Top Fw 190 aces

[knusel]

Good morning Gentlemen,

the Fw190 is considered better than the Bf109 but it never could fully replace it.
What's the main advantage of the Fw190 compared to the Bf109 ?
What's the main advantage of the Bf109 compared to the Fw190 ?

Cheers,

Mcihael

[Alfred.MONZAT]

Originally Posted by knusel

What's the main advantage of the Fw190 compared to the Bf109 ?

Easier to fly (including take-off & landing). More durable. Somewhat better armement (including bombing capabilities and more firing time). Better roll rate.

Originally Posted by knusel

What's the main advantage of the Bf109 compared to the Fw190 ?

Easier to build (cheaper), mostly use B4 fuel. Better rate of climb and better performance over about 6,000 m. Better turn radius.

[knusel]

Good morning Alfred,

thanks for your answer.
I heard that the Bf109 could be assembled by non-professional workers. This might have contributed significantly to its success. The basic concept seems to have been so sound that the plane could be improved again and again over a period of 8 long years.
I did not know that the Bf109 had a better turning radius than the Fw190.
I have a German book featuring a graphic that suggest that the Fw190 was so manoeuvrable in a dive that it easily could shake of a pursuer.

Would you have preferred to serve in an Fw190 unit if given the choice between the two ?

Have a nice Wednesday,

Michael

[Nick Beale]

Originally Posted by knusel

I heard that the Bf109 could be assembled by non-professional workers. This might have contributed significantly to its success. The basic concept seems to have been so sound that the plane could be improved again and again over a period of 8 long years.
Michael

All German combat aircraft were assembled to some extent by "non-professional workers" in the shape of foreign forced labour and enslaved prisoners.

The Bf 109 began life with the same 2 x MG armament as a 1916-vintage fighter (admittedly with a better rate of fire) at a time when the RAF was seeing a need for four times as many guns. From the F-series onwards it had trouble matching the firepower of its US and British contemporaries. Look at how the Fw 190's armament increased from the A-1 to the A-8 for example; a Spitfire V had 2 x 20 mm and 4 x MG, double what the 109 F carried.

Also, there never was a Bf 109 with a sliding canopy, let alone a "teardrop" hood giving all-round vision such as the Spitfire, Typhoon, P-47 and P-51 all acquired. The Fw 190 had very good all-round vision from the start, of course.

[Alfred.MONZAT]

Originally Posted by knusel

The basic concept seems to have been so sound that the plane could be improved again and again over a period of 8 long years.

Should have it, that's another question (that also valable for the Spitfire).

Originally Posted by knusel

I have a German book featuring a graphic that suggest that the Fw190 was so manoeuvrable in a dive that it easily could shake of a pursuer.

The Bf 109 was also maneuvrable in dive, but like the Mustang, it should not be put under to much G. So the Bf 109 and Fw 190 can shake P-47 and P-38 in dive but a certain speed should be reached and timing was critical.

Originally Posted by knusel

Would you have preferred to serve in an Fw190 unit if given the choice between the two ?

Despite the few advantages of the Bf 109 over the Fw 190, except the pilots who know the Bf 109 like the back of their hand for flying it for a long time, most pilot would chose the Fw 190, particulary rookie ones.

But fact is pilot didn't have choice and it's likely that if the production had fully switched to the Fw 190 (something unthinkable knowing the power of Messerschmitt lobbying), they wouldn't have been able to cope with the losses and continue to create that much new Jagdgruppe.

Originally Posted by Nick Beale

a Spitfire V had 2 x 20 mm and 4 x MG, double what the 109 F carried.

Yes the Spitfire V have twice more firepower but the Bf 109 F-4 would fire its 20 mm cannon for three more time (200 rounds vs 60x2 rounds) and its machine guns one third more time (500x2 rounds vs 350x4 rounds). And also engine mounted weapons tends to be much more accurate, a fact that should not be downgraded.

However the situation was different with later variants, the Bf 109 losing performances to cope with Spitfire's level of firepower, despite better ammo and comparable cannons and machine guns.

Originally Posted by Nick Beale

Also, there never was a Bf 109 with a sliding canopy, let alone a "teardrop" hood giving all-round vision such as the Spitfire, Typhoon, P-47 and P-51 all acquired. The Fw 190 had very good all-round vision from the start, of course.

Yes that's a much important advantage in favor of the Fw 190 I forgot.

[Nick Beale]

Originally Posted by Alfred.MONZAT

Yes the Spitfire V have twice more firepower but the Bf 109 F-4 would fire its 20 mm cannon for three more time (200 rounds vs 60x2 rounds) and its machine guns one third more time (500x2 rounds vs 350x4 rounds). And also engine mounted weapons tends to be much more accurate, a fact that should not be downgraded.

A fair point but is longer firing time better than the ability to deliver a heavier weight of fire quickly, given that much aerial combat was a matter of split-second opportunities? I agree that better accuracy does help because what matters is how many bullets hit the target, not how many you fire.

I think if we are looking at development potential then Fw 190 (Fw 190 A – Fw 190 D – Ta 152 H) showed more than the Bf 109. And the same is true of the Spitfire (Mk I – Mk XIV) and P-51 (A – K) for example.

[Kutscha]

The P-51K was a P-51D but built at a different plant. I am sure you meant to say P-51H.

[Nick Beale]

Originally Posted by Kutscha

The P-51K was a P-51D but built at a different plant. I am sure you meant to say P-51H.

Either that or I was just going for the highest letter!

[Johannes]

Hi Michael

As I understand it the Fw190 was an easier aircraft to fly(wherefore good for inexperienced pilots), was much better armed, better vision, better undercarriage and better armoured, for these reasons a better ground-attack aircraft, also better at lower altitudes, also a slightly more spacious cockpit.
The Bf109 was a better turner, and better at high altitude.
Certain pilots preferred different types, perhaps it reality Fw190's against bombers and Bf109's against fighters, Anton Hackl always tried to keep both types handy for this reason.
I sat in a Bf109 once, well got most of myself into it, the cockpits are tiny.
I think also the Bf109 was a better climber, and good at diving, but the Fw190 had the edge in a dive?

Kind Regards

Johannes

[FalkeEins]

See top aerobatic pilot (and ex-Lufthansa capitain) Walter Eichhorn's account of flying the Manching Bf 109 in Schmoll's 'Me 109 - Production und Einsatz' - takeoffs and landings still terrify him!.." the experience only becomes a pleasure once the wheels are off the ground.." and on landing "..you see airshow pilots waving at the crowd as they come into land - not me, I need three hands in cockpit!"