RE: Oscars are still death traps from the get-go.

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

RE: Oscars are still death traps from the get-go.

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> RE: Oscars are still death traps from the get-go.

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 4 5 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Oscars are still death traps from the get-go. - 10/17/2004 7:13:05 PM

Mike Scholl

Posts: 9349
Joined: 1/1/2003
From: Kansas City, MO
Status: offline

RAM WHICH Fw-190 are you talking about. The 190a or the 190d? They are virtually
two different aifcraft, The 190a was a small and nimble aircraft at lower altitudes and
became the best German Fighter-Bomber of the war. The 190d was a high altitude
interceptor who's final development (the Ta-152) was one of the best in the war. But
a "blanket claim" for the Fw-190's abilities won't wash any better than one for the
Spitfire (various "marks" were optimized for different tasks and missions)

_____________________________

(in reply to RAM)

Post #: 31

RE: Oscars are still death traps from the get-go. - 10/17/2004 7:29:10 PM

madmickey

Posts: 1336
Joined: 2/11/2004
From: Calgary, Alberta
Status: offline

It is also pretty hard to shoot down anything with 2 12.7mm machine guns.

(in reply to Mike Scholl)

Post #: 32

RE: Oscars are still death traps from the get-go. - 10/17/2004 7:54:41 PM

RAM

Posts: 402
Joined: 5/1/2000
From: Bilbao,Vizcaya,Spain
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl

RAM WHICH Fw-190 are you talking about. The 190a or the 190d? They are virtually
two different aifcraft, The 190a was a small and nimble aircraft at lower altitudes and
became the best German Fighter-Bomber of the war. The 190d was a high altitude
interceptor who's final development (the Ta-152) was one of the best in the war.

in fact, I'm talking about both. They aren't that different, in fact the Fw190D9 was not a high altitude interceptor, but a mid-altitude fighter. If you look carefully at the two-speed supercharger of the Jumo213A in the Dora-9 you'll see that it's rated altitude is about only 1000m more than that of the BMW801D-2 of the Fw190A series. Over that altitude the engine lost power quite fast (just as with the BMW801), meaning that if the Fw190A was in trouble at more than 18500 feet the Fw190D9 was good up to 22000feet more or less. It was an improvement, indeed, but not enough to call the D9 a "high altitude interceptor". That role was owned by the late Bf109 Gustav series.

About the maneouverability, the early 190 Antons were lighter than the Fw190D9. However that was true only up to the A8 series, and anyway the much better powerloading of the Doras even over the early A-series Fw190s gave them a definitive upper hand in close fight performance (with higher powerloading your sustained turn rate improves, as does your climbrate&acceleration, meaning that the Dora was able to hold its own quite longer than an Anton in a close knifefight). The longer fuselage in the D9 meant a bigger elevator moment (because the tail was farther from the CoG), allowing for a much improved pitch control for the pilot.

Not only that, the Fw190D9 had better aerodynamics than the radial engined ones, meaning that in dives and zooms the performance of the Dora was noticeably better.

The only drawback noticed for the D9 compared vs the A series 190s was a slightly slower roll rate. I never understood why was that (in fact the D9 having only two inner 20mm guns should have lesser roll inertia and better roll rate), but there are several accounts about it.

Quite possibly the best german dogfighter of the war was the Fw190D9, and in my own personal opinion the Dora owns the "best piston engined fighter of the war" title. However this is highly subjective because there were some other excellent fighters around (like the F4U4) which could very well deserve that distinction.

the Ta-152H was too late in too little numbers. It was an excellent plane but it suffered at lower altitudes (the Jumo213E was optimiced for extreme altitudes)...

quote:

But
a "blanket claim" for the Fw-190's abilities won't wash any better than one for the
Spitfire (various "marks" were optimized for different tasks and missions)

True as it is, the Spitfire always went one step behind the Fw190 development, exception made for the late'43-early'44 period. The Spitfire was an excellent fighter, but in my opinion it was always a notch lower than the better contemporaneous german fighters. In fact, when in the early'43 the american FGs in England flying with Spitfire IXs were converted to the enormous, big and bulky P47 (a plane wich was, in every meaning of the word, the anthitesis of the Spitfire), they found the Thunderbolt was vastly superior in actual combat...

And the P47 ,no matter how formidable fighter it was, wasn't by far the best fighter flying around at the ETO.

< Message edited by RAM -- 10/17/2004 5:56:20 PM >

_____________________________

RAM

"Look at me! look at me!!!

Not like that! NOT LIKE THAT!!!"

(in reply to Mike Scholl)

Post #: 33

RE: Oscars are still death traps from the get-go. - 10/17/2004 8:01:21 PM

madmickey

Posts: 1336
Joined: 2/11/2004
From: Calgary, Alberta
Status: offline

It was the range that made P-51 best piston fighter of the war.
Problems with Me-262, let the P-51 pick them off when they landed.

(in reply to RAM)

Post #: 34

RE: Oscars are still death traps from the get-go. - 10/17/2004 8:19:02 PM

RAM

Posts: 402
Joined: 5/1/2000
From: Bilbao,Vizcaya,Spain
Status: offline

Long range made the P51D the best escort fighter of the war.

In everything but range the Fw190D9 could kick a P51D out of the sky. The D9 (no matter what you've read) was actually faster than the Mustang at altitudes under 24000 feet, had way better powerloading, climb rate, sustained turn rate, acceleration, dive, zoom, roll rate and firepower than the P51D. And the Fw190D9 with drop tank's range wasn't exactly bad either.

The P51D was much more prone to fatal damage: one 7,92mm bullet into the extremely exposed ventral radiator and say bye bye...the Fw190D9 had an annular cowling radiator in the nose( meaning it could only be hit in frontal area impacts, much harder than to hit the ventral spot of an aircraft), and the airframe wasn't well stressed for high-G maneouvers (the airframe of the Merlin mustangs were very similar to that of the Allison Mustangs, however the weights were much bigger, meaning the wings sometimes snapped in high-G maneouvers).

Also the Merlin could use its War Emergency Power for 3 minutes in a row only. The Fw190D9 with the MW50 injection could use it for periods of 10 minutes in a row as long as there was MW50 in the tank (and there was enough for 40 minutes).

There are some contenders for the "best piston engine fighter of the war", but the P51D is not one of them, IMHO.

< Message edited by RAM -- 10/17/2004 6:19:52 PM >

_____________________________

RAM

"Look at me! look at me!!!

Not like that! NOT LIKE THAT!!!"

(in reply to madmickey)

Post #: 35

RE: Oscars are still death traps from the get-go. - 10/17/2004 8:35:04 PM

Hatamoto

Posts: 64
Joined: 5/5/2004
From: near Munich/Germany
Status: offline

like ram and ron I�d vote for a bonus like the zero bonus in the early month for all jap fighters. with the exception of the zero all jap fighters seem to perform worse in the early game than they actually did in history, no matter what tactic you use or how experienced, rested, motivated... your pilots are.

< Message edited by Hatamoto -- 10/17/2004 6:35:36 PM >

(in reply to RAM)

Post #: 36

RE: Oscars are still death traps from the get-go. - 10/17/2004 9:45:51 PM

Nikademus

Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: RAM

The initial successes of the model were because the same reason as the Zero's: everyone tried to dogfight them...as soon as the allied fighters started using energy fighting, the Oscar was pretty much useless for air combat.

I don't think is undervalued. The Oscar was probably one of the most rubbish fighters of WW2.

The Ki-43, at it's time of introduction was a fine plane, but one with a limited shelf life given it's top rated speed and light armament. To say that the plane was rubbish is a gross exageration. Its success was not meerly due to it's dogfighting capabilities but as with the Zero because of a combination of it's positive attributes which included agileness, quick acceleration and good handling qualities. The centerline armament also aided the Japanese gunners in lining up their targets and it was superior to the Hurricane (it's principle opponent) in vertical manevuering. I recall reading up on a P-40 driver's accounts over NG...and in his opinion he considered the Oscar (the IIB version) to be a more dangerous opponent than a Zero because a Zero had wing mounted cannons with limited ammo. Harder to get hit with....the Oscar on the other hand had two .50cal (equiv) guns mounted centerline and could potentially fill your plane with many hits in a short space of time.

Using energy tactics would indeed be the best general tactic to use against an Oscar but setting up such a situation is not as easy to do as is often suggested. Much depended on the initial setup. A key difference in the fighting over Malaya was the absense of an early warning net. This often did not allow RAF units to gain tactical advantage (i.e. altitude advantage) and often the Japanese could catch the slow climbing Allied planes and bounce them. As with the Zero, the Oscar was not as good a diving platform as their opposites, but that doesn't mean it couldn't dive or use energy tactics itself.

_____________________________

(in reply to RAM)

Post #: 37

RE: Oscars are still death traps from the get-go. - 10/17/2004 9:58:03 PM

Nikademus

Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

Hey, I know. Have a few beers, act like an ass in the private forums as you pressure for a change. Worked for me. Not!

Changing it would be difficult. The A2A model is very linear in terms of how it represents speed and gun value. The same aspects that make the F4U "uber" even beyond it's historically formidable attributes is the same thing that makes the Ki-43 (and all obsolecent plane types - Ki-27, P-26 etc) flying targets.

_____________________________

(in reply to Ron Saueracker)

Post #: 38

RE: Oscars are still death traps from the get-go. - 10/17/2004 10:06:20 PM

kaiser73

Posts: 394
Joined: 7/28/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nikademus

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

Hey, I know. Have a few beers, act like an ass in the private forums as you pressure for a change. Worked for me. Not!

Changing it would be difficult. The A2A model is very linear in terms of how it represents speed and gun value. The same aspects that make the F4U "uber" even beyond it's historically formidable attributes is the same thing that makes the Ki-43 (and all obsolecent plane types - Ki-27, P-26 etc) flying targets.

then why not changing stats of nates and oscars to adapt them to the a2a model?

question: does this apply also to later jap fightedrs, like the upgraded oscar? i mean, they are as useless as nates and oscars?

(in reply to Nikademus)

Post #: 39

RE: Oscars are still death traps from the get-go. - 10/17/2004 10:17:18 PM

Nikademus

Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline

You would have to implement extreme changes in the OOB to have a visible impact. I once experimented with a MVR=40 Nate. A very extreme change that only had very modest impact on the combat results. You'd have to modify more than one stat and it would be a major undertaking to balance it out.

Late model Oscars will do slightly better vs the at start models.

_____________________________

(in reply to kaiser73)

Post #: 40

RE: Oscars are still death traps from the get-go. - 10/17/2004 11:12:05 PM

madmickey

Posts: 1336
Joined: 2/11/2004
From: Calgary, Alberta
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: RAM

Long range made the P51D the best escort fighter of the war.

In everything but range the Fw190D9 could kick a P51D out of the sky. The D9 (no matter what you've read) was actually faster than the Mustang at altitudes under 24000 feet, had way better powerloading, climb rate, sustained turn rate, acceleration, dive, zoom, roll rate and firepower than the P51D. And the Fw190D9 with drop tank's range wasn't exactly bad either.

The P51D was much more prone to fatal damage: one 7,92mm bullet into the extremely exposed ventral radiator and say bye bye...the Fw190D9 had an annular cowling radiator in the nose( meaning it could only be hit in frontal area impacts, much harder than to hit the ventral spot of an aircraft), and the airframe wasn't well stressed for high-G maneouvers (the airframe of the Merlin mustangs were very similar to that of the Allison Mustangs, however the weights were much bigger, meaning the wings sometimes snapped in high-G maneouvers).

Also the Merlin could use its War Emergency Power for 3 minutes in a row only. The Fw190D9 with the MW50 injection could use it for periods of 10 minutes in a row as long as there was MW50 in the tank (and there was enough for 40 minutes).

There are some contenders for the "best piston engine fighter of the war", but the P51D is not one of them, IMHO.

What was the kill ratio of P51d versus Fw190D9?

(in reply to RAM)

Post #: 41

RE: Oscars are still death traps from the get-go. - 10/18/2004 12:44:15 AM

RAM

Posts: 402
Joined: 5/1/2000
From: Bilbao,Vizcaya,Spain
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: madmickey

What was the kill ratio of P51d versus Fw190D9?

Actually I think it was in the negative range, but don't take my word on it as no immediate sources back up my position. I recall reading somewhere quite a long time ago that the Fw190D9 got a K/D ratio over 1 vs the P51 but I can't recall where (and it wasn't on the net anyways).

In any case, it's irrelevant. In 1944 most german fighter pilots were so untrained that they didn't know even how to keep their plane from slipping because engine torque while almost every P51D rider had a good deal of training, and in the most cases, experience. Under such circumstances, and given the fact that the D9 came only in noticeable numbers from September 1944 onwards, Kill ratio is an extremely misleading way to qualify the quality of an aircraft.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nikademus

The Ki-43, at it's time of introduction was a fine plane, but one with a limited shelf life given it's top rated speed and light armament. To say that the plane was rubbish is a gross exageration.

heya nik! :)

The Ki-43 at the time of its introduction was obsolescent. It could be a dangerous foe in a close encounter, true, but as soon as the allied fighter pilots learnt not to close fight them, the Oscar stopped being a real menace.

quote:

Its success was not meerly due to it's dogfighting capabilities but as with the Zero because of a combination of it's positive attributes which included agileness, quick acceleration and good handling qualities. The centerline armament also aided the Japanese gunners in lining up their targets and it was superior to the Hurricane (it's principle opponent) in vertical manevuering. I recall reading up on a P-40 driver's accounts over NG...and in his opinion he considered the Oscar (the IIB version) to be a more dangerous opponent than a Zero because a Zero had wing mounted cannons with limited ammo. Harder to get hit with....the Oscar on the other hand had two .50cal (equiv) guns mounted centerline and could potentially fill your plane with many hits in a short space of time.

I agree on the centrally mounted weapons, but I more or less disagree with anything else. Mostly because if Oscars were obsolescent in 1941-42, the P40s were never anything much better than that...I'd say that even a Sopwith Pup was dangerous for a P40 (hehehehe ;)) so an Oscar should be an enemy to fear :D.

Now seriously and jokes aside. I'm not fan of the Zero either, and I've always said that if the Zero is the myth it is, it's because it excelled against old and badly flown fighters. But the Zero never achieved air superiority against the F4F, and the F4F was by any standards a quite mediocre fighter performance-wise for 1942. In the end the Zero wasn't exactly the best plane around.

Finally, that a fighter was better than the Hurricane in the vertical plane isn't something new ;). Every enemy that little plane met was vastly better in the vertical (even a P40 was!!!), so... ;)

quote:

Using energy tactics would indeed be the best general tactic to use against an Oscar but setting up such a situation is not as easy to do as is often suggested. Much depended on the initial setup. A key difference in the fighting over Malaya was the absense of an early warning net. This often did not allow RAF units to gain tactical advantage (i.e. altitude advantage) and often the Japanese could catch the slow climbing Allied planes and bounce them. As with the Zero, the Oscar was not as good a diving platform as their opposites, but that doesn't mean it couldn't dive or use energy tactics itself.

in fact, it couldn't, Nik. The Ki-43's ailerons were uncontrolable at high indicated speeds. The stick forces were so high that no pilot was able to bank the plane in a high speed dive. Under such circunstances, hitting anything in BnZ style was pretty much impossible. Flying an Oscar you really didn't have too much choices...you had to turn...and you had to turn. Dive&Zoom tactics weren't appliable if you actually wanted to hit something ;).

That without forgetting that in the pull-out of the dive the Oscar's pilot should be QUITE careful on the elevator input he applies...because if he pulls out too sharply he could lose his wings and lawndart his wingless rice paper plane ;).

As I said if I was in any plane of the allied arsenal and had an Oscar over me all I had to do was to wait until he dived on me, bank towards his direction, and start diving. For the time he has recovered from his dive, I'm far enough to flee.

Of course, if you got a Ki43 stuck at 100m on your tail, you'd be in deep doo-doo. But that was true for EVERY fighter plane of WW2...so that aren't break news either :)

I think some of the japanese fighters were among the best of the war...the Ki44, Ki84, J2M or N1K2 were superb designs. But the Ki43 wasn't up to the task.

_____________________________

RAM

"Look at me! look at me!!!

Not like that! NOT LIKE THAT!!!"

(in reply to madmickey)

Post #: 42

RE: Oscars are still death traps from the get-go. - 10/18/2004 2:17:37 AM

madmickey

Posts: 1336
Joined: 2/11/2004
From: Calgary, Alberta
Status: offline

I have seen between 10 to 19 to 1 kill ratio (including ground combat it had the best kill ratio of the war in ETA). The Luftwaffre was destroyed when the P-51 went from just intercepting German fighters attacking bombers to free attack.

(in reply to RAM)

Post #: 43

RE: Oscars are still death traps from the get-go. - 10/18/2004 2:49:41 AM

RAM

Posts: 402
Joined: 5/1/2000
From: Bilbao,Vizcaya,Spain
Status: offline

a simple analysis of the numbers doesn't back up your words. There were between 700-800 d9s built, and all of them were used in air superiority missions, not bomber-destruction missions. By the time of the peace in Europe, a great part of what was left of the Luftwaffe were Dora nines. That ammounts for quite a lot of machines of those 700 built still in existance in May'45.

Also, don't count straffed planes. I'm talking about true air-to-air combat here. No german plane had such a bad K/D relationship during WW2. Even the claimed 11 to 1 and 19 to 1 k/d awarded to the F4U and F6F vs the japanese had to be severely downgraded after the war when the numbers of japanese planes destroyed were aknowledged.

And in any case, even if your numbers are true, the fact is that for September 1944-May 1945 the german planes were hopelessy outnumbered, and mostly flown by kids who didn't know how to fly a training biplane. As I already said, due to the extreme circunstances the Luftwaffe had to face on such late dates, true real war numbers don't give the true dimension of the ability and quality of the Fw190D9 when compared vs allied fighters.

All we can do is to see the reported performance and flight qualities of the Dora. It was one of the easiest fighters to fly (if not the easiest at all, Kommandog�rat and the greatly designed cockpit meant extremely low pilot workload), had superb controls at all speeds, excellent performances (375mph@SL, 445mph@best altitude), magnific powerloading (meaning great acceleration&climbrate), exceptional dive and zoom, splendind roll rate, great sustained turn rate , great structural strenght, good firepower, good all around vision, engine powers achievable for very long periods (2240 ps for 10 minutes, 1900 for 30 minutes, 1750 for unlimited use), etc etc etc.

If we compare it with a P51D, the Mustang doesn't get out of the comparison quite favored even while it was an extraordinary warplane. As I already said the 190D9 was faster at most altitudes, climbed and accelerated better, rolled faster and easier, had more power for longer times, and dived and zoomed if not better, at least as good as a P51. There is little to choose between both as pure air superiority fighters. And that is quite a fact. Even if the USAAF P51s got a 50-to-1 K/D ratio in the last days of the war, the analysis won't change, because, as I already said, most of the german pilots in late 1944 didn't know even how to use their rudder to prevent their plane slipping because engine torque, much less how to fight a more numerous, vastly better trained, enemy in such a high-performance state-of-the-art fighter.

The best proof of the Dora's excellence was that the Red Air Force was so amazed of the quality of the plane that they kept a Fw190D9 unit operational from 1945 to 1948, composed of captured german planes. We all know that the soviets were extremely germanophobes after WW2, and that they held in extremely high steem their own aircraft models.

The fact that they chose to get an operational unit composed of pure german planes means that those planes had to be REALLY excellent. Not even the Me262 was put in service in the Red Army Air Force at a time when the Soviets had no jet fighter...but the Fw190D9 was. It had to be an amazing plane to achieve that level of respect from such a particular, ferocious foe.

The soviets, BTW, tested almost every western fighter of WW2. They had some P47s in service in the Navy air force, and those and several P51B and Ds were tested in WW2. None of those american planes got the excellent test reports from TsAGI as the Fw190D9 got. And , I reapeat, the Soviets HATED everything with the "german" label on it, so hardly they were to accept easily the superiority of the german fighter unless they really had a GOOD REAL reason to do it. Something worth a thought, too.

< Message edited by RAM -- 10/18/2004 1:03:11 AM >

_____________________________

RAM

"Look at me! look at me!!!

Not like that! NOT LIKE THAT!!!"

(in reply to madmickey)

Post #: 44

RE: Oscars are still death traps from the get-go. - 10/18/2004 3:04:57 AM

Tankerace

Posts: 6400
Joined: 3/21/2003
From: Stillwater, OK, United States
Status: offline

I like the P-51 as much as anybody, but the Luftwaffe was on its way to destruction before the P-51 entered large production numbers.

The P-38s, P-47s, and Spitfires were holding their own, and in late '43 the P-51B model arrived on the scene. By 1944 it was clear that the Luftwaffe was nowhere near the capabilities of the Allied Air forces. While the P-51 made a definate impact, it did not win the war alone. By D-Day, there were several times more P-38s, P-47s, and Spitfires than P-51s.

Below (As near as I can find) are the Highest ranking US Aces and their planes.

Richard Bong, 40 kills, P-38
Thomas McGuire, 38 kills, P-38
David McCampbell, 34 kills, F6F
Francis Gabreski, 28 kills, P-47
Robert Johnson, 27 kills, P-47
Charles MacDonald, 27 kills, P-38
George Preddy, 26.8 kills, P-51
Joeseph Foss, 26 kills, F4F
Robert Hanson, 25 kills, F4U

While I did include CBI, USN, and USMC pilots, I did so to prove a point. The P-51 was a good aircraft, but it didn't win the war single handedly. In the Pacific, there were only 4 P-51 aces, and 2 of those scored a good number of their kills in P-40s. As near as I can figure it, there were 28 P-51 aces in the ETO (8th AF). There were 20 who flew P-47s. Granted, the P-51 produced more Aces, but not near so much to validate a claim that "The P-51 destroyed the Luftwaffe".

The P-51 was a suberb aircraft, yes. It was also a war winner. But it did not singlehandedly destroy the Luftwaffe. Don't remember where, I seem to remember reading that the P-47 shot down more German Aces than any other aircraft. The P-51 was also a very vulnerable aircraft, due to its inline engine. The P-47 (and even the P-38) had a reputation for ruggedness, unlike the P-51.

Most people today think of the P-51 like the Britons think of the Spitfire. To them, it was the plane. The Spitfire is thought to have won the Battle of Britain, despite the fact there were far more Hurricanes. The P-51 is thought to have won the air war over Europe, when it in reality took a combined effort of Spitfires, Tempests, Jugs, Forktailed Devils, Hurricanes, and Mustangs. The Mustang assured victory, but it did not do it single handedly.

< Message edited by Tankerace -- 10/17/2004 7:06:18 PM >

_____________________________

Designer of War Plan Orange
Allied Naval OOBer of Admiral's Edition
Naval Team Lead for War in the Med

Author of Million-Dollar Barrage: American Field Artillery in the Great War coming soon from OU Press.

(in reply to madmickey)

Post #: 45

RE: Oscars are still death traps from the get-go. - 10/18/2004 3:16:00 AM

RAM

Posts: 402
Joined: 5/1/2000
From: Bilbao,Vizcaya,Spain
Status: offline

quote:

While I did include CBI, USN, and USMC pilots, I did so to prove a point. The P-51 was a good aircraft, but it didn't win the war single handedly.

it's not an useless thing, Tankerace. Almost all the highest scoring american aces in of the ETO flew the Thunderbolt, not the P51D :).

As I already said, the Mustang was an excellent fighter, but doesn't rank high enough for the best piston engined fighter "award" in the war...just for the starters, it wasn't even the best American fighter (the F4U4 holds that spot, at least from my point of view)...

_____________________________

RAM

"Look at me! look at me!!!

Not like that! NOT LIKE THAT!!!"

(in reply to Tankerace)

Post #: 46

RE: Oscars are still death traps from the get-go. - 10/18/2004 3:26:56 AM

Tankerace

Posts: 6400
Joined: 3/21/2003
From: Stillwater, OK, United States
Status: offline

For best fighter, I'm split between the Corsair and the Flying Milk Bottle.

_____________________________

(in reply to RAM)

Post #: 47

RE: Oscars are still death traps from the get-go. - 10/18/2004 4:26:07 AM

caslug

Posts: 48
Joined: 8/19/2004
Status: offline

Everyone has an interesting take on P51 prowes vs other planes. I throw my hat in ring, and say that P51's #1 contribution was that it was the ONLY(i might be wrong here) allied fighter that could escort the bombers from England deep into Germany(berlin&beyond) AND hold it's own with LW fighters. Sure the P38 could go far(i don't think it could go as far as P51), but definitely as not as good as P51 as a dogfigher. Without P51, 8th AF couldn't sustain an offensive deep inside GE(beyond range of P47&P38-even w/ drop tanks), thereby taking the war to the LW. Without the defeat of the LW prior to summer of 44, DDAY would have been a lot more difficult. Yes, the allied could gain complete tatical air superiorty w/o P51 in France, Esepcially the invasion zone, becaue P47, Spit, Tempest, etc., had enough leg to operate in that areas.

Personal story: My 6th grade teacher, Mr. Green flew P51 during the war w/ the 8th AF. He was wounded during DDAY, but told our class that strafing trains was "fun". He wasn't an ace, I'm not sure he shot down any plane. But he definitely was up there doing his bit. I regret I didn't talked to him more about his experience, but hey I was a 11 yr kid at the time, and was more interest in recess than war stories.

(in reply to Tankerace)

Post #: 48

RE: Oscars are still death traps from the get-go. - 10/18/2004 4:36:06 AM

Tankerace

Posts: 6400
Joined: 3/21/2003
From: Stillwater, OK, United States
Status: offline

The P-51 was invaluable in the bombing of Germany. However, as far as D Day is concerned, the P-47 and the P-38 were the stars there. The P-51 was not as good a ground attack plane, because one hit from a Luger on the engine could bring it down. P-47s with drop tanks could escort bombers as far in as Holland, and thus and Luftfotten that could have impacted the D Day landings were dealt with by P-47s. The P-51 was a better fighter, yes. However they were single use planes. In fact, after German surrendered, PTO commanders requested more P-47s than P-51s.

The P-51 was a great aircraft. But to say that "it" destroyed the Luftwaffe is totally absurd. It was it, the Spitfires, and the T-bolts shooting them down, the P-47s strafing the L.W. on the ground, and the B-17s bombing the factories that destroyed the Luftwaffe.

_____________________________

(in reply to caslug)

Post #: 49

RE: Oscars are still death traps from the get-go. - 10/18/2004 5:05:53 AM

caslug

Posts: 48
Joined: 8/19/2004
Status: offline

I don't numbers on how many a/c various allied fighters "destroy". Wasn't in PTO Hellcat was number one or something. Guess there could be couple question is what a/c had an impact on the war OR what was best a/c of war? Spit, didn't win the BOB by itself, hurricane shot down more GE. Just like P51 didn't win the war by itself, we could make an argument that it was the "strategic bomber" that had a bigger impact. Kinda like what came first, chicken or the egg. W/O fighter escort ALL the way to the target, the bombers couldn't do the job. While, w/o bombers present, fighters wouldn't have the opp't to shot down enemy fighter. Beside, by the time major strategic bombing offensive started (feb 44 and onward) the USAF had lots of fighters escorting(from P47, P38, P51) that LW eventually didn't bother to try to intercept the heavily escorted raid, therefore the raid go thru and bomb the crap out of the factories, refineries, etc., Which cut down on training, spare parts, etc., which in turn lead to greener & greener repl pilots for the LW. So P51, didn't need to shot down a/c to do it's job, escort fighter job is to escort the bomber to/from target, shootdown was secondary bonus.

(in reply to Tankerace)

Post #: 50

RE: Oscars are still death traps from the get-go. - 10/18/2004 5:16:38 AM

madmickey

Posts: 1336
Joined: 2/11/2004
From: Calgary, Alberta
Status: offline

Range was the P-51 asset that no fighter had in Western Europe.
Since it was not in service as long it did not have a higher ace total,
oering said he knew the war was over when he saw P-51 overhead of Berlin.

(in reply to caslug)

Post #: 51

RE: Oscars are still death traps from the get-go. - 10/18/2004 5:19:05 AM

RAM

Posts: 402
Joined: 5/1/2000
From: Bilbao,Vizcaya,Spain
Status: offline

quote:

P-47s with drop tanks could escort bombers as far in as Holland,

that was true in 1943, Tankerace

in 1944 bigger drop tanks allowed the P47 to escort bombers well into Germany, and by late 1944 the latter marks of theP47D (with two big wing drop tanks plus the belly DT) were able to fly all the way to Berlin (and slightly beyond) and back.

The diversion of the P47 to ground attack duties was done because the P51 simply couldn't do it because its lower payload and much higher vulnerability to ground AA fire. Not because the P51 was a better in the escort role.

_____________________________

RAM

"Look at me! look at me!!!

Not like that! NOT LIKE THAT!!!"

(in reply to Tankerace)

Post #: 52

RE: Oscars are still death traps from the get-go. - 10/18/2004 5:25:39 AM

Tankerace

Posts: 6400
Joined: 3/21/2003
From: Stillwater, OK, United States
Status: offline

Bingo. A P-51 in the ground attack role could go down from a hit by an '08 Luger. A P-47 could sometimes survive a direct hit from an 88.

When the first pilots had to take the P-47 into combat, the thought the thing would never fly. Once they got it in to combat, however, they were even surprised at its qualities. Skeptical Luftwaffe pilots were even amazed and came to respect the jug.

_____________________________

(in reply to RAM)

Post #: 53

RE: Oscars are still death traps from the get-go. - 10/18/2004 5:29:18 AM

RAM

Posts: 402
Joined: 5/1/2000
From: Bilbao,Vizcaya,Spain
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: madmickey

Range was the P-51 asset that no fighter had in Western Europe.

the P38 had wider range. P47D with external DTs had a range of 1900 miles in 1944. Only 100 less than the P51D with full fuel load. Given that the P51D had to drain its aft internal tank BEFORE starting to drain the DTs (which were to be dropped as soon as contact with the enemy had been established), the P47D in fact guaranteed a wider range by mid-1944.

In any case the P47N had a range of 2250 nautical miles. If range is your only motivation for qualifying the P51 as the best fighter of WW2, then you've mistaken your plane of choice.

quote:

Since it was not in service as long it did not have a higher ace total

Gabreski was captured in 1944. Bob Johnson was retired for combat in 1944, too, after ending his Tour of Duty. lenght of service was irrelevant over europe, because all the pilots had a top of missions to fly, after doing it they were rotated home.

quote:

Goering said he knew the war was over when he saw P-51 overhead of Berlin.

If would be hesitant to qualify G�ring as a mastermind of WW2 air power, even more in the latest stages of the war when he had lost any rational thinking.

Anyway, he would've seen fighters over Berlin less than 3 months later if the P51 had never existed. And they would've been P47s. Not a great deal of difference, in any case.

_____________________________

RAM

"Look at me! look at me!!!

Not like that! NOT LIKE THAT!!!"

(in reply to madmickey)

Post #: 54

RE: Oscars are still death traps from the get-go. - 10/18/2004 5:36:21 AM

Tankerace

Posts: 6400
Joined: 3/21/2003
From: Stillwater, OK, United States
Status: offline

When Herr Goering said He knew the war was over when he saw P-51s over Berlin, he was not saying the P-51 meant the war was lost. He was saying now that US Strategic Bombers had escort to and from their targets, there was nothing they could do. In a few months, the P-47D could the same job.

Another job the P-47 had that the Mustang didn't was V-1 busting. The P-47M, along with Hawker Tempests and occasional Spitfires, were used to intercept and shoot down the buzz bombs. The P-47 was adaptable, the P-51 was not. Now, one claim that could be made in the P-51s defense is that in Korea, it was used as a ground attack plane. However, it was quickly replaced by the F-80 and F-84, because it was just as vulnerable as it was in WW2.

_____________________________

(in reply to RAM)

Post #: 55

RE: Oscars are still death traps from the get-go. - 10/18/2004 5:44:10 AM

RAM

Posts: 402
Joined: 5/1/2000
From: Bilbao,Vizcaya,Spain
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tankerace

Another job the P-47 had that the Mustang didn't was V-1 busting. The P-47M, along with Hawker Tempests and occasional Spitfires, were used to intercept and shoot down the buzz bombs. The P-47 was adaptable, the P-51 was not. Now, one claim that could be made in the P-51s defense is that in Korea, it was used as a ground attack plane. However, it was quickly replaced by the F-80 and F-84, because it was just as vulnerable as it was in WW2.

I read somewhere that the reason why the P-51 was used in Korea, and not the P-47 was because pure economics. It seems it was cheaper to operate Mustangs over Korea than P-47s. Given that the P-51 was such a weak target in ground attack roles I think quite some of the Penthagon's staff of the era should've had spent a lot of years in jail for homicide...the choice of Mustangs instead of Thunderbolts in ground attack roles killed many, many, american pilots.

_____________________________

RAM

"Look at me! look at me!!!

Not like that! NOT LIKE THAT!!!"

(in reply to Tankerace)

Post #: 56

RE: Oscars are still death traps from the get-go. - 10/18/2004 5:51:48 AM

Tankerace

Posts: 6400
Joined: 3/21/2003
From: Stillwater, OK, United States
Status: offline

It was economics. The Jug was a big fuel guzzling beast. The P-51, at least discounting human lives, could be issued to units at a fraction of operating costs. Oddly enough, while both the P-51 and P-47 were exported, from what I have seen, many Air Forces preferred to buy up the P-47s. Especially those that needed ground attack planes.

_____________________________

(in reply to RAM)

Post #: 57

RE: Oscars are still death traps from the get-go. - 10/18/2004 6:01:35 AM

madmickey

Posts: 1336
Joined: 2/11/2004
From: Calgary, Alberta
Status: offline

P-51 killed V-1
Model P-51A P-51B P-51C P-51D P-51K P-51H
Production Count 310 1988 1750 8102 1500 555
Combat Record 4950 Air Kills, 4131 Ground Kill, 230 V-1 Kills, 19:1 Kill Ratio
Less than 300 P-51's exist today, about 145 flying
http://www.icon.co.za/~pauljnr/specs1.htm

The P51 accounted for 49% of luftwaffe killed. This for a plane that was in combat ffor less than 1.5 year.

(in reply to Tankerace)

Post #: 58

RE: Oscars are still death traps from the get-go. - 10/18/2004 6:11:55 AM

Tankerace

Posts: 6400
Joined: 3/21/2003
From: Stillwater, OK, United States
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: madmickey

Combat Record 4950 Air Kills, 4131 Ground Kill,

The P51 accounted for 49% of luftwaffe killed. This for a plane that was in combat ffor less than 1.5 year.

Interesting. You say that just over 9,000 planes destroyed is 49% of the German Luftwaffe? You might want to check your sources bud. In 1943 alone Germany built 6,418 Me109Gs, not counting planes of other types. It might have killed 49% of 1 years production of 1 fighter, but certainly not 49% of the entire Luftwaffe.

EDIT. 20,000 FWs were built during the war. So, if we assume that all the German Luftwaffe operated was Focke-Wulfs, then you are correct. Unfortunately for you, they operated a wide variety of aircraft. Claiming the P-51 shot down 49% of the Luftwaffe is just insane.

< Message edited by Tankerace -- 10/17/2004 10:14:01 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to madmickey)

Post #: 59

RE: Oscars are still death traps from the get-go. - 10/18/2004 6:17:41 AM

RAM

Posts: 402
Joined: 5/1/2000
From: Bilbao,Vizcaya,Spain
Status: offline

Well, you're right and wrong, madmickey.

Right in that P51s killed V1s. Some mustangs in the RAF were used for that duty, running on special extra-pure 150 octane fuel.

And quite wrong in the K/D ratio.

First of all, substract the ground kills, as they aren't of any use for the air-to-air relation we're talking about. That leaves around 4900 kills, and the K/D goes quite lower, to something near 10-1

Second of all, overclaiming was a standard matter in WW2. For instance: in 1943, in one combat over Italy, the american fighters involved (p38s, IIRC) claimed downing a lot of 109s. So many messerschmitts that after the war the luftwaffe papers showed that in fact they claimed they had killed TWICE the number of 109s present in the MTO at that date!!!. Ironics apart, no 109 was lost at all that day, and only a couple of Italian fighters failed to return. Similar things happened over the Channel clashes between the RAF and Luftwaffe, and almost anywhere else (not only by fighters, the bomber raids over france and germany in 1943 reported so many enemy fighter losses that the Luftwaffe would've been wasted by autum'43 had they been true!!!)

So we'll take that 4900 kill number with pincers...because more probably than not if we cut that number in two it would still be over the actual Air to Air kills of the Mustang. i would love to see actual revised numbers of true kills in WW2 by model. But until that is done (and there are some great jobs that way in some books, but have seen none about the Mustang's kills), I tend to be sceptical about american K/D ratios before Vietnam.

Thirdly, if we add all the kills claimed by the Soviets, British and americans on the Luftwaffe we reach roughly three times the actual number of warplanes the Luftwaffe ever had. And that including operational losses, retired obsolete models, and damaged planes lost in captured air fields. Did I say "overclaim" was a major matter here?. Well, it is.

Finally, we were discussing K/D of the P51 vs a definite german model, the Fw190D9. Those numbers say nothing about the matter.

As a side line I'll add that in any case numbers of the P51 (or any other allied fighter) after Summer'44 don't tell any interesting tale. The americans, soviets and british were fighting an air force composed of 99% kids and 1% experts, which were in serious trouble to go up because extreme lack of fuel and were outnumbered out of any hope of success. Numbers won't give you the slightest hint of a true fighter quality in this particular case, madmickey, nor they will prove your point in the slightest way.

< Message edited by RAM -- 10/18/2004 4:20:55 AM >

_____________________________

RAM

"Look at me! look at me!!!

Not like that! NOT LIKE THAT!!!"

(in reply to madmickey)

Post #: 60

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 4 5 next > >>

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> RE: Oscars are still death traps from the get-go.