Comparing the Best of the Allied Fighters with the Best of the Luftwaffe

Vrenn said:
After BofB, it really didn't matter the range of the 190 and 109 since they were already in the battle area just above their home fields. Without them, there would have been no war nor any reason to build the long ranged fighters by the USA. Without the BF109, Franco would have his ass handed to him in Spain.
Click to expand...
Don't forget the tens of thousands of Soviet fighters, and of course the US and Japanese fighters, and of course the Mediterranean. You are merely discussing one theater only.
 
Vrenn said:
Let's have a little fun. Let's compare the best of Luftwaffe with the long ranged fighters of the Allies. They have to have been introduced in enough numbers to have an impact so no P-51H types.

Allied

Republic-P-47N-Thunderbolt.jpg

P-47N
  • A special model which went into service in Europe early in 1945 as the M for the ETO while the N had 18inchs longer wing span and was used in the Pacific.
  • Fitted with a P-47D wing.
  • P-47N fuselage and a 2,100 hp Pratt & Whitney R-2800-57 engine with larger supercharger and improved water-injection system.
  • Was claimed to be the fastest airscrew-driven airplane in service at that time and to be successful in combating German jet propelled fighters.
  • Maximum speed (P-47N): 467 mph at 32,500 ft with the M being able to fly at over 473mph.
  • The M had a combat radius of 530 miles while the N had a range of over 800 miles.
  • For the P-47M and N, think of a TA-152 on steroids. At a high altitude, nothing could out turn either of these including the other Allied and Axis Fighters.
250px-XP-51F.jpg

P-51D/K
General characteristics

Performance

  • Maximum speed: 440 mph (710 km/h, 383 kn)
  • Cruise speed: 362 mph (583 km/h, 315 kn)
  • Stall speed: 100 mph (160 km/h, 87 kn)
  • Range: 1,650 mi (2,660 km, 1,434 nmi) with external tanks
  • Service ceiling: 41,900 ft (12,800 m)
  • Rate of climb: 3,200 ft/min (16 m/s)
  • Lift-to-drag: 14.6
  • Wing loading: 39 lb/sq ft (190 kg/m2)
  • Power/mass: 0.162 / 0.187 hp/lb (0.266 / 0.307 kW/kg) (without / with WEP)
  • Recommended Mach limit 0.8
Armament

Notable appearances in media​

Main article: Aircraft in fiction § P-51 Mustang


General characteristics
Performance
  • Maximum speed: 440 mph (710 km/h, 383 kn)
  • Cruise speed: 362 mph (583 km/h, 315 kn)
  • Stall speed: 100 mph (160 km/h, 87 kn)
  • Range: 1,650 mi (2,660 km, 1,434 nmi) with external tanks
  • Service ceiling: 41,900 ft (12,800 m)
  • Rate of climb: 3,200 ft/min (16 m/s)
  • Lift-to-drag: 14.6
  • Wing loading: 39 lb/sq ft (190 kg/m2)
  • Power/mass: 0.162 / 0.187 hp/lb (0.266 / 0.307 kW/kg) (without / with WEP)
  • Recommended Mach limit 0.8
Armament
The p-51D had an advantage over all other prop fighters from 18,000 to about 21,000 feet. Right where the bombers were flying. Higher than that and others performed better. Below that and others performed better. Funny how the P-38J/L owned the skies below 18,000 feet over all single engine fighters.

250px-Lockheed_F-5_Lightning.jpg

P-38J/L

General characteristics
Performance
Armament
  • Guns:
  • Rockets: 4× M10 three-tube 4.5 in (112 mm) M8 rocket launchers; or:
    • Inner hardpoints:
      • 2× 2,000 lb (907 kg) bombs or drop tanks; or
        • 4× 500 lb (227 kg) bombs or
        • 4× 250 lb (113 kg) bombs; or
      • 6× 500 lb (227 kg) bombs; or
      • 6× 250 lb (113 kg) bombs
      • 10× 5 in (127 mm) HVARs (High Velocity Aircraft Rockets); or
      • 2× 500 lb (227 kg) bombs; or
      • 2× 250 lb (113 kg) bombs
Out of the top 3 long ranged Allied Fighters, this one had the longest legs and was used as both a bomber escort and a bomber. The Bomber Mafia hated this strange bird since it carried as heavy a payload as a B-17 set up for a long ranged bomb run. When the US flew the F and G models, the Luftwaffe could dive to disengage and the P-38 would not follow. But with the introduction of the Dive Flaps, that trick didn't work anymore and after diving thousands of feet down, they would see the P-38L had only lost a bit of distance and would make up for it fast. Plus, since they would be below 18,000 feet, the P-38L could not only out turn them but out climb them. the P-38J was the first fighter to get the Fowler Flaps which aided their turning at lower speeds.

Sorry, the British never really offered a long ranged fighter. And there were only 3 KI-100 Japanese fighters that would have been a real handful for the 3 long range Allied Fighters. While the KI-100 was introduced, it just didn't have enough numbers to make much of a difference.

Yes I know, Germany didn't have any real long ranged fighters to speak of but we will use their top 3 (excluding the Jets).

BF-109 and the ME-109K-4
Messerschmitt-Bf109-G-14-5.jpeg

BF-109G6

  • Wingspan: 9,92 m
  • Length: 8,85 m
  • Height: 3,40 m
  • Top speed: 685 km/h
  • Service ceiling: 12,500 m
  • Max. weight: 2,900 kg
  • Drive: Daimler Benz DB 605
  • Power: 1350 hp
  • Crew/passengers: 1
  • Display: Flying
This was a boom and zoom fighter that started out as being able to turn and burn with everything thrown at it. This is the most numerous Luftwaffe Fighter. The problem is, it just got too long on the tooth so a replacement had to be found.

ME-109K-4
They upped the power of the engine and added a bit more fire power but the weight went up. At high altitude, (above 20,000 feet) this was more than a formidable fighter. Below that and the P-38L and the P-51D would be able to more than handle it. But at over 20,000 feet, it would take a P-47M to compete with it which at that point would depend on the pilot more than the Aircraft. It often flew high escorting the FW-190s who would strafe the bombers while the 109K-4 would dive down on the accompanying fighters in a Boom and Zoom attack.

FW-190A, FW-190D Dora.
When the 190A was first introduced in 1941, There was nothing in the skies that could handle it until late 1943 when the P-38J/L and the P-51B/C first hit the skies. The early models would eat a Spitfire alive. But due to a bit of luck, the Brits ended up with a fully functional FW-190A so they could figure out why and come up with tactics to combat it. The Spitfire design was updated to meet it's performance but never to exceed it. This was the most produced of all the 190s and it wasn't until the later 1943 that the P-51B/C and the P-38J/L was introduced to exceed it's performance. The 190 did most of the shooting down of the allied Bombers since it had the guns, speed and could take a lot of punishment.

The Dora was introduce a little late in the war and was used as the platform to make the TA-152. This thing was a beast at medium altitude where the bombers operated at. And could sustain a whole bunch of damage and keep fighting. I think a close comparison would be that of the P-47D.


Which one was better? It all depended on the year, model and altitude. No single one is the winner in this one.
Click to expand...



It looks like you left out what was possible the most effective fighter of WW 2, the Me 262 jet.

I know that it's not within the scope of a brief comment to cover all fighter aircraft of WW 2 but the Me 262 was exceptional.

Thanks,
 
Zincwarrior said:
Don't forget the tens of thousands of Soviet fighters, and of course the US and Japanese fighters, and of course the Mediterranean. You are merely discussing one theater only.
Click to expand...

The Soviets never had the need of a long ranged fighter so they never built one. Even though the Germans had short range fighters, they took the fight to Russia. It still boils down that the only 3 long ranged fighters are American. That is, unless you want to reclassify the Mossie which is actually a light bomber.
 
Grau said:
It looks like you left out what was possible the most effective fighter of WW 2, the Me 262 jet.

I know that it's not within the scope of a brief comment to cover all fighter aircraft of WW 2 but the Me 262 was exceptional.

Thanks,
Click to expand...

The 262 is nothing more than a cliff note on this subject. Just how far can you get with only a MAX less than a 2 hour flight. Yes, you may think that would mean over 1000 miles range but if a 262 did that, it's flight time would be more like 30 minutes and a cooked engine. The ONLY time it was invulnerable to Allied fighters was once it spooled up. And then it was just for a few minutes.
 
Vrenn said:
The Soviets never had the need of a long ranged fighter so they never built one. Even though the Germans had short range fighters, they took the fight to Russia. It still boils down that the only 3 long ranged fighters are American. That is, unless you want to reclassify the Mossie which is actually a light bomber.
Click to expand...
Ues but we are discussing and comparing US fighters with German ones yet only brought three to discuss. The parameter of long distance applies ONLY to long distance bomber escort. Again, thats just one theater and excludes the Mediterranean, Russian Front, and most of how fighters were actually employed in the ETO (9th Air Force for Example). While I think the P38 is the bee's knees there is room to discuss others, and any Western Theater discussion excluding Spitfires and the Hawker planes is not a fighter discussion.

ESPECIALLY when we are including German planes with limited flight times of their own. :cool:
 
Zincwarrior said:
Ues but we are discussing and comparing US fighters with German ones yet only brought three to discuss. The parameter of long distance applies ONLY to long distance bomber escort. Again, thats just one theater and excludes the Mediterranean, Russian Front, and most of how fighters were actually employed in the ETO (9th Air Force for Example). While I think the P38 is the bee's knees there is room to discuss others, and any Western Theater discussion excluding Spitfires and the Hawker planes is not a fighter discussion.

ESPECIALLY when we are including German planes with limited flight times of their own. :cool:
Click to expand...

After the BofB, the Spit really didn't have a huge effect until it could be based out of France. And in the PTO, there was only the Lightning that had the range without island hopping. The two Navy Fighters (the F-4U and the F6F) were carrier based and had really short legs.

Pay attention, it's about the best long range fighter, now which one wins at the High School Prom.l
 
Vrenn said:
After the BofB, the Spit really didn't have a huge effect until it could be based out of France. And in the PTO, there was only the Lightning that had the range without island hopping. The two Navy Fighters (the F-4U and the F6F) were carrier based and had really short legs.

Pay attention, it's about the best long range fighter, now which one wins at the High School Prom.l
Click to expand...
So why are you discussing German planes?
 
Vrenn said:
Because no matter how good a long ranged fighter is, it has to fight something and the Luftwaffe had the best outside of the Big 3.
Click to expand...
Cool. P51 wins, hands down. 20 P51s to every Bosch plane in 1944 means it beats the Bosch like a red headed stepchild. improved tactics in 1944 including the USAAC sending out mass fighter fomrations to target airfields there and back helped, as did the 9th hammering French locations. Once back in France it was a mauling of the remaining German pilot, culminating in their suicidal deathride that was Bodenplatte in 1945.
en.wikipedia.org

Operation Bodenplatte - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org

On akewl factor, the merlin engine of the P51 is just sweet sounding at power.
 
Last edited:
Vrenn said:
The 262 is nothing more than a cliff note on this subject. Just how far can you get with only a MAX less than a 2 hour flight. Yes, you may think that would mean over 1000 miles range but if a 262 did that, it's flight time would be more like 30 minutes and a cooked engine. The ONLY time it was invulnerable to Allied fighters was once it spooled up. And then it was just for a few minutes.
Click to expand...


Do you really consider the world's first mass produced jet fighter to see combat a "Cliff note..." on the subject?

The authors of the following source seem to have a different opinion.

".....the Messerschmitt Me 262 was the best fighter plane of World War II."

"Messerschmitt Me 262"​

science.howstuffworks.com

Messerschmitt Me 262

The great legacy of the Messerschmitt Me 262 is that it inspired other air forces to adopt the jet fighter as standard, and moved engineers to utilize its layout for fighters and airliners. Learn more about this top World War II fighter plane.
science.howstuffworks.com science.howstuffworks.com

Key Takeaways​

  • EXCERPT "Capable of flying 120 miles per hour faster than the P-51 Mustang, the Messerschmitt Me 262 was the best fighter plane of World War II.
  • Its late introduction to combat was due to delays in jet engine production, not Hitler's decision-making; had its introduction come earlier, it could have significantly impacted the outcome of the war.
  • The Me 262's design, especially its dramatic swept wings, inspired future jet fighters and airliners, marking its legacy as a pioneering aircraft in aviation history." CONTINUED
 
Stryder50 said:
One factor to remember is gasoline quality.
Allies, as in USA and UK, had use of 100 octane which helped top out the max engine performance.
Germany stayed with 87 octane because it could nearly double gasoline production with that compared to going for 100 octane.

BTW, don't recall seeing the Spitfire here yet, or any Russian fighters.
Click to expand...
They were all short ranged point defense fighters. They were over specialized, that's why thoroughbreds are never mentions in lists of the best horses. When a nation considers the P-39 one of its best fighters it says a lot about the rest of the fighters. The P-39 was a dog that no other air force used as a normal front line fighter in anything but an emergency.
 
Vrenn said:
After BofB, it really didn't matter the range of the 190 and 109 since they were already in the battle area just above their home fields. Without them, there would have been no war nor any reason to build the long ranged fighters by the USA. Without the BF109, Franco would have his ass handed to him in Spain.
Click to expand...
The only US fighter than wasn't long ranged by European standards was the P-39. Distances inside the USA were just so long that long range was a necessity.
 
Grau said:
Do you really consider the world's first mass produced jet fighter to see combat a "Cliff note..." on the subject?
Click to expand...
If you talk about the 262: 1) you have to include its plane killing faults (engine maintenance and unrealistic build requirements); and 2) you have to include the Gloster Meteor, and the fighter planes like the Tempest that tore it a new asshole.
 
Grau said:
EXCERPT "Capable of flying 120 miles per hour faster than the P-51 Mustang, the Messerschmitt Me 262 was the best fighter plane of World War II.
Click to expand...
It literally can't be. Its another wehreboo myth. Just like the Tiger II its a hangar queen with almost no flying time permitted for the engines, and the engines requiring specialist metals that the Germans just didn't have.

The few times it flew and didn't get shot down when landing were epic. The nonGerman casualties it caused however where deminis in comparison to US escorts, Jabos, and Soviets.
 
Grau said:
Do you really consider the world's first mass produced jet fighter to see combat a "Cliff note..." on the subject?

The authors of the following source seem to have a different opinion.

".....the Messerschmitt Me 262 was the best fighter plane of World War II."

"Messerschmitt Me 262"​

science.howstuffworks.com

Messerschmitt Me 262

The great legacy of the Messerschmitt Me 262 is that it inspired other air forces to adopt the jet fighter as standard, and moved engineers to utilize its layout for fighters and airliners. Learn more about this top World War II fighter plane.
science.howstuffworks.com science.howstuffworks.com

Key Takeaways​

  • EXCERPT "Capable of flying 120 miles per hour faster than the P-51 Mustang, the Messerschmitt Me 262 was the best fighter plane of World War II.
Click to expand...

For short spurts. If almost every allied fighter (Including British) caught it flying below 400 mph then it couldn't accelerate fast enough to avoid being destroyed. It rarely flew over 500 mph except for a combat closing on a bomber.

Grau said:
  • Its late introduction to combat was due to delays in jet engine production, not Hitler's decision-making; had its introduction come earlier, it could have significantly impacted the outcome of the war.
Click to expand...

It Germany handn't started the war, they would have had the metals to make a jim dandy bird. Instead, as the war dragged on, the materials to make a world class engine went down the tubes and they had to use inferior metals on the turbines.


Grau said:
  • The Me 262's design, especially its dramatic swept wings, inspired future jet fighters and airliners, marking its legacy as a pioneering aircraft in aviation history." CONTINUED
Click to expand...

Funny, two Germans were attributed to inventing the concept of the swept wing in 1935 yet in 1934 and American presented pretty much the same thing.


We all forget Robert T Jones and give credit to the Germans. And I question if the Germans came up with the original idea for the jet engine at all. For the centrifugal jet engine I would give that to Frank Whittle (1928. So you now will counter with the axial flow. Okay, but in 1937, German Scientists were given a tour of Lockheed who had the proposed Axial Flow engine on display. I propose that Germany stole both engines and called it their own inventions.

Back to the swept wing. Most gives the Germans credit for the swept wing in 1935 yet in 1912, Burgess-Dunne tailless biplane was already flying. And let's not forget the Russians in the middle 1930s and the Italians as early as 1922. These weren't just concepts, they were fully functional flying aircraft.

In some ways, war accelerated the aircraft but in other ways it stifled some. In the Burgess-Dunne case, they first flew theirs in 1912 but was gearing up for mass production in 1913 to release the new models in 1914. And well all know what happened in 1914. Then WWII put a damper on the Lockheed Axial Flow because the DOW forced them to just make more P-38s and Cargo Planes because they thought the axial flow was a silly idea.

I keep seeing Germany making claims for the jet engines, swept wings and a host of other things when all they really did was put someone elses invention into an application out of desperation.
 
15th post
Vrenn said:
The M and N of the P-47 had more internal fuel. Hence the increase in combat radius. Okay, once you drop your tanks, you are limited by your own internal fuels. If you are carrying enough fuel to go 350 miles internally, that means if you are above Germany, you won't have the gas to get back to England. This is why the P-47D had to be the second leg of a long bomber flight while the first leg was with the Spitfire. The last leg would have to be either the P-51 or the P-38 which had the combat range to get home on.
Click to expand...
The drop tanks were used to get to the combat area. By the time combat ensued, they were empty most of the time and had been dropped. That left entire internal fuel load to be used for combat and return. You are still confused, the American fighters had no less than a thousand miles on internal fuel, the early P-38s had 1,300 miles on internal fuel in fact the prototype was lost doing a publicity stunt speed run from March Field Ca to Mitchel Field New York. That was as distance of 2,418 miles at full throttle with refueling stops at Amarillo Texas and Dayton Ohio; all on internal fuel as the prototype wasn't fitted for drop tanks. The first leg was 888 miles, the second was 1,016 miles. The flight took seven hours with the XP-38 averaging 340 mph, a speed just below the maximum speed of the Me-109E or the Spitfire. The Spitfire maxed out at 362 mph, the Me-109E maxed out at 350 mph; the XP-38 maxed out at 420 mph during the cross country flight. The P-40E had a range on internal fuel of 640 miles. The P-47B had a range of 835 miles on internal fuel. he P-39D had a range of 565 miles. Contrast that to the Hurricane's 468 miles, the Spitfire's 400 miles and the Me-109s 410 miles.
It's 644 miles from Germany to the UK, that's about two thirds the internal fuel of a P-47D and half the internal fuel of a P-38 D,F or G model. that leave plenty of fuel for combat.
 
AZrailwhale said:
The drop tanks were used to get to the combat area. By the time combat ensued, they were empty most of the time and had been dropped. That left entire internal fuel load to be used for combat and return. You are still confused, the American fighters had no less than a thousand miles on internal fuel, the early P-38s had 1,300 miles on internal fuel in fact the prototype was lost doing a publicity stunt speed run from March Field Ca to Mitchel Field New York. That was as distance of 2,418 miles at full throttle with refueling stops at Amarillo Texas and Dayton Ohio; all on internal fuel as the prototype wasn't fitted for drop tanks. The first leg was 888 miles, the second was 1,016 miles. The flight took seven hours with the XP-38 averaging 340 mph, a speed just below the maximum speed of the Me-109E or the Spitfire. The Spitfire maxed out at 362 mph, the Me-109E maxed out at 350 mph; the XP-38 maxed out at 420 mph during the cross country flight. The P-40E had a range on internal fuel of 640 miles. The P-47B had a range of 835 miles on internal fuel. he P-39D had a range of 565 miles. Contrast that to the Hurricane's 468 miles, the Spitfire's 400 miles and the Me-109s 410 miles.
It's 644 miles from Germany to the UK, that's about two thirds the internal fuel of a P-47D and half the internal fuel of a P-38 D,F or G model. that leave plenty of fuel for combat.
Click to expand...

If you are over Berlin and have used 2/3rds of your internal fuel, you aren't going to make it home without buying a boat. The P-47N had over 800 miles on internal fuel and would probably just barely make it back. But if you do experience combat on the way back, even the P-47 isn't going to make it home so the used them to the edge of edge of the German France Border so they knew they could do combat and get home. But P-47N and M were a non issue because by the time they came out, all types (both British and US) were transfering a lot of their fighters to France where the Spits and Hurricanes had the range by launching in France.

After D-Day, things changed fast for using fighters. And remember, the ME262 was introduced during that time as well. Germany had already lost the war and it meant that no matter how good the 262 was, it was being lost in an alarming rate. Plus, Germany had problems making the special fuels it had to run.

It wasn't that the fighter won the war. But the Fighters helped to get the Bombers to their targets and destroyed Germanies Military Industry. That ball bearing factory doesn't sound too important until you realize that all tanks, armor, artillery, aircraft uses ball bearings. And it allowed the ground forces to close in on Germany. To give you an idea, the Soviet Union begged the Allies to do daylight bombing in 1942 because they were having their asses handed to them by Germany.
 
Vrenn said:
Let's have a little fun. Let's compare the best of Luftwaffe with the long ranged fighters of the Allies. They have to have been introduced in enough numbers to have an impact so no P-51H types.

Allied

Republic-P-47N-Thunderbolt.jpg

P-47N
  • A special model which went into service in Europe early in 1945 as the M for the ETO while the N had 18inchs longer wing span and was used in the Pacific.
  • Fitted with a P-47D wing.
  • P-47N fuselage and a 2,100 hp Pratt & Whitney R-2800-57 engine with larger supercharger and improved water-injection system.
  • Was claimed to be the fastest airscrew-driven airplane in service at that time and to be successful in combating German jet propelled fighters.
  • Maximum speed (P-47N): 467 mph at 32,500 ft with the M being able to fly at over 473mph.
  • The M had a combat radius of 530 miles while the N had a range of over 800 miles.
  • For the P-47M and N, think of a TA-152 on steroids. At a high altitude, nothing could out turn either of these including the other Allied and Axis Fighters.
250px-XP-51F.jpg

P-51D/K
General characteristics

Performance

  • Maximum speed: 440 mph (710 km/h, 383 kn)
  • Cruise speed: 362 mph (583 km/h, 315 kn)
  • Stall speed: 100 mph (160 km/h, 87 kn)
  • Range: 1,650 mi (2,660 km, 1,434 nmi) with external tanks
  • Service ceiling: 41,900 ft (12,800 m)
  • Rate of climb: 3,200 ft/min (16 m/s)
  • Lift-to-drag: 14.6
  • Wing loading: 39 lb/sq ft (190 kg/m2)
  • Power/mass: 0.162 / 0.187 hp/lb (0.266 / 0.307 kW/kg) (without / with WEP)
  • Recommended Mach limit 0.8
Armament

Notable appearances in media​

Main article: Aircraft in fiction § P-51 Mustang


General characteristics
Performance
  • Maximum speed: 440 mph (710 km/h, 383 kn)
  • Cruise speed: 362 mph (583 km/h, 315 kn)
  • Stall speed: 100 mph (160 km/h, 87 kn)
  • Range: 1,650 mi (2,660 km, 1,434 nmi) with external tanks
  • Service ceiling: 41,900 ft (12,800 m)
  • Rate of climb: 3,200 ft/min (16 m/s)
  • Lift-to-drag: 14.6
  • Wing loading: 39 lb/sq ft (190 kg/m2)
  • Power/mass: 0.162 / 0.187 hp/lb (0.266 / 0.307 kW/kg) (without / with WEP)
  • Recommended Mach limit 0.8
Armament
The p-51D had an advantage over all other prop fighters from 18,000 to about 21,000 feet. Right where the bombers were flying. Higher than that and others performed better. Below that and others performed better. Funny how the P-38J/L owned the skies below 18,000 feet over all single engine fighters.

250px-Lockheed_F-5_Lightning.jpg

P-38J/L

General characteristics
Performance
Armament
  • Guns:
  • Rockets: 4× M10 three-tube 4.5 in (112 mm) M8 rocket launchers; or:
    • Inner hardpoints:
      • 2× 2,000 lb (907 kg) bombs or drop tanks; or
        • 4× 500 lb (227 kg) bombs or
        • 4× 250 lb (113 kg) bombs; or
      • 6× 500 lb (227 kg) bombs; or
      • 6× 250 lb (113 kg) bombs
      • 10× 5 in (127 mm) HVARs (High Velocity Aircraft Rockets); or
      • 2× 500 lb (227 kg) bombs; or
      • 2× 250 lb (113 kg) bombs
Out of the top 3 long ranged Allied Fighters, this one had the longest legs and was used as both a bomber escort and a bomber. The Bomber Mafia hated this strange bird since it carried as heavy a payload as a B-17 set up for a long ranged bomb run. When the US flew the F and G models, the Luftwaffe could dive to disengage and the P-38 would not follow. But with the introduction of the Dive Flaps, that trick didn't work anymore and after diving thousands of feet down, they would see the P-38L had only lost a bit of distance and would make up for it fast. Plus, since they would be below 18,000 feet, the P-38L could not only out turn them but out climb them. the P-38J was the first fighter to get the Fowler Flaps which aided their turning at lower speeds.

Sorry, the British never really offered a long ranged fighter. And there were only 3 KI-100 Japanese fighters that would have been a real handful for the 3 long range Allied Fighters. While the KI-100 was introduced, it just didn't have enough numbers to make much of a difference.

Yes I know, Germany didn't have any real long ranged fighters to speak of but we will use their top 3 (excluding the Jets).

BF-109 and the ME-109K-4
Messerschmitt-Bf109-G-14-5.jpeg

BF-109G6

  • Wingspan: 9,92 m
  • Length: 8,85 m
  • Height: 3,40 m
  • Top speed: 685 km/h
  • Service ceiling: 12,500 m
  • Max. weight: 2,900 kg
  • Drive: Daimler Benz DB 605
  • Power: 1350 hp
  • Crew/passengers: 1
  • Display: Flying
This was a boom and zoom fighter that started out as being able to turn and burn with everything thrown at it. This is the most numerous Luftwaffe Fighter. The problem is, it just got too long on the tooth so a replacement had to be found.

ME-109K-4
They upped the power of the engine and added a bit more fire power but the weight went up. At high altitude, (above 20,000 feet) this was more than a formidable fighter. Below that and the P-38L and the P-51D would be able to more than handle it. But at over 20,000 feet, it would take a P-47M to compete with it which at that point would depend on the pilot more than the Aircraft. It often flew high escorting the FW-190s who would strafe the bombers while the 109K-4 would dive down on the accompanying fighters in a Boom and Zoom attack.

FW-190A, FW-190D Dora.
When the 190A was first introduced in 1941, There was nothing in the skies that could handle it until late 1943 when the P-38J/L and the P-51B/C first hit the skies. The early models would eat a Spitfire alive. But due to a bit of luck, the Brits ended up with a fully functional FW-190A so they could figure out why and come up with tactics to combat it. The Spitfire design was updated to meet it's performance but never to exceed it. This was the most produced of all the 190s and it wasn't until the later 1943 that the P-51B/C and the P-38J/L was introduced to exceed it's performance. The 190 did most of the shooting down of the allied Bombers since it had the guns, speed and could take a lot of punishment.

The Dora was introduce a little late in the war and was used as the platform to make the TA-152. This thing was a beast at medium altitude where the bombers operated at. And could sustain a whole bunch of damage and keep fighting. I think a close comparison would be that of the P-47D.


Which one was better? It all depended on the year, model and altitude. No single one is the winner in this one.
Click to expand...
Would help to define what you mean , in terms of quantification of attributes and qualities, that determine what is "Best".
I can think of a matrix of about a dozen items to score on, say on a one to ten scale, ranging through performance to weapons to costs, etc. that would provide a total score for each aircraft type.

I'll provide my example of such shortly, but for now this looks like a relative spitting/pissing into the wind contest with little real context or usability.

IMO!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Beretta v Sako: Which hits the mark to be the British Army’s next assault rifle?

< Previous Thread

Ever been stationed in Germany?

Next Thread >

Similar threads

Vrenn
ME109K Fighter
4 5 6
Replies
116
Views
3K
westwall
westwall
Rumpole
Conversation with ChatGPT on how I could learn to invent an anti-gravity machine
Replies
13
Views
1K
Chuz Life
Chuz Life
Vrenn
P-63 King Cobra
2
Replies
32
Views
2K
Vrenn
Vrenn
Vrenn
Now it's time to P*** off the Brits
Replies
1
Views
369
JWBooth
JWBooth
Vrenn
Operation Point Blank
Replies
0
Views
523
Vrenn
Vrenn

New Topics

Latest Discussions

Back
Top Bottom