Author Topic: P-51D vs Fw-190D  (Read 3443 times)

Offline GRUNHERZ

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 13413
P-51D vs Fw-190D
« Reply #30 on: August 04, 2005, 12:18:05 AM »
I've had some luck outcliming multiple coalt P51s to a good tactical advantage in the 15 to 20K band in the Dora.

But really it is a terrible POS in AH and I'm shocked to hear that Chuck Yeager of all people said that the FW190D9 was the best WW2 fighter he flew provided it was kept under 25K - yes he flew them after the war and without MW50 to boot.

Offline Urchin

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5517
P-51D vs Fw-190D
« Reply #31 on: August 04, 2005, 12:45:37 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by SirLoin
Extending is not running..and yes it is allowed.

Once the 190 runs the pony outta WEP...the stang is on the pure defensive.

Boring?..Yes..if you are the p51 dude.


And what do we do when it is boring?  Joust.  

The D-9 will have to either commit to a fight, or partake in a series of jousts... it isn't possible for a D-9 to bleed the P-51 down to the point where it wouldn't be able to get its nose back on you during each bore n zoom pass.

Offline Cobra412

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1393
P-51D vs Fw-190D
« Reply #32 on: August 04, 2005, 01:23:54 AM »
If the D-9 pilot does get the game turned in his/her favor (BnZ)then he/she does hold some of the cards. Doesn't mean that the Pony is just waiting to die though. I use a few maneuvers in the Pony that keeps me at a good maneuvering speed and will allow me to take shots here and there when the Dora thinks they are in control. Typically I'm landing shots after the second pass.

Offline Charge

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3414
P-51D vs Fw-190D
« Reply #33 on: August 04, 2005, 05:42:21 AM »
"Stick stirring" if the D9 uses its superior roll capability it's "stick stirring"? I thought  there is a damper to counter the actual stick stirring?

-C+
"When you wish upon a falling star, your dreams can come true. Unless it's really a giant meteor hurtling to the earth which will destroy all life. Then you're pretty much screwed no matter what you wish for. Unless of course, it's death by meteorite."

Offline J_A_B

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3012
P-51D vs Fw-190D
« Reply #34 on: August 04, 2005, 09:44:13 AM »
In a 1 vs 1 I would rate the P-51 as superior although by a small enough margin that pilot skill makes the difference.  Given equal pilots, the P-51D would probably win.

A large-scale fight, say between two squadrons, could go either way.  

J_A_B

Offline Mustaine

  • Parolee
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4139
P-51D vs Fw-190D
« Reply #35 on: August 04, 2005, 11:21:30 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
But really it is a terrible POS in AH and I'm shocked to hear that Chuck Yeager of all people said that the FW190D9 was the best WW2 fighter he flew provided it was kept under 25K - yes he flew them after the war and without MW50 to boot.
thats what always bothered me about the AH 190...

in the accounts i have read it could turn much better, and if say the elevator authority in AH was brought up 15% in the dora, it would be a monster plane.
Genetically engineered in a lab, and raised by wolverines -- ]V[ E G A D E T ]-[
AoM DFC ZLA BMF and a bunch of other acronyms.

Offline Tony Williams

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 725
      • http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk
P-51D vs Fw-190D
« Reply #36 on: August 05, 2005, 05:53:52 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
I'm shocked to hear that Chuck Yeager of all people said that the FW190D9 was the best WW2 fighter he flew provided it was kept under 25K - yes he flew them after the war and without MW50 to boot.


So did Eric Brown. He regarded the P-51, the 190D-9 and the Spit XIV as the three best single-engined fighters of the war, with little to choose between them -  they had different strengths and weaknesses.

Tony Williams: Military gun and ammunition website and discussion forum

Offline Charge

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3414
P-51D vs Fw-190D
« Reply #37 on: August 05, 2005, 06:32:48 AM »
"thats what always bothered me about the AH 190...

in the accounts i have read it could turn much better, and if say the elevator authority in AH was brought up 15% in the dora, it would be a monster plane."

For some reason I don't think that the description "maneuverable" meant only maneuverability in rolling plane as is commonly thought. I think it meant that the elevator (and rudder) authority are good, too, and the a/c actually can turn or at least change its vector considerably and fast and yet the logic tells that in cannot be very good in sustained turns (except maybe only in a narrow part of speed envelope) or in slow speed dogfight. Maybe the wing-area itself is not a very good quality to compare 190 to other planes but also the planform qualities have to be taken into account? :confused:

-C+
"When you wish upon a falling star, your dreams can come true. Unless it's really a giant meteor hurtling to the earth which will destroy all life. Then you're pretty much screwed no matter what you wish for. Unless of course, it's death by meteorite."

Offline Urchin

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5517
P-51D vs Fw-190D
« Reply #38 on: August 05, 2005, 09:46:52 AM »
I actually don't put much stock in the "XXX was the best plane of the war" type business.  

I do believe that when veterans say that the 190 was a good "dogfighter" they aren't even referring to the same kind of fight that AH'ers refer to as a dogfight.  

For the most part, AH'ers refer to the same kind of fight that would be seen in WW1, or in a WW2 Japanese pilots idealized version of a fight.

I think for the most part, Western Front vets refer to a more BnZ type "hit and run dogfight".  Hell, Eric Brown even says so in his book where he evaluates different kinds of planes.  

I'm paraphrasing of course, since I don't have the book in front of me, but I believe his description of the fight went something like "the 190s were untouchable as long as they kept diving and zooming, a spit that followed a 190 up would quickly find another 190 on his tail.  Of course, if a 190 was lured into turning with a Spitfire, he would quickly find another Spitfire on his tail as well".

In other words, you have a group of 190s above a group of Spitfires, making passes and "extending" or zooming, it really isn't clear which.  

A group of 190s that starts with more altititude or energy than a group of Spits can play this game all day long, and would be quite untouchable.  Unless they were good shots the fight would go on for quite a while, but the conclusion would be a foregone affair.  

I'm reasonably certain this was meant to describe a fight between 190As and Spit Vs, but I can't say for certain.

I put a lot of trust in HTC, actually.  HT is a very smart man... and aerodynamics is physics, which can be modelled accurately given known parameters.  With a given set of "atmospheric" variables that effect all planes equally... just having the specs for the given aircraft should make it possible for HTC to develop planes that all perform correctly vis a vis one another.  There really isn't much room for "bias" in the modelling.  The specs are what they are.  The results are what they are.  Performance-wise... there really isn't any judgement involved in how individual planes perform.

Offline Naudet

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 729
P-51D vs Fw-190D
« Reply #39 on: August 05, 2005, 11:16:26 AM »
Urchin, in "Duels in Sky" Brown is really putting WW2 Fighters against each other in a duelling situations, not the multiplane engagements that were the standard in WW2.

And still he rates the Spit XIV and FW190D9 as the two top notch fighters for this type of engagment, the P51D following very closely.

I personally think that he takes into account some factors flight sims cannot model at the moment. Control forces and harmony being the most important i guess.
In AH you can fly endless aerobatics without getting tired, but in a real fight that won't be the case.
Turning circle in reality might in many cases much more the result of the pilots ability to apply back pressure on the stick than of the wingload.

Erich Hartmann himself referred to turnfights as being a competition between the physical fitness of the involved pilots. He knew several comrades that trained their fitness to the point where they just would fight so long with an opponent till he lost due to fatigue.

The Spit was also known for having a light elevator - maybe even to light - and that might have been much more important for its famous turning capabilities than its wingloading.

Offline Crumpp

  • Parolee
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3671
P-51D vs Fw-190D
« Reply #40 on: August 05, 2005, 01:04:44 PM »
Quote
I do believe that when veterans say that the 190 was a good "dogfighter" they aren't even referring to the same kind of fight that AH'ers refer to as a dogfight.


I don't know about this, Urchin.  The FW190 pilots I have spoken with were very clear in their memories.

 
Quote
A single Mustang (HB836) tried to help out, and attacked the German fighter. A long aerial duel developed. The Mustang finally caught fire, and made a wide turn out the fjord. Perhaps he will try to get away and make a crashlanding. But then the British pilot turned back. According to eyewitnesses the pilot must have been badly wounded, but instead of bailing out he continued the fight. But to no avail. The Mustang crashed in the green pine forrest being the only Mustang loss of this battle. W/O Cecil Claude Caesar was dead.

The German fighter was in trouble also. The engine had been damaged and this forced the pilot to bail out. A small charge dispensed with the canopy and a small figure detatched itself from the plane. But he was to close to the ground for the chute to open. Fortunately, the snowy hillside enabled the pilot to survive, a small avalanche carried him to the bottom of the valley. During the journey down, the flare gun accidentally went off, causing severe burns on one leg. Still, he can walk, and he found his way into a small barn.


http://www.white1foundation.org/history_blackfriday.htm

This was a Mustang III vs. an FW190F8 converted to an FW190A8 at the Geschwader.

They got in close and fought in classic dogfights.  In general all fighter pilots avoided a protracted dogfights as it left you vunerable.  Both Oscar and Heinz engaged in intense close quater "AH" dogfighting and were successful.  Both have expressed the same sentiment about the FW190's dogfighting ability.  To quote Oscar Boesch, "I feared no fighter I could see in my Focke!".

He flew an FW190A8 for the majority of his FW190 career.  He is credited with P51, Spitfire, La, and Yak kills.  

All the best,

Crumpp

Offline Kweassa

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6425
P-51D vs Fw-190D
« Reply #41 on: August 05, 2005, 06:52:25 PM »
Quote
I personally think that he takes into account some factors flight sims cannot model at the moment. Control forces and harmony being the most important i guess.
In AH you can fly endless aerobatics without getting tired, but in a real fight that won't be the case.
Turning circle in reality might in many cases much more the result of the pilots ability to apply back pressure on the stick than of the wingload.

Erich Hartmann himself referred to turnfights as being a competition between the physical fitness of the involved pilots. He knew several comrades that trained their fitness to the point where they just would fight so long with an opponent till he lost due to fatigue.



 This is probably it.

 Since I have no flight experience, much less aerial combat experience whatsoever, I can only rephrase some of the info I've read, but it seems pretty clear that pulling black out turns at  speeds again and again would hardly be anything a real life pilot would want to do.

 In AH we can go from +5G to -3G in a matter of seconds. We do 'stick stirring'  where the vector of the plane is changed violently in a split second, and then still instantly pull out of it to go into another high G turn yet.

 Most pilots would hardly have the time to manage the trinkets, buttons, levers inside the cockpit. Some go as far as to say that changing the throttle setting during combat wasn't a common thing to happen.

 It's not difficult to imagine that in WW2 planes, which a pilot had to fight the stick forces at high G loads, the pilot would rarely, if ever, let go of the stick with one hand and start fiddling with throttle levers or push switches or buttons.

 In most cases the throttle would be set upon a certain combat setting, and then the pilot would hold the stick with both hands and maneuver at that state.

  Based upon past discussions, especially the one related to flaps, it also seems pretty clear that even the "combat flaps", were not really used all that much in combat. Only a handful of extremely experienced pilots would ever use it - in great many cases the flaps were never used in combat at all. People openly admit that they can't find any real any evidence of extensive flap usage for the P-38s. Others with correspondence with P-51 pilots mention that no P-51 pilot ever recalls having using flaps during combat.

 ...

 So basically, my picture of a real life  "dogfight" between a P-51 and Fw190D-9 would consist of two pilots with typically throttle set firmly to combat power.

 Both pilots would hold the stick firmly with two hands, and struggle to pull turns at speeds. Neither side would go as far as to approach grey out.

 Using turn-tightening techniques such as chopping throttle, dumping E, using flaps and etc.. is probably a grossly uncommon thing to happen.

 Both planes, as a result, would probably go around in simular turn circles most of the times.

 At least, that's my take on it.
 
 Just for the sake of discussion, if HT somehow adds an experimental system  of fatigue... the fights between planes would show a lot less diversified results than it is now - at least, in the turn fighting department.

Offline Guppy35

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 20385
P-51D vs Fw-190D
« Reply #42 on: August 05, 2005, 07:07:04 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Kweassa
This is probably it.

 Since I have no flight experience, much less aerial combat experience whatsoever, I can only rephrase some of the info I've read, but it seems pretty clear that pulling black out turns at  speeds again and again would hardly be anything a real life pilot would want to do.

 In AH we can go from +5G to -3G in a matter of seconds. We do 'stick stirring'  where the vector of the plane is changed violently in a split second, and then still instantly pull out of it to go into another high G turn yet.

 Most pilots would hardly have the time to manage the trinkets, buttons, levers inside the cockpit. Some go as far as to say that changing the throttle setting during combat wasn't a common thing to happen.

 It's not difficult to imagine that in WW2 planes, which a pilot had to fight the stick forces at high G loads, the pilot would rarely, if ever, let go of the stick with one hand and start fiddling with throttle levers or push switches or buttons.

 In most cases the throttle would be set upon a certain combat setting, and then the pilot would hold the stick with both hands and maneuver at that state.

  Based upon past discussions, especially the one related to flaps, it also seems pretty clear that even the "combat flaps", were not really used all that much in combat. Only a handful of extremely experienced pilots would ever use it - in great many cases the flaps were never used in combat at all. People openly admit that they can't find any real any evidence of extensive flap usage for the P-38s. Others with correspondence with P-51 pilots mention that no P-51 pilot ever recalls having using flaps during combat.

 ...

 So basically, my picture of a real life  "dogfight" between a P-51 and Fw190D-9 would consist of two pilots with typically throttle set firmly to combat power.

 Both pilots would hold the stick firmly with two hands, and struggle to pull turns at speeds. Neither side would go as far as to approach grey out.

 Using turn-tightening techniques such as chopping throttle, dumping E, using flaps and etc.. is probably a grossly uncommon thing to happen.

 Both planes, as a result, would probably go around in simular turn circles most of the times.

 At least, that's my take on it.
 
 Just for the sake of discussion, if HT somehow adds an experimental system  of fatigue... the fights between planes would show a lot less diversified results than it is now - at least, in the turn fighting department.


Not to start the flap debate again, but I did post those 38 combat reports, and here's a quote from a combat report of 4th FG pilot Willard Millikan in his combat report of April 22,1944, flying a P51B:

"The Hun kept up his attack and turned steeply to come in on my number 4's tail, so I pushed everything forward and dropped flaps to turn inside him.  Through the early stages of the turn he outturned me, but I pulled up and corkscrewed inside him and laid off a deflection shot which hit him hard enough to cause him to flick out of his turn.  He started to split-ess but my shots forced him to turn back the other way.  Immediately I managed to get a few strikes and he began to skid and slow up and prepare to bale out.  I was closing very rapidly so I dropped full flaps and throttled back completely....."

Other examples of 51 drivers using combat flaps etc in dogfights as well.

Dan/CorkyJr
returning you to your previous discussion :)
Dan/CorkyJr
8th FS "Headhunters

Offline Kweassa

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6425
P-51D vs Fw-190D
« Reply #43 on: August 05, 2005, 09:15:21 PM »
I'm not debating the fact that it did happen Guppy. The point is how commonly did it happen in real life.

Offline 1K3

  • Parolee
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3449
P-51D vs Fw-190D
« Reply #44 on: August 05, 2005, 10:39:50 PM »
So in r/l 190D and P-51D are equal?

The P-51D can actually pull tighter turns but i agree that takes toll on the energy of the average fighter pilot.

I also agree that they engaged mostlyy by BnZ, cherry picking, and less turning circles.