Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: midnight Target on May 02, 2002, 06:24:13 PM
-
Just watched a show on Discovery-Wings (Love my new cable) about fighters. The show chose the best fighter plane of each era.
1911 - 1925 was the Fokker VII
1926 - 1942 was the Spitfire (This was backed up by Gunther Rall in an interview)
1943-1946 Mustang
1950-1961 F-86 Sabre
1962-1971 F4-Phantom II
1972-Present (Show was probably made in the early 1990's) F-15 Eagle (Although the vote was very close with F-16)
-
for 1943-1946 i'd vote the La-7 as the best 2 p-51s dived on a RUssian Aces La-7 and the La-7 pilot turned the fight around and killed both of the P-51 pilots. It made the Germans crap their pants too when seeing it at low alt.
-
perk da lala7
-
Me 262 is best from 43-46. And Günter Rall was treatend att gunpoint. The Spit 1 vs Me 109 E-4 (Draw)
The Spit 5 vs Me 109 F-4 (F4 wins)
The Spit 9 vs Me 109 G-6 (Draw)
And before u say it was only prop figthers from 43-46.
109-G14, Fw190D9 and D12, and in 45 Ta-152 and Do 335. I laughf at the La7 (Maximus Dwebius prematurius cry babyus)
And (Spittius Dwebius Newbeeius Afraidius too figthus on equalius termius) and N(ewbee)1K(oward)2.
Ok the Pony drivers have my respect *S*
In my humble oppinion. No wait I mean that.... so F*** all
LOL :-)
-
Some room for debate on some of those..
but no room for debate on the Spit ix vs 109G6 one....
The G6 is in real trouble against the Spit we have..much less its contemporary spits Lf and HF models.
-
Don't you know the P-51 won the war by itself.
-
Originally posted by Wutz
(Spittius Dwebius Newbeeius Afraidius too figthus on equalius termius)
In my humble oppinion. No wait I mean that.... so F*** all
LOL :-)
If you're silly (or is that stupid) enough to fight on equal terms...well...nevermind...
:D
-
Why is the F86 considered superior to the Mig15? The Mig15 was superior to the F86 in performance.
-
Originally posted by Soviet
for 1943-1946 i'd vote the La-7 as the best 2 p-51s dived on a RUssian Aces La-7 and the La-7 pilot turned the fight around and killed both of the P-51 pilots. It made the Germans crap their pants too when seeing it at low alt.
hang on, why did two p51s dive on an La7, or was this another case of america way of fighting -"shoot first, ask questions later"?:rolleyes:
Gulf War
-
Originally posted by Wutz
Me 262 is best from 43-46.
And before u say it was only prop figthers from 43-46.
109-G14, Fw190D9 and D12, and in 45 Ta-152 and Do 335.
LOL :-)
Not good enough to keep Germany from being set on fire.
-
La7 was no good at alt so it simply cant be considered best overall fighter. And high alt performance was much more important in RL than in AH. Im talking over 20,000 at least.
-
Originally posted by fdiron
Why is the F86 considered superior to the Mig15? The Mig15 was superior to the F86 in performance.
Because the goobers who flew the Mig15s in Korea didn't do it "right" and got their tails waxed. The Russian pilots did very well, but the North Koreans (and Chinese I think) who flew Migs got very poor training. Just watched a documentary on the History channel the other day where a NK Mig pilot explained his Mig-15 training (from the Russians).
Step 1: Introduction to the Aircraft (groundschool)
Step 2: Take off
Step 3: Fly a circle around the field
Step 4: Land
Step 5: Report for combat duty
-
Originally posted by Wutz
(Spittius Dwebius Newbeeius Afraidius too figthus on equalius termius) and N(ewbee)1K(oward)2.
must be a civilian to say that... your confusing a game to real war.
-
He he,, so many strong feelings for something I said.. lol I dont care what u say Spit fliers are dweeeebs. At least I dont pretend too be in the military Sarge1. and it is Montezuma who is confusing this game for a real war :) and Puck.. he he did the big bad german insult ur spit :) I am sorry.
-
Originally posted by Soviet
for 1943-1946 i'd vote the La-7 as the best 2 p-51s dived on a RUssian Aces La-7 and the La-7 pilot turned the fight around and killed both of the P-51 pilots. It made the Germans crap their pants too when seeing it at low alt.
Hmm, then explain why the La-9 and La-11, as well as the Yak-9P were slaughtered over Korea by the F-51D (AKA P-51D).
Sounds like a propaganda fish story to me... Like the Soviet claims of F-86 kills, exceeding total production by 200%, and deployed aircraft totals by 400%. Here's a shocker... The Soviets frequently lied, or at the minimum, exaggerated to extremes. It's the nature of the communist system, the truth is what they say it is....
Some historians have concluded that Soviet (and Japanese) kill claims should be divided by 3 to get close to the actual numbers.
Now, before anyone whines about overclaiming by the Brits, Americans and Germans, understand that this is true. They did overclaim. But, only fractionally as compared to the Soviets and Japanese.
My regards,
Widewing
-
"the best 2 p-51s dived on a RUssian Aces La-7 and the La-7 pilot turned the fight around and killed both of the P-51 pilots. It made the Germans crap their pants too when seeing it at low alt."
Any documentation on this?
RC
-
I think I know the true story about this. Russian aircraft spotted P51s flying near Berlin. They mistook them for Me109s. The Russian fighters bounced the P51s, but only damaged one P51. The P51s then shot down 2 of the Russian fighters.
I will try to remember the name of the book I read this in. It was a book purely about the P51. I think it was called "The P51 Mustang".
-
Originally posted by fdiron
Why is the F86 considered superior to the Mig15? The Mig15 was superior to the F86 in performance.
Well, the MiG had a performance edge in limited areas. In terms of general performance, the F-86 held advantages in rate of roll, rate of turn, and maximum speed below 30,000 feet. However, the MiG was clearly superior in climb and acceleration. Perhaps, the greatest advantage of the MiG was its higher ceiling. This allowed the MiGs to have the advantage of altitude, which always translates into having the initial tactical edge in any encounter. Moreover, the MiG pilots could escape across the Yalu river should they find themselves in danger of being shot down. Likewise, the Sabre pilots were able to escape over the sea as Soviet pilots were forbidden to pursue U.N. aircraft over water. Armed with six .50 caliber Browning machine guns, the F-86 lacked the hitting power of the MiGs with their three heavy, but slow firing cannon. Unlike the U.S. Navy, the Air Force elected to refrain from specifying the 20mm cannon. As a result, many MiGs survived hits that would have been fatal had the Sabre been fitted with the much more lethal 20mm weapons.
One major disadvantage of the MiG was its inability to exceed Mach 1 in a dive and remain in one piece. On the other hand, the F-86 was fully transonic, having achieved speeds in excess of Mach 1 during the prototype's maiden flight, two weeks before the Bell XS-1 (X-1) did so. However, the XP-86 required a dive to do so. When in trouble, the F-86 pilot merely split-s'd for the deck, and the MiG was unable to follow without reducing power. Moreover, once they dropped below 30,000 feet, the MiG surrendered every advantage except climb rate. Indeed, at altitudes below 20,000 feet, the MiG would be hard pressed by such aircraft as the F9F-5 Panther and F-84C Thunderjet. Their (the Soviets) one significant encounter with Navy Panthers was a complete debacle as three expertly flown F9F-5s handled seven of them quite roughly, shooting down two and damaging 3 others for no losses. Considering that the Soviet pilots held every tactical advantage at the outset of the engagement, it must have been a shock to them to take such a beating. By the way, this engagement is heavily documented. I have the after action reports and pilot interviews, one of which was conducted just a few months ago. A second pilot passed away shortly after giving his interview, and I have not been able to locate the third pilot to date.
Another point: Subsequent versions of the F-86 proved superior to the MiG-15 in every area of the performance envelope. Ultimately, the MiG-17 re-established parity briefly. With the introduction of the F-100, the edge went back to the Americans. and remained that way until the MiG-21 arrived (the MiG-19 was not quite up to the standard of the F-100 and other early century series fighters).
My regards,
Widewing
-
The fortunes of the air arms of the various combatants in World War II were determined to a large extent by what the leaders of those combatants saw as the main "mission" of their air arms should be.
For the Russians, that mission was close air-support of the ground forces. Consequently, Russian aircraft were designed to deliver maximum performance at low-levels, where it was most needed.
The Germans preferred to carry the war to higher altitudes, at least in fighter design. Early in the war, German fighters, especially the Me-109, were designed to deliver maximum performance at altitudes of at least 20,000 feet. Because of their high-altitude performance, German fighters almost always engaged Russian aircraft from a superior tactical position. The kill claims of German fighter pilots may be exaggerated, but are probably closer to the truth than the Russians are willing to admit.
The P-51, P-38, and the P-47 displayed a high-altitude design philosophy that in many ways mirrored that of the Germans. However, the American aircraft payed certain penalties in design because they had one performance parameter that the German designs did not; long-range bomber escort. While many AH fighter jocks decry the manuverability of the Mustang it would be well to remember that in real life, low-speed manuverability wasn't really all that important. High-speed manuverability, at high-altitudes was. Long range and high-speed manuverability were the main performance goals of American designers. These designs, especially the Mustang, were imminently suited for the war that they had to fight.
By the way, I've read several articles by pilots who flew captured or restored Me-109s of various models. While their personal opinions about the merits of the 109 differ there is one thing that they tend to agree on; handling at low speeds, up to 250 mph was excellent. The 109G series could outmanuver the Mustang in a low-speed, hard-turning dogfight because its roll rate and handling were superior. Of course this was not of much use in the skies over Europe, where combat speeds were usually much faster than 250 mph.
Regards, Shuckins
-
i think this list must mean most influential or something.
whether they won or not you cannot deny a me262 is a better aircraft than any prop plane of that era.
history channel and discovery are unfortunately rarely full of anything but BS :D
-
One interesting advantage that the Sabre had over the Mig-15 was the climate control in the cockpit. This was brought up by one of the pilots interviewed in the show. He basically said that if you could catch a Mig up high and get him to dive ......the Mig was dead. The lack of adequate climate control would fog his canopy every time, making him blind until he leveled or slowed the plane. The American pilots were well aware of this deficiency and used it to their advantage.
-
Originally posted by hazed-
i think this list must mean most influential or something.
whether they won or not you cannot deny a me262 is a better aircraft than any prop plane of that era.
history channel and discovery are unfortunately rarely full of anything but BS :D
The question begs, better at what? It's the "what" that qualifies the statement. Yes, it was better at some missions, and grossly inferior at others. Nothing is absolute. It would have made little difference if the Luftwaffe had F-16s, if they can't get off or on the runway without getting blasted by the roaming Allied fighters.
My regards,
Widewing
-
Me 262 was a death trap with an average engine life of between 10-12 hours. They never fixed these problems and I don't see how such an unreliable aircraft can be considered the best of anything. There is a reason they never had more than 40 of them servicable at one time.
As for the La-7 vs. P-51. Somebody is forgetting that if Mustangs met Lavochkins, the Mustangs flew all the way from England to eastern Europe. Let's see any Soviet WWII fighter achieve that feat...
-
Well done Shuckins!
-
Hey, very cool thread and I respect the knowledge of many of you.
But as far as selecting an aircraft based on its impact in the war, shouldn't the Hellcat receive mention?
-
This is from memory, but these were the planes nominated in each era...IIRC:
1911-1925 Fokker DVII, Spad, Fokker triwing (forget designation number), Sopwith Camel
1926-1942 Bf109, Spit, Hurricane, Zero, F4F, P-40
1943-1946 Pony, 262, FW190, P-38, F6, F4U
1947-1961 F-86, Mig-15, ...dont remember ?
1962-1971 Getting really foggy..........
1972-Present whats my name again?
-
Yes, I can take a Mig in two out of three falls:D.
Midnight Target:
One interesting advantage that the Sabre had over the Mig-15 was the climate control in the cockpit. This was brought up by one of the pilots interviewed in the show. He basically said that if you could catch a Mig up high and get him to dive ......the Mig was dead. The lack of adequate climate control would fog his canopy every time, making him blind until he leveled or slowed the plane. The American pilots were well aware of this deficiency and used it to their advantage.
This is an urban legend, which resulted from the inspection of the Mig-15 that was flown by a defecting NK pilot to South Korea. That particular model had a defective environmental system. The inspectors mistook an anomoly for a design defect, which led to incorrect intelligence being fed to U.N. pilots. The reason Mig's died when they died is because the Sabre's were faster in the dive and more stable. The Mig's were pushing up against the sound barrier, which they were not designed to handle. Other models that were subsequently inspected were found to have the same environmental system, but ones that worked correctly.
This same aircraft was test flown by a (then) Maj Charles Yeager. He got into an argument with another pilot (a Colonel) who claimed that the Sabre was a clearly superior aircraft, based on its 6:1 kill ratio over the Mig. Young Major Yeager told him it was not the quality of the aircraft that made the difference over Korea, but the quality of the pilots. The colonel said, "Bull! Prove it!" He and ol' Chuck went up, the colonel flying the Sabre and Yeager in the Mig. Chuck handed the colonel his arse in a basket several times in a row. The just to make his point cyrstal clear, they switched aircraft. Rinse and repeat, as they say...Yeager again trounced the colonel.
-
Fokker triwing (forget designation number),
The Dr.1. There weren't a whole lot of them, and while they could turn tight and climb well, their lack of speed as opposed to allied fighters meant that they could not control a fight. I've always thought of Werner Voss as the perrenial icon of the Dr.1 legacy. In his last battle, he gave 56 squadron fits with his aerobatics, but ultimately he was killed because he couldn't leave the party. Think of the Dr.1 as the A6M of WW1.
The American fighters of WW2 probably represented the largest variety of versatility that any country could put out during the war. All of the frontline fighters from '43 on were used heavily in a multitude of roles. The P-38, P-47, P-51, F6F, and F4U (P-40 and F4F as well when compared to contemporaries) could all fly fast, fly high, fly far, had good firepower, could carry large amounts of ordinance, possessed good maneuverability, and they had good durabilty and protection for the pilot. The F6F and F4U (and F4F) had the added bonus of being able to operate from a carrier. Not to claim that any were "the best" designs, but they could all certainly serve as a median for which other design philosophies of the time are compared. None of them specializing at any one thing, all of them capable in the vast majority of fighter-dependent roles.
-
MiG had incredibly high stick forces at high speeds, and above a certain Mach it would pitch up uncontrollably. The forces were so high that the Koreans welded on stick extensions to get more leverage.
MiG vs Sabre is kind of like Spit IX vs. Fw 190A. MiG has a bit more turning and climbing ability and better high altitude performance. But the Sabre handles a lot better at high speeds and is not far behind in performance. Just like with 190 and Spit, a sharp 190 pilot can dominate the fight if he exploits his aircraft.
-
mustang sucks, the tempest was much better in the later war years,especially at low altitudes. and it also had much more powerful armament- 4 20mm cannons.
Tempest rules!!!!!
-
Cool stuff Sabre...thank you. I guess that particular urban legend has endured, because it was a Sabre pilot that was telling the story.
-
Thanks, Don.
Regards, Shuckins
-
Originally posted by funkedup
As for the La-7 vs. P-51. Somebody is forgetting that if Mustangs met Lavochkins, the Mustangs flew all the way from England to eastern Europe. Let's see any Soviet WWII fighter achieve that feat...
Did the Lavochka need to? No remember it fought on the Eastern front where low altitude performance was preferred and Range wasn't as essential as the ETO.
Also i've heard from Several sources that It was 2 P-51s who bounced Ivan Kozhedubs (not very sure on the spelling) La-7 thinking it was a FW-190 and Ivan showed those P-51s.
Also the reason the Yak-9Ps and Lavochkins in Korea didn't do so well is they had NK pilots flying them. I'm positive if the Russians were flying them it would have been different or at least not such a slaugther as it was.
And don't forget how the Mig-15 was able to cruise along at 50,000 feet while the Sabre couldn't really go that high. Remember on the History channel? the black thursday thing or whatever it was where the Russian Mig-15 pilots hung around really high then dived in and slaugthered dozens of B-29s?
The Americans have had some good designs but don't underestimate the Russians they have some Really good aircraft and pilots.
-
Heres what I saw in an interview on the History channel
The maximum speed of the F86 and Mig15 were within 5 mph of each other. The Mig held advantages in climb rate, turn rate, and ceiling. The F86 was not fast enough to provide escort for B29s against Mig15s. The most important quality of an escort fighter is speed.
-
Originally posted by fdiron
Heres what I saw in an interview on the History channel
The maximum speed of the F86 and Mig15 were within 5 mph of each other. The Mig held advantages in climb rate, turn rate, and ceiling. The F86 was not fast enough to provide escort for B29s against Mig15s. The most important quality of an escort fighter is speed.
My problem with the History Channel is that most of the shows presented are riddled with error. This is because most of them are written and produced by people without any credentials as historians. Their primary goal is to make money, accuracy in their material is secondary.
Primary escort for the B-29s was the F-84. This fighter was not fast enough to cope with the MiG-15. However, the Sabre was. As Sabres became available, the F-84 was reassigned to attack missions, where it excelled.
Later, the B-29s were switched to night bombing. Here they were escorted by dedicated night fighters, such as the Lockheed F-84 and the Douglas F3D Sky Knight. You might find it interesting that no B-29 was ever lost to communist fighters while being escorted by the F3D. However, 44 communist fighters were shot down.
Losses of B-29s totalled just 22% of communist claims. Typically, anything the Soviets shot at, they claimed as destroyed.
My regards,
Widewing
-
The Sabre was not fast enough to cope with the Mig15 while escorting B29s. Thats what my previous post was all about. After a very infamous raid in which quite a few B29s were shot down, the Air Force did some combat simulations stateside and concluded that the F86 did not have a sufficient speed advantage over the Mig15 in order to successfully escort the bombers.
-
Just a note: The P-38, P-47, And P-51 were NOT designed from the outset to be long range bomber escorts.
The P-38 was originally intended to be a bomber interceptor. Good speed, climb, armament, high altitude performance, and a fuel duration of 1 hour at full power were design criteria. It wasn't meant to slug it out with single engine fighters.
The P-47 was designed as a high altitude fighter, hence the turbo. Extreme range wasn't a major design goal until the N was developed.
The Mustang was designed in response to a British request for North American to build P-40s for them. NAA thought (quite rightly) that they could build a better fighter than the P-40, and proceeded to do so in very short order. However, the Mustang I (like the P-40) was powered by a non-turbocharged Allison V-12 and therefore its high altitude performance was less than stellar.
In their initial incarnations, none of these three had the combination of range and high altitude performance needed for the escort role. This was partially due to a pre-war Air Corps doctrine that forbade the use of external stores on pursuit craft.
The reasoning for this was to avoid the added drag of external fuel tanks and to prevent ground commanders from using their pursuit ships for ground attack. BTW, this policy essentially dictated that Kelly Johnson and Lockheed use a thicker wing on the P-38 than they would have liked in order to provide internal tankage for the required fuel load. It wasn't until Jan. 1942 that the ban on external stores was lifted.
Another contributing factor was the American belief that large formations of heavy bombers would be able to adequately defend themselves on their way to and from the target. It wasn't until the Luftwaffe began destroying the bombers in appalling numbers that the Air Corps realized that A) the bombers did in fact need escort, and B) they had no purpose built type to fill that role. Only then were existing types adapted to fill that void in the inventory.
-
But even without drop tanks those three aircraft still had greater range than any of the single engine types used by Germany or the USSR.
-
" .... However, the Mustang I (like the P-40) was powered by a non-turbocharged Allison V-12 and therefore its high altitude performance was less than stellar. "
But the Allison did have a mechanical supercharger sometimes supplemented by a GE turbo charger. What made the Merlin was the 2 speed, 2 stage mechanical supercharger.
(not debating, just clarifying your statement)
-
DblTrubl,
Quite right. Those American fighters weren't designed from the outset to be long-range escorts. Nevertheless, when the failure of the American bombers to protect themselves against German fighter opposition became apparent, each of those American fighters were heavily modified to extend their range. The P-51 literally became a flying fuel tank. The weight of the extra fuel tanks made the Mustang sluggish and hard to handle in the early stages of an escort mission. After burning off some of that fuel, however, the situation changed, and the Mustang became a swift, agile, and deadly fighter.
An empty fuel tank no doubt didn't weigh very much. Yet it was extra weight. This was a handicap, however small, that German and Japanese designs did not suffer from.
Anybody have any idea how much the empty wing and fuselage tanks weighed?
Regards, Shuckins
-
Neg Funked- Yak 9DD was fully capable of flying as far as a mustang, but it was completely impractical and useless on the Eastern front and they pulled out the extra wing tanks and used them for the same purpose as the Yak-9D.
Without any serious attempt at a strategical air bomber niether AF had any real reason to develop LR escort fighters. That would be putting the cart before the horse :)
Widewing- several times I have seen you comment that the Sabre was "faster below 30,000 feet". Can you please explain why Yeager stated the Mig was faster by a slight to large margin at all altitudes? And how the Mig could climb better at all altitudes yet you think it couldn't fly faster than a sabre in lower alts?
And BTW the success of the F-51 was against the NK airforce. Hardly indicative of the capability of the planes flown.
-
Long range and high altitude performance come at a heavy penalty in weight. Empty fuel tanks are still heavy because of self sealing rubber shell. Additionally, the aircraft structure has to be enlarged and strengthened to accommodate the extra fuel tanks, turbosuperchargers (the turbosupercharger is why the P-47 is so porky) and so on. If the P-51 had been designed as a short range fighter (like the spitfire), it would have been lightened noticeably and would have been in the weight class of a spit or 109, probably 2000 or 2500 lbs lighter with full internal fuel and ammo.
Hooligan
-
And so often the greatest achievments are unintentional :) One other trait that was common with the five frontline U.S. fighters is that none of them were really in the echelon of comparative dominance when they initially appeared on the scene. The Spitfire, Me109, Fw190 and A6M were all practicaly out-of-the-gate, world-class powerhouses. The P-47 and the F6F probably had the best initial combat versions when pitted against contemporaries, but the P-38 and F4U had teething problems, and the P-51 needed a new engine.
DblTrubl is right in that none of the five U.S. fighters were based on any single intent (The Navy and Army obviously had different needs, and the USAAC infatuation with streamlining possibly cost the P-39 a place in greatness). In part, that's what makes it so cool to look at. Not only did they all end up with remarkably similar capabilities (when the emphasis on multi-role capabilities did become a priority among both services), but eventually all were able to operate at a high level of competitivness throughout the full range of the multi-role spectrum.
-
Dangit John you took my saying. I came up wit da lala-7 and the peepee-51 so hahahahahahahaha
im the ruler of onion land and theres nothing you can do about it.:D :p
-
you are all mistaken my friends:the tempest is the best fighter of the late war period for low altitudes, while the Ta152 is the best for high altitudes. All the mustang can do is suck and swallow.
-
Please could anybody comment this article (http://dzampini.boom.ru/Korea/MiGsoverKorea.htm) ?
When you were talking about the range of the lavochkins i was thinking that the fuel tankage was decreased from La-5FN to La-7. The limitation of the russians was their engines, i think. But it's also worth mentioning that russian engines were more adapted to the harsh conditions of the eastern front.
Greetings
-
My top list in no special order.
Focke Wulf FW 190, Messerschmitt Me 262, Vought F4U Corsair, North American P51D Mustang, Spitfire 9 and there after.
-
The best fighter plane like any other weapon, is the one you can use most effectively to kill your enemy with.
-
On April 14, 1945, two Hawker Tempests of 486 (New Zealand) Squadron took off from the Volkel airfield in Holland in order to attack the railway yards at Ludwigslust. As they initiated their low-level attack, three Ta 152s of Stab/JG 301 were scrambled against them from Neustadt-Glewe, five miles away. Within minutes, the German aircraft hurriedly fell upon the New Zealanders. Oberfeldwebel Sattler, flying in No. 3 position in the German formation, lost control over his new plane and crashed vertically into the ground. In the following dogfight at almost tree-top level, Sattler's comrade Oberfeldwebel Willi Reschke displayed the superior maneuverability of the Ta 152 by out-turning and shooting down the Tempest flown by Warrant Officer Mitchell, who had no chance to survive.
Reschke was an excellent pilot at the controls of the Ta 152. Ten days later he flew "Green 9", shown here, and destroyed two Yak-9s in the air over Berlin. Reschke had flown in JG 300, I./JG 302. and III./JG 301 before he was transferred to Stab/JG 301. He survived the war with a total score of 26 victories, eighteen of them 4-engine bombers.
-
i still think the Tempest is better than the Ta152 at low level :p
-
The Mig-15 pilot who flew to Kimpo said the Sabre is superior. In the Interview you can read:
He said that the Red pilot were very much afraid of Sabres because of the better maneuverability and better gunsight of the American planes and said that that he thought the American planes were superior too.
or
The first qualification of a pilot, he said is to be a member of the Communist party. The second was a strong physique and the third a good memory, he added.
or
He saw ne planes being shipped into North Korea about 40 days ago and the planes piloted by the Russians were superior to those flown by Chinese and North Korean pilots. the Russian piloted planes, for one thing, had radar gunsight which the other did not, he said.
btw- he did not know about the 100.000$ reward when he flew.
J.H.R Merifield said about the MiG that it is faster, accelerate better, climbs better and has a higher ceiling. The high communist losses can be explained by bad flying discipline. They donīt keep formation well and are badly guided from ground. Though superior in armment they donīt suceed in shooting down fighters because of bad gunnery training or insufficient gunsight equipment. Furthermore the abillity to fly tight turns is limited. The Mig15 tends to spin.
Another flight test from Okinawa found out that the Sabre is superior on grounds of:
Necessary automatic devices are missing for the Mig, so the pilot has a lot to do in flight and canīconcentrate himself fully to the fight
Topspeed of the Mig is lower than for the Sabre
No stall horn installed
insufficient climate control
The cockpit is too small
Someone said that the climate control was defect, and a small cockpit is no handicap for korean pilots, i think
Another test found out that at combat speed heavy yaw movements occur, thus it is no good gun platform. The weapons are not equipped with a heating device what is necessary in high altitudes.
Best Mach-number was 0.92, yaw movements begin at 0.86
Aillerons were the only controls that were boosted (Hydraulic system)
niklas
-
Originally posted by Widewing
Sounds like a propaganda fish story to me... Like the Soviet claims of F-86 kills, exceeding total production by 200%, and deployed aircraft totals by 400%. Here's a shocker... The Soviets frequently lied, or at the minimum, exaggerated to extremes. It's the nature of the communist system, the truth is what they say it is....
Some historians have concluded that Soviet (and Japanese) kill claims should be divided by 3 to get close to the actual numbers.
Again the money for the fish. We discussed it here a year ago.
First: Soviet victories in Korea include all types of ACs, not only Sabres.
Second: about the nature of communist system - better watch what your own "ministry of truth" toejams into your brain. 64th IAK losses are all documented, and never ever were touched by propaganda. They were de-classified after "destroyka" in early-90s.
OTOH - UN "heroes" didn't have a single "confirmed" kill in Korea.
Third: the most interesting part. Japanese aces had the victory counts up to 350-300. Later American "historians" divided that numbers by 3 or 4, probably because noone could kill so much "defenders of democracy". OTOH - Japanese aces who claimed up to 75 kills in 2 weeks over Khalkhin-Gol were considered OK - they fought against Russian "untermenschen". So did LW "knights" - so we have that ridiculous numbers like Hartmann's 352 kills.
Now - pathetic mode off ;)
Eugeniy Pepelyaev (i read his book last week) said that Sabre was in many ways superior to MiG. Advanages: better electronics and radio, better cockpit, G-suits, high-speed handling, critical speed (M0.92 for MiG vs Sabre's M0.95). MiG had slightly better climb and slightly worse turn, better cieling.
-
Is this something you folks were looking for?
"-Mission 894, largest ever to Berlin - 1264 heavies and 600 escorting P-51s - was launched against targets in and near the German capital to deliver 3724 tons of bombs. Twelve Mustang fighter groups escorted the bombers while two others went to nearby areas.
As previously agreed, the Russians were notified of the mission and its targets. The encompassed area between the Oder and Pasewalk-Berlin had been defined earlier to ensure that Russian and American forces would not meet accidentally.
Flying from East Wretham, 46 P-5IDs from the 359th Fighter Group divided into two formations - Group A led by Captain Ralph L. Cox, 369th Fighter Squadron, and Group B led by Captain Ray S. Wetmore, leading ace of the 359th with 21.5 victories, with 28 aircraft from the 368th and 370th Fighter Squadrons. The time is now 1135 flying at 2,000 ft when Captain Cox leads them in an attack on aircraft seen strafing Zackerick airfield north of Kustrin. There are now fifteen aircraft in the area, Germans as well as Russians. Captain Cox brings down a his fifth victory so quickly that he does not have time to identify its markings. His wingman, Lt. Harold R. Gates, barely avoids colliding with that aircraft but clearly sees its white crosses.
In the midst of this confusing dogfight, as aircraft spin down and explode on impact, the Soviet flak, up to now quiet, throws a wall of fire up to 5,000 ft. Red flight dives on two unidentified aircraft climbing at 10 o'clock. Lt. Robert J. Guggemon (Red 3) identifies one of them as a FW-19O while his leader fires a long burst at the other one. Noticing a ventral radiator beneath his opponent, Red Lead realizes that it is a Yak-9.
Just then, Lt. Robert E. McCormak (Red 4) fires a short burst at another aircraft and hits it just as his adversary reverses his turn. McCormak identifies it as a "round-wing Me-109" in gray blue camouflage. Meanwhile, Lt. Bryce H. Thomson (Yellow 3) attacks an aircraft which he believes to be German, but soon realizes his error. Looking aft, he sees another one about to fire at him. Breaking left sharply, Thomson ends up on the tail of a Yak-9 after a 360-degree turn and places himself on its side while wagging his wings to show his national markings and making hand signals. After hesitating, the Russian responds in kind. With confusion everywhere and little chance of finding the Germans, Cox orders his pilots to break and get back in formation.
In the meantime, Lt. Robert S. Gaines' flight is in difficulty after being separated from the group over Berlin. While flying at 10,000 feet toward Joachimsthal, Gaines sees three or four unidentified aircraft flying below towards the east. Followed by his flight, Gaines makes a 180-degree turn to the left, losing altitude. While making a pass at the leader, Gaines sees the tail-end Charlie breaking away, notes that it is finished in a bluish scheme and devoid of markings; nevertheless, he formally identifies it as an Me-109. He fires at the aircraft which catches fire and falls toward Joachimsthal Lake. Meanwhile, F/0 Harley E. Berndt (Yellow 4) starts to fire at the second "enemy" aircraft while 600 ft. away and quickly moves in. After seeing his bullets chew up the wing root and cockpit of the "enemy" aircraft which dives away, Berndt rejoins his leader. Time is 1130.
All over the area, formations are running into each other. Northeast of Berlin, some 65 miles from the German capital, a flight from the 353rd Fighter Group is attacked from the rear by two La-5s. Seeking to be identified as friendly, the US fighters wag their wings, but to no avail. The Russians come back for a second pass. The P-51s fire a few warning shots while the Russian fighters fire at a straggling B-17.
At 1315, Lt. Tiede, a flight leader in Group A, spots three aircraft above and at 6 o'clock. Crump and Atkins climb toward them and, identifying them as Russians, try to contact them on radio channels A and C. At that very moment, a fourth fighter speeds toward Kyle and fires a short burst at him. The Russian then joins in formation with the other three and, together, they fly away after making a wide turn. The four P-51s then rejoin the stricken B-17 which they escort until 1320 when they are forced by fuel considerations to abandon.
On the Monday following these encounters, Marshal S. A. Kudiakov, chief of staff of the Soviet Air Forces, sent a strong note of protest to Gen. Hill at the US military Mission (USMILMIS) in Moscow. Notably, Marshal Kudiakov stated: 'While near Kustrin, Soviet Yak fighters approached the formation, saw they were Americans, and withdrew. While withdrawing, they came upon German fighter planes which were about to attack the American formation and so the Soviets attacked the Focke Wulfs. Soon the American Mustangs joined in the battle and shot down 4 Yak planes.
In a report dated 19 March, Col. Alfred R. Maxwell, chief of operations, noted minor incidents: "Two P-51s followed two Yak-9s to Zackerick airdrome north of Kustrin and shot down one of the four Fw-190s which were strafing the airdrome. Russian aircraft were circling the airdrome at the time, and when one crashed, the Soviets threw up intense accurate light flak - the P-51s then withdrew".
During the melee over the airdrome, one Yak fired on American aircraft without effect. Pilots report Russian aircraft painted blue exactly like identified German planes and that although haze and patchy clouds complicated recognition, recognition signals were ineffective.
In his reply dated 20 March, Gen N. D. Antonov, chief of staff of the Soviet Army, reported the destruction of six Soviet aircraft by US fighters and stated: "When the group of American planes reached Morin (35 kilometers northwest of Kustrin), at the time over the Morin region there were 6 Soviet (Yak-3) fighters. The Soviet fliers, having noticed the German fighters which were chasing the Americans, attacked the Germans, but they themselves, in turn, were attacked by American fighters".
On 2 April, Gen. N. D. Antonov raises his tone: "Your letter of 28 March 1945 did not satisfy me ... In the air at the time and in this region were a total of 8 Soviet fighters and not 34 planes as indicated. Not a single Soviet attack was made on American planes. Soviet flyers recognized American bombers immediately and Soviet fighters attacked no American planes but only German planes. In your letter it is claimed that the Germans did not shoot down a single Russian plane. Consequently all 6 Soviet fighters were shot down by American planes. By observation of Soviet pilots and also by observation of ground troops it was accurately established that American planes flew 6 to 8 kilometers cast of Kustrin. Conclusions drawn from the investigation virtually prove criminal action of individuals of the American Air Force and do not indicate that such actions will not occur again in the future."
The next day, Gen. Arnold had the following message forwarded to Gen. Antonov in which he stated: "I am greatly distressed to learn that further investigation by Gen. Spaatz reveals that some of our US personnel were at fault in the March 18th incident. I deeply regret the death of Soviet flyers and the destruction of Soviet aircraft resulting from this incident. I am requesting General Spaatz to make exhaustive investigation of this incident and to take strict disciplinary action against individuals who are to blame".
SOURCES-- Detailed mission reports by the 353rd, 357th and 359th FGs--Telex, Memorandum,and Letters from Gen. Spaatz to Colonel Alfred Maxwell, Gen. Anderson to USMTLMIS Moscow, Gen Arnold, War to US Joint Chiefs of Staff, Mighty Eighth War Manual, Missing Air Crew Reports, The Army Air Forces in WWII"