Originally posted by Kweassa
Why would the LW crowd ever get spite when already every USAAF plane outmaneuvers every LW plane(the E-4 and F-4 being exception) with those combat flaps creaking up and down?
It's not like there was ever a chance to outmaneuver 4~5 ton US planes that turn better than planes that weigh less than half that, in the first place, regardless of AH1 or AH2.
First, to me, it seems roll rate is important in outmaneuvering. The FW 190 is peerless in this regard.
Second, in steady-state, stall-fight turning, the FW 190A-8 (and probably the rest of the 190 series) outturns the P-47D; the Bf 109G-6 outturns the P-47D, the P-51D, and the P-38J with no flaps, and is about even with the P-38J when it has 1 notch of flaps deployed; the Bf 109E-4 outturns the P-47D, P-51D, and P-38J with or without 1 notch of flaps.
As for turn performance of heavy vs. light planes, it's not just a matter of weight. Take a small plane, give it high wing loading, and it isn't going to do well in steady-state, stall-turn conditions. It's the whole package that counts, including wing loading, lift/drag, and so on. The B5N2 turns as well as the A6M2 Zero, which is to say much better than any American or German fighter. The C-47 turns much better than P-38's, P-51's, P-47's, FW 190's, and a little better than Bf 109's, La-7's, and almost as well as Spit I's, and N1K2's.
There seems to be the opinion that HTC biases performance in favor of US aircraft or that turn performance of US aircraft is unrealistically good. I just go and test the steady-state turn performance. The real stats don't back up that opinion.
Also, I would bet money that HTC models these aircraft based on flight-test data and mathematical aerodynamic models that are pretty accurate -- not based on someone's opinion without any data to back it up or based on someone's feeling that one aircraft should be better because he likes that aircraft.