certain alltitudes I am sure the Dora is faster.
You want to talk about that too? Like I said, there are more than enough discussions on the net about which was the best, but the only conclusion is that there is not enough difference between them to say that one is definitely better than the other. In any case, the Fw 190D-9 was not better than the P-51D. But the Mustang was there in great numbers and flown by the best trained pilots in the world. So that's why I'm saying the Fw 190D wasn't the solution. And because the Bf 109K was at least as good as the Dora but easier to produce, I don't see any reason for the Dora. But that last bit is just my opinion. My main point was to prove that the "Dora could only hope to match the P-51D".There is more to what makes a great fighter than speed and numbers my friend
Wespe, what is your uncle's name. He's spot on! It was ludicrous that the high brass wanted to put pilots in the air before properly trained.
But there's definitely a flaw in your own reasoning: if you only put the best pilots in the best aircraft, it will lead to nothing. Remember JV 44? And enough of these Experten were shot down, so your claim that they will be victorious against American pilots is simply wrong. Don't think the German pilots like your uncle were superhuman, they were damn good pilots, but all sides had men like these!
Civetone said:I don't think so Adler, 704 kmh? Perhaps you're talking about the D-12? The D-9 had a max speed of around 685 km/h, and that's with MW 50.
Even with MW 50 the Fw 190D-9 was not faster than the P-51D, at any altitude!
FW 190 D-9 Flight Trials
Civetone said:You want to talk about that too? Like I said, there are more than enough discussions on the net about which was the best, but the only conclusion is that there is not enough difference between them to say that one is definitely better than the other. In any case, the Fw 190D-9 was not better than the P-51D. But the Mustang was there in great numbers and flown by the best trained pilots in the world. So that's why I'm saying the Fw 190D wasn't the solution. And because the Bf 109K was at least as good as the Dora but easier to produce, I don't see any reason for the Dora. But that last bit is just my opinion. My main point was to prove that the "Dora could only hope to match the P-51D".
Kris
Wespe, where did I put words in your mouth?
I looked it up, and it was you who started saying that if the Luftwaffe had focused on the Me 262 and Dora, there would not have been any need for Me 163, Natters, and the like. Then I said that the Dora wasn't the 'solution' because it could only hope to match the P-51.
I use the word 'solution' deliberately: if you want to defeat the 8th AF (that is inflicting more losses than they are able to sustain, like happened in 1943) you'll need a solution! for the American P-51 problem.
So that's why I said that the Fw 190D could only hope to match the P-51, as it is not superior. You can say it matched the P-51 but it's my opinion that it didn't even manage to do that. This is partly because it doesn't have an answer to the main weapon of the Mustang: speed! I provided a link that shows that the Dora was too slow. Only in 1945 with MW 50 enabled overboosting could the Dora get to a speed of 685 kmh at an altitude at which the Mustang was still faster. So the Dora can not run from the Mustang, which is a huge disadvantage.
So then you can start talking about the D-12 or D-13, D-14 or D-15 for all I care, that only appeared in 1945. At that time the Americans were producing the P-47N and P-51H. And they also had the even faster P-47M and P-51F/G available at the end of 1944, but decided there was no need to interrupt production for them because there was no need for better fighters.
Then, you can start discussing how Luftwaffe veterans with 5 years experience are better than the best trained USAAF pilots. I agree with that, though I don't know what that's worth. Better to have a steady flow of well trained pilots than a bunch of Experten who were getting killed one by one...
But back to my main point, you don't need a Fw 190D that can "handle" a P-51D. The Dora appeared a year later than the P-51D. Dann brauchst du keine Zwischenlöschung mehr. Even the Ta 152 wouldn't have been made a difference in 1945, only jet fighters were able to clearly outmatch the P-51H, Spitfire F.21, Tempest II, Fury, Spiteful, ... and then there are the P-80, Vampire, ...
Or am I missing something about the Dora??
Kris
The example (5 years experience contra well trained US pilot) only clarifies that it is not just the performance of a plane that decides an outcome. In other words even in a "****" plane an experienced Lw Pilot could have knocked out an Super dooper wowy wow wow P-51 or what ever)
Since the Germans did not have enough jet fighters and enough time to make them more reliable, what should they have send up against the allies ??
9 mm Parabellum or what ?
And P-80s and Vampires during WWII, well obviously your knowledge is far ahead of mine
Wespe
There were many experten left at the end of WW2 but at the same time there were many extremely low time pilots who were meat on the table for P-51s and P-47s. As stated a so-so pilot jumps into a P-51 and becomes a "good" pilot. With many Luftwaffe aircraft you had to be a good pilot to begin with to fully exploit its characteristics. Again not taking anything away from the Luftwaffe and its aircraft but they were simply overwhelmed in intercepting bombers, attacking fighters and stopping invading allied armies after D-day.
Not for a well trained pilot and Germany had thousands of those at the beginning of the war.An aircraft is only as good as the pilot flying it. That's old wisdom, FlyboyJ.
It also seems as if you're saying that the P-51 made a mediocre pilot a good one, while the Bf 109 required a good pilot to begin with. That also means that the Bf 109 was difficult to fly.
Again, see the above The Geman and Finn account of flying the aircraft come from guys with ample training under their belts.I would like to know why you make such a statement. German and Finnish accounts tell quite a different story.
And what does this mean regarding the Fw 190D? Was it more difficult to fly than a P-51?
Kris