Russians tried to make the He-162 work post war, but found it just to difficult to fly and gave up.
http://www.airpages.ru/eng/lw/he162.shtml
http://www.airpages.ru/eng/lw/he162.shtml
You'd lose.
Air to air the 8th AF Mustang had 3313 vs 322 losses, and 4179 vs 402 for 9th and 8th AF combined. Just over 10 A/C shot down for each one lost.
If that's mediocrity, I'll have a 1000 mediocre Mustangs.
Russians tried to make the He-162 work post war, but found it just to difficult to fly and gave up.
http://www.airpages.ru/eng/lw/he162.shtml
I've read the same thing, its only weak point was literally its rudders.Really? That's odd, I've always heard that early examples displayed excellent characteristics, especially relative to the 262, which tended to wallow at lower speeds and was pretty slow in low speed acceleration.
Yeah I would think so too.And frankly looking at its rudders, that's pretty understandable. But it should be a pretty straightforward fix
Russians tried to make the He-162 work post war, but found it just to difficult to fly and gave up.
http://www.airpages.ru/eng/lw/he162.shtml
Really? That's odd, I've always heard that early examples displayed excellent characteristics, especially relative to the 262, which tended to wallow at lower speeds and was pretty slow in low speed acceleration.
Rudders, not particularly stable, and needs a bloody long runway
A Hawker T fighter optimised for a Griffon engine would be a pretty good bet.
That's not a Griffon Tempest, that's the Sabre Fury (originally flew with a Griffon in November 44, re-engined with a Sabre VII in 1946)*. Fastest ever Hawker piston-engined fighter (faster than a Centaurus Sea Fury), and perhaps prettier, if that's possible![]()
Didn't fly until November 1944 in OTL, however...
According to the link they never tried; they found the basic design as flawed and pretty much gave up on it after testing where Heinkel was at with it.Russians tried to make the He-162 work post war, but found it just to difficult to fly and gave up.
http://www.airpages.ru/eng/lw/he162.shtml
I'd wager that a standard Bf 109K (which you could absolutely make in 1943) could kick the snot out of a P-51B at any altitude below 25K.
The P-51 was a fantastic escort. But it was a mediocre dogfighter.
All the more reason for a FW190C. The DB603 worked in 1943 and was fitted to a fighter that accepted it and performed well with it. Dump the dysfunctional turbocharger and still have excellent performance for 1943-44.The DB 605D (engine of the Bf 109K) was available from late 1944 on. Thus - no 109K in 1943. The DB 605A won't cut the mustard any better than it did in 1943 in OTL.
P-51 was a 'boom & zoom' fighter, and as such it need to be used.
All the more reason for a FW190C. The DB603 worked in 1943 and was fitted to a fighter that accepted it and performed well with it. Dump the dysfunctional turbocharger and still have excellent performance for 1943-44.
How many P-51B/Cs were in service in 1943? Given that the competition for the most part was the P-47D in 1943, seems reasonable. Also wasn't the DB603AA available in 1943?Here is what was expected or achieved from Fw 190s with different engines: link
Basically, the armed Fw 190 powered by DB 603A (vs. non-armed prototype) was expected to do about the same turn of speed as the Fw 190D-9 above 7 km, and around 10 km/h slower under that altitude. That would meant almost no disadvantage vs. the P-47D, and less of a disadvantage vs. Merlin Mustang once it is deployed than it was the case with the Fw-190A-7 or A-8. But still almost a 30 mph disadvantage above 8 km vs. P-51B/C, the DB 603E is needed to decrease that, and that is 1944 engine.
GM-1 was developed in 1940 by Otto Lutz to improve high-altitude performance. It could be used by fighters, destroyers, bombers and reconnaissance aircraft, though its first use was in the Bf 109E/Z fighter. Originally, it was liquified under high pressure and stored in several high-pressure vessels until it was found that low-temperature liquefied nitrous oxide gave better performance due to improved charge cooling. It could also be stored and handled more conveniently and was less vulnerable to enemy fire.
The DB 605D (engine of the Bf 109K) was available from late 1944 on. Thus - no 109K in 1943. The DB 605A won't cut the mustard any better than it did in 1943 in OTL.
P-51 was a 'boom & zoom' fighter, and as such it need to be used.
How many P-51B/Cs were in service in 1943? Given that the competition for the most part was the P-47D in 1943, seems reasonable. Also wasn't the DB603AA available in 1943?
Also that is why I suggested if we could mix and match I'd add the Merlin 1943 supercharger to the DB603 and replace the turbocharger with the P-51's cooling system.
Irrelevant, the thread is about "best of", and the 605D was just an overboosted, overcompressed 605A using 100 octane C3 fuel (available in 1939 right off the jump) and MW 50 injection off the 1942 BMW 801D.
And the 109 excelled in the vertical, climbed hand over fist like satan himself l was shoving a red hot iron up it's ass, and accelerated like a banshee. In other words the absolute worst target for a BnZ style of fight. The only other fighter that might have been a worse target for a P-51 would have been a Spitfire 14, since it's a touch more maneuverable than the 109K.
Given pilots of equal skill, the P-51 gets two passes before the 109's leveled the playing field.