Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: Wildcat1 on August 26, 2012, 09:45:46 PM
-
Did these two ever match up in strength in North Africa? I know No. 112 squadron started operation the P-40 in June of 1941, was the Emil still the main Luftwaffe fighter at that time? What other RAF units had the P-40 in mid-1941?
Thanks :salute
-
The 109f was not introduced to the african theater until September 1941.
-
It's the 109E that's being discussed.
-
It's the 109E that's being discussed.
Yep, and the F wasnt introduced until Sept 1941.
A cursory google turned up a book and a note in the wikipedia page The P-40 usually had an edge over the Bf 109 in horizontal maneuverability, ..... (http://The P-40 usually had an edge over the Bf 109 in horizontal maneuverability, .....)
-
109Es that may have engaged in early Hawks were most likely E-7 or later F. The E served on until almost the end of 1942, but more as a second-tier jabo platform, delivering fast small bombloads. It wasn't being used as a fighter very much at that time.
I believe our E-4 has the edge against the P-40C. I think it can turn better, it's got better climb and vertical (my opinion, just from feel), and can regain lost E way better. Once the cannon ammo runs out the odds even out significantly, but still, there ya have it.
-
I'm just trying to think of some major air battles early on in the Western Desert Campaign where these two would have faced off
-
I'm just trying to think of some major air battles early on in the Western Desert Campaign where these two would have faced off
They could have faced off during the Tunisia Campaign and I'm sure they would have fought during the Western Desert Campaign as well.
ack-ack
-
As long as the speeds stay above 250 TAS and at at 12k-15k me thinks it would be more of a pilot vs pilot fight than a P40C vs 109E-4 match duel. The only real card the P40 can play is a better dive speed and control ability at those high speeds. Otherwise, the 109E-4 seems to me would have a better climb, a better acceleration, and a better snap shot ability (the quad .30's and dual .50's need to land multiple hits while the 109E-4 can land only 1-2 20mm and get results). Otherwise I think turn and roll is not all that different with maybe a slight edge to the P40 in the roll (Just a theory, I have not tested it yet).
As far as how they were flown in WWII in North Africa, I'd be willing to be the rules of engagement favored and tactics favored the Allies in the P40C vs 109E-4 match-ups. It isn't quite so black and white and crystal clear to which plane is/was superior in the real deal as it is in AH. Keep that in mind with all things in AH. :aok
-
P-40s were slaughtered in Africa by 109s, and even 110s. In one engagement German ace Hans-Joachim Marseille attacked a formation of 16 P-40s all by himself and shot down six of them including three aces: Robin Pare, Douglas Golding and Andre Botha.
-
Tomahawks were used for low level escort and low level attack. Aside from the Bf 109, they also encountered many Italian CR-42s and G-50s. Both were slow, badly armed opponents and rather easy to defeat or avoid. Didn't Clive Caldwell (RAAF) earn more than 20 kills in a Tomahawk IIB? Several 109s in that total too.
-
In my research I've found that many 109 pilots thought the P-40 was in many ways equal. It wasn't "slaughtered" by the Luftwaffe in North Africa, IIRC.
-
P-40s were slaughtered in Africa by 109s, and even 110s. In one engagement German ace Hans-Joachim Marseille attacked a formation of 16 P-40s all by himself and shot down six of them including three aces: Robin Pare, Douglas Golding and Andre Botha.
Marseille had only 12 or so kills in North Africa flying the 109E, or something near to that. Indeed, he lost several 109Es in combat. One Free French Hurricane pilot (Denis, was his name, I think) shot down Marseille twice!
It wasn't until early 1942, now flying a 109F, that Marseille really began to roll up the victories quickly. But, he was flying the best fighter in the theater at the time, and he worked very hard to develop his marksmanship and tactics. By then, the Kittyhawk I was arriving in theater. Probably the best pilot in North Africa, but he also had the best fighter to take full advantage of his remarkable skill.
-
Tomahawks were used for low level escort and low level attack. Aside from the Bf 109, they also encountered many Italian CR-42s and G-50s. Both were slow, badly armed opponents and rather easy to defeat or avoid. Didn't Clive Caldwell (RAAF) earn more than 20 kills in a Tomahawk IIB? Several 109s in that total too.
Caldwell was a stud. :aok The RAAF's best ace of WWII. He had quite the colorful history. :salute
-
James "Stocky" Edwards, flew P-40s in North Africa. He got several kills with the P-40 before switching to Spitfires. Here are his views on the P-40:
"... not an easy aircraft to fly properly and as a result, we lost a good number of pilots while training. In the first few months after conversion to Kittyhawks, all the squadrons lost heavily to the 109s.
I found that one had to have a very strong right arm to fly the Kittyhawk I during most maneuvers. In dive-bombing, the aircraft would pick up speed very quickly in the dive, but it had a great tendency to roll to the right. One could trim this out reasonably well with the left hand, but even then when one pulled up, it wanted to roll to the left quite viloently. So I learned to trim about halfway in the dive and hold the control stick central by bracing my right elbow against my right leg and the right wall of the cockpit. It was also distracting to have one's left hand on the trim all the time, when it should be on the throttle. In a dogfight, with violent changes of speed, it was all one could do to fly the aircraft.
Kittyhawk II... was a definite improvement in lateral stability over the Kitty I. Eventually, with the Mk IIIs, the Kittyhawk became a good, stable fighting aircraft, although it never did have enough power or climbing ability compared to the 109s or the Spitfire."
-
Did these two ever match up in strength in North Africa?
Many times mostly in section strength
was the Emil still the main Luftwaffe fighter at that time?
It was and units of both JG-26 and 27 were flying them
What other RAF units had the P-40 in mid-1941?
250 Squadron RAF and 2 Squadron SAAF
The following actions took place towards the end of Operation Battleaxe. Rommel had advanced to Sallum, Egypt but his offensive was stalled because of supply issues. Tobruk was surrounded but still in Allied hands.
*16 June 1941
At 1500, eight Tomahawks of 250 squadron fought their first battle over the desert meeting five 109s over Bardia. Squadron leader Scoulnar and Flight Lieutenant Martin each damaged a 109 and Pilot Officer Edghill shot one down. The Germans initially identified the Tomahawks as Brewster’s.
*18 June 1941
The Tomahawks of 250 squadron suffered their first loses while strafing the Capuzzo-Tobruk-El Adem road. One aircraft was brought down by flak but the pilot bailed successfully and joined a friendly party of Arabs. Fifteen days later he arrived back at Sidi Barrani. While returning to base the other seven Tomahawks were bounced by four 109s. Three Tomahawks were shot down; all the pilots bailed out. However one, Sergeant Munro, was dead upon landing.
*Source – Fighters Over the Desert
-
As long as the speeds stay above 250 TAS and at at 12k-15k me thinks it would be more of a pilot vs pilot fight than a P40C vs 109E-4 match duel. The only real card the P40 can play is a better dive speed and control ability at those high speeds. Otherwise, the 109E-4 seems to me would have a better climb, a better acceleration, and a better snap shot ability (the quad .30's and dual .50's need to land multiple hits while the 109E-4 can land only 1-2 20mm and get results). Otherwise I think turn and roll is not all that different with maybe a slight edge to the P40 in the roll (Just a theory, I have not tested it yet).
As far as how they were flown in WWII in North Africa, I'd be willing to be the rules of engagement favored and tactics favored the Allies in the P40C vs 109E-4 match-ups. It isn't quite so black and white and crystal clear to which plane is/was superior in the real deal as it is in AH. Keep that in mind with all things in AH. :aok
^this. The ability to disengage as soon as the conditions become unfavorable is a huge advantage. It is not so much in AH, where we don't get hurt when we "die"
In an AH fight I want the 109e, in RL I think I would want the P40? It's hard to compare performance when dying isnt an issue. But if it was I want the plane that can get the hell out of dodge if things go south, and that makes the P40 the winner.
-
^this. The ability to disengage as soon as the conditions become unfavorable is a huge advantage. It is not so much in AH, where we don't get hurt when we "die"
In an AH fight I want the 109e, in RL I think I would want the P40? It's hard to compare performance when dying isnt an issue. But if it was I want the plane that can get the hell out of dodge if things go south, and that makes the P40 the winner.
this. I think the reason most British pilots found it unfavorable was because it wasn't as responsive as rides they were used to, i.e. the Gladiator, Hurricane, Spitfire etc.
IIRC the P-40C can turn inside the 109E. it is close, though. Engine performance is definitely a key advantage the 109 has over the P-40, but where it falls behind is high-speed responsiveness. At favorable altitudes it is a pretty even fight.
-
But if it was I want the plane that can get the hell out of dodge if things go south, and that makes the P40 the winner.
Not quite...
(http://www.hitechcreations.com/components/com_ahplaneperf/genchart.php?p1=73&p2=61&pw=1>ype=0&gui=localhost&itemsel=GameData)
Below 15k the 109E is the faster ride and thus the one who can choose to disengage at will. The P-40 will have to stay above 20k to have any appreciable speed advantage over the 109, but if it dives the 109 will catch up eventually.
Even above 20k the 109 can always gain an energy advantage over the P-40 by spiral climbing:
(http://www.hitechcreations.com/components/com_ahplaneperf/genchart.php?p1=73&p2=61&pw=1>ype=2&gui=localhost&itemsel=GameData)
-
I don't think the USAAF took the P40C model to North Africa. According to my history of the USN in WW2 / Vol 2 (Operations in North African Waters), ACV 28 Chenango TF34 carried 76 Army P40Fs with them for future basing in Casablanca.
-
I have a poster of the Uss Chenango with p40's taking of the carrier.
-
There are multiple pictures out there with the P40F model flying off the carrier decks in the MTO, obviously for ferrying purposes and not for combat operations (none that I am aware of anyways). I have not seen photos anywhere of P40C's on a carrier deck.
-
AH P40 doesn't have WEP :D
109E4 should win in an AH fight
-
Emil > P40, all day any day.
-
Guys please comment about the P-40f. How do you feel it competes with different 109 variants?
Thanks.
-
In an equal E situation? All 109 should wreck any P40.
-
Guys please comment about the P-40f. How do you feel it competes with different 109 variants?
Thanks.
Not much of an easier of a fight than if you were in the C model. The P40's in general are heavy, climb poorly, and accelerate like grandma in a wheel chair. They are built tough, dive well, can roll well, and can surprise enemy fighters in initial turns. Once the fight is slow all any 109 has to do is get in to a 2000ft/min spiral climb and the game is over. The P40 needs to stay fast and as high as possible, keep the fight as open as possible, and use the ammo load to its advantage. In a knife fight the 109 wins.
The C is probably the most agile, but the weakest engine (best climb though), and weakest guns (4/.30's and 2/.50's). The E is slightly heavier, yet slightly faster with better guns. The F is for up high stuff. The N is the best all around (at alts below 12k thanks to an impressive WEP), but it too is heavy. Ultimately, it is all about which paint job or unit you want to represent. :aok I'm looking forward to the RAF skin for the C model. :D
-
Guys please comment about the P-40f. How do you feel it competes with different 109 variants?
Thanks.
The P-40F had a follow up variant in the L which historically gave he early 109Fs and Gs some go. Because of the P-40s disadvantages there were not that many P-40 aces in the western desert. The P-40L was a stripped down version of the F, which still sported the RRM, but with less armor, two less 50 .cals and less range. The L could handle itself with the 109 when it had the altitude advantage. A prolonged fight would spell out its death. But, as many of you have mentioned, if the P-40L maintains it "E" and altitude, "watch out".
October's Sunday European Campaign will be featuring the P-40F/L and P-38G vs 109G2s, 109G6s and C202s over the Island of Pantelleria.
You all are invited to join for what should be some really great action. I hope to see you there.
(http://www.332ndfg.org/PANTITLE.png)
See you in October.
:salute
-
I was looking at a playful P-40 at Duxford the other day.
And then as well, 2x109's....but they were Buchons. They did a nice show though.
BTW, Spitfires used spiral climbing as an evasive maneuver vs 109's......
-
I was looking at a playful P-40 at Duxford the other day.
And then as well, 2x109's....but they were Buchons. They did a nice show though.
BTW, Spitfires used spiral climbing as an evasive maneuver vs 109's......
iirc, the "spiral climb" the Spitfires used a tight and steep climb defensively vs the 109's because the wing load of the 109's couldn't maintain the climb as long as the Spits. Anyone able to confirm this? I remember reading something of that nature long ago.
-
Johnny Johnsson once out-spiralled a gaggle of 109's in his Spit IX. It was a bit tight until he hit 20K, then he just said bye-bye. It's in his autobiography. I think it was a 1 vs 12 set-up, but not sure.