Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: iron650 on June 02, 2011, 02:54:38 PM
-
Yes, I am one of the few to fly the Pony B. No I will never BnZ repeatedly. I instead prefer to come down and engage the enemy from san altitude advantage and try to outplay them. Anyone have good tips defensively and offensively?
-
Yes, I am one of the few to fly the Pony B. No I will never BnZ repeatedly. I instead prefer to come down and engage the enemy from san altitude advantage and try to outplay them. Anyone have good tips defensively and offensively?
defencivly-dont get sucked into a long turn-fight. that will kill your E and youll be an easy target once youve shot down your enemy, but what do i know? i hardly fly it
-
I apparently chased down an I-16 in a turnfight. (Oh how I wish I had a film.) And in an earlier fight I took out a Spit (somehow it happened to be Midway in his SpitIX) in scissors and found a low I-16.
-
Well there's a difference between out turning and out angling somebody. If you're in a dedicated flat turn fight you're dead against 90% of the fighters in this game. The P-51 has a really awful turn radius.
However, if you have speed and E to play with you can bleed it off and pull some sharp angles for a couple seconds. Just long enough to get kills, sometimes.
Defensively? Don't get too slow. Unless you are absolutely sure nobody is around within 5 minutes' range don't get slow! If you wallow you're a sitting duck. Now, if you slow down to manuver but you stay above a certain speed, you'll be much better off. I'm totally SWAGing it here but I'd say maybe 200mph should be your danger zone, and don't go below 150. You CAN but your performance will suffer. Stick for an angles shot, and if you have to don't be afraid to use your main strength and disengage. Dive away, use your top speed to get out of the bad situation.
The big problem I'd forsee is getting stuck in the mentality that you HAVE to stick it out and fight in a losing situation. Break that mentality and you can disengage at will. Then re-engage once you have separation, E, alt, speed, whatever you were lacking before.
I'm a casual fan of the pony B as well. I like it for the challege of 4 guns. I used to like it because it wouldn't spin out nearly as much as the D in tight turns, but that rarely happens in recent versions of this game. In AH1 it was the main reason to take the razorback jug or pony over the bubbletops.
-
Well there's a difference between out turning and out angling somebody. If you're in a dedicated flat turn fight you're dead against 90% of the fighters in this game. The P-51 has a really awful turn radius.
However, if you have speed and E to play with you can bleed it off and pull some sharp angles for a couple seconds. Just long enough to get kills, sometimes.
Defensively? Don't get too slow. Unless you are absolutely sure nobody is around within 5 minutes' range don't get slow! If you wallow you're a sitting duck. Now, if you slow down to manuver but you stay above a certain speed, you'll be much better off. I'm totally SWAGing it here but I'd say maybe 200mph should be your danger zone, and don't go below 150. You CAN but your performance will suffer. Stick for an angles shot, and if you have to don't be afraid to use your main strength and disengage. Dive away, use your top speed to get out of the bad situation.
The big problem I'd forsee is getting stuck in the mentality that you HAVE to stick it out and fight in a losing situation. Break that mentality and you can disengage at will. Then re-engage once you have separation, E, alt, speed, whatever you were lacking before.
I'm a casual fan of the pony B as well. I like it for the challege of 4 guns. I used to like it because it wouldn't spin out nearly as much as the D in tight turns, but that rarely happens in recent versions of this game. In AH1 it was the main reason to take the razorback jug or pony over the bubbletops.
thats the main reason i fly it, I suck in the D but im suddenly better in the B its weird lol
-
You can use the Pony's E to your advantage very well. Especially if you get into a rolling scissors with the enemy at any alt up to and above 10k. That's where I used to get many of my Pony kills. When I used to play a lot, I could take on spits and win almost every time using that, but also adjusting my throttle and flaps a LOT. I haven't flown in so long that I'm probably no good anymore, but one day when I get the time, I'ill get back into the game. :rock
-
try to stay over 200mph...the P51 acceleration is crap at low speeds, but pretty decent between 250mph and 350mph, and once slow you won't be able to get away from anyone. If you have to avoid someone, try to use you ailerons and as few as possible of your elevators so you don't bleed too much E, and put yourself in a better position for a reversal/runaway
-
The P51 Bravo is a beautiful aircraft iron. meet up with the 20th in the MA's sometime and we'll show you some stuff about it. Although most of the 20th are P38 enthusiasts about half of the 38 enthusiasts love the 51 too :aok
(gotta love a RL squadron that flew both right? :ahand )
-
Defensively, I break turn when least expected then turn to the enemy that couldn't follow the turn. Most of the time it ends up in the scissors which I tend to be good at. But, then I also get into somewhat intense dogfights.
-
I too enjoy the B model even more so than the D. Its seems to have more character, and it feels nice to get a kill in an "outdated" aircraft. Is it also just me or does it turn sharper than the D? :airplane:
-
I too enjoy the B model even more so than the D. Its seems to have more character, and it feels nice to get a kill in an "outdated" aircraft. Is it also just me or does it turn sharper than the D? :airplane:
It's just you....
Actually, its marginally lighter than the D, mostly because it lacks two extra .50s and ammo. But realistically, for ever 1 time you get out-turned by a B in the D, there will be 3 times when a pinged bandit would have been dead with two more guns.
-
A P-51D with 4 guns, NO fuel, and NO ammo weighs 7,882 pounds.
A P-51B in the same state weighs 7,838 pounds.
Note that P-51D with 4 guns has a much longer clip than the B with the same load-out.
-
It's just how it feels to fly a B but not D. The B just feels so nice and feels a little more like the P-51's stories of maneuverability.
-
I do a lot of ords porking and I like the p-51D for that. I can kill all four ords on a large field with the D Pony and just 2 500lbs bombs & the guns and fly away. If ENY don't let me have the D model then my next choice is the B Pony. It has speed and great range like the D. For all around good planes the P-51s are my choice. Both planes however seem to operate at the low end of the scale here in AH. I want the P-51s I saw on Dog Fight lol.
-
I do a lot of ords porking and I like the p-51D for that. I can kill all four ords on a large field with the D Pony and just 2 500lbs bombs & the guns and fly away. If ENY don't let me have the D model then my next choice is the B Pony. It has speed and great range like the D. For all around good planes the P-51s are my choice. Both planes however seem to operate at the low end of the scale here in AH. I want the P-51s I saw on Dog Fight lol.
I see I'm not alone. Anyway, I seem to be bad at defensive maneuvers in one. Any tips?
-
Both planes however seem to operate at the low end of the scale here in AH.
:huh :confused:
Uh... say whut?
It's the BENCHMARK for late war planes. It's one of the fastest and highest flying planes with the standard snap-shot-killing 6 pack of guns. Under no stretch of the imagination may the P-51 (B or D) be considered at the "low end" of any scale in AH. If all you're doing is porking with it, there are even better rides for that.
P.S. P-51D is the most used single plane in AH (you add up spit8 and spit16 and together they outnumber the ponyD) for a long time running now. Low-end of the spectrum my petude!
-
Krusty,
For April you had to add the Spitfire Mk XVI, Spitfire Mk VIII and Seafire Mk II to exceed the P-51D's numbers.
-
Usage means jack. The best unperked Hog in the whole pigpen, the 1A, is rarely used. The Ki-84 is the best plane in the Japanese arsenal, and its used less than the N1K.
Yeah, the P-51 is a good plane for the gang-pick and run home between your legs style, but lots of planes, like the 190D, the "fast" 47s, the Typhoon, and even the F4u1a excel at that (as is evidenced by their K/D ratios). What the P-51 does NOT do as well as many 20ENY fighters is ACTUALLY FIGHT. Keep that in mind when you are attacking those of us who point that it is kind of mediocre in ways not revolving around top speed-we know this to be true because we are the ones actually trying it to use it for AIR COMBAT from time to time, (which is the whole point of having this game), instead of sticking to a steady diet of cherrying.
Funny...I notice I get alot more S! flying the F4u's than the Pony. Its not like I've magically become a better pilot, its just that the plane will allow you to pull off a lot more of that "pilot ****". Actually fighting in the P-51 without all the alt and numbers is what requires more skill, IMHO, but is apparently considered less "awe" worthy...after all, yer in a P-51 and thats the bestest plane cuz History Channel said so. :rolleyes:
-
The P-51 shot down MiG 15s in Korea and was still in use with the air National Guard into the late 50s. It was still in use in Central America until the mid 80s. No other piston engine plane from any country can say that except the ME-109 with a Merlin engine used by Spain until the 60s. The P-51 still wins air races all over the world. Maybe because it was one of the best if not the very best all around prop fighter ever produced. It is for sure one of the prettiest
-
Wrestled with a 190 today. Almost ran out of ammo. Thanks uneven ammo numbers. :aok The 2 .50s knocked him out of the sky. We got into scissors which the Pony B got to 200mph and won. I also skimmed the danger zone at a point 190mph. Also, the 190 had the alt advantage. It was A5 and I'm not sure how well it performs.
-
The P-51 shot down MiG 15s in Korea and was still in use with the air National Guard into the late 50s. It was still in use in Central America until the mid 80s. No other piston engine plane from any country can say that except the ME-109 with a Merlin engine used by Spain until the 60s. The P-51 still wins air races all over the world. Maybe because it was one of the best if not the very best all around prop fighter ever produced. It is for sure one of the prettiest
The F4U-4 was pretty clearly superior in nearly every respect except range. The 47M/N were clearly superior above 20K. Almost ANYTHING with an air-cooled engine is superior for groundpounding. Many prop designs of the immediate post-war trounce the P-51 even worse. The H is a counterpoint, but it was never fielded in strength. The P-51s usage in Korea and long service life tells us a lot about the numbers it was produced in and its relatively low cost, but not that it was the "best". And none of those factors directly correlate to the P-51 as modeled in this game.
-
Dogfights is 1 part history and 9 parts horsepoo. According to Dogfights any US plane will outperform any other plane in all departments. I recall the 51 episode where the planes were sweeping over Japan and were shooting Japanese planes down with abandon. But you must notice that all the "kills" are flying straight and level. Even with the undertrained pilots Japan had at that point they wouldn't be flying straight and level during a furball.
-
By the end of the war both Japan and Germany had so few well trained pilots the performance of the air craft they flew was canceled out. The German air craft industry still produced a very competitive combat plane as good or in some cases better then the p-51 in the prop engined planes. The numbers of allied planes just overwhelmed the Luftwaffe. The p-51 looks like a racing plane while the ME-109s and FW 190s look like the war birds the are. That gives them a beauty all their own.
-
BnZs, that's a rather harsh take on it. You might as well say the same thing about Spits. So many dweebs, newbies, lamers fly those, but that doesn't deny the fact that the spit16 is one of the all time best fighters in this game.
So, saying you don't think the best people fly the pony doesn't change the actual plane itself. When you choose to mix it up with a pony, it CAN hand you your butt. There are quite a few pilots that specialize in this plane in AH and they prove that more than the lemming hordes prove your point.
:D
It is CLEARLY not "low end" by any definition.
-
The numbers of allied planes just overwhelmed the Luftwaffe.
Like how the Sherman outnumbered the German Tanks. (That averagely had more armor.) Why would the Pony be low end?
-
I see I'm not alone. Anyway, I seem to be bad at defensive maneuvers in one. Any tips?
SA...
-
I apparently chased down an I-16 in a turnfight. (Oh how I wish I had a film.) And in an earlier fight I took out a Spit (somehow it happened to be Midway in his SpitIX) in scissors and found a low I-16.
I'm sure this happened, although I don't recall since I get shot down so often still, but p51s are usually easy kills for me when they are alone and don't run. Looking forward to another encounter. ;)
-
The P-51 shot down MiG 15s in Korea and was still in use with the air National Guard into the late 50s. It was still in use in Central America until the mid 80s. No other piston engine plane from any country can say that except the ME-109 with a Merlin engine used by Spain until the 60s. The P-51 still wins air races all over the world. Maybe because it was one of the best if not the very best all around prop fighter ever produced. It is for sure one of the prettiest
You want to go back and check your notes on that? What Mig kills? The F4U was also in combat in Central America and claimed the last kills in a piston engined air combat fight when a Honduran F4U-5 shot down 2 FG1D and a P51D of the El Salvadoran Air Force. This was in 1969
-
BnZs, that's a rather harsh take on it. You might as well say the same thing about Spits. So many dweebs, newbies, lamers fly those, but that doesn't deny the fact that the spit16 is one of the all time best fighters in this game.
So, saying you don't think the best people fly the pony doesn't change the actual plane itself. When you choose to mix it up with a pony, it CAN hand you your butt. There are quite a few pilots that specialize in this plane in AH and they prove that more than the lemming hordes prove your point.
:D
It is CLEARLY not "low end" by any definition.
In this game, from a fair start, every 109 from the F-K will easily outfight the P-51, as will every Spit starting with 9, the F4U-1A, The N1K and Ki-84, the Yak-9U and La7, the C205, and the P-38. The P47M/N is a less clear case-I think the P-51 has a slight edge in sustained turn rate that can be used to win an extended nose-to-tail turn fight, but the Jugs definitely have the advantage in a scissors.
IOW, the P-51 is outfought by the top-of-the line perk-free fighters of every air force represented in AHII. To win a fight with conservatively 75% of the fighters in this game, the P-51 needs an edge in pilot skill or energy, preferably both.
-
IOW, the P-51 is outfought by the top-of-the line perk-free fighters of every air force represented in AHII. To win a fight with conservatively 75% of the fighters in this game, the P-51 needs an edge in pilot skill or energy, preferably both.
And, this just goes to show you how what works in real life, doesn't necessarily translate into game.
-
IOW, the P-51 is outfought by the top-of-the line perk-free fighters of every air force represented in AHII. To win a fight with conservatively 75% of the fighters in this game, the P-51 needs an edge in pilot skill or energy, preferably both.
The question is: How much of it is a result of the complete different combat environment and the relative lack of wing tactics in the MA? Almost all combats on AH are more or less a chaotic, low altitude brawl by undisciplined pilots. This favors different traits in planes than for example the real ETO air combat. Slow but very maneuverable fighters like the Hurri, the B-239 or the Zero are performing well MA because of that.
-
The following information is from North American Aviation records and not Wikipedia. All information is with full internal fuel loads only.
Wing Span 37.5 ft
length 32 ft
Ht. 13.4 ft
Wing Area 340 Sq ft
Engine/Marlin V.1.790 hp
Max Speed 443 mph
Clime rate 3.320 ft. per minute. Clime to 20.00 ft 7.5 minutes
Ceiling 41.900 ft
Range 1.140 miles of max cruise at 10.000 ft
weight 11.100 lbs
Guns 6-50 cal Browning machine guns
The last P-51 in service with the US military was with the W.VA ANG in 1957. It is listed as one of the six best prop fighters of WWII.
-
The question is: How much of it is a result of the complete different combat environment and the relative lack of wing tactics in the MA? Almost all combats on AH are more or less a chaotic, low altitude brawl by undisciplined pilots. This favors different traits in planes than for example the real ETO air combat. Slow but very maneuverable fighters like the Hurri, the B-239 or the Zero are performing well MA because of that.
I was not discussing the ETO or indeed the historic Mustang with that remark, but what it is the AHII MA.
And in the AHII MA, the P-51 is outfought by planes that are *not* easily disengaged from.
-
And, this just goes to show you how what works in real life, doesn't necessarily translate into game.
In "R/L", the need for dogfighting is constantly forgotten between the wars, leading to deficiencies in pilot training and plane designs that amount to manned missiles. Scientific evaluation of air combat by pilots over the years, especially in the post-Vietnam era, eventually led to designs that did NOT throw maneuverability out the window for all-out performance.
Of course, in R/L in the ETO the P-51 was sufficiently maneuverable versus all of its opponents to dogfight, but that is a completely different topic.
-
The following information is from North American Aviation records and not Wikipedia. All information is with full internal fuel loads only.
Wing Span 37.5 ft
length 32 ft
Ht. 13.4 ft
Wing Area 340 Sq ft
Engine/Marlin V.1.790 hp
Max Speed 443 mph
Clime rate 3.320 ft. per minute. Clime to 20.00 ft 7.5 minutes
Ceiling 41.900 ft
Range 1.140 miles of max cruise at 10.000 ft
weight 11.100 lbs
Guns 6-50 cal Browning machine guns
The last P-51 in service with the US military was with the W.VA ANG in 1957. It is listed as one of the six best prop fighters of WWII.
From memory the wing area for both B/D is 235 sq ft ---- not 340
-
Well I guess North American aviation was wrong about their own plane lol.
-
Something is wrong somewhere, gross wing area on production P-51's at least through the D model is around 235 sq ft according to the sources I have here, America's Hundred Thousand lists it at 235.75 square feet.
A couple other documents at http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/mustang/mustangtest.html (http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/mustang/mustangtest.html) list the gross wing area at 233.4 square feet.
-
Dogfights is 1 part history and 9 parts horsepoo. According to Dogfights any US plane will outperform any other plane in all departments.
Pure unadulterated B.S. I've seen just about every episode, Dogfights was quick to point out the superiority of Japanese planes in categories of weight and maneuverability, for example. Try again.
-
They are still 9 parts horsepoo. Even some of their comparisons are off. I recall one where they were comparing the wrong models and even just ignoring the graphics they seem to super-over-generalize everything to the point of nonsense.
-
They are still 9 parts horsepoo. Even some of their comparisons are off. I recall one where they were comparing the wrong models and even just ignoring the graphics they seem to super-over-generalize everything to the point of nonsense.
His comments were as much horse crap as anything on the show. It's a fact, they give Axis aircraft credit for their maneuverability, as well as any speed or climb edge, or firepower, in their head to head comparisons. They may not be perfect, it is television. But the claim that they give always the edge to U.S. planes in every category in every comparison is simply an out and out lie. It just is not true.
Dogfights has/had any number of flaws. Stating the real ones and being honest is one thing. Slinging crap and making up lies is something else entirely. Honest fair criticism of the program is a good thing. And there is room for plenty of it. There's no need to make up outright lies about it.
-
True enough
-
Shouldn't the D/K have a slightly greater wing area than the B/C because of the leading edge crank from Station 61.5 inwards?
-
So you think pilots like Bud Anderson, Don Bryan and Chuck Yeager and a many others just lie about the p-51? Really.
-
don't get them started on chuck yeager ! :bolt:
-
Shouldn't the D/K have a slightly greater wing area than the B/C because of the leading edge crank from Station 61.5 inwards?
Not sure, the table in America's Hundred Thousand lists the wing area "Through P-51D", the information on wwiiperformance.org is the Mustang IV which was the British designation for the D model 51.
-
So you think pilots like Bud Anderson, Don Bryan and Chuck Yeager and a many others just lie about the p-51? Really.
What lies has anybody accused them of?
Eric Brown, who flew more types of aircraft than any other pilot, did not include the P-51 on his list of "best fighters of WWII". His list was the F4U-4, Fw190D-9 and Spitfire Mk XIV.
People who expect the P-51 to be the best fighter of WWII, period, are always going to be disappointed. The P-51 is a great fighter, but like all aircraft it has design limitations and compromises.
-
the 51-D in the hands of certain people................. is a viscous beast that will leave you :headscratch: and doing this :cry
thank fully there are less then you could count on your one hand, so when I see a 51 1vs1 I am like this :x
51 I think is the highest kill count I have every month, and I always kill 2 -3 times the amount that kill me.....
-
Eric Brown, who flew more types of aircraft than any other pilot, did not include the P-51 on his list of "best fighters of WWII". His list was the F4U-4, Fw190D-9 and Spitfire Mk XIV.
Which is just a list of the highest-performing planes each nation managed to field in notable numbers, I think. Difficulty to find any consistency in it. The -4 and XIV clearly outclass the Mustang as dogfighter, but the D9 does not, nor does it outperform it at typical ETO alts.
In any case, I do not speak about the historic P-51, but only the beast as found in AHII.
-
So you think pilots like Bud Anderson, Don Bryan and Chuck Yeager and a many others just lie about the p-51? Really.
According to them, the P-51 was an airplane that could dogfight on fairly equal terms with any of its German opposition while being much faster than most of it until late war. Totally different from AHII P-51 in the AHII main, which is what I speak of.
-
BnZs,
His list was made based on his opinions having flown all the American, British and German contenders. I don't think he got to fly an La-7, Yak-9U, Yak-3 or Ki-84 though.
He did not select the P-47N, Tempest Mk V or Bf109K-4, yet those are also very high performing aircraft that were produced and fielded in numbers.
-
He did not select the P-47N, Tempest Mk V or Bf109K-4, yet those are also very high performing aircraft that were produced and fielded in numbers.
Yes, that is perhaps the oddest one, selecting the D9 over the Kurt as the finest German aircraft.
-
Yes, that is perhaps the oddest one, selecting the D9 over the Kurt as the finest German aircraft.
As it should be. :)
-
Just drain your rear tank a bit,and its a entirely different handling aircraft. Like most aircraft we have. :salute
-
51 I think is the highest kill count I have every month, and I always kill 2 -3 times the amount that kill me.....
you and me ink :t you and me :t
-
Yes, that is perhaps the oddest one, selecting the D9 over the Kurt as the finest German aircraft.
The Bf109 had inherent flaws. It had no rudder trim, it had such a small cockpit it was difficult to turn to check your six, its cockpit was small enough to be a significant barrier to getting adequate leverage on the stick.
The Fw190 shared none of those flaws.
-
Well I guess North American aviation was wrong about their own plane lol.
Well I suppose that NAA (if any are still alive and connected to the Boeing website) know what they are talking about - but 340 sq ft is simply wrong. If you believe that the dork webmasters at Boeing or Lockheed are infallible, check out rate of climb for P-38L and tell me you believe 20,000 ft per minute (~F-100 ROC)
The A through D, including K are cited as 235.75 sq ft (Gruenhagen "Mustang"- directly from NAA reference data) even though the leading edge strake on the D is more pronounced.
-
What lies has anybody accused them of?
Eric Brown, who flew more types of aircraft than any other pilot, did not include the P-51 on his list of "best fighters of WWII". His list was the F4U-4, Fw190D-9 and Spitfire Mk XIV.
People who expect the P-51 to be the best fighter of WWII, period, are always going to be disappointed. The P-51 is a great fighter, but like all aircraft it has design limitations and compromises.
IIRC the ranking was F6F, Fw190D-9 and Spit XIV with P-51D ranked fourth.
I had a long running debate with Captain Brown (via letter) because I felt that he undervalued excellent performance combined with exceptional range, creating a special niche for ranking fighters.
He concluded the points I made about strategic footprint was valid, but his ranking was solely about his views regarding performance and agility... and we then launched into P-51B vs Fw 190D-9 and he fell back on firepower, so then we launched into air superiority (P-51B) versus wide range of destructive capability (favors D-9)...and then as an extension of new versions based on cycles (Fw 190D reached operational units in late November 1944 vs P-51D in May, 1944 versus P-51H in April 1945 and Ta 152 in ~ February/March?) and we went round and round again.
BTW he is an Aero Engineer in addition to being a reknowned pilot. I may disagree but I concede his unquestioned qualifications to pontificate.
-
The Bf109 had inherent flaws. It had no rudder trim, it had such a small cockpit it was difficult to turn to check your six, its cockpit was small enough to be a significant barrier to getting adequate leverage on the stick.
The Fw190 shared none of those flaws.
When did the Fw190 get rudder trim?
-
IIRC the ranking was F6F, Fw190D-9 and Spit XIV with P-51D ranked fourth.
I had a long running debate with Captain Brown (via letter) because I felt that he undervalued excellent performance combined with exceptional range, creating a special niche for ranking fighters.
He concluded the points I made about strategic footprint was valid, but his ranking was solely about his views regarding performance and agility... and we then launched into P-51B vs Fw 190D-9 and he fell back on firepower, so then we launched into air superiority (P-51B) versus wide range of destructive capability (favors D-9)...and then as an extension of new versions based on cycles (Fw 190D reached operational units in late November 1944 vs P-51D in May, 1944 versus P-51H in April 1945 and Ta 152 in ~ February/March?) and we went round and round again.
BTW he is an Aero Engineer in addition to being a reknowned pilot. I may disagree but I concede his unquestioned qualifications to pontificate.
Over the many years, I have not had an opportunity to talk with Brown, and I was never really keen to bother. I have spoken to many WWII era pilots who involved in flight testing, with Corky Meyer being among the most objective. Brown and Meyer have butted heads many times. Brown's edge was being an actual combat pilot (albeit, limited), and Meyer's advantage was being a top tier developmental test pilot. Corky argued that the F4U-4 was utterly superior to the Fw 190D as an air to air fighter. You would think that he would have argued for a Grumman fighter, and he did point out that the F7F Tigercat and F8F Bearcat were even better than the F4U-4, but since neither had an opportunity to get into combat, he limited his choice to the Vought. Corky was also a vocal advocate for the P-47, especially late models. Corky believed that the P-47 was without peer at high altitude and did more to crush the core cadre of the Luftwaffe than any other fighter. I agree with this view.
At one time or another, Meyer flew everything in the US inventory, as well as Brit and captured German fighters. Corky was a graduate of MIT. He would eventually become President and CEO of Grumman.
Sadly, Corky passed away less than two weeks ago. A major loss for the aviation community. A big :salute to Corwin Meyer, a giant in American aviation.
-
. Corky believed that the P-47 was without peer at high altitude and did more to crush the core cadre of the Luftwaffe than any other fighter. I agree with this view.
I tend to discard this view. The P-47 was an able adversary to the Fw 190s flown by LuftFlotte 3 pilots (I. & II./JG26 plus I.&III./JG2 based in France and Belgium and Holland between say July 1943 when the 56th and 78th and 4th began to develop combat skills in the P-47C through March 1944 when the P-51 and P-38 assumed long range target escort and the P-47s extended only to Stuttgart, Frankfurt and Hannover. By the time the 8th had expanded to include the 353rd, 352nd, 355th, 359th and 361st as P-47 groups the first three had more scores than the others combined.
LuftFlott Reich replaced LuftMitte and was created in late 1943 for the defense of Germany and drew massive reinforcements from East and South that were completely untoched by P-47s except for a few equipped in 12th AF and then 15th - with similar range limitations. So the Jugs were left to the ETO and MTO sidelines when the Germans pulled many of their fighter units out of range of the P-47.
I stated Fw 190s for a reason - the Jug simply did have superior perfromance above 20,000 feet against the Fw 190 and that is where the escorts were engaged. Different discussion against the 109 except for pure raw straight ahead speed and a margin in dive - although once going the 109 could more easily gain control in the higher speed ranges.
Summary - the Mustang killed the German Fighter Command from March through August when the P-47 finally got the ability to go past Brunswick, Mulhausen and Ulm - but still limited to penetration and withdrawal support. In that role they occasionally got into some scraps with JG11 and JG1 and elements of JG3 and JG53.
One could postulate that the RAF had as much or more to do with attrition of experienced German pilots on the Kanal front as the P-47 - but neither (or both) had the same impact as the swath cut through the LuftFlotte Reich, as a meatgrinder for so many pilots from the east and south in addition to those within the German border, as the Mustang.
At one time or another, Meyer flew everything in the US inventory, as well as Brit and captured German fighters. Corky was a graduate of MIT. He would eventually become President and CEO of Grumman.
Sadly, Corky passed away less than two weeks ago. A major loss for the aviation community. A big :salute to Corwin Meyer, a giant in American aviation.
Having disagree with Meyer he was A true giant - :aok
-
I tend to discard this view. The P-47 was an able adversary to the Fw 190s flown by LuftFlotte 3 pilots (I. & II./JG26 plus I.&III./JG2 based in France and Belgium and Holland between say July 1943 when the 56th and 78th and 4th began to develop combat skills in the P-47C through March 1944 when the P-51 and P-38 assumed long range target escort and the P-47s extended only to Stuttgart, Frankfurt and Hannover. By the time the 8th had expanded to include the 353rd, 352nd, 355th, 359th and 361st as P-47 groups the first three had more scores than the others combined.
LuftFlott Reich replaced LuftMitte and was created in late 1943 for the defense of Germany and drew massive reinforcements from East and South that were completely untoched by P-47s except for a few equipped in 12th AF and then 15th - with similar range limitations. So the Jugs were left to the ETO and MTO sidelines when the Germans pulled many of their fighter units out of range of the P-47.
I stated Fw 190s for a reason - the Jug simply did have superior perfromance above 20,000 feet against the Fw 190 and that is where the escorts were engaged. Different discussion against the 109 except for pure raw straight ahead speed and a margin in dive - although once going the 109 could more easily gain control in the higher speed ranges.
Summary - the Mustang killed the German Fighter Command from March through August when the P-47 finally got the ability to go past Brunswick, Mulhausen and Ulm - but still limited to penetration and withdrawal support. In that role they occasionally got into some scraps with JG11 and JG1 and elements of JG3 and JG53.
One could postulate that the RAF had as much or more to do with attrition of experienced German pilots on the Kanal front as the P-47 - but neither (or both) had the same impact as the swath cut through the LuftFlotte Reich, as a meatgrinder for so many pilots from the east and south in addition to those within the German border, as the Mustang.
Is this your opinion?
-
yes
-
yes
To amplify further - the P-47 was 'missing in action' beyond Dummer Lake to Stuttgart when the huge battles over Berlin, Leipzig, Brunswick, Munich, Augsburg, Schweinfurt, Halberstadt, Poznan, Brux, Stettin, Ruhland, etc, etc etc were being fought from January 1944 - August 1944.
The P-47 was a great fighter, cannot diminish its contribution, but nobody can make a sound claim that 'it' in the hands of the 12th, 8th and 9th AF defeated the Luftwaffe.
-
To amplify further - the P-47 was 'missing in action' beyond Dummer Lake to Stuttgart when the huge battles over Berlin, Leipzig, Brunswick, Munich, Augsburg, Schweinfurt, Halberstadt, Poznan, Brux, Stettin, Ruhland, etc, etc etc were being fought from January 1944 - August 1944.
The P-47 was a great fighter, cannot diminish its contribution, but nobody can make a sound claim that 'it' in the hands of the 12th, 8th and 9th AF defeated the Luftwaffe.
I think a pretty solid case can be made that the P-47 broke the back of the Luftwaffe in the west.
-
To amplify further - the P-47 was 'missing in action' beyond Dummer Lake to Stuttgart when the huge battles over Berlin, Leipzig, Brunswick, Munich, Augsburg, Schweinfurt, Halberstadt, Poznan, Brux, Stettin, Ruhland, etc, etc etc were being fought from January 1944 - August 1944.
The P-47 was a great fighter, cannot diminish its contribution, but nobody can make a sound claim that 'it' in the hands of the 12th, 8th and 9th AF defeated the Luftwaffe.
No one said the P-47 defeated the Luftwaffe... It was an insurmountable menace, that effectively chased the Luftwaffe back into Germany, where they could organize defensive formations and not get chewed up by the Jugs. Moreover, Walt Boyne pointed out an interesting fact. P-47s shot down less German fighters than the P-51. However, the P-47 shot down more than twice as many Luftwaffe aces as the P-51. The typical Luftwaffe pilot faced by the P-47s from mid 1943 through the end of the year had over 100 hours of fighter time. The typical Luftwaffe pilot faced by the P-51 in July of 1944 had little more than 25 hours of fighter time. That is very significant. Thunderbolts seriously depleted the Luftwaffe's cadre of aces before the P-51B ever flew an escort mission. That loss of experienced pilots was critical to what was coming. However, don't dismiss the P-47s after the P-51s were in service in large numbers... The 56th was shooting down fighters over the outskirts of Berlin in middle/late 1944.
I attended a seminar given by Günther Rall. He took questions afterwards, and one fellow asked him, "Mr. Rall, what would you do when flying your Bf 109 and saw a P-47 diving on you?"
Rall's answer was, "I'd shoot it down."
I stood up, and Rall signaled me to ask my question.
"Mr. Rall, were you not shot down by a P-47?"
Visibly surprised that someone in the audience knew this, he replied.. "Yes, I was shot down by an unseen P-47 while I was engaged with other American fighters."
I replied, "It is my understanding, having spoken to some of the pilots involved, and having read the combat reports, that you and the rest of your Staffel were engaged with three P-47s. Two were on their first combat mission, and the third was Hub Zemke. Joe Powers, leading three other Thunderbolts, came down to aid Zemke. The result was that Powers shot you down and every 109 in you Staffel went down as well. Is that correct?"
"I believe it may be", said Rall.
"And, if my memory serves me, the wounds you suffered effectively ended your combat career, is that also correct?"
"Generally speaking, yes", said Rall, "I was unable to fly again for quite some time."
"Thank you Mr. Rall."
Rall never shot down another Allied aircraft. His one and only encounter with P-47s ended his combat days.
By the way, P-38s began escorting bombers into Germany in October of 1943, providing over-target cover. These early escort missions were flown in P-38H models, and their range was less than that of the J models that began replacing the H beginning in November of '43.
Also, you seem to imply that the Bf 109 was not frequently encountered in 1943 by 8th AF P-47s... It was commonly encountered, and the typical 109 was also over-matched at high altitude. That was the prime advantage of the P-47. Depending on the model, FTH was 30k to 32K high, well above where the 190s and 109s found themselves on the back side of their power curves. The Luftwaffe was never able to solve the problem of the P-47, so they simply pulled back the bulk of their fighters out of range.
http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/p-47/er/4-care-26june43.jpg (http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/p-47/er/4-care-26june43.jpg)
http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/p-47/er/4-godfrey-22dec43.jpg (http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/p-47/er/4-godfrey-22dec43.jpg)
http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/p-47/er/4-evans-16aug43.jpg (http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/p-47/er/4-evans-16aug43.jpg)
http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/p-47/er/4-evans-28july43.jpg (http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/p-47/er/4-evans-28july43.jpg)
http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/p-47/er/4-oregan-12aug43.jpg (http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/p-47/er/4-oregan-12aug43.jpg)
These are typical encounter reports from mid 1943 involving Bf 109s. The split between 190s and 109s shot down was nearly 50-50, with some ill-fated 110s thrown in.
-
I think a pretty solid case can be made that the P-47 broke the back of the Luftwaffe in the west.
I think if you said the Spitfire and Jug did it, with a bit of help from the 38 and 51B, you'd have a solid case :) While some of the LW guys might argue it, I think it's safe to say the back of the Luftwaffe was broken in the West by May 44, and there just weren't that many Mustangs involved, and those that were involved were the B models.
-
No one said the P-47 defeated the Luftwaffe... It was an insurmountable menace, that effectively chased the Luftwaffe back into Germany, where they could organize defensive formations and not get chewed up by the Jugs. Moreover, Walt Boyne pointed out an interesting fact. P-47s shot down less German fighters than the P-51. However, the P-47 shot down more than twice as many Luftwaffe aces as the P-51. The typical Luftwaffe pilot faced by the P-47s from mid 1943 through the end of the year had over 100 hours of fighter time. The typical Luftwaffe pilot faced by the P-51 in July of 1944 had little more than 25 hours of fighter time. That is very significant. Thunderbolts seriously depleted the Luftwaffe's cadre of aces before the P-51B ever flew an escort mission. That loss of experienced pilots was critical to what was coming. However, don't dismiss the P-47s after the P-51s were in service in large numbers... The 56th was shooting down fighters over the outskirts of Berlin in middle/late 1944.
First things first - JG26 and JG2 were never 'chased' back into Germany until December 1944 and in fact retreated back into western Germany then. You might note that they fought and fought quite well against total RAF TAC, 9th AF TAC and 8th AF FC - mostly Jugs until the 78th, 353rd and 356th converted to Mustangs in fall of 44.
The rest of LuftFlotte Reich were initially based and set up in Germany ranging from West to East to North to south. They were never 'chased' back either until the Allies over ran their bases. What the Luftwaffe Did is mass out of range of the Jugs so that a.) the ZG and NZG 110s and Ju 88s could join. The Jugs Did hammer the twins when they ventured past Dummer Lake so they stopped venturing past Dummer Lake and later were hammered by the P-38 and Mustang.
I never 'dismissed' the Jug and did mention that the P-47 (D-25 and higher with wet wing) were ranging to Leipzig in late July timeframe. Nor did I ever denigrate the 56th FG which I consider the best of the US combat units in WWII.
Second thing - I didn't say the Jug didn't shoot down 109s - what I implied is that they were more effective vs the 190. The 56th had a 278 to 264 ratio 190 to 109 and the 109 totals went way up from D-Day forward. The 78th 125:110, the 4th 73:47 and the 353rd 71:101 ---- these are your 'old hands/long term Jug units. When they switched to 51's the ratios flipped. The above figures were compiled by me from looking at nearly every encounter report in the 8th AF - If I ever figure out how to post an attachment I'll show you the results and it will be published in my new book.
These are typical encounter reports from mid 1943 involving Bf 109s. The split between 190s and 109s shot down was nearly 50-50, with some ill-fated 110s thrown in.
See above comments. Take a sample of ~ 500 for 1943 and look at the entire mix.
I'll address the rest next.
-
I think a pretty solid case can be made that the P-47 broke the back of the Luftwaffe in the west.
Then see if you can make it - and factor into the equation that starting in late 1943 the Luftwaffe flooded LuftFlotte Reich with more than 30 Staffel's from east and south - most of which were for the defense of the Reich - not the Lowlands where JG2 and 26 along with some JG3 and JG27 units from Munster to Frankfurt were based.
-
Drgondog to post an attachment you can upload it to a file sharing site like mediafire and then put the link, mediafire can create the link for you, in your post.
-
However, the P-47 shot down more than twice as many Luftwaffe aces as the P-51.
Widewing - with all due respect that is a 'fact' not in evidence. Your sources?? - and more curiously name the matching process for a Luftwaffe ace killed in combat with a P-47 versus B-17 vs B-24. I have been able to identify several such cases but I know of no possible factual roll ups.
The typical Luftwaffe pilot faced by the P-47s from mid 1943 through the end of the year had over 100 hours of fighter time. The typical Luftwaffe pilot faced by the P-51 in July of 1944 had little more than 25 hours of fighter time. That is very significant. Thunderbolts seriously depleted the Luftwaffe's cadre of aces before the P-51B ever flew an escort mission.
IIRC the Luftwaffe had over 500 WWII aces survive the war. What is your definition of 'seriously depleted' and what is your fact base for aces killed by P-47 vs P-51?
Care to draw your attention to the attrition the Luftwaffe faced vs the P-51 between January and July 1944 before skating on to you conclusions? Illustrate for the audience what the Luftwaffe fighter pilot attrition was over Germany in those six months.
And while the replacement pilots coming in from flight school were that low in fighter time (and in some cases stick time) quite a few replacements - particularly for the Sturm units were high time twin engine fighter and bomber pilots.. for example the conversion of ZG26 into JG4 Fw 190 units. What is patently Not true is that the 'average' fighter pilot time was 25 hours.
That loss of experienced pilots was critical to what was coming. However, don't dismiss the P-47s after the P-51s were in service in large numbers... The 56th was shooting down fighters over the outskirts of Berlin in middle/late 1944.
I totally agree - see the above comments in previous post.
I attended a seminar given by Günther Rall. He took questions afterwards, and one fellow asked him, "Mr. Rall, what would you do when flying your Bf 109 and saw a P-47 diving on you?"
Rall's answer was, "I'd shoot it down."
I stood up, and Rall signaled me to ask my question.
"Mr. Rall, were you not shot down by a P-47?"
Visibly surprised that someone in the audience knew this, he replied.. "Yes, I was shot down by an unseen P-47 while I was engaged with other American fighters."
I replied, "It is my understanding, having spoken to some of the pilots involved, and having read the combat reports, that you and the rest of your Staffel were engaged with three P-47s. Two were on their first combat mission, and the third was Hub Zemke. Joe Powers, leading three other Thunderbolts, came down to aid Zemke. The result was that Powers shot you down and every 109 in you Staffel went down as well. Is that correct?"
"I believe it may be", said Rall.
"And, if my memory serves me, the wounds you suffered effectively ended your combat career, is that also correct?"
"Generally speaking, yes", said Rall, "I was unable to fly again for quite some time."
"Thank you Mr. Rall."
Rall never shot down another Allied aircraft. His one and only encounter with P-47s ended his combat days.
On May 12 Rall clobbered Zemke's flight, had Zemke trapped and hollering for help while hanging on by a thread. Rankin caught Rall w/o a wingman in a single duel with Zemke with four T-Bolts and reveresed the tables with a.) altitude advantage, b.) airspeed advantage, c.) numerical advantage of 4:1 so that Rall could not engage in a turning fight and had to evade in a strike zone entirely in favor of a P-47.
If that thesis is the one you wish to make for the superiority of a P-47 over an 109 it seems you could do 'better'.
As to his 'squadron or flight' being shot down by Jugs - there is no way to state that either - either that they were shot down (not in evidence in any documented account I am aware of). It is documented that Rall was alone and chasing Zemke by Rankin's own account (and Zemke's). It is documented (by Zemke) that Rankin's flight was the only one to pull back from the Zemke Fan of four flights of four out in front of 1st TF/3BD headed for Frankfurt on the way to oil refineries at Brux, Zwiekau, etc. It is documented that the 56th, 4th and 357th shot down ~ 50 between Frankfurt and Giessen. It is documented that the 352nd and 353rd and 78th also scored between Koblenz and Frankfurt.
So - your sources on Jugs shooting down Rall's squadron again?
Rall was out of combat until April because of the infection in his hand that didn't heal - and when he returned it was just before the end... so the point you want to make is a.) about Jug superiority here or b.) a .50 cal API is a bad thing when it hits you?
By the way, P-38s began escorting bombers into Germany in October of 1943, providing over-target cover. These early escort missions were flown in P-38H models, and their range was less than that of the J models that began replacing the H beginning in November of '43.
Yes... and?
the 20th and 55th shot down a total of 88 and 103 respectively for All P-38 sorties combined through July when they were fully converted and the biggest score scored in a day was 19 by Landers led 55th in Bernburg area July 7 - nearly double the highest day total of any prior P-38 Group. Those two groups doubled their air to air totals in 51's. BTW the 20th and 55th were barey 2:1 air credit to air loss in 38's but more than 10:1, respectively air to air in the 51.
Also, you seem to imply that the Bf 109 was not frequently encountered in 1943 by 8th AF P-47s... It was commonly encountered, and the typical 109 was also over-matched at high altitude. That was the prime advantage of the P-47. Depending on the model, FTH was 30k to 32K high, well above where the 190s and 109s found themselves on the back side of their power curves.
WW- read my post again. as well as below. The Jugs were constrained to close escort until January when 8th FC was turned loose. Close escort for B-17s was ~ 26-28K and for B-24s 22-24K --- not 32K The Fw 190 and the BMW801 was on the back side in the 20K plus but the 109 was just fine at 26K... both were slower but the 109 could out turn and out climb the 47. pre and post WI (Jan) and Paddle Prop (jan) at those altitudes..
The Luftwaffe was never able to solve the problem of the P-47, so they simply pulled back the bulk of their fighters out of range. Where they could never solve the problem of the P-51!
What I implied is that in 1943 the Jug had a better high altitude advantage over the Fw 190 (true) than over the Me 109G-6 (also true) at bomber escort altitudes (also true) - There were more 190s in JG2 and JG26, and more 109s in JG3 and JG 27 in western Gy... So, the early battles over French targets and North Sea/Holland would encounter 190s and Me 110s more than 109s - until the 110s were pulled back and the bomber escorts got range to punch the German border.
We can agree to disagree and let facts decide the questions. The German commanders and pilots that survived Jan 1944 through July 1944 weren't lamenting their inability to 'solve the P-47"
-
I think if you said the Spitfire and Jug did it, with a bit of help from the 38 and 51B, you'd have a solid case :) While some of the LW guys might argue it, I think it's safe to say the back of the Luftwaffe was broken in the West by May 44, and there just weren't that many Mustangs involved, and those that were involved were the B models.
Guppy - look at LW attrition in LuftFlotte Reich (JG1, JG3, JG5, JG11, JG27, JG300) from January 1944 (354 - 9th AF)
(357th FG -Feb, 4th FG -feb, 355th FG Mar, 352nd FG April, 359th FG April, 339th FG April, 361st - early May)
Contrast those losses to JG26 and JG2 along the Channel.
Big Week was the cross over for the Mustang as the big battles were deep into Germany and the P-47 air battles, even for the great 56th, were from Dummer Lake westward- way short for Berlin, Brunswick, Halberstadt, Schweinfurt, Leipzig, etc, etc... and the 4th FG alone shot down more in March than the 55th FG(P-38s) shot down from November through July,1944. The 354th, 357th alone shot down approximately the total of all the 8th FC P-47s in March, 1944 and the 355th and 4th added another 170
-
Are we debating which is the better bird, or had the bigger impact? I'm not discounting the ability of the 51. I'm a 4th FG fan after all :) Having read as a kid way back when about the race between the 4th and 56th for total claims, that always was a Jug vs 51 bit. Gotta give the 56th their due in having the most air to air claims of all the 8th FGs
In the end, I'm still of the belief that the guys and the birds doing the work in 43-early 44 are the ones that turned the tide and had the biggest impact.
Had I been there and given a choice of which of the two I'd take into combat, I'd have taken a P51
-
Are we debating which is the better bird, or had the bigger impact? I'm not discounting the ability of the 51. I'm a 4th FG fan after all :) Having read as a kid way back when about the race between the 4th and 56th for total claims, that always was a Jug vs 51 bit. Gotta give the 56th their due in having the most air to air claims of all the 8th FGs
In the end, I'm still of the belief that the guys and the birds doing the work in 43-early 44 are the ones that turned the tide and had the biggest impact.
Had I been there and given a choice of which of the two I'd take into combat, I'd have taken a P51
Guppy - my only point is that if you have an opinion - then supprt it with facts. This is always an interesting debate and I'm not sure there are winners. Each proponent of a point of view usually cites facts that support their view.
A significantly smaller % of LW confronting USAAF in 1943 fell in contrast to 1944. There is a 'blurring' of cause and effect between P-47 in 1943, early 1944 and P-51 from December 1943 to February 1944. After that timeframe the numbers and impact overwhelmingly support the Mustang. The Luftwaffe, including Rall, considered the P-51 to be the 'best Allied fighter'. In my opinion it does not mean the 51 was superior to the Spit - it meant it was intrinsically equal or greater to the 109 and 190 Over Germany - a Huge distinction!
-
We can agree to disagree and let facts decide the questions. The German commanders and pilots that survived Jan 1944 through July 1944 weren't lamenting their inability to 'solve the P-47"
Re: P-47 ace kills vs P-51 ace kills.
I recall reading this in a Walt Boyne article. Walt is a friend, but I won't bother him with "some guy on a meaningless BBS wants your sources, because he doesn't believe your analysis" request. Walt stated it as fact and I have no reason to believe he's wrong. Based upon Walt's thoroughness, I imagine that his data was vetted carefully.
As to Rall. My understanding is that Rall was leading his Staffel, which consisted of 7 Bf 109s that day, but please correct me if my memory is faulty. Rall was not alone, despite much revisionist propaganda stating that he was. Zemke lost two pilots, both low time rookies. Rall stated in a 1999 interview, that he learned much later than only two of his pilots returned to their airfield on May 12. I have that interview in a magazine somewhere in my archives. Joe Powers, with Joe Vitale flying his wing, has been often credited with shooting down Rall. However, my own examination today of the combat reports of both pilots does support Rankin being the pilot who got Rall on May 12, along with four additional 109s he claimed. Likewise, the reports confirm that 109s were everywhere and Rall was not alone in the sky.
For those interested in the encounter reports....
Rankin's report.
http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/p-47/er/56-rankin-12may44.jpg (http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/p-47/er/56-rankin-12may44.jpg)
His wingman's report.
http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/p-47/er/56-thomton-12may44.jpg (http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/p-47/er/56-thomton-12may44.jpg)
As to close escort... Close escort does not mean flying the bomber's wing. It meant staying close to the bomber stream. Typically, the P-47s held station between 3,000 and 5,000 feet above the bombers. Bob Johnson told me that they rarely cruised below 30,000 feet. Up there, the P-47s held the tactical and performance advantage. Moreover, the typical 190s and 109s of the time had a FTH of 22,000 feet or less. If they climbed beyond that, they were on the back side of their power curves. That is not a good place to be. Once the Jugs start coming down, it was usually buttholes and elbows trying to evade the bounce.
I'm going to assume that you don't fly Aces High. If you did, you would realize that the 109G-6 has no business tangling with P-47s at high altitude. If you believe that the 109 can out-turn a Jug at Bomber altitudes, you would be wrong to assume that it can be an advantage. Why? Because they lack the power to sustain a turn, and even more importantly, the loss of airspeed associated with attempting to tightly maneuver at high alt leads to stalls and nasty spins. Remember, it's indicated airspeed that counts, not true airspeed. At 27k, the 109G-6's cruise speed is not very far from it's stall speed. Load it with 3g or more and you'll find the slats popping out and the aircraft threatening to depart. Thus to maneuver effectively, the 109 pilot must trade altitude for airspeed. Meanwhile, the P-47 has plenty of speed and reserve power. He doesn't have to turn, but merely yo-yos and blam! One dead 109. I've demonstrated this with arguably the best 109 pilot in the game. He was unable to do anything but try to drag the fight down to low level as my P-47D-25 was running circles around his G-6. Around 15,000 feet, the 109G-6 began to gain a slight edge, but not enough to win. Finally down at lower altitude, the 109 was the superior turning fighter to the point where he could gain and hold an advantage, but it wasn't easy. One mistake and the P-47's battery will shred the 109. Fighting at high altitude is largely a foreign experience for most AHII players. It's a completely different world up there, and most certainly not the domain of the 109, including the K-4. Up at 30k and beyond, the Jugs rule the roost. However, the Spitfire Mk. IX and Mk. XIV are very able, as is the P-51B (better than the D up high) and the mighty F4U-4. P-38s are formidable, but they have serious issues with compressibility, so getting their nose below the horizon for more that a few seconds can lead to buffeting and control lock-up. The L model's dive recovery flaps do allow for decent elevator authority up to Mach 0.70, and it's still controllable up nearly Mach 0.73. However, the G and J models will be having trouble. So, to reiterate, high altitude performance is all about available power. Low to medium altitude turning ability is of little consequence up high. This is why so many very capable low to medium altitude fighters are absolutely awful at high altitude, and the 109s are not vastly better than those.
In the game, the P-47M and N models are all but untouchable at 30k. Up there, they reach 476 mph. Indeed, they can sustain 460 mph at 40k until they run out of gas. The balance of the P-47s are not quite as fast, but more than fast enough for the 109s to deal with effectively.
So, if you are writing a book on WWII fighter combat, you can learn much by gaining some simulator experience. Aces high is the best WWII fighter simulator that exists. Especially in terms of flight physics and performance fidelity. Sure, it uses a game as the basis of the experience, but the game is less important than the experience. Give it a try, it will provide insight that all of the combat reports on earth can't begin to equal.
-
Guppy - my only point is that if you have an opinion - then supprt it with facts. This is always an interesting debate and I'm not sure there are winners. Each proponent of a point of view usually cites facts that support their view.
A significantly smaller % of LW confronting USAAF in 1943 fell in contrast to 1944. There is a 'blurring' of cause and effect between P-47 in 1943, early 1944 and P-51 from December 1943 to February 1944. After that timeframe the numbers and impact overwhelmingly support the Mustang. The Luftwaffe, including Rall, considered the P-51 to be the 'best Allied fighter'. In my opinion it does not mean the 51 was superior to the Spit - it meant it was intrinsically equal or greater to the 109 and 190 Over Germany - a Huge distinction!
The facts end up being it was a war of attrition and by the time the 51 was out in force that air war had begun to turn as the quality of Allied pilots was superior as a whole to the Luftwaffe and the numbers were as well. That doesn't negate the quality of the Mustang as a fighter. But in my eyes it was the guys early on, that were learning on the 'fly' so to speak and fighting a higher caliber of Luftwaffe pilot that turned that tide. I suppose you can really go back to the RAF pilots who kept going back across the Channel in Spit Vs fighting the 190 that was a far superior bird, fighting over it's own turf. Throw in the Russian pilots who chewed up the Luftwaffe on the Eastern Front, the Allied guys who were fighting in North Africa up through Italy and it's the same thing.
Again it's not a shot at the 51. The Merlin 51 just wasn't there as long. I'm sure those guys fighting 109s and 190s in P40s and P39s in the MTO would have loved a good Merlin Mustang :)
In terms of Rall's comments, it makes sense that the 51 was the primary concern at that point as it was doing the escorting deep while the Jugs and remaining 38s were ground pounding. Of course which was more important in the long run, is also open for debate, but I'm sure the German soldiers on the ground might have a different opinion then Rall :)
-
Re: P-47 ace kills vs P-51 ace kills.
I recall reading this in a Walt Boyne article. Walt is a friend, but I won't bother him with "some guy on a meaningless BBS wants your sources, because he doesn't believe your analysis" request. Walt stated it as fact and I have no reason to believe he's wrong. Based upon Walt's thoroughness, I imagine that his data was vetted carefully.
I respect Boyne. I have a complete list of LW aces which include KIA and WIA but not bail outs. How Boyne could assess the facts that even touch on the subject via US sources is a mystery to me and I have researched this subject for 40 years. I suspect you would have to have a library of Prien's squadron histories, combat film and all encounter reports to make a start... someday over a cool one you might ask the question?
As to Rall. My understanding is that Rall was leading his Staffel, which consisted of 7 Bf 109s that day, but please correct me if my memory is faulty. Rall was not alone, despite much revisionist propaganda stating that he was. Zemke lost two pilots, both low time rookies.
According to Zemke, Rall and six others were circling ~ 5000 feet above him and the 'single' made diving passes. The first notion he had is when eithe Lt. Col. Piper or Lt. McConnell called a 'break'. McConnell was shot down immedieately, Zemke called a Lufberry and the 'single (Rall) came in with a high deflection shot and knocked out Piper, then zoomed back up - if you don't have the book, look for Zemke's Wolfpack on page 156
Rall stated in a 1999 interview, that he learned much later than only two of his pilots returned to their airfield on May 12. I have that interview in a magazine somewhere in my archives. Joe Powers, with Joe Vitale flying his wing, has been often credited with shooting down Rall. However, my own examination today of the combat reports of both pilots does support Rankin being the pilot who got Rall on May 12, along with four additional 109s he claimed. Likewise, the reports confirm that 109s were everywhere and Rall was not alone in the sky.
Zemke states that when he again bounced preceeding Rankin's bounce that there were four 109s chasing him.
As to close escort... Close escort does not mean flying the bomber's wing. It meant staying close to the bomber stream. Typically, the P-47s held station between 3,000 and 5,000 feet above the bombers. Bob Johnson told me that they rarely cruised below 30,000 feet. Up there, the P-47s held the tactical and performance advantage. Moreover, the typical 190s and 109s of the time had a FTH of 22,000 feet or less. If they climbed beyond that, they were on the back side of their power curves. That is not a good place to be. Once the Jugs start coming down, it was usually buttholes and elbows trying to evade the bounce.
WW - this is well known. Ditto 3-5K. Also notable is that the 109s countered the Jug high preference position by forming up at 33-35K altitudes. On May 12, when Zemke states he started patrolling over Koblenz the 63rd was climbing through 22,000 feet... implying not much higher before he was bounced. I am sure you have read through many group histories and individual summary reports as well as flash reports. There was no set altitude - mostly depended on what they were escorting and whether it was a Ramrod or Sweep or Area Patrol - and what they were anticipating. For a Sweep, they thinking was often be ~20-22K looking for LW forming up abut 50-100 miles out front - similar to 56th on May 12
I'm going to assume that you don't fly Aces High. If you did, you would realize that the 109G-6 has no business tangling with P-47s at high altitude. If you believe that the 109 can out-turn a Jug at Bomber altitudes, you would be wrong to assume that it can be an advantage. Why? Because they lack the power to sustain a turn, and even more importantly, the loss of airspeed associated with attempting to tightly maneuver at high alt leads to stalls and nasty spins.
Also well known - speed is life, but the ability to pull an insantaneous sharp turn for deflection and continue on is a nice ability. Re-read Zemke to see what dire straights he was in when Rall used this same tactic. Yes I do believe a 109 can out turn a Jug at 22-25000 feet and lose less energy than the Jug in the same manuever and I can work out the math. Absent the math I have also accumulated some 40-50 years talking with fighter pilots on both sides because a.) it was available to me, and b.) because it was a passion when I was growing up.
Remember, it's indicated airspeed that counts, not true airspeed. At 27k, the 109G-6's cruise speed is not very far from it's stall speed. Load it with 3g or more and you'll find the slats popping out and the aircraft threatening to depart. Thus to maneuver effectively, the 109 pilot must trade altitude for airspeed. Meanwhile, the P-47 has plenty of speed and reserve power. He doesn't have to turn, but merely yo-yos and blam! One dead 109. I've demonstrated this with arguably the best 109 pilot in the game. He was unable to do anything but try to drag the fight down to low level as my P-47D-25 was running circles around his G-6. Around 15,000 feet, the 109G-6 began to gain a slight edge, but not enough to win. Finally down at lower altitude, the 109 was the superior turning fighter to the point where he could gain and hold an advantage, but it wasn't easy. One mistake and the P-47's battery will shred the 109. Fighting at high altitude is largely a foreign experience for most AHII players. It's a completely different world up there, and most certainly not the domain of the 109, including the K-4. Up at 30k and beyond, the Jugs rule the roost. However, the Spitfire Mk. IX and Mk. XIV are very able, as is the P-51B (better than the D up high) and the mighty F4U-4. P-38s are formidable, but they have serious issues with compressibility, so getting their nose below the horizon for more that a few seconds can lead to buffeting and control lock-up. The L model's dive recovery flaps do allow for decent elevator authority up to Mach 0.70, and it's still controllable up nearly Mach 0.73. However, the G and J models will be having trouble. So, to reiterate, high altitude performance is all about available power. Low to medium altitude turning ability is of little consequence up high. This is why so many very capable low to medium altitude fighters are absolutely awful at high altitude, and the 109s are not vastly better than those.
Agree on most points -
In the game, the P-47M and N models are all but untouchable at 30k. Up there, they reach 476 mph. Indeed, they can sustain 460 mph at 40k until they run out of gas. The balance of the P-47s are not quite as fast, but more than fast enough for the 109s to deal with effectively.
WW - I am not going to debate with you on the basis of the simulator... but simply the 109G6 stall speed is not close to top speed and (certainly nowhere close with the AS at 27K)
So, if you are writing a book on WWII fighter combat, you can learn much by gaining some simulator experience. Aces high is the best WWII fighter simulator that exists. Especially in terms of flight physics and performance fidelity. Sure, it uses a game as the basis of the experience, but the game is less important than the experience. Give it a try, it will provide insight that all of the combat reports on earth can't begin to equal.
I am not writing a book on fighter combat - it is the History of the 355th from WWII through Vietnam and Afghanistan. I wrote and published Angels, Bulldogs and Dragons 27 years ago and have compiled a great deal of information since then including all the Macrs and encounter reports - biggest issue for me is that they are still on microfilm. I am contemplating converting them to DVD when I win the lottery
As to anybody who has never flown combat it would be silly to expound on the subject - with or without simulator experience. You and I may debate the aero stuff as you choose but I have no outright argument with your comments above other than waxing poetic to weight your POV.. i do the same
-
I will add that drgondog is the son of WW2 ETO ace.
-
I am not writing a book on fighter combat - it is the History of the 355th from WWII through Vietnam and Afghanistan. I wrote and published Angels, Bulldogs and Dragons 27 years ago and have compiled a great deal of information since then including all the Macrs and encounter reports - biggest issue for me is that they are still on microfilm. I am contemplating converting them to DVD when I win the lottery
As to anybody who has never flown combat it would be silly to expound on the subject - with or without simulator experience. You and I may debate the aero stuff as you choose but I have no outright argument with your comments above other than waxing poetic to weight your POV.. i do the same
I know this book! I've read it, perhaps 15 years ago. I stumbled upon it in our public library and was quite surprised that they had it. It must have been purchased via a special request at some point. (our library is terrific at filling special requests). They recently purchased Jim Hornfisher's Neptune's Inferno when I simply asked if they had it.
Anyway, I recall it to be an excellent work.
I'll PM you with some info on joining our Military and Aviation writers groups. Just about everyone you may know, or read is involved.
Oh, and yes, I certainly do some waxing..... ;) I've been flying Aces High for about 10 years... A long time, I suppose.
My background is Naval Aviation (bouncing fixed wing off of CVs, hauling people and cargo). I have written for several magazines, museums, websites and did some ghost writing for other authors who simply had too much on their plate. In addition, I worked with Bodie for several years, after Jeff Ethell's death. Warren was not the diplomatic type, and his many falling-outs with other writers and publishers is almost legendary. Some of our disagreements were epic... :cry
These disagreements were invariably about projects, not content. Warren tended to bounce from project to project. This would get me nuts, as I would do much of the background work, only to have Warren tell me he wants to take on a different project. Finally, while I still retained some sanity, I said enough was enough. I guess the killer was our aborted book, "A Mighty Fortress". Warren had purchased the rights to Pete Bowers, "Fortress in the Sky". Warren wanted to do a full re-write, with many more photos. I was tasked with doing the re-write, Warren would handle the photos and captions. I was just beginning my third draft, had done some of the layout and designed the dust jacket, when Warren announced that he thought there was a glut of B-17 books on the market and decided to put the project on the back burner. I was more than a little upset... I had more than six months invested in writing and much travel doing research. That, and his blow-up with Flight Journal (which scuttled three magazine articles) put an end to our association.
Well, it certainly is a pleasure having you posting to this board. I'm sure we will agree much more than disagree.. :aok
Now, as to the performance of the 109G-6 at 30,000 feet. It was far less than that of the P-47.
The 109G-6, configured for bomber interception, can attain 348 mph TAS (213 mph IAS), at 2,600 RPM and 0.96 ATA. It's a little faster with Emergency power, but barely pulls 1.1 ATA. Compare that to the P-47D-11, which attains 426 mph TAS (261 mph IAS) at 2,700 with 52" MAP. That's a 78 mph difference. At 32,000 feet, the disparity is even worse. The bigger problem for the 109 is, it can't pull more than 2g for no more than 45 degrees of turn before it begins a stall buffet. On the other hand, the P-47 can pull more than 4g before it begins to object. Huge difference. It simply means that if the 109 doesn't get the nose down fast, the P-47 will easily turn inside of it. At 30k, the P-47 climbs faster, accelerates quicker, turns much better and is much faster than the 109G-6. As I said, a 109G-6 has no business picking a fight with a P-47 at 30k. With equal pilots, the 109G-6 is toast waiting for the grape jelly.
-
I will add that drgondog is the son of WW2 ETO ace.
We knew this Milo :)
-
We knew this Milo :)
Just making sure. ;)
-
Just making sure. ;)
I was going to ask him if his Dad had any recommendations for getting two pilots in a 51 cockpit :)
-
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/scores/genchart.php?p1=46&p2=15&pw=2>ype=0)
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/scores/genchart.php?p1=46&p2=15&pw=2>ype=2)
I've got to say, sim flying will give you a perspective on aerial warfare you simply can't get anywhere else. No, it will not put you in the kill or be killed emotional state, but it will inform you of the some of the technical realities of flying in combat.
-
I know this book! I've read it, perhaps 15 years ago. I stumbled upon it in our public library and was quite surprised that they had it. It must have been purchased via a special request at some point. (our library is terrific at filling special requests). They recently purchased Jim Hornfisher's Neptune's Inferno when I simply asked if they had it.
Anyway, I recall it to be an excellent work.
Corey - thanks. If you liked it the new one will make my first effort look pitiful in comparison. 20 years of addition research into MACRs Encounter Reports, LW claims and losses have helped me make the 're-do' a far more effective book for my market - which are the 355th all generation vets and historians like yourself. Its the kind of book I would first pull out to research first 355th and second 'touches' on other groups and big battles on particular days.
I'll PM you with some info on joining our Military and Aviation writers groups. Just about everyone you may know, or read is involved.
Oh, and yes, I certainly do some waxing..... ;) I've been flying Aces High for about 10 years... A long time, I suppose.
My background is Naval Aviation (bouncing fixed wing off of CVs, hauling people and cargo). I have written for several magazines, museums, websites and did some ghost writing for other authors who simply had too much on their plate. In addition, I worked with Bodie for several years, after Jeff Ethell's death. Warren was not the diplomatic type, and his many falling-outs with other writers and publishers is almost legendary. Some of our disagreements were epic... :cry
I have heard about Bodie. As an aside Jeff's dad Irv was a squadron CO when my father had the 35th FBW in Japan and Jeff and I kind of grew up together. My ABD was written to conform with Ethell/Fry Escort to Berlin so that Jeff and I could work on a series of three within an overarching 8th AF Fighter Command - Early, Crescendo and the End taking the 8th from the days of Monk Hunter to Kepner and the Big changes December-Jan 1944. I am sure you know that Irv was at the airshow when Jeff busted his bellybutton on a hard break final in the 38.. and he could see the stall unfold in front of his eyes, knowing nothing good was in stroe for his son.
.
Well, it certainly is a pleasure having you posting to this board. I'm sure we will agree much more than disagree.. :aok
Now, as to the performance of the 109G-6 at 30,000 feet. It was far less than that of the P-47.
The 109G-6, configured for bomber interception, can attain 348 mph TAS (213 mph IAS), at 2,600 RPM and 0.96 ATA. It's a little faster with Emergency power, but barely pulls 1.1 ATA. Compare that to the P-47D-11, which attains 426 mph TAS (261 mph IAS) at 2,700 with 52" MAP. That's a 78 mph difference. At 32,000 feet, the disparity is even worse. The bigger problem for the 109 is, it can't pull more than 2g for no more than 45 degrees of turn before it begins a stall buffet. On the other hand, the P-47 can pull more than 4g before it begins to object. Huge difference. It simply means that if the 109 doesn't get the nose down fast, the P-47 will easily turn inside of it. At 30k, the P-47 climbs faster, accelerates quicker, turns much better and is much faster than the 109G-6. As I said, a 109G-6 has no business picking a fight with a P-47 at 30k. With equal pilots, the 109G-6 is toast waiting for the grape jelly.
Corey and BnZ - recall that the period we were primarily discussing before May 12/Rall was 1943 - was 1943 when the P47C was SOP and the D-2 was primary mount during the fall. Some -11s got to the 56th with WI/Paddle blades and upgraded power in Jan 1944 and it was a difference maker. I am not debating speed, nor debating 30K performance advantage. My comments regarding 109s changing tactics was to note that during the period of 'close escort' the SOP was closer to 2K altitude and constant tether to the bomb groups. That put high cover Jugs in 24-27K depending on the mission and bomber type. Zemke broke the mold and cheated but the other groups with possible exception of Blakeslee/Duncan, stayed pretty much with the program - and 109s entered most times with significant altitude advantage for all the reasons you mentioned re: 47 perfromance at 30K..
So, much of the initial envelope was between 20 and 28K and the Jugs were mostly pulled back from chasing to the deck. IMO the debate between the two is much better focused from 26,000 to the deck vs >28,000
-
The Jug is the hotter ship pretty much to the deck, decidedly so above 15K. It can plunge away in a dive-the 109s and 190s cannot dive away from it. It is more rugged, and has more punch than the 109. The 190A has about equal firepower, but .50s are arguably easier to use fighter-vs-fighter. From its attributes and what it actually accomplished one the proper tactics were devised, the Jug seems like a winner.
However, both the Americans and the Luftwaffe apparently felt the 51 could engage the 109 and 190 on more equal terms than the 47, and it developed a more fearsome reputation accordingly.
Walter Wolfrum, a Luftwaffe ace with 137 victories, remembered of his encounters with American fighters that "the P-47 wasn't so bad because we could out turn and outclimb it, initially. The P-51 was something else.
http://www.mustang.gaetanmarie.com/articles/germany/germany.htm (http://www.mustang.gaetanmarie.com/articles/germany/germany.htm)
-
The Jug is the hotter ship pretty much to the deck, decidedly so above 15K. It can plunge away in a dive-the 109s and 190s cannot dive away from it. It is more rugged, and has more punch than the 109. The 190A has about equal firepower, but .50s are arguably easier to use fighter-vs-fighter. From its attributes and what it actually accomplished one the proper tactics were devised, the Jug seems like a winner.
The first fully operational Jug that was obtained by the Luftwaffe was a brand new -2RA. The same day another -2RA was captured (Nov 7, 1943) near Caen after running out of fuel. It was wrung out at all altitudes to calibrate max speed, high and low altitudes, manueverablity at all altititudes and used to familiarize LW leaders in tactical approach/strength weakness. Their summary at that time for that dash number was 'excellent speed, great diver, large cockpit, slow acceleration, slow climb, good roll" (Luftwaffe Test Pilot - Hans Werner Leche
Second observation - while the Jug and the P-38 were the best armed US fighters in ETO, even 8 x .50 doesn't compare to a four .20mm equipped Fw 190 in throw weight and destructive power. Having said that it all depends on who is on who's tail and we know 4x .50 worked well on the P-51B
However, both the Americans and the Luftwaffe apparently felt the 51 could engage the 109 and 190 on more equal terms than the 47, and it developed a more fearsome reputation accordingly.
Anecdotally I have had detailed conversations with perhaps 20 LW aces regarding ranking opponents in air to air combat. For those that fought all of ours and the RAF, the Spit was generally ranked 1 and the Mustang was 2 and the Tempest was 3 and the Jug 4 - caveats being that the Spit was never seen over German soil in 43-late 1944 and therfore irrelevant to the big battles. When the German leaders flew the 4th FG Mustang (P-51B-15?) captured on D-Day and sent to Rechlin, where Rall rested while recuperating, the account later by Gunther Rall was that the Mustang was the best Allied Fighter during WWII - and certainly with the caveats that there were multiple envelopes that a Fw 190 or Me 109 would out perform it. It wasn't so much that the 51 was a superior knife fighter - it was about being equal in summary but equal over Berlin where latest Spits would be tougher to fight one on one given a neutral stactical advantage.
Walter Wolfrum, a Luftwaffe ace with 137 victories, remembered of his encounters with American fighters that "the P-47 wasn't so bad because we could out turn and outclimb it, initially. The P-51 was something else.
http://www.mustang.gaetanmarie.com/articles/germany/germany.htm (http://www.mustang.gaetanmarie.com/articles/germany/germany.htm)
There is virtually no Luftwaffe pilot who fought both that say consistently that "I feared the P-47 more than the Mustang" - and the reason is simply there was no place in Germany that was safe from being molested by the 51.
-
Gentlemen - thanks one and all for the thoughtful debate points. You can probably tell I hate this subject..