I think by that stage of the war, attrition had accounted for a lot of the experienced pilots in the Luftwaffe (as in the Japanese Air Forces). Regardless of the quality of the mounts, the riders were young and inexperienced - and often didn't live long enough to gain that vital experience.Cliff, can You qualify this statement with sources and numbers?
0 Kudo
P-40 vs FW190
| Author | Comment | ||
|---|---|---|---|
 delcyros |
|||
|
Posts: 1749 (16-May-2008 07:58:48) |
|
||
|
Dave Bender |
Attrition had accounted for a lot of the experienced pilots | ||
|
Posts: 6497 (16-May-2008 13:36:25) |
The same holds true for the RAF and US Army Air Corps. Even expert pilots like Hans-Joachim Marseille, Saburo Sakai, Stanford Tuck and Pappy Boyington will have a bad day eventually. By the fall of 1944 most of the early war Uber pilots of all nations were already gone. |
||
|
jlyons97 |
|||
|
Posts: 1485 (16-May-2008 17:10:23) |
Dave Bender wrote: Call it what you will. The option was not to engage at all. And, the FW better hope he isn't turned into and become
the target for six .50 cal. Lots and lots of fighters got bounced; probably most of the shoot-downs took place this way. Altitude advantage or not, equals in
this regard got bounced through out the war. F-86s waited to get bounced by Mig-15s in Korea. "Desperation" in this case gave them an overall
favorable kill ratio. [I will not enter the lists as to what ratio is to be believed]
|
||
|
delcyros |
|||
|
Posts: 1750 (16-May-2008 21:40:59) |
The Fw-190A has a comparably low max. turnrate at lower airspeeds. That´s where the max. turnrate get´s established and that´s exactly why in tests the Bf-109
was always able to outturn the Fw-190. However, things change at 250 IAS and more. At this speed, the Fw-190 will outturn about anything with the exception of
the P-51. That´s excatly why P47/51 US encounter reports consistantly note that the Fw-190 was more difficult to outturn than the Bf-109. This is also a reason
why the Fw-190A dominated so much over the Spit-V when it appeared over western Europe in 41-42. The good turnrate at high maneuvering speeds combined with the
excellent energy keeping abilities made up the difference. Low & slow, the Fw-190 was not neartly that dangerous.
|
||
|
Dave Bender |
FW better hope he isn't turned into and become the target | ||
|
Posts: 6499 (16-May-2008 23:14:05) |
4 x 20mm vs 6 x .50cal. Furthermore the Fw-190 is a more rugged aircraft. The odds are greatly in favor of a Fw-190 in a head on pass. Not that the Fw-190
needs to accept the head on pass. The aircraft with more energy can engage and disengage at will unless he gets sandwiched by greatly superior numbers.
|
||
|
seasick |
|||
|
Posts: 4667 (17-May-2008 02:20:50) |
The USN and Army Air Corps would pull pilots with a large number of kills, and send them back to the US to train new pilots.
|
||
|
ickysdad |
Just who says... | ||
|
Posts: 3128 (17-May-2008 08:15:47) |
Dave Bender wrote: the "190 is more rugged then the P-40????? |
||
|
Dave Bender |
190 is more rugged then the P-40 | ||
|
Posts: 6500 (17-May-2008 12:22:48) |
The Fw-190 has an air cooled engine. The P-40 has a liquid cooled engine. That makes all the difference. Early war Japanese aircraft are the exception to the rule as they lack cockpit armor and self sealing fuel tanks. |
||
|
NewGolconda |
|||
|
Posts: 3343 (17-May-2008 15:08:02) Commonwealth Moderator |
In general, I would agree. Mind you, it could be a tough little beasty, the P-40.
"On 29 August 1941 Clive Caldwell was attacked by two Bf 109s North-West of Sidi Barrani. One of his attackers was the Bf 109 E-7 "black 8" of 2./JG 27 piloted by one of Germany's top aces, Leutnant Werner Schroer who was credited with 114 Allied planes in only 197 combat missions. Caldwell's P-40 "Tomahawk" of 250 Squadron was riddled with more than 100 rounds of 7.9 mm slugs, plus five 20 mm cannon strikes which punctured a tyre and rendered the flaps inoperative. In the first attack Caldwell suffered bullet wounds to the back, left shoulder, and leg. In the next pass one shot slammed through the canopy, causing splinters which wounded him with perspex in the face and shrapnel in the neck. Two cannon shells also punched their way through the rear fuselage just behind him and the starboard wing was badly damaged. " |
||
 Red Admiral |
|||
|
Posts: 1866 (17-May-2008 17:44:25) |
The difference in vulnerability between liquid cooled and air cooled engines has been massively overstated on the internet. I remember looking at a USN study
in the Pacific in 1944 of over 500 aircraft. Only 25-30% of those with engine strikes kept on flying. You get the occassional tale of engines keeping running
with entire cylinder shot away, but that is because the statisical sample is so massive that a couple of freak events are bound to happen.
|
||
- Battleship Vs Battleship
- Should Battleships Be Back In Service?
- The United States Navy
- The Royal Navy
- The European Navies
- The Commonwealth Navies
- The Asian Navies
- Aircraft Carriers
- Fighting Ships Of The World
- Submarines
- Designing A Navy/Ship
- The Land Forces
- The Air Forces
- The Naval Fiction Board
- The Politics Of War
- Naval Help
