Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: Anaxogoras on February 23, 2009, 05:56:34 PM
-
From wikipedia:
The Fw 190 gruppen adhered to well-proven hit-and-run tactics, avoiding whenever possible any turning engagements or being caught in a position of inferior numerical advantage. These tactics were used by Bf 109 pilots as well, albeit "the lean" (the Soviet nickname for the Bf 109 series) was widely considered by Soviet airmen as a more agile and potent adversary than the Fw 190, which was viewed as "heavy and slow..." especially when climbing
Is this accurate? Did Russian pilots really consider the Bf 109 the more potent adversary? One of the citations for the quote is an interesting translation that is sort of a guide for how to fight the 190 in the La-5: http://www.lonesentry.com/articles/ttt/russian-combat-fw190.html (http://www.lonesentry.com/articles/ttt/russian-combat-fw190.html). The amount of head-on attack references is quite funny; apparently, the head-on was standard for the Fw 190. The other citation is a broken link. :rolleyes:
-
:rofl Oh my. Think you should have kept that 190 part out of it G, now we won't hear the end of it! :lol
-
:confused:
-
One has to remember that many of the 190s in Russian were ground attack a/c. These pilots were not trained in a2a combat though some did run up impressive scores.
-
One has to remember that many of the 190s in Russian were ground attack a/c. These pilots were not trained in a2a combat though some did run up impressive scores.
I don't think that accounts for it. Remember, even the 109 was used as a ground attack plane.
I'm a little surprised at the lack of interest/knowledge about this topic. Maybe HTC is correct to ignore the Eastern front. :noid
-
How does this contradict with the game at all?
-
How does this contradict with the game at all?
Did I say it did, bubi?
What it contradicts is the opinion of the Western air forces.
-
Maybe HTC is correct to ignore the Eastern front. :noid
I took this to mean that you thought their opinion was contradicted.
-
I took this to mean that you thought their opinion was contradicted.
No, I meant that HTC is possibly right to ignore the Eastern front because of the near total lack of interest in the Russian opinion of the Bf 109 and Fw 190.
-
In a knife fight a 109G6 is certainly more potent than a heavy 190. 109's were used as top cover for attacker 190's as it has been said.
I don't know if it was the case really but the Russians would be right to consider the 109 as a better dogfighter.
What it contradicts is the opinion of the Western air forces.
You've got to keep in mind the evolution of the 190 over the years, the good reports on the 190 date from the battles over Britain and France were the 190 was used a lot as an air superiority fighter in its light version (no extra guns or armor and no ord) and at medium to high altitude, with skilled fighter pilots at the commands, and often favourable situation. What the russians met at low alt over russia was the basicly the same plane with same engine but full of armor guns and bombs in a position that doesn't fit the 190 IMO, not to mention the pilot skill in air combat. Someone said bomb truck ?
-
Practice has shown that in frontal attacks both planes are so damaged that, in the majority of cases, they are compelled to drop out of the battle.
The reason I don't 99% of the time.
-
"In a knife fight a 109G6 is certainly more potent than a heavy 190."
In this GAME it is. IRL it was a bit different. Not that I have any other reference to that than the duel (a draw BTW) between J. Meimberg/E. Mayer, and that was G2 vs. A6, AFAIK.
Considering the attrition rate on Eastern front and the new pilots ability to better utilize the better continuous climb rate of 109 I do not find the Russian opinion too surprising of 109 being the better plane. However in a 190 you are more safe in low level than in a 109 due to damage survivability so I assume that many times the 190 operated nearer the deck where as 109s did not fly with ordnance after the 190 became available, so it is possible that statistically the 190s more rarely had neither the altitude advantage nor the benefit of sneak attack partly being responsible in forming such opinion.
I also think that if people insist believing the allied tests of 190's abilities in a dogfight a veteran German pilot probably could show those test pilots a trick or two to realize what where the 190s actual strengths in a knife fight. However as that never happened and the only evidence of 190s fighter abilities we have remaining is pretty much only the records like this: http://www.luftwaffe.cz/spit.html (<- You need to dig up some to see who flew 190s, but Priller did.)
-C+
-
109s did not fly with ordnance after the 190 became available
I don't believe this to be true. Messerschmidt Bf 109 F, G & K Series by Prien and Rodeike has numerous pictures of 109G's on the Eastern front outfitted for ground attack, and after the introduction time of the FW 190 to that theater.
-
Really the only people who thought the 190s were "good" were the British with old Spitfires or Hurricanes.
Besides which, the 190 (as awful as they all are in this game) are still better than the 109 against the "old" Spits (1,5,9) in squadron sized numbers. The firepower alone makes them more dangerous.
Against Spit 8,16,14 I think squads of 109s and 190s would get shredded about equally.
-
I think the opinion of the Russian pilots would depend a lot on the aircraft and front they flew as well. If they were flying in the south where German units like JG 52 and JG 3 were flying the 109 (as well as the Rumanians and Hungarians) and most 190s were ground attack and close support types, they would probably see the 109 as the better fighter. In the north, where JG 54 was tearing holes in the VVS with the 190, maybe not so much. Also, as they got closer to Germany and the later-model 190s kept close for Home Defense got into the fight, also might make a difference.
As far as the matchups go, if the VVS pilot was in a P-40, P-39, LaGG or something else of the "lower rung", the agility and climb rate of the 109 would seem a serious overmatch (at least to an average or below-average pilot). In a late Yak or La, not so much.
-
Also, as they got closer to Germany and the later-model 190s kept close for Home Defense got into the fight, also might make a difference.
The same wiki article says the VVS pilots' impression of the 190D-9 was that it burned as well as the other 190s.
-
Wiki also points out that John McCain loves chocolate milk.
-
Wiki also points out that John McCain loves chocolate milk.
I'm asking for evidence that either affirms or denies the article, and so what the article says about the D-9 is relevant. Don't derail the discussion, please.
-
Chances are if its on Wiki, it can already be considered discredited. Its about as reliable as wartime "intelligence" assesments of enemy equipment. I've seen stuff from alternate-history sites and events and stats that have been 'fudged' for fiction works show up on wiki as if is were 100% authentic. I don't even go there anymore. Its like the "Mad Magazine" version of the world- the more preposterous, the more likely it is to appear.
-
Chances are if its on Wiki, it can already be considered discredited. Its about as reliable as wartime "intelligence" assesments of enemy equipment. I've seen stuff from alternate-history sites and events and stats that have been 'fudged' for fiction works show up on wiki as if is were 100% authentic. I don't even go there anymore. Its like the "Mad Magazine" version of the world- the more preposterous, the more likely it is to appear.
It all depends on what sort of citations you can find for the article. High quality citations from primary or reliable secondary sources usually make for a quality article. For example, their articles on WWII aircraft usually rely on the same books and evidence that our biggest WWII buffs do.
This particular section isn't up to that standard, and so besides mere speculation, has anyone read about the opinions of the VVS toward the 190 vs 109? I'm guessing not, otherwise I would already have heard about it. The translated article is very interesting, however; definitely read it if you haven't already.
-
Really the only people who thought the 190s were "good" were the British with old Spitfires or Hurricanes.
I don't have Caldwell's "JG 26" book with me at the moment - if you do, you can check me out - but here's the essence of what he reported from all the JG 26 pilots he interviewed:
JG 26 had three Gruppen. By the time the summer of 1944 rolled around, one of them was equipped with 109s, and the other two had 190s. The two FW Gruppen people were in reasonably good spirits at that point. They were convinced that at low altitudes the A8 could outrun any other plane (Caldwell reported that they thought this regardless of what statistics they were shown), and that its high roll rate gave it "a useful maneuver."
By contrast, morale in the 109 Gruppe - and its losses - were the worst of JG 26, and kept on getting worse as the war continued. The 109 pilots felt they were outperformed by nearly all the Allied planes, and their losses seemed to confirm this.
Now JG 26 was in a different position from the Reich defense outfits that were based further back from the front. Those Geschwaders had the advantage of ground controllers and time to reach altitude, so they were fighting a different war. I think I'm reasonably well-read on Western Front air operations, and I've never seen any evidence that British or American pilots thought that the 109 was clearly superior to the FW - in fact, my impression has always been just the reverse (Willi Heilman's book repeatedly makes fun of the "hated" 109s). All of the sims that have attempted to duplicate WWII combat planes have rated the FW as a dog, so it isn't just AH2. I have to conclude that the difference between real-life reporting and simulation experience is that actual air combat was markedly different from what we do here, and rewarded speed and firepower far more than those qualities are valued in a sim.
- oldman
-
I don't have Caldwell's "JG 26" book with me at the moment - if you do, you can check me out - but here's the essence of what he reported from all the JG 26 pilots he interviewed:
JG 26 had three Gruppen. By the time the summer of 1944 rolled around, one of them was equipped with 109s, and the other two had 190s. The two FW Gruppen people were in reasonably good spirits at that point. They were convinced that at low altitudes the A8 could outrun any other plane
(Caldwell reported that they thought this regardless of what statistics they were shown),
Faith in/willingness to push the BMW Radial to the limits and beyond?
I think I'm reasonably well-read on Western Front air operations, and I've never seen any evidence that British or American pilots thought that the 109 was clearly superior to the FW - in fact, my impression has always been just the reverse (Willi Heilman's book repeatedly makes fun of the "hated" 109s). All of the sims that have attempted to duplicate WWII combat planes have rated the FW as a dog, so it isn't just AH2. I have to conclude that the difference between real-life reporting and simulation experience is that actual air combat was markedly different from what we do here, and rewarded speed and firepower far more than those qualities are valued in a sim.
- oldman
Visibility? Control function at high IAS?
-
I have to conclude that the difference between real-life reporting and simulation experience is that actual air combat was markedly different from what we do here, and rewarded speed and firepower far more than those qualities are valued in a sim.
This makes a lot of sense. I wouldn't be the first one to say that the AH arena is a pretty good simulation of the Eastern front war, and a terrible simulation of the war over France and Germany. Still the 190 is an effective killer in the arena, but most do not have the patience required for the hit-and-run tactics at which it excels.
A lot of the 109s on the Western front had the underwing gondolas in '44. I can sympathize with the pilots who had to fly those crates.
-
Your logic is somewhat flawed in that nearly ALL of the planes in the game can be just as "effective" as the 190s when flown in the manner the 190s must be flown to ensure "effectiveness".
Pretty much any plane with cannon can play the "orbit high and pick off engaged cons" game with success. Hell, an 'pilot' with average intelligence and poor shooting abilities can be just as effective with 6 .50s if he knows how to set himself up with good shot opportunities.
The only thing the D-9 brings to the table is the ability to outrun a good percentage of the planes in the arena, the A-5/8 can't even manage that any more.
-
Your logic is somewhat flawed in that nearly ALL of the planes in the game can be just as "effective" as the 190s when flown in the manner the 190s must be flown to ensure "effectiveness".
Nearly all of the planes? Come on, that's an exaggeration. The Spitfire series can't roll in a dive (except for the XVI) and has a short ammo clip. The N1K and F6F are too slow, and the Ki-84 loses parts past 450mph. The 109's control surfaces become too heavy. The 38J not only has compression issues at high speed, its ailerons become ineffective. The LA series abhors altitude, and the Yak's ammo clip is too small for hosing down a maneuvering target. Not to forget the Typhoon, it also sucks at altitude and has a glacial roll-rate.
That leaves the F4U, P-51, P-47, P-38L and 190 series, of which the A5 is still very fast compared to the midwar/earlywar planeset. These aircraft roll well at high speed, and have enough ammo to allow the pilot to start firing a ways out in a BnZ guns pass. I would still hesitate over the 38L, however, because, despite its dive flaps, the elevator becomes ineffective at high speed.
Edit: some mention should go to the C205, which has great diving characteristics, but which is probably too slow for an effective BnZ platform.
-
When looking at Pokryshkin's kill record, the majority of his kills on fighters were on the 109, could either be there were more 109s? Or just easier to kill them?
From Wiki:
Kuban
Pokryshkin's most significant contribution to the war effort and the most impressive kill record came during the battle for the Kuban region in 1943. The area east of the Crimean peninsula had seen heated air combat in the months that led to the Soviet assault on Crimea itself, where Kuban-based Soviet air regiments went against Crimea-based Luftwaffe Geschwader. Pokryshkin's regiment went against such well-known German fighter units as JG 51 'Mölders', JG 52 and JG 3 'Udet'. The area saw some of the most heated fighting of the Eastern Front, with daily engagements of up to 200 aircraft in the air. Pokryshkin's innovative tactics of using different fighter types stacked in altitude, the so-called 'pendulum' flight pattern for patrolling the airspace, and the use of ground-based radar, forward based controllers and an advanced central ground control system led to the first grand Soviet Air Force victory over the Luftwaffe.
In the summer of 1942 the 4th Air Army in which Pokrishin's was a part of received the first mobile radar stations which were tested in aiding over-water interceptions of German and Romanian aircraft, that proved highly successful.[citation needed]
In early January, 1943, 16 GIAP was sent to 25 ZAP near the Iranian border, to re-equip with new aircraft, and also to receive new pilots. many of these had to be ferried over from Iran. When there were delays in assembly by the Americans on the Iranian side, it was felt, by the Soviet pilots involved, that the Americans were willfully impeding the war effort. It was at this time that the unit converted onto the P-39 Airacobra, which when all had arrived, turned the unit into a 3-squadron Regiment. 16th Guards received 14 P-39L-1s, 7 P-39Ks, the very last of which was assigned to Pokryshkin, and 11 P-39D-2s. The unit returned to action on April 8, 1943. During this time, Pokryshkin was credited with ten Bf 109s destroyed. Pokryshkin was credited with a Bf 109 destroyed on his very first Airacobra mission, on April 9, 1943, and was only able to gain confirmation for two out of 7 kills on April 12, 1943, although scoring on the 15th, 16th, and 20th, with a score of four shot down during a single sortie on April 29th. Pokryshkin received his first HSU on April 24, 1943, and, was promoted to major in June, having become Commanding officer of his squadron, and also on June 23, 1943, exchanged his old P-39K-1, 42-4421 "White 13", for the famous - and, incidentally, unmarked by any victory stars - P-39N, 42-9004, "White 100", which he flew for the rest of the war, excepting the test of the Berlin Autobahn as a runway in Konstantin Sukhov's "White 50" which was much photographed on the occasion.[1]
One of the most famous engagements he was involved in took place on April 29, 1943. Eight of Pokryshkin's Airacobras were directed by ground control towards a large group of enemy planes. Three whole squadrons of the obsolescent Junkers Ju-87 Stukas were being escorted by a geschwader of Bf-109s. Attacking from the sun, a pair of P-39s attacked the fighters while the remaining six dove through the bomber formation, repeating the attack twice using Pokryshkin's method of swapping dive directions. Twelve Stukas were claimed shot down, with Pokryshkin claiming five.
In most subsequent fights Pokryshkin would usually take the most difficult role, attacking the leader of the German fighter escorts. As he learned in 1941–42, shooting down the flight leader would have a very strong demoralizing effect on the enemy and often would cause them to scramble home. On September 21, Pokryshkin was involved in another high-profile air engagement. This one happened at low altitudes right over the front line. It was witnessed by dozens of journalists and representatives of high command. Pokryshkin shot down three Ju-88s in a single pass, either showing off or overcome by hatred as he had just found out a close friend's entire family has been killed in German occupied territories. Only two kills were confirmed, the third Ju-88 being recorded as brought down by the explosion of the second one and not Pokryshkin's gunfire.
On August 20, 1943, Zaev, who had been the Unit Navigator, and then been promoted to Commanding Officer, and with whom Pokryshkin had strong differences, took measures to have Pokryshkin stripped of his HSU, expelled from the Regiment, and hauled before a tribunal! From 10PM that night until part of the following day, Pokryshkin, 298 IAP's Major Taranyenko, and the 16th Guards' Commissar, Gubarevim, and some "Osobists"(NKVD people!) were completing interrogations and investigations that lasted at least through the following day! Gubarevim, with difficulty, was able to clear Pokryshkin's name and reputation, and "Sasha" was thereupon awarded his second HSU on August 24th. [2]
Here's another one:
Aircraft flown by Pokryshkin
Pokryshkin started the war flying the Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-3 fighter, in which he scored almost twenty victories. The unit was given the honor "16th Guards Fighter Regiment" in March, 1942.at this time, or soon after this, the unit received some Yak-1s, in which Pokryshkin also scored victories. In January, 1943 his regiment converted to lend-lease Bell P-39 Airacobras, which despite a persistent myth the Soviets never used in the ground attack role. Soviet pilots liked this aircraft, and found it quite competitive with the Messerschmitt Bf-109 and superior to the Focke-Wulf FW-190 at the low air combat attitudes common on the Eastern Front. Pokryshkin really enjoyed the 37mm cannon's destructive firepower, and had his own aircraft rigged so that the single button simultaneously fired both the main cannon and the 2 upper nose-mounted .50 caliber machine guns, synchronized to fire through the propellor (airscrew), in addition to the pair of .30 caliber machine guns mounted in each wing, outside the propellor arc and therefore unsynchronized. In his memoirs he describes any enemy aircraft immediately disintegrating upon being hit by the salvo. Pokryshkin and his regiment were repeatedly asked to convert to new Soviet fighters such as the La-5 and Alexander Sergeyevich Yakovlev's Yak fighter series. However Pokryshkin found La-5's firepower insufficient and personally disliked Yakovlev so he never did.
-
From wikipedia
-
From wikipedia
Last time I checked it says the Earth is spherical, too. ;)
Secondly, if the whole point of the thread is to ask if the article is accurate, and you come back with the notion that it must be inaccurate because it's at wikipedia, well, that's just a big fat instance of begging the question. :D
I hate to say it, but information from all sources needs to be evaluated on a case by case basis. We are too much in the habit of believing everything because it's from a reputable source, and disbelieving everything from another source because it contains some bad articles that are completely unrelated to the topic at hand. In both directions, that's laziness in forming our opinions.
-
Nearly all of the planes? Come on, that's an exaggeration.
Care to make a wager? I'm betting it could be done in an FM-2.
-
Whats alts were the fights on the Eastern front? I'm assuming far less than the 25k over Germany and Britain. (Aside from that, the LW pilot has to be thinking if he bails out over that frozen tundra, dying of exposure is a likely outcome)
oops
-
When looking at Pokryshkin's kill record, the majority of his kills on fighters were on the 109, could either be there were more 109s? Or just easier to kill them?
There were 33,000 Bf.109's produced compared to 20,000 Fw 190's; and the Western Front had a higher priority for Fw.190's (the Bf.109's armament being largely inadequate for taking on heavy bombers).
There were only two Geschwaders operating Fw.190's in Russia, JG51 and JG54. JG51 converted back to the Bf.109 in 1943 IIRC.
-
Well I think refering back to the original post we must understand that the La5 in question was the La5 of early 1943. This was most likely actually the original La5 with neither boosted or injected engine.
Early VVS aircraft even the Laggs and Yaks could out turn the 190 that was introduced on Eastern front in 1942. Whilst the 109F and even later the G2 were equally proficient in this area and better in every other than such as the LaGG3 and Yak1.
Indeed only with the introduction of the La5FN did the VVS think they had a plane equal to the current LW aircraft on the front.
It was not until the introduction of the La7 and to some extent the Yak 3 that the VVS thought they had aiorcraft superior in some aspects to the LW equivilents (then on the eastern front)
The dominent LW aircraft on the Eastern front throughout 43 was the 109 in its various types........... since 41 the VVS had been taught to fear getting trapped by a small group of 109's.
I have 3 accounts each of whom refer to the paractice of head on attacks from FW pilots. It seems this became a sort of myth much discussed by VVS pilots.
The later 190 F series was very much a tool designed with the eastern front in mind to replace the Ju87. These would not have been feared by the VVS indeed there are many accounts of small numbers of VVS on patrol hitting larger groups of 190's which were all heavy with bombs.
Pokryshkin's (regiments and later divisional) record basically shows what can be accomplished with thorough training. He was a master of ACS (air combat strategy) enabling groups of ac performing very specific tasks to accomplish stuff that standard patrol and engage tactics failed at.
-
Whats alts were the fights on the Eastern front? I'm assuming far less than the 25k over Germany and Britain. (Aside from that, the LW pilot has to be thinking if he bails out over that frozen tundra, dying of exposure is a likely outcome)
oops
Most I recall reading were very very low. So, anything really.
From wikipedia
I understand, but it was a quick search.