Me 109, Spitfire, Zero or Mustang

[drgondog]

Originally Posted by Kurfürst

Two things to consider here : P-51s were few in numbers, and the /AS aircraft appeared at about the same time, also few in numbers initially, and the Mustang was bugged with teething problems with it`s armament, which was too light anyway. The 51 was certainly a lot faster than the G-6 or 190A at altitude, but as long as there weren`t too many of them, such performance advantage of a few aircraft didn`t not weight much in the Big Picture.

Good observation. The first operational sorties for the 354FG Mustangs were 1 December 1943. It was sole and exclusive Mustang Group until 363rd (9th also) and 357th (1st 8th AF) started in Feb.

The early battles of 1944 were not fought by these aircraft, but G-6s, A-5/A-6s and P-47Ds/P-38Js.

Depends on definition of 'early'. The 354th awards crossed 100 in February and all the early Mustang groups had big months starting in February, escalating in March to peaks in April and May.

Imho, performance differences between the G-6/AS, G-14/AS, G-10 and the K-4 were rather marginal. The 109K (and G-10) initially had the same output of 1800 PS, and was something like 20 km/h faster than the rest due to aerodynamic refinements. That`s it, and 20 km/h of top speed is not a big deal - in practice, even less - it`s about as much as indivual aircraft of the same type from the very same factory differ from each other due to varying production quality.

PS : Bill, sorry I will try to answer later. In a nutshell.

IIRC look up the combat between that 15th AAF P-38 Group in 14 July(or June) 1944 vs. our guys from the 101st.

Agreed - but I believe I was limiting the scope of my points all in to 8th AF

The graph I posted is not some production figure but first/secondline strenght of daylight fighters, compiled by HoHun from ww2.dk. In theory, it should be possible to compile exact shipments, losses to enemy and accidents etc. per month..

I've thought about doing the same as I find ww2.dk to be best source - but I have enough on my plate with the 8th AF. Clearly you have a couple of issues to deal with to get closure. Classic Inventory management.

Inventory on hand plus deliveries (new production and Damaged-returned to service) minus damage WIP and minus those destroyed.

This will yield effectives - then if the subject under discussion is LuftFlotte Riech you have to account for movement/re-assignement of parts of the inventories as a function of the fighter units within that Organization.

I am afraid I am not proficient on the manner the Germans recorded their losses, but I understand your point. In any case, I am MASSIVELY sceptical about these 10:1 kill ratio claims... look at the known records of the BoB`s loss ratios, rather close to 1:1 overall...

AFAIK the Luftwaffe approach was same. Major component (wing, tail)lost, a/c blow up, a/c crashed as a result of an attack (either mid air or into ground - also a source of USAAF error), major fire not believed to be stoppable if a/c left visible sight (source of error), seen to spin out of control (another major source of error for both sides) but not seen to hit ground. The latter two could result in a Destroyed award or a Probable Award

I would be massively sckeptical about 10:1 also, until much later than 1/44-5/44 when a lot of old hands were still flying.

My rollup for 8:1 air to air, 4:1 for air awards to ALL losses are predicated on a.) high degree of understanding of all 8th AF losses by types, and b.) data for Awards which ARE subject to the challenges of matching an 8th AF 'claim' translated into an Award - but subject to at least the uncertainties introduce by 'shot down' but repaired discussion above.

This is highly variable when you look at the different fighters.. when you look at my Lightning data, compiled with same rules, it is down in the 2:1 ratio, the P-47 in the 7:1 and the Mustang in the 9:1 area. I'm still tweaking and am sending my stuff to Soren soon.

In my opinion, and I'm still building the monthly data, the ratios were 'less' across the board but growing until perhaps May, dipped a little in June-Aug, and climbed in September till end of war. The June-August timeframe found more 8th AF air to air losses as result of getting caught strafing on the deck by roving LW squadrons and Gruppe's.

Kurfurst, the key issue still is completeness of LW records. I have found several significant 'holes' in loss data. And, reflect that the pioneer and major source of all our discussions reside in Prien's excellent work to piece it together. The 8th AF data is pretty solid, the MACRs are nearly 100%, the damaged/written off category is visible and countable, the flight accidents are accounted for over the UK.

What is less certain is the 'award to actual' because we can't match up to central LW reports by theatre and winng and pilot to parse the data and draw conclusions... But I pretty much KNOW which US aircraft were either lost in air combat or lost to Unkown causes that suspiciously SHOULD be in the "air loss" column just to be conservative. My tables reflect this.

But, if Tony Woods' data for his published Award records are considered accurate I could show you huge holes in claims by JG3, JG27, JG26 over Munich April 24, 1944 for example, in consideration for actual USAAF aircraft and crews lost versus what was awarded... It points out that even the highly respected LW awards process had significant flaws which seem to be as serious as the USAAF.

I am not going to get into an argument here because I feel all airpowers struggled with matching awards to actual a/c destroyed. Given that a shot down 109 could be repaired is an excellent example of how a USAAF claim could be an award for an aircraft NOT destroyed, but honest in the context that the Jug pilots cased, shot, hit and watched the 109 crash land. In his mind it doesn't occur that this a/c is not destroyed..

If you want to see what I have generated let me know.

Regards,

Bill

[drgondog]

Originally Posted by renrich

Bill, in one of your posts you mention a fellow name of Tolliver. I believe he was a co author of "Horrido" ( I can't reach my copy, it is packed) How do you rate that book?

Ray Tolliver was first American that the German Fighter Ace community came to trust to tell their side of the story. Ray coincidentally was trusted by American Fighter Aces for his fairness and contributed to bringing the two groups together (along with Trev Constable).

Ray also was a USAF fighter pilot and Col (retired) with his last assignments including being an F-100 Squadron CO.

Damn good guy and helped me immensely when I started thinking about doing a book. Most of my LW photo collection comes from him or Galland via him

[drgondog]

Originally Posted by renrich

Bill, in one of your posts you mention a fellow name of Tolliver. I believe he was a co author of "Horrido" ( I can't reach my copy, it is packed) How do you rate that book?

I think all of his books are good, some better. He does not edit the interviews or quotes to fit his own (Toliver or Constable) opinions if they differ - so what you get is unfiltered German POV.

I use Luftwaffe Fighter Aces a lot to go after pilot/unit details and perspectives.

[fly boy]

p-51d no contest

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Originally Posted by fly boy

p-51d no contest

Explain why?

[fly boy]

well it was the best alaround fighter it had the speed truning range altitue weapons porduction speed

[fly boy]

it also out flew everything

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Originally Posted by fly boy

it also out flew everything

You know this because you flew it in sims right?

Just wondering...

[SoD Stitch]

Originally Posted by DerAdlerIstGelandet

You know this because you flew it in sims right?

Just wondering...

LMAO!

[joy17782]

I would take the 109. then stang. uhh i would take the zeke if i wanted the other guy too get a kill!!!!!!! All i flew the 109 in the sims does that count. how about the Fw-190 dora !!!!!!!!

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Originally Posted by joy17782

All i flew the 109 in the sims does that count. how about the Fw-190 dora !!!!!!!!

No...

[fly boy]

well yes the sims and dogfights on the history channel

[Njaco]

Of those choices i would go with P-51 but the Spitfire isn't in the poll. In a dogfight I think i would pick that. I'm not technical as has been posted but what I do understand is that the spit was well liked by pilots because it was comfortable and pilots felt like an extension of the plane which I believe helps dogfighting. Now as eveyone gets ready to trash such a stupid statement, I understand roll rates, etc. But pilot skill is an important factor and if the plane fits, fly it.

He still hasn't changed that freakin avatar. It creeps me out.

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Originally Posted by fly boy

well yes the sims

Voting for the P-51 is fine but you do realize that computer flight sims are not flying a real plane right?

[Soren]

As a pure fighter: Bf-109 100%!
As a long range fighter & escort: Zero from 41-43, and P-51 from 43-44

One has to keep in mind that the A6M Zero was a first class fighter in 1941-42 and remained competitive up till 1943, infact superior to USN fighters up till then.