Best Heavy Fighter

[J.A.W.]

Well Brooke, they did want to come down & play in the mud, didn't they?
So, they can hardly complain if they then get their faces rubbed in it by the big boys..

2nd TAF had  air-control advisory - forward based in liberated Europe, viz  'Kenway',
- who would direct/vector the Tempests  via radar plots (& etc) of e/a activity,
& I'm guessing - the 9th AF maybe ran a similar tactical system.

The 8th AF Mustangs went on defacto 'Ranger/frei-jagd' duties -
 - once homebound when released from heavy bomber escort,
but didn't [AFAIK] get the same benefit of radar guided ground control.

[J.A.W.]

Knak, according to the USAAF stats, the P-51 also got the best results of the 3 fighter types they operated into Germany, both A2A, A2G & on cost/benefit - win/loss ratios..

Certainly the LW couldn't have afforded to run either the `38 or `47 - in gas bills alone..

& Brooke, the 2nd TAF also operated Spitfire XIVs in the air-superiority role,  & they
had the high alt' zone - top covered [ & yes, they'd also kick the `51's butt - above '22,000ft'].

[Karnak]

Knak, according to the USAAF stats, the P-51 also got the best results of the 3 fighter types they operated into Germany, both A2A, A2G & on cost/benefit - win/loss ratios..

They didn't operate at the concurrently, entering the war in similar strengths at the same time so cannot be directly compared without consideration of other factors.  The P-47 and P-38, as well as the Spitfire, faced a much more consistently veteran Luftwaffe than did the P-51s.  You keep trying to compare things directly without considering contributing factors to the respective results.


The Marianas Turkey Shoot shot the Hellcat's win/loss ratio through the roof, but you can't directly compare the Wildcat's performance to that as when it was our first line carrier fighter it was engaged in the destruction of the very well trained pre-war Japanese pilots who were much more capable of defending themselves.  What you are doing with the P-51 when you compare it like that to the P-38 and P-47 is the same kind of action.

[Brooke]

Well Brooke, they did want to come down & play in the mud, didn't they?
So, they can hardly complain

I'm not complaining.  Just pointing out that the P-51 was a better plane above about 22k.

The Tempest was an awesome plane below that and especially down low.

[Brooke]

& Brooke, the 2nd TAF also operated Spitfire XIVs in the air-superiority role,  & they
had the high alt' zone - top covered [ & yes, they'd also kick the `51's butt - above '22,000ft'].

The Spit 14 is also a marvelous plane.  It is great at high altitude.  Without WEP, the P-51D is substantially faster below about 15k.  With WEP, the P-51D is only a very tiny bit faster below about 15k.  The Spit 14 is a lot faster than the P-51D at about 27k on up.  The P-47M and N are a lot faster still.

In some of the late-war scenarios, I got to fight against Tempests, P-51's, and Spit 14's while flying Bf 109K-4's and FW 190D-9's.  Interestingly, despite what the matchups might be like in 1 on 1's, in the scenario environment, those planes are competitive against each other.

[J.A.W.]

Indeed Brooke, those top performing late war recip' fighters were closely matched-
 as you describe,  with certain performance advantages
giving a combat edge under specific circumstances.

But - for Knak's benefit I will point out that the 8th AF had the pick of the USAAF types & settled on the P-51 as best for the job they were tasked with, & the results - even when all 3 types were operated in the same missions - showed they were right to do so.

Interestingly, the RAF chose to use their combination of Tempest/Spitfire XIV in
 2nd TAF tactical air-superiority roles & sent their Merlin Mustangs back to the UK for
long range escort duties too.

[J.A.W.]

Knak, the USAAF did fly Spitfires over Berlin [ albeit PRU types] ,
 & it sure is a matter of speculation - as to if they'd use them in the fighter role -
 instead of `38s & `47s,-  if Merlin Mustangs weren't available.

I doubt it though, & the `51 really did just hold all the best cards for escorting 8th AF heavy bombers, & wasting the Jagdwaffe by attrition.

I know that in the MTO, Allison powered Mustangs flew escort for medium bombers,
but lacked the alt' performance of the turbo boosted birds.

Brooke, about hi-alt performance of Griffon Spitfire vs P-47, here's a scenario
I wonder if even the `47N could tote enough gas/run its R-2800 long enough at high power,
 - to fly an intercept vector on a high/fast flying PRU Spit XIX?

Post war trials showed that the new-fangled RAF Meteor jets couldn't do it.

& does anyone know - if the Soviets ever used their Thunderblots to try & intercept RAF PRU
snoopers prowling high over the iron curtain - post VE-day?

[Tank-Ace]

Knak, the USAAF did fly Spitfires over Berlin [ albeit PRU types] ,
 & it sure is a matter of speculation - as to if they'd use them in the fighter role -
 instead of `38s & `47s,-  if Merlin Mustangs weren't available.

I doubt it though, & the `51 really did just hold all the best cards for escorting 8th AF heavy bombers, & wasting the Jagdwaffe by attrition.

You mean the already greatly diminished and weakened Luftwaffe?

[J.A.W.]

Why not just post the LW Jagdwaffe loss/USAAF FG claim stats from 1-1-44 to D-day?

 & all can see what proportion was attributable to the FGs of the 8th AF

Any bets as to how the P-51 stacks up vs its turbo-brethren?

The 'greatly diminished & weakened' LW was still bombarding London in `44, both with
bomber aircraft & later by V1 cruise missiles, killing & wounding thousands..

& on 1-1-45, - somehow the 'greatly diminished & weakened' LW put nearly
a thousand fighters over Allied airfields on strafing duty..

[Saxman]

The Marianas Turkey Shoot shot the Hellcat's win/loss ratio through the roof, but you can't directly compare the Wildcat's performance to that as when it was our first line carrier fighter it was engaged in the destruction of the very well trained pre-war Japanese pilots who were much more capable of defending themselves.

Wonder what the K/D of the Hellcat would be if you did factor out the Turkey Shoot.

[bozon]

& on 1-1-45, - somehow the 'greatly diminished & weakened' LW put nearly
a thousand fighters over Allied airfields on strafing duty..

and generally failed.

[save]

But not due bad heavy fighters.

and generally failed.

[Brooke]

Brooke, about hi-alt performance of Griffon Spitfire vs P-47, here's a scenario
I wonder if even the `47N could tote enough gas/run its R-2800 long enough at high power,
 - to fly an intercept vector on a high/fast flying PRU Spit XIX?

The P-47M and N are faster under non-WEP than the Spit 14 above about 35k, so up there I'd think that they would have enough gas or flight time.

[Tank-Ace]

Why not just post the LW Jagdwaffe loss/USAAF FG claim stats from 1-1-44 to D-day?

 & all can see what proportion was attributable to the FGs of the 8th AF

Any bets as to how the P-51 stacks up vs its turbo-brethren?

The 'greatly diminished & weakened' LW was still bombarding London in `44, both with
bomber aircraft & later by V1 cruise missiles, killing & wounding thousands..

& on 1-1-45, - somehow the 'greatly diminished & weakened' LW put nearly
a thousand fighters over Allied airfields on strafing duty..

Because even by 1-1-44, the Luftwaffe had already taken one hell of a beating. Because it completely ignores the 4 previous years of war, during which the majority of kills were made, and the luftwaffe reached its peak.


You really seem to be physically incapable of looking at anything prior to 1944, when the Allies reached the height of their airpower, and the Germans were weaker than they've ever been since the start of WWII.

The fact is the P-38, P-47, and Typhoon all faced much better pilots on average than the P-51 and Tempest did.

[BluBerry]

The fact is the P-38, P-47, and Typhoon all faced much better pilots on average than the P-51 and Tempest did.

great point.