Was it a foregone conclusion when a ME109G

[Felix C]

encountered a late model P-51 or P-47 in air to air combat?

I read where the G model was too heavy to engage either of the two as it was designed to shoot down bombers. Does this account for the high losses when the Luftwaffe still had capable pilots?

[Oberst]

There were plenty of P-51s shot down By G-series Me109's.

Read up on the training practices on Luftwaffe fighter pilot training. The emphasis was training bomber pilots. Fighter pilots learned mostly 'at the field'.

The biggest enemy to Luftwaffe fighter pilots was the Luftwaffe.

Just my .02 cents.

[ahafan]

Originally Posted by Felix C

encountered a late model P-51 or P-47 in air to air combat?

I read where the G model was too heavy to engage either of the two as it was designed to shoot down bombers. Does this account for the high losses when the Luftwaffe still had capable pilots?

Hello
also in many ways your right, the ME 109s Gs under wing gun pods (GUNBOOT) reduced speed by 15-20 mph..ME 109s Gs-top speed was 380 mph in combat,but in a turnin combat fight too 355 mph true speed./mustangs top speed was 440, but say 430 in turning fights...
The Luftwaffe boys considered the JUG-P47 a leathal plane..as to the P51
I think the best was the K-7..but that's my Guess....
sharon

[Graham Boak]

The designation Bf109G covers a wide range of variants over a number of years. After making the point that the pilot may often have been more dangerous than the aircraft he was flying; it is probably safe to say that any early version of the Gustav, up to the main production variant the G-6, would be inferior in combat to the P-51 or later P-47s, but not by much. The later versions with DB605AS or D engine variants, the G-10 and K, remained competitive in the hands of competent pilots - which were in decreasing numbers late in the war.

Yes, versions encumbered with the additional underwing cannon (or rocket pods) would be more vulnerable, but these were the only versions that could reasonably be described as dedicated bomber-attackers. This role was more commonly (where possible) left to the Fw190 with its heavier armament and better head-on protection. With superior performance at higher altitudes, the 109G was better used in fighting (or at least distracting) the US escort fighters.

[Felix C]

Thanks. I read from Johnson that the P47 would out dive and out barrel roll any of the German piston a/c and then out climb with the paddle blades. That would leave out turn to escape but the heavier armament of the ME109G would negate that possibility.

Yes it was the G6 which I thought was the most common in use against the heavies.

Well I read it in a book about ME109s so I guess that is why no mention was made of FW190s being preferred for anti-bomber use.

[ahafan]

Originally Posted by Felix C

Thanks. I read from Johnson that the P47 would out dive and out barrel roll any of the German piston a/c and then out climb with the paddle blades. That would leave out turn to escape but the heavier armament of the ME109G would negate that possibility.

Yes it was the G6 which I thought was the most common in use against the heavies.

Well I read it in a book about ME109s so I guess that is why no mention was made of FW190s being preferred for anti-bomber use.

hello
by 1943 Me 109 G6/R too were employed.mainly as bomber interseptions..JG11 JG3-holland-but some fw 190s were used too.but not forget airel bombings too by JG11-
then rockets use may 43-then the downfall P47s escorts and P38s-then by 1944.the P51 came. the me 109s G/R were used and well came off worse,the fw 190 stormbrock a heavy laden armor plated plane .was just a rammer to the end..JG300 -.they did have some me 109s as top cover to protect them ;-but losses came very fast as most pilots by then had come from USSR-back home..
yes a cruel world...and One war I wont and hope never see again..

but stress might the Ta 152 came faster in service along with the 262 jet would the outcome been differn't?
MY FAVE PLANE WAS THE D9s-Ta 152 Me 109 K the K was 460 mph? Ta 152 480 mph-D9 same as P51s 440 mph and a good match.

sharon.
my 50% might be wrong -read aircraft of the aces defence of the reich -series pretty good

[Nick Beale]

Originally Posted by ahafan

but stress might the Ta 152 came faster in service along with the 262 jet would the outcome been differn't?
MY FAVE PLANE WAS THE D9s-Ta 152 Me 109 K the K was 460 mph? Ta 152 480 mph-D9 same as P51s 440 mph and a good match.

If you read first hand accounts of combat, you hardly ever see a case where a pilot reports achieving anything like the published top speed of his aircraft in level flight. You even read accounts where the faster aircraft (on paper) cannot catch the slower one (on paper). Pilots also write of how one Spitfire (for example) was better than another of the same specification — squadrons often had better and worse machines in their ranks.

[Laurent Rizzotti]

As Nick said there is a lot of difference between the theorical speed of an aircraft and the one that an operational aircraft will achieve in combat situation. And the pilot will be far more important than the aircraft.

My own perception of air combat is that speed is not as important in the result of an fighter battle as most books said. A modern gunsight, a cockpit allowing to see more sky around, reliable weapons and radio, were also very useful.
On the other hand, and still in my opinion, speed will be very important for a fighter used to attack bomber formations. A greater speed will allow the fighter to choose from where it will attack, and to make repeated passes, while a slower fighter will have no choice than to attack from the rear, and be exposed to defensive gunfire.

Your question was about the last model of P-51 and P-47: when these were available (in late 1944 or in 1945), I doubt that many Bf 109 G will be met with gun pods or rocket launchers for bomber interception. By this stage of the war, Bf 109s were rather use to protect Fw 190 from US fighters, while Fw 190 will be the ones attacking the heavy bombers.

[Don Pearson]

The main factor in the end was range and overwhelming number of machines in the air.

Don

[Bluenose]

With the advent of the 30 mm motor-cannon the use of the gondolas appears to have declined; certainly by mid-44 with G6 late and G10 / G14s there seems to have been less used of additional weapons on 109s, probably owing to the increased prevalence of Allied fighters.

Since much of the outcome of aerial combat depends on the relative pilot skills and tactical positions, there are very few foregone conclusions