Welcome to the WWII Forums! Log in or Sign up to interact with the community.

Mustang vs. FW 190

Discussion in 'Air Warfare' started by Commando, Oct 5, 2007.

  1. Commando

    Commando recruit

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2007
    Messages:
    494
    Likes Received:
    0
    via TanksinWW2
    Mustang vs. FW 190. Which do you reckon was the best of the two, both for air to air, and air to ground attacks? I personally think the Mustang was better in a ground attack role, than the 190.
     
  2. Skua

    Skua New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2003
    Messages:
    2,889
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Norway
    via TanksinWW2
    Depends on the Fw 190. An Fw 190F or G was as good as any ground attack aircraft you could get your hands on during WWII. The Fw 190D was conceived as an interceptor and is more comparable to the Mustang, but not as well suited for ground attacks. Depends on the Mustang as well. The Allison-engined Mustangs performed better at lower levels than the Merlin-engined Mustangs did, but were completely unsuitable as escorts for long range bombers.

    I guess an Allison-engined Mustang was better in the ground attack role than the Fw 190D, but I'm not so sure it would be better suited than an Fw 190F or G.
     
  3. Ricky

    Ricky New Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    Messages:
    11,708
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Luton, UK
    via TanksinWW2
    In addition to Skua's comments, the Mustang was a little fragile for the ground attack role. It did have a dedicated ground-attack variet, the A-36 (I think) which was pretty good.

    Personally I would prefer the Fw-190 - tougher and can carry more - unless there was a P-47 on offer...
     
  4. Hubsu

    Hubsu New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2005
    Messages:
    165
    Likes Received:
    0
    via TanksinWW2
    You'd rather take a water cooled engine, which can be taken out by a single bullet in the coolant system, down to the bush opposed to an engine which will carry its pilot back to the base even with cylinders being shot out by enemy fire?
     
  5. TISO

    TISO New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2005
    Messages:
    1,231
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    A wierd blue planet
    via TanksinWW2
    Allison powered Mustang acctually had more economic engine on low levels and same huge range, but rapidly lost power on higher alt's. basicly problem was in compressor not the engine.
    All Mustangs were ill suited for ground attack work as their glycol cooler was a big and voulnerable target. That's why after D-day all Mustangs in 2.TAF were quickly replaced by Lightnings and Jugs.

    BMW powered 190's had the same problem as Allison Mustangs. They were used for bomber interceptors and were ussualy protected ny Bf-109's.
     
  6. redcoat

    redcoat Ace

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2002
    Messages:
    1,521
    Likes Received:
    141
    via TanksinWW2
    Are you sure you mean the 2.TAF ? This was a RAF formation, and it never used either the P-38 or P-47.
     
  7. Blaster

    Blaster New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2006
    Messages:
    1,687
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Canada
    via TanksinWW2
    I think of the Mustang as an interceptor, and a heavier aircraft like the P47 Thunderbolt or P38 Lightning going around bombing things. I think the Fw 190 might be better at causing ground devastation.
     
  8. TISO

    TISO New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2005
    Messages:
    1,231
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    A wierd blue planet
    via TanksinWW2
    :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: mea culpa, mea maxima culpa :oops: :oops:
    9.th AF
     
  9. me262 phpbb3

    me262 phpbb3 New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2004
    Messages:
    3,627
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Porter,TX
    via TanksinWW2
    but why to risk a mustang if you have the p-47 capable to get pounded and still get home?
    in line engines very delicate for that roll, fw 190 a-g, aircooled engine same like the p-47
    now if you change the 190 d for a ta 152 c that will be a better comparison
    both bids with in line enignes capable of high altitud, toward the end of ww2 some pilots of ta 152 became aces!!!!
    but remember that the difference will be in the pilot!!!!
     
  10. McRis

    McRis New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2006
    Messages:
    549
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    a_centauri
    via TanksinWW2
    I think only one became ace in the Ta-152 by scoring 5 to 8 kills...I don't remember the name right now nor the exact score...I should check though...
     
  11. Commando

    Commando recruit

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2007
    Messages:
    494
    Likes Received:
    0
    via TanksinWW2
    I forgot about the P 47. :oops: It surely was better in a ground attack role than the Mustang!
     
  12. Che_Guevara

    Che_Guevara New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2005
    Messages:
    1,109
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Davy Jones's locker
    via TanksinWW2
    Feldwebel Joseph Keil scored five kills and Oberfeldwebel Willi Reschke three (the only two pilots, who comes to my mind while thinking of the Ta-152), both of the Stabschwarm, JG301.

    Joseph Keil

    [​IMG]


    http://luftwaffe.cz/keil.html

    Regards,
    Che.
     
  13. Hubsu

    Hubsu New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2005
    Messages:
    165
    Likes Received:
    0
    via TanksinWW2
    For top 10 USAF fighter aces in ETO, 7 flew Thunderbolts and only 3 flew Mustangs. Can we say as well that the jug is even better at air combat than the Mustang? ;)
     
  14. Ricky

    Ricky New Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    Messages:
    11,708
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Luton, UK
    via TanksinWW2
    Probably not - the P-47 was in action longer than the P-51.
     
  15. Hoosier phpbb3

    Hoosier phpbb3 New Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2005
    Messages:
    904
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Bloomington, Indiana USA
    via TanksinWW2
    Hubsu:
    I think it safe to say few--if any--planes could take the punishment a P-47 Thunderbolt could... and still bring it's pilot safely home.

    The experience of Robert S. Johnson comes to mind.

    Tim
     
  16. Hubsu

    Hubsu New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2005
    Messages:
    165
    Likes Received:
    0
    via TanksinWW2
    You got that right, Ricky. However, no bad plane can rack such a high number of aces with only being "a long time in the service" . Can you elaborate on what stats made the Juggernaut so great at shooting down enemy planes? I have no idea. I do know, that the massive armament it had wasn't it.

    Hoosier, at least one plane comes to my mind that was notably hard to shoot down. It had an inclined engine and was watercooled. Incidentally, the "easiest" way to bring it down was to hit it in the radiator :)
     
  17. Siberian Black

    Siberian Black New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2006
    Messages:
    1,097
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Hunting Panzer IV's
    via TanksinWW2
    Stuka? Only thing that comes to mind with a big rad......

    Varients aside weren't the P-51 and FW-190 more or less evenly matched at any altitude? Or would the BF-109 be closer?
     
  18. Simonr1978

    Simonr1978 New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2004
    Messages:
    3,392
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Kent, UK
    via TanksinWW2
    Watercooled inline engine and hard to shoot down, wouldn't be the Il-2M Stormovik by any chance? :wink:
     
  19. majorwoody10

    majorwoody10 New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2005
    Messages:
    1,898
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    ca.usa
    via TanksinWW2
    sure ..hartmann said it was easy to drop a sturmovic ..just shoot the oil cooler ...its only the size of a youth size football ...peice of cake !! ..if you are hartmann ,perhaps
     
  20. Ricky

    Ricky New Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    Messages:
    11,708
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Luton, UK
    via TanksinWW2
    Hi Hubsu, I didn't mean to imply that the P-47 was a bad plane (it was not!) but just to point out that we can't call it better than the P-51 just because it shot down more enemy planes, for the reason given.

    The P-47 was a good fighter - fast & heavy (an excellent 'boom & zoom' fighter), well-protected, and with an adequate armament given its opposition.

    The P-51 was a bit more fragile, but a better dogfighter.

    Personally I would take the P-51 for fighter, and the P-47 for fighter-bomber.
     

Share This Page