Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Franek
Just a short comment concerning Japanese aircraft - most popular types were Zero and Hayabusa, then perhaps Shoki. They were used through the whole war of 'Pacific'. I consider other types both not significant and not really mature. Problems were not limited to poor quality fuel, though it was doubtless one of the factors.
Going back to Mustang vs T-bolt, one of the principles of aerial tactics is to keep own bases out of reach of enemy forces. Introduction of T-bolt pressed Germans to the Netherlands, then look what was a real impact of Mustang. And the latter was not only better in range.
|
The Japanese discussion although interesting, should be continued elsewhere, needless to say I do not share your overall lacking assessment of operational Japanese fighter types. You seem to draw most of your conclusions on the CBI front and extrapolate them beyond said narrow base.
WRT to the Tbolt vs Mustang debate, we seem to continue flying around the same light bulb, like moths in the night.
1. The Mustang was a very capable fighter, as stated before.
2. The Thunderbolt could have done the same job, being in some areas superior (high altitude escort) or at least equal, and in others playing catch up (like range).
3. In service of the US VIII. AF, the Thunderbolt engaged the Jagdwaffe when it was relativly speaking an equal adversary, hence its achievements must be waged accordingly.
4. The Battle over the Reich (daylight) was basically lost by Big Week, or at best the spring of 1944, when the Mustang was only starting to replace the Thunderbolt as the main escort type.
These are generalizations, but they need be, if this discussion isn't lost in (minor) detail and related subjects, like Japanese fighters and their engines.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Jens
Of course the figures i have posted are claims and not confirmd kills. On the other side they show the relative comparsions between the types. So it's notable for the statement to say, mustangs got much more.
Don Caldwell's site is a little bit... one third of all Luftwaffe planes were destroyed at Eastern Front, all over the war.
|
You should offset the number of US claims against a number of variables.
Number of operational a/c, number of encounters, type of a/c claimed, quality of opposition etc etc etc. Whereas 1943 Thunderbolt claims will be versus mainly well trained and well equipped Jagdwaffe units, 1944/45 Mustang claims will cover the whole range of Luftwaffe spectrum, including trainers, and generally far less trained pilots. So although the Mustang claim might be (dramatically) higher, the
value might actually be substancially lower.
Don Caldwell in his assessment also focuses on numbers alone, and forgets the qualitative drain of the earlier Eastern Front attrition (1941 to mid 1943).
That's why these stats only proof to be half of the picture if taken at face value.