P-47 vs P-51 in WWII

[worr]

Originally posted by H. Godwineson
Weren't P-38's routinely being  flown across the Atlantic to England as early as 1943?  No lack of range there.  And wasn't the range of the Lightning exceeding that of the Mustang by 1945?  Have no sources handy to verify.

Anybody out there know for certain?

Regards, Shuckins

Yes, I already mentioned the 38 was over Berlin before the 51 above.

P-38 had another hour plus in the air over the P-51....but it took buns of steel to sit in it that long.

Wor, out

[worr]

Originally posted by Wotan
I have read this as well.  Its pretty clear to me that the p51 was the plane. According to Butler the lw in the west was able be maintain an average operational dayfighter strength of 1364 while 14,720 aircraft were "lost".

Quantity has a quality of its own.........

The 38, as before said, wasn't produced in any quantities to have an impact in the ETO. As before said, only two P-38 figher groups were operating in 1943(Oct then Dec). Add to this the demand for the 38 in the PTO...and you have very minimal impact in the ETO with the forked tailed devil.

The 47 was the machine that broke the back of the LW. The 51 was still being rushed into production. The turning point was when Doolittle took command of the 8th AF and "set the fighters free." By June 44 it was all over. Only by husbanding a reserve could the LW make an impact on the airwar over Germany then.

Worr, out

[worr]

Originally posted by Captain Virgil Hilts
The P-51's claim to being the plane that broke the Luftwaffe's back just doesn't fly.

I've never read any claim like this. This has most consistently been applied to the P-47D....and particularily after Doolittle set the fighters free.

Worr, out

[AtmkRstr]

Originally posted by fd ski
Yak , Migg and Lagg is what broke LW back.

I read somwhere that about 75% of the Luftwaffe's losses were on the Western front.

Can sombody verify this?

[whgates3]

i can not verify that you read it somewhere

¦¬þ

[Puke]

I met a Pac theater P-38 pilot who is current with many other WW2 pilots.  In conversation with this pilot he told me he knows Gunthar Rall pretty well and they meet up on occasion and when really pursuing Gunthar about his true feelings of the P-38 (he said Gunthar was very diplomatic and usually doesn't say anything negative about anything...or that was the gist I got), I was told that Gunthar Rall kinda looked at him as if telling a secret and said they saved the P-38s for their rookies to go after.  That said to me right there the P-38s were not feared in any manner by the LW.

BTW, this same pilot told me P-38's could make "box turns" on Spitfires.  What is a "box turn"?

[Purzel]

Hmm, the impact on the war is surely bigger with the P-51. Because of the greater range off course.

If I had to choose in which plane between these two to fly and fight, I would most prolly choose the ugly P47 tho.

In RL it didnt have the touchy merlin, which could be easily critically damaged. It had a very reliable and rugged motor. This lead to the fact that most p47 were tuned up so the had very good performance. And the structural strength of the Jug is very high. AFAIK there was no Jug-Ace shot down. Not saying that I'm an ace (or would be) but I certainly would feel more comfortable in a 400MPH Tank than a 400MPH Fish.

If it was not for the west front, the jug may have been the "better" fighter FOR THE WEST-FRONT.

In the east the altitudes were very low, and AFIK at these alts the jug was a pig. The russians didnt like it either

[Purzel]

Originally posted by Puke
BTW, this same pilot told me P-38's could make "box turns" on Spitfires.  What is a "box turn"?

A box-turn is the following maneuver:

You throw a pink box out of the window, the persuing spit-pilot gets distracted, you turn at that moment the p38 upside down, split-s and run away.

It only works with sissy... Spits, because pilots of real planes dont usually have this affinity to pink stuff in general

[-ammo-]

Originally posted by Purzel
AFAIK there was no Jug-Ace shot down.

Actually there were several P-47 aces shot down. Most notable was Hub Zemke, Gerald Johnson, Bud Mahurin  and while he was not actually shot down, Francis Gabreski went down near a German airfiend.

[whgates3]

Originally posted by -ammo-
Actually there were several P-47 aces shot down. Most notable was Hub Zemke, Gerald Johnson, Bud Mahurin  and while he was not actually shot down, Francis Gabreski went down near a German airfiend.

according to his autobiography, 'Hub' Zemke, while on a mission in a P-51, lost control in bad weather & his plane came apart in the ensuing violent spin.


BTW - just came across this chart:
Fighter Losses ETO

Type -- Sorties ----- Combat Losses - Production
P-47 -- 423,435 ---- 3077 ---------------- 15,579
P-51 -- 213,873 ---- 2520 ---------------- 14,490
P-38 -- 129,849 ---- 1758 ------------------ 9,535
P-40 -- 67,059 ------ 553 ------------------ 13,738
P-39 -- 30,547 ------ 107 ------------------- 9,585

[-ammo-]

Yes that is true, however he was a 10+ P-47 ace at the time. He was asked to take command of a P-38 unit while he was commanding the 56 FG. This unit soon transitioned to the P-51.  He was not actually shot down, but his wimpy P-51 cam apart in turbulance while flying in a cloud bank.  If he had been in a P-47, his wings would have not folded and he would have brought his AC back to England.

[whgates3]

according to the chart i posted the P-39 was the most effective USAAF plane in the ETO

[bj229r]

Gabreski bought it strafin an airfield..spent last of war in prison camp

[Dwarf]

Interesting viewpoints.

Most of the arguments hinge on whether you believe a plane's effectiveness was due to the plane or the pilot.

As a number of posts illustrate, the P-38 (my personal favorite WWII fighter) wasn't as effective in the ETO as it should have been because the aircrews were poorly trained and the commanders had no faith in the bird.  Any plane incompetently flown is easy meat, so, Gunther Rall notwithstanding, German estimates about the plane are based on the pilot not the aircraft.

The 56th was an exceptional outfit, both in the quality of its leadership and the talent of its pilots.  In the hands of a good pilot, the P-47 was exceptionally effective.  Once again, the pilot, not the aircraft being the difference.

The P-51 seemed to be the aircraft that the average fighter pilot could employ most effectively.  Thus it probably contributed most to Allied success.

But, as others have pointed out, by the time it was flying in great numbers, it was the German pilots who were poorly trained and inexperienced and thus easy meat.

Dwarf

[tailgunr]

Jug vs p51 True Story