AH combat vs Real Life

[Pongo]

davidpt40. your american bias and lack of understanding of what happend in ww2 and what makes a good fighter is comical.

You state that planes dont have to climb well, your reason..because the good fighter will always start on top..lol sorry but that is just stupid..

You name some US planes that were inferior to enemy planes in climb. But the F86 was in the same lege as its enemies in climb. In fact right while the US was making the pony they were looking at planes with excellent climb characteristics..Wasnt the 38 the best climber in the world when introduced?For the last 30 years the US has had the best climbing AC in the world. Why did they do that?

What won the war in ww2 was not long range fighters...But russian infantry. Period. Lots of other contributers but what beat the germans was the russians. And they had no escort fighters..your view is very very scewed.  I would in no way degenerate the increadable beating the USAAF inflicted on the germans. But that is not what won the war. it esteblished air supperiority but it never won the war. If you have to pick one thing that won the war it has to be Russian Infantry. Everything else that faced the Germans was optional.

Long range quality fighters with excellent tactics and excellent pilots took advantage of the bombers drawing out the germans to fight. Using overwhelming numbers and there very high average level of flying ability and excellent aircraft for that type of batlte they basically wiped out the LW in the west.
But that didnt win the war.

I love this one..
"I'm not 'trying' to do anything, I am rationalizing and I am drawing attention to why AH is filled with 'minority' aircraft.
"
minority aircraft like the la7, 109 and spitfire? lol what a joke. take your blinders off bud. Those aircraft where only a minority in the US airforce. The 109 has production numbers greater then the 51 and 47 combined and the spit probably has more then then either of them. Nearly 6000 La7s where built. These minority ac your talking about probably have nearly 70 000 airframes between them.

In reading VIII fighter command at War 'Long Reach' testimony after testimony tells how the US pilots understood they were at a disadvantage in climb and to only engage if you have alt. Yes they used their tactics and numbers and skill to overcome this to a certain extent.

If your point is correct it sure was dumb of the USAAF to ask North American to develop the 51 F, G and H. what where they thinking...
 lighter higher power pony types especially to give them better climb and turn. They didnt have to lighten the machine to give them speed
Your original post was silly.

[davidpt40]

what won the air war in World War II

I said air war, not ground war.  

minority aircraft like the la7, 109 and spitfire? lol what a joke. take your blinders off bud.

I was referring to the 109K4, N1k2, Typhoon, and a few others.

If your point is correct it sure was dumb of the USAAF to ask North American to develop the 51 F, G and H. what where they thinking...

Well, it kind of was.  The U.S. got behind in jet technology and got quite a few bomber crews killed.  How well do you think a P51 can intercept and shoot down a Me262 at 30,000 feet?  Not very well.  

After posting my original post, I was watching the history channel.  A P38 ace was being interviewed and he said "We knew not to climb or turn with the Japanese planes.  They could out-turn and out-climb us.  We would keep our airspeed above 300 and make passes.  It frustrated the hell out of them".

In reading VIII fighter command at War 'Long Reach' testimony after testimony tells how the US pilots understood they were at a disadvantage in climb and to only engage if you have alt.

Go read some more books.  U.S. pilots (unless escorting) have been engaging only when they have had an advantage since World War I.  What happens when neither side has an advantage?  Quite a bit of the time the two flights just pass by each other.

Whew, I have a headache.  Your spelling and lack of reading comprehension hurts my eyes.

[Pongo]

Your initial post mentioned" La7 or 109."
But anyway. Sorry but none of the planes you now mention are rare either....except the 109k4 which is rare in AH..(non existant) but was a common late war fighter.Have you played AH?


So you think that since the US airforce doctrine was to attack from above like every other airforce in history..that they didnt need superior climbing planes..your rediculous..

So you think then..that without the efforts to improve the p51s climb and agility..the US would have had an NA jet fighter ready to meet the 262...lol

The US had design and engineering resources to spare to develop any jet fighter they wanted. If it occured to them early enough.. Hell blame the continued developement of the p38 and 39..at least those companies were making jets early enough to have a chance of getting them to war. The NA team didnt even consider it till late 44. Even if they had started in late 43 they wouldnt have gotten it to war.

is there no straw you wont grasp?

And once again..the planes you are indireclty whining about. Are very good planes in AH and very popular. The pony and f6f and the P47 all have great usages in AH.

You are maintaining then the US fighter pilots usually avoided an even state engagment in ww2? Could you provide one quote to back that up. My reading almost univerally has them aggressivly engaging any LW they could...maybe the history channel says different though. Would they let it degenerate into a turning fight..not against zeros...but against 190s...why not.

[Innominate]

Originally posted by davidpt40

After posting my original post, I was watching the history channel.  A P38 ace was being interviewed and he said "We knew not to climb or turn with the Japanese planes.  They could out-turn and out-climb us.  We would keep our airspeed above 300 and make passes.  It frustrated the hell out of them".

While this quote is completly true, counting on the history channel for accurate information is a rather bad idea.  The history channel seems to have a significant US bias.  The P51 for instance, was an excellent fighter, perfectly suited for the escort operations it was designed for.  It was NOT a "king of the skies" able to dominate anything it ran into.  The P-51 won the air war through numbers.  We simply outproduced the germans.

When it comes to getting into a fight, and getting out alive, I'd rather have a 109 than a p51 any day of the week.

[davidpt40]

But anyway. Sorry but none of the planes you now mention are rare either....except the 109k4 which is rare in AH..(non existant) but was a common late war fighter.Have you played AH?

Meant to say 109-G10.

So you think that since the US airforce doctrine was to attack from above like every other airforce in history..that they didnt need superior climbing planes..your rediculous..

Why would the U.S. sacrifice range for better climb rate?  Ever heard the old fighter pilot saying "Speed is life"?  Climb rate is fine and dandy if your flying a one trick plane, but top speed is better.  Let me reiterate why the U.S. had an advantage in the Pacific and in the ETO- SPEED.  Even the old F4f wildcat became a contender against the A6M when it used its high speed.  I think it was Francis Gabreski (P47 Ace) who talked about using the momentum of the P47 against the Fw190s and not turning with them.  Dive-Attack-Repeat.

P47-Designed as a high speed, high altitude, heavy fighter
F4U-Navys first plane to break 400mph in lvl flight
P51- Long range high speed fighter

None of these fighters were designed with an overwhelming climb rate in mind.  Maybe in your mind you see World War II as a big race to get to 40,000 feet, and whoever gets there first is the winner.

I am not an aeronautical engineer, but I believe airfoil shape affects climb rate, not soley thrust-to-weight.

You are maintaining then the US fighter pilots usually avoided an even state engagment in ww2? Could you provide one quote to back that up.

I will dig some up.  But in fact, the P38 ace I mentioned earlier talked about that very subject.  He said that if any pilot in his squadron attacked a Japanese aircraft by himself, he caught hell when he got back to base (if he made it back).  One on one 'duels' were a thing of the past.  Team-work and having the advantage is what WW2 air combat was about.

is there no straw you wont grasp?

Oh PLEASE- Your the one going off on tangents about Russian infantry.

But think about it, why did the U.S. lag behind GB and Germany in jet technology?  The P-59 wasnt even as fast as the P51.

The P-51 won the air war through numbers. We simply outproduced the germans.

Yeah, but the U.S. had to ferry planes thousands of miles to get them to the front line.  German factories were at most a few hundred miles from the fighting.  Until the end, U.S. escort fighters were consistently being outnumbered in engagements.

[Innominate]

Originally posted by davidpt40
Meant to say 109-G10.
 
Why would the U.S. sacrifice range for better climb rate?  Ever heard the old fighter pilot saying "Speed is life"?  Climb rate is fine and dandy if your flying a one trick plane, but top speed is better.
...
Yeah, but the U.S. had to ferry planes thousands of miles to get them to the front line.  German factories were at most a few hundred miles from the fighting.  Until the end, U.S. escort fighters were consistently being outnumbered in engagements.

Yes, I agree on the 109g10 being a rare plane, germany only built thousands of them.  

Anyways, You answered your own question.  The p51 was built to fly those incredibly long range flights.  They had to sacrifice maneuverability and climb rate in order to get the plane to carry enough fuel.

It looks like you're reading into my posts that I'm saying speed isn't important, it is.  But given two planes equal in every respect, who has the edge, the one that can climb at 4000fpm, or 2000fpm?  Which plane would you rather be flying when attacked from above?

A good climb rate allows one  to dominate a fight.  It allows one to grab, and to maintain a significant E advantage with more room for error.

[Pongo]

I really dont see what your babbling about. The US needed long range fighters and made them slick enought that they had high speed as well. But the fundimental thing for escort fighters is to get there...The pony and 47 did that. At the sacrifice of climb. To say that climb doesnt matter is just so assinine that I guess we can stop discussing it.

[Thrawn]

Pongo, davidpt40 has been nothing but polite with you, even in the face of your continued patronization.  I think he deserves the same measure of courtesy in  return.

[AtmkRstr]

Originally posted by davidpt40

2:  In AH, range doesn't matter.  I doubt many pilots take more than 50% fuel in even the La7 or 109.  Theres just no reason to.  Fuel=weight.  However, long range fighters are what won the air war in World War II (in the ETO/PTO anyways).
 

In AH, fuel = alt = speed = life.
Bring (and use) more fuel, and you'll die less.

I wish more bish pilots realized this, it would make for more challenging opponents.

[Oldman731]

Originally posted by Thrawn
Pongo, davidpt40 has been nothing but polite with you, even in the face of your continued patronization.  I think he deserves the same measure of courtesy in  return.

Agreed.  Did you take an ugly pill, Pongo?

- oldman

[ccvi]

Originally posted by AtmkRstr
In AH, fuel = alt = speed = life.
Bring (and use) more fuel, and you'll die less.

LOL, yes, if you stay alive longer you use more fuel. Quite obvious.

But if you don't stay alive anyway you don't need that fuel either.

[Red Tail 444]

Wow.....

Well, for me, I always fly an extra base or two at least from the area of conflict, because my plane flies better at high alt, and I like to have options in case the action moves elsewhere.

I'll never up less than 75%, and always at least one external, if I'm going hunting. JABO missions dictate otherwise, but I won't jabo unless it's called for.

I have to agree that altitude is more important than climb rate at some points, but given the fact I choose to take my time to get to alt (and get a drink, nature call on the way) I'm in a far better position to dictate terms, and divert if needed.

Be patient, fools rush in where angels fear to tread.  
Gainsie

[Pongo]

Originally posted by Thrawn
Pongo, davidpt40 has been nothing but polite with you, even in the face of your continued patronization.  I think he deserves the same measure of courtesy in  return.

I know Im being harsh on the guy Thrawn. But he really is spewing one silly lie after another. The Jug and Pony pilots deserve better then to be justfied with silly lies. If he wants a real discussion about the merits of game play in AH vs the utility of a given AC in WW2. He has to try to establish some ethical statements as to why and how the planes that concern him were effective or ineffective.  Just flames till then Im affraid.

[humble]

Originally posted by Pongo

Your post seems to be trying to draw attention or rationalize why the P47 and maybe the pony are not world beaters in AH but they where in ww2. In the case of the Pony the plane is a world beater in AH if you just have a little SA. In the case of the jug. Its probably not as effective here as ww2.  

Hehe, tell that to Drex, Sancho, Frenchy etc...the jug is just as deadly here in the right hands as it was in WW2. It just doesn't fit the "profile" of AH combat very well. BTW I thing you hit the points right on...nice post.

[AKS\/\/ulfe]

Climb is only good if you need to get up there quick.

In the end, unless you are fighting over your own airspace, climb ain't jack... speed is what matters, and David is correct in saying that.

As a matter of fact, Pongo, American pilots were explicitly told to not go engaging the Germans fighters. It wasn't until LATE '44/'45 that the ban was lifted and American pilots were told to do the opposite- engage the LuftWaffe with extreme prejudice.

But by that point air supremacy had already been established.

But then again, I fail to see the whole premise to the argument.

David says climb isn't as important as top speed. He's correct, unless you are scrambling to intercept inbound targets.

As far as long range fighters, they only helped to cover the bombers which in turn put a hurting on Germany and/or Japan.. depending on the theater. It was a combination of a thousand things that won the war, nothing on it's own won anything except small battles.
-SW