Gold-Clash

DAVIDICUS · 05-19-2005, 10:45 PM

Plan_D, your last post should be filed under:

plan_D · 05-19-2005, 11:03 PM

No, David, I had to point it out to him because he obviously doesn't get it.

Udet · 05-20-2005, 03:15 PM

Plan_D and Evangilder:

I appreciate the counseling very greatly, thanks.

Back on topic please. Plan and Evan, how many guncamera films of P-51s getting creamed by German fighters have you seen?

evangilder · 05-20-2005, 03:47 PM

Several, I work at a WWII aviation museum. We have more tapes and videos of that stuff than you could imagine. What does it show me? That war is a nasty business. It also can show off the skills of the pilots involved. Does it show the full capability of the aircraft? Not really, there is no telemetry data to show the speed, altitude, g load, etc. It does show some manuevering that is possible, I will give you that.

But realize that most of us here know that the Mustang was not the end all fighter that nothing else could touch. The Germans were very capable of putting up a hell of a fight, and did. Some allied planners thought the war would be over by Christmas of 1944. Obviously, they didn't realize how much fight was left.

Soren · 05-20-2005, 05:22 PM

I agree. Guncam's don't show what an airplane is capable of, but it does sometimes show how hard a 'target' the enemy can be.

------------------------------------------

Anyway back to the topic:

The Mustang was infact not as 'excellent' a fighter as its often put out to be, and the 109 could easely handle it if pilot skill was equal. The F4U-4 on the other hand, is one of the best fighters of WW2, along with the Spit XIV and Fw-190D-9.

In this 'Clash', as a pure fighter I would definitely go for the 109 G-10 , but as an escort-fighter I would go for the P-51.

lesofprimus · 05-20-2005, 05:53 PM

I agree as well... What i get out of gun cam footage is the destructiveness and accuracy of different weapons and ammo, and their affect on certain aircraft.....

Quote:

The Mustang was infact not as 'excellent' a fighter as its often put out to be, and the 109 could easely handle it if pilot skill was equal.

I agree 100%..... The -51D won the battles because of sheer #'s of aircraft...... As has been pointed out many times here, how can 4 alert -109's possibly combat 30 -51D's??? Prayer and a good chute......

But it also goes both ways.... An excellent -51D pilot could easily handle an equally skilled pilot in a -109.... Combat conditions vary, and so do pilots instincts and reactions...

Quote:

In this 'Clash', as a pure fighter I would definitely go for the 109 G-10 , but as an escort-fighter I would go for the P-51.

Intereseting choice... I would go with the -190D-9 as a pure fighter, and the -51D as an escort.......

Thats why the greatest pilots that lived through the war should be especially regarded by people such as ourselves......

Quote:

The F4U-4 on the other hand, is one of the best fighters of WW2, along with the Spit XIV and Fw-190D-9.

I agree once again, but some would add that the Spit IX was the better of the Spits......

Erich · 05-20-2005, 05:56 PM

just again watched some dramatic gun cam footage of SturmFw's decimating the rear of a B-24 pulk. What shows ? the destructiveness of 2cm and 3cm Minegeschoss rounds and how the B-24 could take the punishment...........not very well I might add.

and what would be shown in the propaganda useage of these films. where to fire your rounds, closely spaed to cause the most damage in the less amount of time.

yes I know I am repeating this but want to make it clear

time for a Bier

Gemhorse · 05-20-2005, 11:45 PM

A truly fascinating discussion.....

As a humble student of WWII Aviation History, I've always regarded the War as a closely fought thing, very even in men and material, and I've consumate respect for those that fought in it....All these aircraft that were used extensively, were superb for their time and it's a pleasure and a privilege to be able to discuss and learn on this site, from those who have researched in depth......

Between these two great aircraft there isn't anything I can add, other than the Bf-109's chief weakness was apparently it's undercarriage, which doesn't really count here, but the courage and skill of some of it's pilots' are of legend, they were tenacious to the end. I have read also of Mustangs being shot down, as they weren't infallible, we perhaps forget sometimes that this War was fought largely by young men in the prime of their life, and to quickly learn their skills and to fly & fight, and survive those years, was indeed a feat in itself......

I just think we're all lucky to live in an age where we can discuss it in retrospect, and that the awesome craftsmanship of selfless Restorators around the world has given us museums of these aircraft to view, and airshows to watch them fly as they were......

I keep reminding myself, Life's too short to get bitchy about the Past......

delcyros · 05-21-2005, 07:52 AM

It´s a fine topic.
Still on my view, if you factor the probable combat situations properly, the P-51 has a big advantage: cruise speed, altitude (remember the Bf-109 would climb), G-suite, better gunsight and numerical advantage. If we compare one -109 and -51 in an empty airspace at equally skills and altitudes I would like to be in a -109G10 but that´s not very probable in 1944 or isn´t it? I do personnaly think the 109G10 is the better dogfighter of both, but there are other factors in an aerial dogfight and pilot skill is probably the most important of them.

lesofprimus · 05-21-2005, 08:10 AM

Quote:

there are other factors in an aerial dogfight and pilot skill is probably the most important of them.

Yup........

evangilder · 05-21-2005, 09:15 AM

Pilot skill has alot to do with it. The Finns did some serious damage with Brewster Buffaloes and there were some Filipino pilots that shot down Zeroes with P-26s!! I would think that the P-26 kills over the Zero also involved some luck though.

cheddar cheese · 05-21-2005, 09:18 AM

SOME luck?

Thats an underestimation

Soren · 05-21-2005, 10:16 AM

Quote:

I agree 100%..... The -51D won the battles because of sheer #'s of aircraft...... As has been pointed out many times here, how can 4 alert -109's possibly combat 30 -51D's??? Prayer and a good chute......

That the 109's lacked fuel didnt help the matter either. Considdering what the LW had to cope with, they did better than the Allies if you ask me. And the 109 remained more than competitive to the very end.

Quote:

But it also goes both ways.... An excellent -51D pilot could easily handle an equally skilled pilot in a -109.... Combat conditions vary, and so do pilots instincts and reactions...

I agree, it depends very much on the pilot ! Strictly talking the two planes, the 109 G-10 was a better dogfighter than the P-51 though. But if the P-51 pilot knew his plane it would be a very tough fight for them both.

Its very much about knowing your plane's strengths and weaknesses.

Quote:

Intereseting choice... I would go with the -190D-9 as a pure fighter, and the -51D as an escort.......

No no no, I meant in this Clash between the P-51 and 109

As a pure fighter the 109 G-10 'was' superior to the P-51.

Amongst all German fighters the Dora-9 was better than the 109 G-10 though.

Quote:

Thats why the greatest pilots that lived through the war should be especially regarded by people such as ourselves......

True.

Quote:

I agree once again, but some would add that the Spit IX was the better of the Spits......

I don't see why though, as the Spit XIV 'was' concluded better by the British themselves. But it may be a case of 'looks' then

lesofprimus · 05-21-2005, 10:56 AM

Quote:

Considdering what the LW had to cope with, they did better than the Allies if you ask me. And the 109 remained more than competitive to the very end.

100% Correct....

Quote:

No no no, I meant in this Clash between the P-51 and 109

OK gotcha.....

Quote:

I don't see why though, as the Spit XIV 'was' concluded better by the British themselves.

The IX was considered the better dogfighter, and more agile of the 2... I also agree with u that the XIV was the better aircraft...

But.... Many pilots preferred the IX to the XIV, but I think that it was probably more so becasue of mission parameters and pilot preference than actual performance differences....

There are a couple of Spit guys here that could probably go over more of the refined differences off the top o their heads....

Quote:

Amongst all German fighters the Dora-9 was better than the 109 G-10 though.

100% correct, IMO and Urs as well.. Some will have different opinions on this.....

Soren · 05-21-2005, 11:22 AM

Quote:

The IX was considered the better dogfighter, and more agile of the 2... I also agree with u that the XIV was the better aircraft...

I agree that some British pilots liked the IX better because of its lighter stick forces, but actual British tests confirm that the XIV was infact as or even more maneuverable than the IX. (With higher stick forces though)

Quote:

But.... Many pilots preferred the IX to the XIV, but I think that it was probably more so becasue of mission parameters and pilot preference than actual performance differences....

Well it was most likely because of the IX's 'easier' handling.

Quote:

100% correct, IMO and Urs as well..

Well in some respects yeah, but the Spit XIV was VERY competitive to the Dora-9 though. And in a clash between the Dora-9 and Spit XIV, it souly depends on the pilot.