P-51 vs Bf-109 dogfight impressions

[Crumpp]

190D9 that was also not produced in very big quantities.

 

Surprisingly, the FW-190D9 is a significant variant in terms of numbers produced.

[Crumpp]

I still think that we should get the best P-51D variant with the best available fuel if we are going up against the best of what III Reich had

 

I agree. Right after the FW-190A8....

[Slippery Pete]

I still think that we should get the best P-51D variant with the best available fuel if we are going up against the best of what III Reich had.

 

 

So when the game goes for high-end for one side, it should go for high-end for the other side as well. To keep the balance.

 

 

No, what matters is what version of the P-51 those late-model 109's and 190's were going up against. Ordinary late war P-51D's. Not post-war Super 51's.

 

You might as well go fly the F-86 against the K4 if all you want is an advantage.

[MiloMorai]

Surprisingly, the FW-190D9 is a significant variant in terms of numbers produced.

Documented deliveries of the D-9 - 670

 

Fw

348 Fw 190 D-9

76 Fw 190 D-9/R11

GFW 75

ArbGem 73

WFG 20

ConAslau 14

MME 64

 

There was 1593 K-4s built or almost 2.5 times the number of D-9s.

[USARStarkey]

Documented deliveries of the D-9 - 670

 

Fw

348 Fw 190 D-9

76 Fw 190 D-9/R11

GFW 75

ArbGem 73

WFG 20

ConAslau 14

MME 64

 

There was 1593 K-4s built or almost 2.5 times the number of D-9s.

 

I agree, 670 is not a significant number. The king tiger had about 470 made. Is this now a significant AFV? I think not.

[Crumpp]

Documented deliveries of the D-9 - 670

 

Not that I get your point as that same information is on the document I posted.

 

Thanks for sharing, maybe? :noexpression:

[MiloMorai]

But your document does not show the manufacturing locations and the number produced (by month and total) at those locations.;)

 

Even the F-8 greatly outproduced the D-9 (AradoWarnem - 2264 and NDW - 1350)

 

Compared to the A-8 at ~4800, the D-9 @ 670 is not a significant number.

[gavagai]

So 957 Spitfire Mk XIV is or is not significant?

 

Or do I need to ask? We already know the answer.:megalol:

 

 

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

 

Compared to the A-8 at ~4800, the D-9 @ 670 is not a significant number.

 

P.S. As someone who actually teaches sigfigs to others for his job... 670 is significant compared to 4800. Only 49 and less is not significant compared to 4800, because 4800 + 49 still equals 4800. But 4800 + 50 you have to round up to 4900.

:book:

Edited December 29, 2014 by gavagai

[Kurfürst]

I agree, 670 is not a significant number. The king tiger had about 470 made. Is this now a significant AFV? I think not.

 

As I understand the German page posted by Crumpp, the 670 number is not valid and research has showed that 1805 D-9s were actually produced. Thats roughly the number of the Spit XIV and Tempest production combined...

 

Which I dare to say is a significant amount, given the small timespan of production, i.e. less then a year. In any case, everyone knows I think that the D-9 was a substantial and common model seen late in the war, so whats the point of all these arguements..?

[Crumpp]

The Luftwaffe was a very small organization in comparison to the Allied Air Forces which means smaller numbers have a more significant impact.

 

 

As I understand the German page posted by Crumpp, the 670 number is not valid and research has showed that 1805 D-9s were actually produced.

 

That is my understanding as well. The page shows what current research at the time the book was published. The book also list's the Werknummer blocks, dates of manufacture, and subcontractors producing the FW-190D9.

Edited December 29, 2014 by Crumpp

[MiloMorai]

That is my understanding as well. The page shows what current research at the time the book was published. The book also list's the Werknummer blocks, dates of manufacture, and subcontractors producing the FW-190D9.

 

The book, which you have not identified, also says words 'up to' and 'mainly'.

 

For those want to see where I got my numbers from (last post), http://forum.12oclockhigh.net/showthread.php?t=25063

[fastfreddie]

670 isn't the correct number. That is only the number of Dora's made in Sep, Oct, Nov, and January. These does not include the month of December or February in which some information is missing and it is assumed that over 1200 Doras were completed before the end of the war. This comes straight out of Focke Wulf Volume 3 1944-1945 by Richard Smith and Eddie Creek who had several thousand pages of research on the FW190. There were plenty of Doras in operational units percentage wise but I've probably got more flight time in this sim than any German combat pilot at the time. Most of them spent there time waiting for fuel or transferring airfield to airfield ahead of advancing allied armies.

[NineLine]

The Luftwaffe was a very small organization in comparison to the Allied Air Forces which means smaller numbers have a more significant impact.

 

 

 

 

That is my understanding as well. The page shows what current research at the time the book was published. The book also list's the Werknummer blocks, dates of manufacture, and subcontractors producing the FW-190D9.

 

Come on guys, this isnt rocket science... or even airplane science... the manufacturing of the D-9 has nothing NOTHING to do with the topic of the OP (P-51 vs Bf-109 dogfight impressions)... you guys are making it hard for me to not hand out warning points, and some of you cant afford anymore...

[Crumpp]

Ooops, sry.

 

Just edit out all the off topic stuff. Won't happen again....

[NakedSquirrel]

=P

 

Try the same with human opponent :harhar:

 

Done sir,

 

 

 

Been spending a bit more time on the P51, because the 109 slots are always taken in MP! (I'll get more time in the Hun planes when the Spit comes out, for sure :pilotfly:)

 

This is a pretty sloppy dogfight but maybe it shows some of the strengths/weaknesses of the planes. The main/only thing the P51 has going for it is speed. You can pull pretty decent turns at 200mph, but below that the plane becomes a dog. Most of the turns I made weren't really to get on his six. They were mainly to make him cut into my turn and lose airspeed so I could get distance and recover energy.

 

I'm not very good at 1v1 though, I prefer flying with a wingman.

[Suchacz]

If you are forced to accept a fair fight, then something is wrong with your tactics :D

 

You should gain some advantage before entering the dogfight (more E, better position), or you should quickly disengage and head home. Because IRL, your opponent will shoot real bullets :smilewink:

Edited December 30, 2014 by Suchacz

[USARStarkey]

The Flaps on the P-51 seem to be much better than the 109s in my opinion. I did a bunch of flying with someone yesterday at various altitudes to test performance. We switched roles several times to keep the pilot variable to a minimum. Regardless of who flew, in dogfights below 10,000ft the P-51 with flaps was able to maintain parity with the 109 in turns. I was in several fights just off the deck where we went round over 10 times without anyone gaining purchase...with both pilots deploying flaps. If either plane has an advantage, it is very very small. In situations where the turning began after then merge, it was damn near impossible to gain on each other. If one of us somehow got in behind before the fight, it was damn near impossible to shake him.

 

One thing I can say for sure is that the flap system in the Pony is much easier to use. It takes a long time to crank out the flaps in the 109, and just as long to get them back up. The airspeed at which you can deploy them is higher for the 51 as well. I find myself not wanting to use the 109s flaps because once i get them down, my opponent can put his back up very fast for whatever reason he might want to. In addition, I lost several fights, (and vise versa) because the 51 got around during the first few high speed turns because he could deploy at speeds as high as 400mph.

[Kurfürst]

It seems strange if the 109 could not deploy combat flaps at 400 mph as well, since the real one could, albeit I am sure it took some effort at such high speeds.

 

Thanks for bringing this up and your other tactical findings! Its a very useful guide! :)

[Flanker35M]

S!

 

From all the memoirs I have read about German Bf109 aces only Marseille was known to use flaps a lot in combat, very successfully that is. But he was a master handling his plane and extremely good marksman as well. Lipfert, Rall, Knoke, Hartmann and many others others never mention using them, except for landing.

 

Anyways using them in combat is risky if the opponent can "hide" his E-state and make you deploy them, thus bleeding your E = you are in trouble. Especially risky at low altitude where you can not regain E by diving or your aircraft is slow to accelerate vs. the opponent.

[Talisman_VR]

It seems strange if the 109 could not deploy combat flaps at 400 mph as well, since the real one could, albeit I am sure it took some effort at such high speeds.

 

Thanks for bringing this up and your other tactical findings! Its a very useful guide! :)

 

Did the 109 have 'combat' flaps as a design function then? I thought 109 flaps were for landing in terms of design function.

[Kurfürst]

Did the 109 have 'combat' flaps as a design function then? I thought 109 flaps were for landing in terms of design function.

 

I meant its possible to slightly drop the flaps at very high speed on the 109s - which will increase drag and lift, allowing for tighter turns -and was used as such by some pilots and appears to have been intended for such use: a number of Bf 109E spec sheets and reports give the radius of turn for both normal condition and with flaps for example.

 

AFAIK the Spit had such design goal for the flaps, i.e. strictly for landing, as it had only two positions: up and fully down.

[gavagai]

Pretty good squirrel. Is that nvidia DSR? Even with that ultra high res your smoking 109 still somehow managed to disappear.:doh:

 

Done sir,

[fastfreddie]

Done sir,

 

 

 

Been spending a bit more time on the P51, because the 109 slots are always taken in MP! (I'll get more time in the Hun planes when the Spit comes out, for sure :pilotfly:)

 

This is a pretty sloppy dogfight but maybe it shows some of the strengths/weaknesses of the planes. The main/only thing the P51 has going for it is speed. You can pull pretty decent turns at 200mph, but below that the plane becomes a dog. Most of the turns I made weren't really to get on his six. They were mainly to make him cut into my turn and lose airspeed so I could get distance and recover energy.

 

I'm not very good at 1v1 though, I prefer flying with a wingman.

 

Good job but I wouldn't use a plane piloted by a vulcher as an example ever. They are usually new pilots or worse ... ones that can't compete in the air so they attack you on the airfield. The guy you were flying against didn't appear to have a clue even on how to enter a turn fight. No high yo-yo's or even straight runs to achieve a successful attack and I was quite surprised you didn't get his cooling system on your first set of strikes.

[Talisman_VR]

I meant its possible to slightly drop the flaps at very high speed on the 109s - which will increase drag and lift, allowing for tighter turns -and was used as such by some pilots and appears to have been intended for such use: a number of Bf 109E spec sheets and reports give the radius of turn for both normal condition and with flaps for example.

 

AFAIK the Spit had such design goal for the flaps, i.e. strictly for landing, as it had only two positions: up and fully down.

 

Yes, must have been harder and slower for the real life 109 pilot to wind flaps up and down in such combat using the manually operated hand wheel, compared to the P51 pilot just flicking the flap lever to the first notch to achieve a combat setting and leaving the hydraulics to operate the flaps. Even easier for the Spitfire pilot with wings that provided enough lift and turn capability without a combat flap setting to worry about.

[Talisman_VR]

The Flaps on the P-51 seem to be much better than the 109s in my opinion. I did a bunch of flying with someone yesterday at various altitudes to test performance. We switched roles several times to keep the pilot variable to a minimum. Regardless of who flew, in dogfights below 10,000ft the P-51 with flaps was able to maintain parity with the 109 in turns. I was in several fights just off the deck where we went round over 10 times without anyone gaining purchase...with both pilots deploying flaps. If either plane has an advantage, it is very very small. In situations where the turning began after then merge, it was damn near impossible to gain on each other. If one of us somehow got in behind before the fight, it was damn near impossible to shake him.

 

One thing I can say for sure is that the flap system in the Pony is much easier to use. It takes a long time to crank out the flaps in the 109, and just as long to get them back up. The airspeed at which you can deploy them is higher for the 51 as well. I find myself not wanting to use the 109s flaps because once i get them down, my opponent can put his back up very fast for whatever reason he might want to. In addition, I lost several fights, (and vise versa) because the 51 got around during the first few high speed turns because he could deploy at speeds as high as 400mph.

 

Did you only use flat turns then? With some vertical in the turn I find the 109 will generally kill the P51 in short order.