P-51 Mustang or F4U Corsair

[syscom3]

Results speak for themselves. As much as the late model Spits looked good in performance figures, they had no impact on the war effort. The P51D brought the fight to the Luftwaffe (not enough P38 groups to have made a big difference) and simply swept the skies.

The P51 was good in so many catagories that is does deserve the honors.

When you start looking at the figures of all of the late model fighters, most of the figures of their performance is quite evenly matched. The only catagory that seperates them all is endurance. And thats where the P51 dominates that catagory.

[wmaxt]

Originally Posted by syscom3

Results speak for themselves. As much as the late model Spits looked good in performance figures, they had no impact on the war effort. The P51D brought the fight to the Luftwaffe (not enough P38 groups to have made a big difference) and simply swept the skies.

The P51 was good in so many catagories that is does deserve the honors.

When you start looking at the figures of all of the late model fighters, most of the figures of their performance is quite evenly matched. The only catagory that seperates them all is endurance. And thats where the P51 dominates that catagory.

The P-38s numbers were only matched by the P-51s in March '43 and remained pretty equal until late May when some of the P-38s were diverted to G/A in preparation for D-Day and D-Day coverage/support. When the P-38s started in Oct. '43 they were always outnumbered by 5:1 or more by the more experienced German pilots, by the time the P-38s were diverted the worst was over and both numbers and experience were now in the Allies hands. There were still some severe battles but the balance had shifted already. The P-38s deserve at least half the credit for that shift from German air dominance to Allied control. There were still two P-38 FGs flying when the Allied control became Allied Dominance.

The P-51 was a very good escort fighter - it did not do it alone, further it was OK everywhere else. The P-40 was a better G/A fighter sturdier, same armament, and could carry three bombs to two of the P-51. In all but speed and range the P-51 was average, in quantity and with a wingman it was a great escort fighter.

As for endurance, The P-38 even Flew a 2,300mi mission. In the ETO the P-38s were limited to a 165gal drop tank, with 300gal drop tanks a P-38F flew 3,000mi in '42. Both the P-47D and N exceeded 2,000mi range. The P-51 was the First single engine fighter with that kind of range.

I like the P-51, but its abilities and exploits have been blown way out of proportion.

wmaxt

[Jank]

"Both the P-47D and N exceeded 2,000mi range."

I don't think so. The N had a 2,300mi range. The D was nowhere close. Hell, the internal fuel capacity of the N was 200 gallons more than the D.

[Soren]

Originally Posted by wmaxt

Also that comparison was very fair and accurate to all sides,

You can't be serious ?! I totally disagree.


"The Americans had the P-47, P-38 and P-51. All of which were very fast and at least a match for the German fighters in maneuverability."

- Total BS, the Bf-109K-4 and Fw-190D-9 could both out-turn and out-climb any of the aircraft mentioned above.(Although the P-51 was indeed a match up high)

"Especially the P-38 which could out-turn anything the Luftwaffe had and could give the Spitfire pilot pause to consider his own mortality."

- Utterly untrue, laughable infact.

Originally Posted by wmaxt

note also that the P-38L met or exceeded virtually all performance categories.

Yeah I did note that the site claimed this, and I think you know what I think about that - Total Hogwash.

Originally Posted by wmaxt

I would also take a P-38J/L against the F4U-4 and a few Spits.

A F4U-4 would make mince meat out of a P-38J/L, and so would a Spitfire Mk.XIV. (As-well as virtually all other late-war single engined fighters)

The only two fighters I would rank above the F4U-4 Corsair is the Fw-190 Dora-9 and Spitfire Mk.XIV. But then again when you count in all the extra duties the Corsair could carry out, you start to realise how great that aircraft really was. (But pretty it wasn't though)

[Gnomey]

F4U for me too.

[syscom3]

The P38 had a tremendous climb rate. Among the fastest of the war. Are you forgetting that its origional role was as an interceptor?

Youre also forgetting one thing that the P38, P47 and P51 could do better than the German fighters, and thats dive out of trouble. Maneuvering also includes the vertical, and the three of those fighters were good at all of them.

[Soren]

Originally Posted by syscom3

The P38 had a tremendous climb rate. Among the fastest of the war.

Not when compared to the climb rates of the Bf-109K-4 and Fw-190 Dora-9.

Originally Posted by syscom3

Youre also forgetting one thing that the P38, P47 and P51 could do better than the German fighters, and thats dive out of trouble.

I wasn't forgetting anything, I was just addressing the comment about the maneuverability. And yes the P-38 and P-47 could both out-dive the German fighters, however the P-51D would find diving pretty useless against a Fw-190D-9.

Originally Posted by syscom3

Maneuvering also includes the vertical, and the three of those fighters were good at all of them.

If the fight starts up high, with enough room for the three american fighters to dive for speed, then yes they would be good in the vertical. But if the fight starts down low, all three american fighters would be in big trouble if faced by the Bf-109K-4 or Fw-190 Dora-9.

[wmaxt]

Your certainly welcome to your opinion Soren.

If the Fw-190D-9 and Bf-109K-4 had the fuel, time and numbers together with pilots that could utilize all their performance, maybe. As it was the American aircraft did fine, even with those that were there.

The P-38 (not even an L) took on a Spit XIV (Griffon engine) and took the match. Go to the Pro Docs page and there is a test of a Spit IX and P-38F.

wmaxt

[KraziKanuK]

The only K-4 that had a high climb rate was the one that was boosted to 1.98ata and these only showed in very small numbers from mid March 1945. Of some ~140 onhand in early April, only ~70 were operational. (50%)

At 1.80ata it was slower (RoC) than the 25lb boost Spit IXs and 21lb boost Spit XIVs.

You got data to back up your Dora claim? Not the data for the few 'specials' either.

[Soren]

Originally Posted by wmaxt

The P-38 (not even an L) took on a Spit XIV (Griffon engine) and took the match.

I'd like to know where I can see this test, urban myth, or whatever it is.

Originally Posted by wmaxt

Go to the Pro Docs page and there is a test of a Spit IX and P-38F.

I did, and whats so special about it ?

All I see is a very lightly loaded P-38 being slightly behind an early version Spitfire IX in climb.

The weight of the P-38F in question is only 15,000 lbs fully loaded, thats a wing-loading of just 45.8 lbs/sq.ft, now when you add the fowler-flaps at slow speed thats a very low lift-loading for such a big aircraft.
_____________________________

Krazi,

What is it with you ? Are you just looking for a fight or what ? I mean why else would you bring the Spitfire into this discussion ??

But ok, I'll take the bate then...

Originally Posted by KraziKanuK

The only K-4 that had a high climb rate was the one that was boosted to 1.98ata and these only showed in very small numbers from mid March 1945. Of some ~140 onhand in early April, only ~70 were operational. (50%)

142 were on hand, and 79 were serviceable.

Anyway please let us know how many Spit XIV's and IX's were running at 21-25lb boost by comparison then. Or better yet let us know how many Spit XIV's were on hand in total, regardless of what boost they used ?

Also perhaps you have forgotten that the 109K-4 was allowed to run at full boost for 10min at a time, where-as the Spit XIV and IX were only allowed to run at full boost for 5min ?

Originally Posted by KraziKanuK

At 1.80ata it was slower (RoC) than the 25lb boost Spit IXs and 21lb boost Spit XIVs.

If you go by Mike Williams figures for an overweight K-4 which is equipped with gun-pods and therefore not only exhibits more drag that usual, but is also alot heavier than usual - then yeah sure, eventhough at 1.8ata it still climbs at 4,400 ft/min with that setup. I'd like to see how a Spit XIV equipped with a 300L drop tank climbs compared to that

But to give you abit of an Idea of how fast a "clean" Bf-109K-4 would be climbing, please note this:

Bf-109K-4 Power-loading at 1.8ata (1,850 HP): 1.8 kg/hp
Bf-109G-2 Power-loading at 1.3ata (1,475 HP): 2.1 kg/hp

Bf-109G-2 climb rate at 1.3ata - 24 m/sec (4,724 ft/min):


So we can expect a cleanly loaded K-4 flying at 1.8ata boost to be climbing at over 5,000 ft/min, not bad huh ? Makes one wonder how fast it was at 1.98ata doesn't it ?

Not convinced ? Take a look at the HA-1112-MIL Buchon then, it has a slightly higher wing-loading than the G-2, but its power-loading is pretty low:

Loaded weight: 3,180 kg
Engine power: 1610 HP
----------------------------
Power-loading = 1.9 kg/hp

Max Climb rate: 5,580 ft/min.

Franz Stigler, German fighter ace:
"The K-4 was very much like the 109G, yet could leave all other fighters behind in climb. "

Originally Posted by KraziKanuK

You got data to back up your Dora claim?

And what "claim" would that be ?

Originally Posted by KraziKanuK

Not the data for the few 'specials' either.

Haha And what the heck is that supposed to mean, huh ? A moment ago you were talking about 25lb boost Spit IX's and 21lb boost Spit XIV's !

But ok I'll explain why a P-38L/J will never out-climb a Fw-190 Dora-9:

Fw-190D-9 normal loaded weight: 4,270 kg (9,414 lbs)
P-38J lowest Gross weight: 7,937 kg (17,500 lbs)
P-38L lowest Gross weight: 7,937 kg (17,500 lbs)

Fw-190D-9 Wing-loading: 233 kg/m2 (47.7 lbs/sq.ft.)
P-38J Wing-loading: 260 kg/m2 (53.4 lbs/sq.ft.)
P-38L Wing-loading: 260 kg/m2 (53.4 lbs/sq.ft.)

Fw-190D-9 Power-loading: 1.9 kg/hp (4.2 lbs/hp)
P-38J Power-loading: 2.48 kg/hp (5.46 lbs/hp)
P-38L Power-loading: 2.48 kg/hp (5.46 lbs/hp)

This is more than enough proof that the P-38 never even approached the climb rate of the Dora-9, but I bet you aint satisfied yet, so I'll continue;

Fw-190 D-9 climb rate using "Sonder-notleistung" (2,100 PS), with ETC-504 rack - 21 m/sec (4,133 ft/min) :
http://img230.imageshack.us/img230/9339/d9climb8yo.jpg

That ETC-504 belly rack takes away approx. 10-15 km/h of the top speed, so you can pretty much expect it takes about 0.5-1 sec away in climb rate as-well.(I bet thats what that partly erased line reaching 22m/s is supposed to represent) And remember this is only using "Sonder-notleistung" (Special emergency power), with a output of 2,100 PS, but it can do even better than that;

Max level speed and power output using "Sonder-Notleistung mit A Lader als Bodenmoter" (Special emergency w/ Compressor, C3 and MW50), with ETC-504 rack - output = 2,250 PS, 640 km/h at SL: http://img482.imageshack.us/img482/3...d2chart2cy.jpg
http://img482.imageshack.us/img482/6...mo213a10cn.jpg

Without the ETC-504 rack you can expect a top speed at SL of 650-655 km/h, and the climb rate can be expected to be around 23-23.5 m/s (4,500-4,600 ft/min).

Now about the P-38;

According to the Pilots manual the P-38J/L's climb rate at its lowest gross weight of 17,400 lbs is around 3,200 ft/min at 54" manifold pressure. However according to a test with various american fighters(F4U-4,P-51B,P-38J,F4U-1), the P-38J with a 50% fuel load and running at 60" MP could hit ca.3,775 ft/min. Now thats at the high end of what I would expect from the P-38, but considering the weight of the aircraft it sounds plausible. (The F4U-4 climbed at 4,500ft/min in that test btw, now thats smoken !)

From the P-38L pilots manual: http://img239.imageshack.us/img239/1...clchart2op.jpg

So there you have it, the P-38 could not follow the Fw-190 Dora-9 in a climb, not even when the Dora-9 was flying at its second best power rating and the P-38 at its highest, it simply didn't have the power or the lift necessary.

[lesofprimus]

So there you have it, the P-38 could not follow the Fw-190 Dora-9 in a climb, not even when the Dora-9 was flying at its second best power rating and the P-38 at its highest, it simply didn't have the power or the lift necessary.

And ur confirming something that I, and many others here, urself included, knew for years...

[syscom3]

It looks like by 1945, the P38L was at the peak of that airframes development. I'd even venture to say that there was little else the Lockheed wizz kids could have done to improve it without a radical redesign. The P38 climbed quite nicely in 1942, 1943 and 1944. But as the data shows, in 1945 it was left behind.

Now the FW190D was a kick ass plane in 1945, marginally better than the P47D-25 and the P51D. But how would it compare to the P47N, P51H and F4U-4? All three of those fighters were in the pipeline in 1945 and were deployed in that year.

The last variant of the ME109 was interesting but a complete waste of time and effort for the Germans. Its airframe was old and like the P38, was a dead end. Was it dangerous? Yes. Did it make the allied pilots shake in fear? Nope.

[Jabberwocky]

Originally Posted by Soren

Anyway please let us know how many Spit XIV's and IX's were running at 21-25lb boost by comparison then. Or better yet let us know how many Spit XIV's were on hand in total, regardless of what boost they used ?

Spitfire F. XIV/ FR. XIVe Squadrons operational as of March 1945:

No 610 Sqn (January 1944)
No 91 Sqn (March 1944)
No 322 Sqn (March 1944)
No 130 Sqn (August 1944)
No 350 Sqn (August 1944)
No 402 Sqn (August 1944)
No 403 Sqn (August 1944)
No 41 Sqn (September 1944)
No 2 Sqn (January 1945)
No 430 Sqn (November 1944)


Nos 268 and 414 were in the process of transitioning to FR. XIVes in March, 1945 and were still partially equipped with Mustang IIIs and Spitfire IXs respectively. 66 squadron operated the type for a brief period in the winter of 1944/1945 before transitioning to the Spitfire LF. XVIe

Given wartime RAF establishment strength of 20-22 airframes and 18-20 pilots, that puts around 200-220 XIVs on the books in 1945, with a few others kicking around in in specialised reconnisance, costal, high altitude and metorological flights. Servicabe strength is probably going to be around 75-85% of that figure.

[Bullockracing]

The P-38 had the advantage of an extra engine for insurance, but it's thicker wing limited the mach number, so even the "Merlins in a P-38" notion would have limited gains. Put a laminar flow wing on it and some late-war Merlins and she would be moving!

[Soren]

Originally Posted by Jabberwocky

Spitfire F. XIV/ FR. XIVe Squadrons operational as of March 1945:

No 610 Sqn (January 1944)
No 91 Sqn (March 1944)
No 322 Sqn (March 1944)
No 130 Sqn (August 1944)
No 350 Sqn (August 1944)
No 402 Sqn (August 1944)
No 403 Sqn (August 1944)
No 41 Sqn (September 1944)
No 2 Sqn (January 1945)
No 430 Sqn (November 1944)


Nos 268 and 414 were in the process of transitioning to FR. XIVes in March, 1945 and were still partially equipped with Mustang IIIs and Spitfire IXs respectively. 66 squadron operated the type for a brief period in the winter of 1944/1945 before transitioning to the Spitfire LF. XVIe

Given wartime RAF establishment strength of 20-22 airframes and 18-20 pilots, that puts around 200-220 XIVs on the books in 1945, with a few others kicking around in in specialised reconnisance, costal, high altitude and metorological flights. Servicabe strength is probably going to be around 75-85% of that figure.

Yep, and IIRC only about 100 of those would eventually be running at 21lbs boost.

By comparison the Germans had over 300 109K-4's on hand by Jan 45, and in April there were 142 K-4's running at 1.98ata on hand, with 79 being serviceable.