Gold-Clash

[Soren]

Originally Posted by Erich

sorry gents but gun cam footage is useless in determining which is best the P-51D or Bf 109G-10. If given sufficient height and equal quality of the two opposing pilots then it will be a draw. By the way some G-10's were fitted with the MG 151/20 through the nose mount plus being unarmored for some pilots to give a slight speed edge although the G-10 was the fastest variant of the G series flown.

think about gun camera footage for a sec. what and why was it shown to younger pilots ? to see where the best spots for landing rounds and the weakest qualities on the enemies a/c to bring down the a/c with the least amount of ammo.....

ok 2 centos'

If both pilots know their plane to the highest degree, it might very well be a draw !

The only thing I would add as advice to the P-51 pilot would be: "Don't get low with the G-10 !" and "Maintain height !"

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Experience played a big part in it.

[Erich]

do not believe that the G-10 had that good low altitude performance as one might think. The a/c was originally designed to take on the 30,000 feet plus of the Mustang while the Fw 190A and even Doras were to fly at medium height while the upper G-10 eschelons to take on advanceing/pouncung Allied escort fighters. the G-10 was the ultimate single engine nf of the war tackling Mossies until the Me 262 single seater became available but never in enough number at tnight to make a difference except a pin prick and keep RAF Mossie and RAF bomber crews on their toes

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

How Night fighter units were fitted with the G-10?

[Soren]

Originally Posted by Erich

do not believe that the G-10 had that good low altitude performance as one might think. The a/c was originally designed to take on the 30,000 feet plus of the Mustang while the Fw 190A and even Doras were to fly at medium height while the upper G-10 eschelons to take on advanceing/pouncung Allied escort fighters. the G-10 was the ultimate single engine nf of the war tackling Mossies until the Me 262 single seater became available but never in enough number at tnight to make a difference except a pin prick and keep RAF Mossie and RAF bomber crews on their toes

At sea level, in level flight, the G10 could do 575 km/h and the P-51D 578km/h. If they both started combat maneuvering the P-51 was very quickly in deep trouble at that altitude, and if the P-51 starts climbing or turning at that altitude it is litterally dead meat !

At sea level the G-10 will climb at over 4,600 ft/min

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Yes the 109 could climb with anything in the sky but here is the thing they were not fighting in a climb. If the 109 climbed away it had a good chance to get away but at the same time they would not dogfight at highspeeds. You just do not have the turning radius at high speeds.

[Soren]

Originally Posted by DerAdlerIstGelandet

Yes the 109 could climb with anything in the sky but here is the thing they were not fighting in a climb. If the 109 climbed away it had a good chance to get away but at the same time they would not dogfight at highspeeds. You just do not have the turning radius at high speeds.

Neither plane has good turning radius at high speed. Below 400mph you better not try and turn with the Bf-109G-10 if your in a Mustang ! Above 400mph both aircraft get stiff elevators, while the P-51's aileron effectiveness remains pretty good so does the G-10's.

[Udet]

The problem some people here have is they are already attached to the nucleus of an idea.

Such situation implies most of these guys have minimun tolerance values for processing divergent points of view.


Erich:
Being you, one of the very few persons whose knowledge and attitude I happen to respect very greatly is that i clarify: i did not suggest guncamera footage will tell in all due accuracy which plane is superior.


Whatever these guys might call it, the outcome of all this implies either a going getting rough or a blow to the allied chit-chat (propaganda) displayed to mock and to minimize the late war effort of the Luftwaffe pilots.

(i) Let´s give them the point a Bf 109 G-6 with underwing gondolas was "no match" against enemy fighters.

Then they should attempt responding some questions:

1. If it were not match against Mustangs, Jugs, etc., why was it G-6/R6´s could find their out -several times in an environment of overwhelming numerical inferiority-?

2. Perhaps German pilots were not -at all- "ill-trained" by mid/late 1944 so they could manage to leave the pursuers behind flying a fighter with a "dramatically diminished manouverability".

3. Perhaps neither the Mustang or the pilots flying it were as about perfect as accordingly depicted in the allied causerie?


I find it funny to discover some guys here do not get my point here and rather resort to attempt diverting the discussion to the pond where they feel comfortable playing.

[evangilder]

Part of the problem here, Udet is that you hae a tendency to word things that either puts them on the defensive, or just puts them off. We all know that allied propaganda is flawed, but you seem to come forward with the attitude that we have all been drinking the Kool-Aid.

I have never stated nor thought that the German pilots and planes were inferior, with the exception in numbers. Yet you seem to lump all of us that are in countries that were on the allied side of believing everything that has been crammed down our throats. You have raised some interesting points, but if you toned down the rhetoric a bit, you might find that your message is better rreceived and more prone to discussion.

[Erich]

several things to point out now.

The gondloa G-6 was to be used for bomber destruction as it's primary purpose, and secondary to fighter vs fighter, and in fact it was worked on to drop the gondolas if at all possible. As I just said the idea was being worked on. the gondloa birds were prime bomber killers especially in the night role by I. and III./JG 300.

The G-10 was developed off the very fast and efficient G-6/AS with a streamlined cowling, larger intake and air and oil cooler. the G-6 was being terminated with the G-14 and AS version being built and soon after the G-10 a bit faster and cleaner lines was introduced for the high altitude protection role or just plain Allied escort intercepting. Because of sufficient numbers of the a/c were produced for the Luftwaffe the 109 was also in useage in the 109 equipped units on the Ost front although JG's 51, 52 and 54 already had the tried and true G-14/AS whcih could keep up with any soviet model at any altitude, but because of the reduction of the Reich and the pulling back of Ost front units, US P-51's with drop tanks could not invade into Luftwaffe/Ost front held air space, Czech areas and into Austria and Hungary, so the faster G-10 model was a very much needed tool in the last months of the war.

There is no doubt in my mind that the Luftwaffe was avery competent force even into January of 1945 and true the well known ace pilots with much experinece were being thinned out and many were given the chance to fly in JG 7 and JV 44 thus ending their carreers for most on not even flying the jet but moving ever so inward the Reich the last months of the war.

the G-10 seemed to be an answer to the P-51 if given enough numbers but it was always the case of being simply overwhelmed in the air. The P-51 units loaded to the plenty in their squadrons on 9 out of 10 occassions always held a height advnatage besides having the larger number of a/c to put in action on any given operation with the Luftwaffe. the G-10 was also given the oppourtunity to show itslef in the ground attack role a role it was not well suited with the underwing mounted 2cm gondolas. these were used by several units such as JG 300 to fight off Soviet bridgeheads and by night flying units such as NJG 11 with the same pricniple - blast out any MT found or eliminate ground and road build ups at important road junctions.

To answer Adlers question. After the G-14/AS was running low in the night fighter units the G-10 was supplemented and given to I./NJGr 10 for mossie cahsing and then removed from that to follow up on RAF 4 enigne bombers. The Three gruppen in NJG 11 used the a/c with it's G-14/AS and later in I. gruppe a few K-4's. One or two special night Kommando's also flew all black G-10's to chase RAF 4 engine jobs as well.

[Soren]

Originally Posted by evangilder

Part of the problem here, Udet is that you hae a tendency to word things that either puts them on the defensive, or just puts them off. We all know that allied propaganda is flawed, but you seem to come forward with the attitude that we have all been drinking the Kool-Aid.

I have never stated nor thought that the German pilots and planes were inferior, with the exception in numbers. Yet you seem to lump all of us that are in countries that were on the allied side of believing everything that has been crammed down our throats. You have raised some interesting points, but if you toned down the rhetoric a bit, you might find that your message is better rreceived and more prone to discussion.

I agree Evan.

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

As do I even. Udet you automatically assume that we all feed this crap. I only know of a few people that posted here that ever posted such nonsense. However I am sorry Udet but the 109 was not the best plane since bread and butter! (this coming from a guy whos favorite plane is the 109)
Secondly if you do not want people to think this of you then you should not use gun camara footage with remarks of "I have seen many footage of P-51's getting blown out of the sky" as sources for your arguments. There is footage that shows the other way around also.

And comments like this:

Being you, one of the very few persons whose knowledge and attitude I happen to respect very greatly

Dont help your cause either.

Originally Posted by Erich

To answer Adlers question. After the G-14/AS was running low in the night fighter units the G-10 was supplemented and given to I./NJGr 10 for mossie cahsing and then removed from that to follow up on RAF 4 enigne bombers. The Three gruppen in NJG 11 used the a/c with it's G-14/AS and later in I. gruppe a few K-4's. One or two special night Kommando's also flew all black G-10's to chase RAF 4 engine jobs as well.

Thanks for the info Erich.

[Udet]

Der Adler:

What on earth makes you think i was referring to you when commenting on the allied propaganda over fed ghoulies?

Perhaps i should have added a "you know who you are" to my idea.


Do not misunderstand the core of my comment: i see the Bf109, throughout its entire chain of evolution, as one of the greatest fighters of WWII. Or did i ever anything like "combat with enemy fighters in the Bf 109 was piece of cake"?

So there is footage showing German planes getting creamed by allied fighters? Pointless remark.

I´d ask, have you ever seen footage of Mustangs getting digested by German interceptors? If so, how many shots have you seen?

You respond to me as if guncamera footage from German fighters showing USAAF fighters getting destroyed in combat would be available at the newspaper corner store. You would be surprised on how rare such view is for most WWII aircraft buffs.

The common thing is to watch guncamera films showing GERMANS getting pounded and shot down.

Quite actually, the most common stuff you can watch from German guncamera are a few -dozens- boring and over repetitive films of German interceptors pounding B-17s and B-24s.

Since you are kind of familiar with my tone in the forum, you´d not believe it but when i was in my early teens (i´m 21) i was convinced the USAAF had won the war in the air "all by itself".

That in fact, the German planes by 1944 had been absolute "crap" when compared to Jugs, Mustangs, Lightnings, Spitfires, etc., and that late war German pilots could "hardly take off".

That in fact, the Luftwaffe had received a brutal treatment from its enemies, and that the USAAF and RAF had been "so superior" their losses had been minimum during the process of defeating the Luftwaffe.

I recall the narrations of my grandfather and the books.

SUPREME BULLSHIT!

It was during my mid/late teens (2-4 years ago) that my interest grew and that i had the chance of meeting veterans and acquiring stuff when staying in Russia.

It was then when i learned i had been an allied propaganda overfed ghoulie myself.

We know it: the Luftwaffe, during 1944, in fact took very very high losses. The news, however, were i discovered the Luftwaffe caused horrific losses to the USAAF.

Dozens of thousands of USAAF pilots and airmen took off to never be seen again.

That German fighters and pilots were everything but the "helpless ducks" portrayed by the victor´s hogwash. That even though their training got shortened they remained skilled and competitive warriors.

Also i learned the Luftwaffe was not defeated on any "decisive" day; it was rather a long process of losses one sole nation fighting three large enemy air forces could not afford.

What else did i learn? Ah! the fuel crisis which grounded so many fighter units in the last months of the war; an issue perhaps more critical than losses. So many times the allied guys would not meet the Luftwaffe guys in the air not because "they had already been shot down" but due to the simple reason there was no fuel to take off.

The same process implied learning the Bf 109 remained one of the best fighters; great enough to meet veterans who flying those in the final weeks of the war delivered lead and gained kills against the allied "marvels".

[plan_D]

Originally Posted by Udet

Der Adler:
So there is footage showing German planes getting creamed by allied fighters? Pointless remark.

This is proving that you are not reading the posts properly. He mentioned that because your remarks about Allied aircraft getting chewed up are also pointless.

It works both ways, there are German, Allied and Soviet gun-cam of the other sides getting destroyed.

That was his, and just about everyone elses point

[evangilder]

You act like you are the only one who discovered that the propaganda is not the real truth. Geez, do you think that some of us, as historians are looking at the facts and not the propaganda? You do not have the monopoly on the facts. So stop treating us like we are all programmed zombies and you may find that people will respond better.