Focke-Wulf FW-190 vs P-51 Mustang - Which was better?

[@Ash007YT]

The P-51 and FW-190 both have a really special place in my heart as I helped restore both aircraft here in Australia for a short time during my aircraft maintenance qualifications.

[@tastethesoup]

Hi Ash!

[@chunkblaster]

That's badass bro, props

[@_tyrannus]

Lucky you, Ash. You sure have a nice collection of beautiful and rare WW2 aircraft over there!

[@karldergrosse-333]

Good to know my War Thunder content creators watch a quality channel. Cheers, Ash.

[@Admiral.Gustaf]

I dont expected Ash will come

[@gravitatemortuus1080]

A lot of people ignore The Fw-190s unique 'Kommandogerat' ("brain box") - a mechanical computer which automatically controls mixture, propeller pitch, boost and magneto timing, the plane was maybe not the best plane but its advances were incredible at the time.

[@123kiwiboy]

the p40n had a rolls royce merlin

[@hertzair1186]

By many it was considered the best

[@jakej2680]

I mean the brain box led to a number of deaths when it prevented pilots from pulling out of dives. Experienced German pilots died when their planes just flew straight down into the ground because the brain box prevented them from pulling up.

[@iskandartaib]

@@jakej2680 Why would it prevent someone from pulling out of a dive? It didn't control the elevator, it was an engine and propeller pitch controller. It wasn't any sort of fly-by-wire box.

[@neighborhoodturnt]

@@iskandartaibright this confused me?

[@nzwotb2525]

A mustang was just discovered in a shed in new zealand last month after it had been forgotten since 1952 it's going to be restored to flying condition.

[@EdwardOskarsson]

How does someone not find a fighter for 70 years...

[@nzwotb2525]

@@EdwardOskarsson don't know but there was also a mosquito, 2 kittyhawks and a Harvard in the shed aswell which are also being restored apparently someone bought them to save them from being scrapped after ww2 to preserve them.

[@dustyak79]

NZ WOTB back then in a civilian could purchase just about any fighter for 1200 bucks. Even adjustments for inflation it still be a good deal. Cheaper than a new car back then

[@brianwilke592]

Must be one remote shed. In the US, every once in awhile some car enthusiast finds a classic car under some tarp in a shed or barn. Example; I recall reading about a 63 Corvette with a 327 with only a couple 1,000 miles on the odometer found in a barn. They are called "barn finds." In your example that is one heck of a "barn find."

[@detroitandclevelandfan5503]

@@EdwardOskarsson Happen in Germany only to a flippin Fokker D7 it was found in a barn in the 80s if my memory serves me correctly. Don't quote me on the date it was found though friend.

[@hueowen2786]

This is a joke I heard decades ago. A few years after World War 2, the local parish priest was introduced to one of his new congregates who was a young man named Shven. After speaking to him for awhile he discovered that Shven had served in the RAF Spitfire Squadron 331, which was mainly made up of Norwegian pilots that had escaped their homeland before Germany had invaded. They spent the rest of the war fighting the axis although most of that time was in the RAF. The priest was genuinely impressed by the stories Shven told him about the war and asked him to come up on the next armistice day and tell the congregation about some of his experiences. Shven reluctantly agreed. So on the Sunday before the next armistice day, the priest called Shven up and introduced him and asked him to talk about his war experience. Now shven had a very thick Norwegian accent, but his English was pretty good. After a minute or two he started recounting one particular mission. "So we took of and flew towards Berlin. We were flying about 5,000 feet when we saw the fuckers flying two thousand feet above us" Understandably there was a chorus of gasps in the church auditorium, but the priest just grinned and stood next to Shven. "Everyone let me explain. Shven being from Norway has a slight accent, and the Germans had a plane called the Focke-wulf, which the allied pilots sometimes called Fockers." So the gasps turned to a sigh of relief and the priest stepped back to let Shven continue his story. Shven smiled and nodded his head. "Ya. Ya. Dis is true, but on that particular morning, the fuckers were flying Messerschmitts".

[@puppylovera]

that made me laghth, good storys

[@georgepantazis141]

Can I use it ? Classic.

[@hueowen2786]

@@georgepantazis141 Absolutely.

[@thenaturalmidsouth9536]

Just saw this....touche....laughed my rear off...😂

[@kennethcurtis1856]

Thanks for your PhD dissertation.

[@posniknelb6114]

The fw 190 looks great and the Dora 9 long nose and ta152 look absolutely superb to me. Kurt Tank was an absolute genius

[@markjohnson6194]

They are good looking airplanes. I always love seeing them in the Mustang gun camera footage

[@johnnichols9056]

I agree, Tank was truely a genius who designed many planes before and after the war and several countries too. The Ta152C and H were superb planes but rate of roll goes down as wingspan increases. The turning radius of the H did decrease tho and there is one account of one downing a Tempest in a low altitude turning fight with jammed guns. The laminar flow wing on the P51 also comprimised the turning ability of it, but with less weight it could still hold it's own. Great planes flown by brave men.

[@johnnichols9056]

That should be increase not decrease.

[@tommcdaniel2208]

@@johnnichols9056Just give me something competitive in performance and I'll take on the details myself.

[@Mr.CliffysWorld]

@@johnnichols9056 .. That's funny you mentioned that because I was reading an article , I really wish I could remember which university it originally was who published but it was , in short, saying the laminar wing configuration had not boosted performance of the the aircraft anywhere near as much as made out to be . This paper was saying the findings showed this to be true . Others say it's fake. All fake . They want people to not know where they got there "FANCY TOYS " . I GOT A KICK OUT ÒF THE GUY TALKING ABOUT THE MUSTANG ..saying that ifbthe laminar wing design worked as well as they made it out to be not even messerschmitt would have stood a chance against it . Now , I don't know abour all of that but it was fast, maneuverable , and regardless what anyone says she sure was pretty streaking across that azure field, sharp leading edge of the wing , the way the wing fit to the body , were all eye pleasing, she was streamline, sleek and loved to go fast ... Not many planes that are THAT beautiful are also not THAT lethal . The Spitfire Auqua-Marine , I think the model was what ? Mark V. Didn't matter because all the Spitfires were things of beauty, Those elliptical wings when she is pulling up into a steep climb . Her beautiful lines silhouetted against a golden red, late afternoon summer's day . Magnificent. Just grace and performance, the P-47's pilots were all envious of those Spitfires, secretly, but outwardly we were loyal to the P-47's, they had served us very well , built like tanks , take about as bad a beating a plane could and still fly, and saved many of our butts , but we we still secretly harbored thoughts of flying spitfires, such graceful looking planes just had to be a dream to fly, and it turned out , they were ! A very small cockpit and it and the whole plane kind of held you snug, but in a good way , you felt part of it , it was a plane with great 'feeling' . Then months later our envy turned to pride as we got to show off our sleek mustangs, to could see it in them . They WANTED to go fast and had no compunctions with taking on any other fighter out there , many with cool confidence, they were a plane to be taken seriously. To bad they were used for such grisly purposes for both planes. But high speed buzzing up and down the east coast, and I mean full throttle, exhaust full open high speed buzzing right up the coast , first day we got them . Boy we turned some heads that day , But they WERE and i suppose always will be two of the prettiest of the pretty ones . In my humble opinion .

[@Waltham1892]

"The radial engine causes to much drag for a high speed fighter..." P-47 has left the chat. F4U has left the chat. F7F has left the chat. F8F has left the chat.

[@Appletank8]

I mean, by the nature of needing air cooling, managing drag would always be a bigger problem than the closed off, pointed nose of liquid cooled engines.

[@Waltham1892]

@@Appletank8 The F8F laughs at your mistaken assumptions!

[@ohlawd3699]

@@Waltham1892 So does the P-47M! 😂

[@caif4]

It's not a complete lie. Those planes had over 2500 hp to achieve those speeds. Bf 109 K4 achieved similar speeds with less power. The thing is that's it's easier to make a high power radial than it is an inline.

[@wetzel1628]

Sea Fury has left the Chat

[@FaderFlosser]

P-51 is my favorite prop fighter. I was lucky enough to get to ride in a P-40 at a St. Paul air show in around 1989. My grandfather, bless his soul paid $600 for a fifteen min flight. It was amazing!!!

[@StrangerHappened]

Why? Piper PA-48 and other later prop fighters are way better (though no wonder: they are newer).

[@laa0fa502]

@@StrangerHappened no soul. Nothing really makes em special yet. In 100 years those will take the place of the p-51

[@3isr3g3n]

Lucky you, i only got to fly in a JU-52, which was nice as well

[@FaderFlosser]

@@3isr3g3n That's awesome too!!

[@olliefoxx7165]

Cool storey. Your grandpa gave you a 15 min ride and a lifetime of memory. Would love to ride in one but I'm not sure I'd fit. Did pilots have height limits?

[@TakenTooSeriously]

I love the perfect union of science, engineering, and history on this channel.

[@VladR1024]

As a SW Engineer I love the methodical approach of his videos. Explaining the thinking process of the managers and worker bees, advantages and disadvantages of each such decision (high vs low altitude, etc.). I sure hope germans weren't executing their top engineers if their designs didn't perform to specification, but I' not holding my breath for that...

[@augustosolari7721]

AND dont forget the beautiful shirts

[@OFFICIAL_VIDEO_AWARDS]

Nailed it

[@Leon_der_Luftige]

VladR1024 The Germans didn't do that you imbecile.

Good video, but the "If the Fw-190 had been available at the beginning of the war, the outcome of the Battle of Britain could have been different" remark near the end was rather pointless. Such musings are purely fantasy "what if" as opposed to anything grounded in realistic alternative historical possibility. A much better question would be to ask why the Germans, by the start of 1943 at the latest, failed to make a firm decision to concentrate all near-term future efforts to expand conventional single inline-engine powered fighter production on the FW-190 D (Jumo 213), as opposed to continuing to increase Me-109 G (DB-605) production. There was certainly good reason to try & maintain existing levels of Me-109 production, & increase FW-190 A production, but efforts to substantially increase 109 production at the expense of potentially vastly increasing 190 D production was completely irrational.

[@jetman7946]

My Ole Man flew 23 missions in a B-24 ( before being shot down and a POW in the Fall of '44). He rarely spoke about the War, like so many others, but once told me in all those bombing missions, he only recorded 1 confirmed kill and 1 probable when he was manning his .50 cal waist gun. That's how fast, maneuverable, and terrifying the FW 190 was !!!

[@chrislong3938]

My favorite has always been the FW-190! I built a beautiful model of one out of balsa in about '68-'69! I couldn't afford a gas .49 engine to install and it came with a rubber-band option! I chose neither and once the dope was dry everywhere, I painted her to look as authentic as I could! She looked SO BEAUTIFUL when I was done!!! I was never gonna let her fly after all of that work! She sure was gorgeous! My other favorite was the P-47! I have a thing for Radial Engines and yes, I ride a Harley!

[@abjectt5440]

I had the .049 engine about the same year. I would put the tissue on wet and dope the stringers after and when it dried it was tight as a drum. My buddy and I would go to the tavern after and dismantle and clean the engines over a few draft.. When I turned 21 they lowered the age to 19.

[@KG-li7kg]

Du fährst "Harley"? Dann tust Du mir Leid, ich fahre eine VF C45, die ist Standfest😄

[@JohnSmith-oh9ux]

It all depends what version of FW-190 you compare to what version of P-51. In one case scenario FW will dominate, in other P-51 will. Otherwise it`s just like comparing apples and oranges. Simple as that. FW-190 wasn`t nicknamed "Butcherbird" for no reason. Later iterations of P-51 were hell of a good plane. I like both. EDIT: "Greg's Airplanes and Automobiles" channel has a great videos about FW-190 / P-51 / ME-109 etc.

[@dragoonTT]

Yup, maybe the Ta-152 and P-51H are a better comparison for later fighters as well.

[@martijn9568]

@@dragoonTT I doubt it for the Ta-152, even the H-1 variant. Due to the fact that the P-51H is in all things a new fighter that looks like the old one, but with British safety margins for weight loads etc in mind. Meaning they got a lighter Mustang while also using their own Allison engine, which by then became more powerful than the Merlin. This gives the plane even more of an manoeuvrability edge, while too reaching 770 km/h

[@dragoonTT]

@@martijn9568 Of course, sorry I mean no discredit to the H model, pretty much a new plane compared to early models. It was still a mighty attempt by Tank to design such beasts as well, he was fighting against the economic power house of the world.

[@fedomandez]

@soaringtractor the Junkers 213E was a beast with MW50.

[@JohnSmith-oh9ux]

@@fedomandez True that. BF-109K and Dora versions of FW-190 were a very good ones.

[@Disruptedable]

Amazing to think, that they were so capable at reliably making such high power engines almost 80 years ago. I mean, 2000hp supercharged engines is even to this day only seen in special applications. They really pushed development to the limet back during the war!

[@jamesricker3997]

That is because when you're starting getting into the higher horsepower, turbo props are more efficient. Those high powered piston engines are obsolete.

[@rotorheadv8]

At the end, Mustang pilots had G-suits. This allowed them to perform higher g maneuvers than the unsuited Germans. As for which was better, both sides had a healthy respect for the other. However, the problem with the Germans was they were running out of experienced pilots. Take a pilot with 300+ hours and put him against one with possibly less than 30 and it isn’t going to end well for the latter regardless of the plane.

[@justinheadley9453]

At the end of the day it was down to pilot skill. German aces were able to achieve skills despite the fact. Germany was fast losing experienced pilots however.

[@IgnoredAdviceProductions]

@@justinheadley9453 German aces got far more kills than allied aces because experienced allied pilots were pulled back to train new cadets. The average allied pilot was far more ready for combat than the average axis pilot, especially towards the end of the war.

[@markswain5021]

Yes but the Germans had a much larger crap box fitted ! .

[@mikemontgomery2654]

That’s interesting. I thought the pilots of the JU-87 had some form of G-suit to help them not black out from a dive.

[@rotorheadv8]

@@mikemontgomery2654 I haven’t heard that. I heard the Mustang g-suit info in an interview with Chuck Yeager. It must have come in late in the war.

[@jonathanwest6564]

I listened to an interview of a P-51 pilot that told a story of his first bomber escort mission where a ME-109 was clearly out flying him and he was happy to just get away from this guy. So pilot experience and knowing how to push their planes to there limits can be an understated but important factor.

[@theblytonian3906]

It's interesting to read what the legendary Erich Hartmann had to say about both dispelling some of the Fw 190 superior to the Bf 109 mythology. He preferred the Bf 109 and said two things about it of note. It was the better performer at altitude, and the more able/manoeuvrable if one was forced to engage in a dogfight. Of course his TOO was the Eastern Front where the harder hitting firepower of the likes of Fw 190A7 & A8s predominant at the time of the battles for air supremacy during the Reichsverteidigung was preferred given the priority of engaging the massed wings of B-17s and B-24s before diving away to evade escort fighters rather than engage them.

[@retluoc]

I always say that...it's not the plane, it's the pilot that matters.

[@theblytonian3906]

@@retluoc Overgeneralisation/oversimplification. Experience counts yes, but there are too many many factors involved for it just to come down to that. Numbers, circumstance, type advantage matter. -Outstanding- exceptional and highly experienced pilots in an aircraft they are thoroughly familiar with might be able to pull off surviving engagements where they should have been shot down/killed, e.g. Hartmann or Sakai, but even then as they'd admit themselves, luck counts.

[@rimshot2270]

@@theblytonian3906 Hartmann did not believe in dogfighting. He considered it too dangerous and a waste of ammunition and fuel. He preferred hit-and-run tactics.

[@theblytonian3906]

@@rimshot2270 Perhaps your comprehension overlooked the word "forced" deliberately inserted within the sentence in my earlier post. Quote: "It was the better performer at altitude, and the more able/manoeuvrable if one was forced to engage in a dogfight." Regardless of what his preferred terms of engagement were, things frequently don't go to plan in battle, and one doesn't always dictate the circumstances. i.e. Read the account in his biography of his engagement in a Bf 109 with multiple P-51s over Hungary where alone, he fought several of them in a classic dogfight of manoeuvre and evade until he ran out of fuel and hit the silk. He also states in the biopic that the Bf 109 was his preferred mount, and why.

[@Senaleb]

P-51 was a long range fighter. It had insane fuel capacity and could thrive in higher elevations. Dangerous fighters to deal with when you think you have an easy kill on bombers.

[@tellyonthewall8751]

no.. not capacity.... consumption

[@beckyfrogers]

@@tellyonthewall8751 The fuel tanks on the P-51 were considerably larger than the FW-190, so yes capacity. With the addition of external tanks, their range was almost three times that of the FW-190, which gets us back to the point, the P-51 was a long range bomber escort and the FW-190 was not.

[@tellyonthewall8751]

@@beckyfrogersFirst of all, I don't question which plane was "long range fighter" and which plane was not , don't know were you read that in my 1. text Taken in basic versions the P51 had 695 L inboard fuel capacity and the FW190 had 550 L inboard fuel capacity. That's 145 L in difference . . one hour flight for the P51 and roughly 45 min. of flight for the FW190. Not some big differences seen in the time ... AND the concept for the XP51 was actually *not* a long range fighter *but* an addition/supplement to the Spitfire and Hurricanes in Britain as the Brits couldn't produce Spits and Hurricanes fast enough and in needed quantities. North American presented the Brits with a new fighter instead of building after the Brits specs and that's how the P 51 was born. It was miserable at high altitude due to the Allison engine and a RAF test pilot suggested putting the RR Merlin in instead and first that gave the P 51 it's huge performance envelope .. and the "long range fighter" was born. Yes the P51 can carry about 695 L internal in the D version and only with the "long range fuselage tank" of about 300 L it comes to about 1.000 L. Adding two 350 L drop tanks gave it a ferry range of app. 3.560 km and up to 12 hours in the air. But it was a 'sitting duck' in that configuration until the fuel was down to half .. Due to the low drag profile and the Merlin engines good performance the fuel consumption was only about 143 L/h at about 300 km/h. The FW190 was from the start born to be a 'cavalry horse rather than a race horse' (Kurt Tanks own words) and an easy to fly and easy to maintain airplane. It was from start a concept like the Spit and Hurricanes .. a home defense fighter and a diff. resource consuming airplane. The A series with BMW 801 radial engine outperformed anything the Brits had at the start and first the mrk. IX Spit could keep up with the FW190A. The A8 actually stood out as a formidable fighter/bomber too .. The B variant and C long nosed variants used the turbosupercharged BMW801 and DB 603 respectively but never got full operative until the 'Dora' with JUMO engines came of the production. The fuel capacity of the FW190 was about 550 L internal and with a often used 300 L drop tank and a consumption of 185 L/h at 296 km/h gave it a ferry range of 1.360 km and close to 5 hours in the air. But consumption has a big role here too ... The P51 only used 75% of fuel compared to the FW190 giving the P51 an edge in range and duration ...

[@tellyonthewall8751]

@@beckyfrogers take a look and listen from 09:25 in this clip kzbin.info/www/bejne/h3aWaoSjm76Vb6M "half the fuel than ...."

[@trey1531]

Kurt Tank was educated as an electrical engineer. The Fw-190 had electrical systems that no allied planes had.

[@hyennussquatch4597]

Exactly. It was very "user friendly" to fly. The analog computer system for engine control was a marvelous and unique design for the time.

[@1986tessie]

And we still won.

[@alandavis6429]

@@hyennussquatch4597 that few realize had motors with bearings made in the USA.

[@hyennussquatch4597]

@@alandavis6429 Not true. There were factories making roller bearings in the Reich.

[@waynesimpson2074]

@@hyennussquatch4597 Nice one.You beat me to it, the FW engine management system simplified the accessibility of the aircrafts' engine performance to release the pilots' concentration for more important matters like...staying alive, flying the airframe and killing the opposition. Other minor features also made a worthy contribution such as the 'canted' seat angle/ rudder pedal braces to help with enduring G forces and the simple inclusion of an ammo round counter. We (the British) shat ourselves when the 190 revealed itself. The Curious Droid was also uncharacteristically lacking in detail when it came to the innovations for the 'Stang...laminar flow wings for reduced drag and the Meredith flow radiator which actually added a positive thrust aspect to the airframe. The Mustang gets my attention every time because its a metaphor for the results of Anglo/American co-operation. Another allegory is the timing of the P51s inception into the hunt for German Luftwaffe fighters...no longer were Mustangs camouflaged for their own protection? They wore vivid, highly visible designs with polished aluminium fuselages for maximum attention to draw up German fighters . It was a sign that the boot was on the other foot. Two superb aircraft with wildly differing attributes.

[@Nivola1953]

i appreciate the fact that you didn’t give a “final judgement” on which one was the best as it’s always a matter of “it depends “. Anyway both planes are good examples of beautiful well proportioned lines. I only regret that you didn’t mention the geared cooling fan in the 190 cowl to solve the overheating and the laminar flow wing profile for the P 51 and yeah I have a war story too, my father then 19 years old enrolled in the engineering corp of the Italian army was captured by the Germans just after Italy surrender on 8 september 43 and sent to work as forced labor in a 190 factory near Kassel and he was on the receiving end of many Americans bombing raids, which he obviously managed to survive.

[@PappyGunn]

It only depends on who won air superiority. Nothing else matters.

[@WilliamJones-Halibut-vq1fs]

Both aircraft were being continuously improved. The Fw 190 was likely to develop into a Fw 190D13 with the 2700hp Jumo 213J or Ta 152H with the same engine or the Ta 152C with the 2800hp DB603N. These aircraft almost certainly could have exceeded 500mph. The P51H and the planed P51K also very fast. As it was the Fw 190D9 had the single stage supercharger 2100hp Jumo 213A but some Fw 190D13 with the two stage super charged Jumo 213F entered service capable of 455mph. The Fw 190D13 with the 2350 Jumo 213EB was expected to do 488mph. The Ta 152H and Ta 152C with this engine would have been slightly slower but they had much greater wing area and far more growth potential. The Fw 190A BMW 801 Engine had only a single stage supercharger and this was its main disadvantage in dealing with the P51B/C/D. The two stage 3 speed BMW801R engine was to be fitted to a variant of the Ta 152C but bombing so delayed the program it was abandoned and reliance had to be placed on the Jumo and DB water cooled engines for high altitude performance.

[@jeffk464]

In the remote control world the long lines of the 190 d9 are far superior to the mustang but probably not relevant. The D9 practically flies as well as a pattern plane, basically the longer the distance between the tail and the wing the better.

[@jeffk464]

@@WilliamJones-Halibut-vq1fs I don't know the US military during WW2 was extremely, extremely conservative, you could say they didn't like to muck around with new equipment. German's always had new fangled equipment that was superior but didn't tend to be reliable or well supported. US soldiers could have benefited from more experimental equipment but the guys in charge figured we can win with what we have, just cost more lives. Also kind of describes the Russian philosophy.

[@ddpeak1]

Nivola 1953 Hey Nivola that’s interesting. funny how nobody has commented on your dad however it must have been awful for him to be captured and sent to a slave labour factory to do a Jobb he enjoyed glad he survived, take care, keep safe as we say these days and thank you for sharing.

[@RockinRobbins13]

_"FW-190 vs P-51 -- Which was better?"_ *Yes*

[@randomsnow6510]

Angered spitfire mk9 noises.

[@CaptainKapitan]

_sad Swordfish noises_

[@spawnof200]

@@randomsnow6510 pls, spitfire mk 21.

[@RockinRobbins13]

@keith moore And the Spit 9,and the P-47, and the Mosquito, and the ME-262, and the P-38, and the.....

[@dogsbd]

@@RockinRobbins13 I think you fail to understand the meaning of the word "best".

[@chestermcdaniel106]

My dad flew a p51d late in the war. The war was all but over, and he was headed back to base when 5 folkewolf 190s got after him as he would say. He said i could have outran them with the Merlin. But then said..."I didn come here to run away" he got all 5 and became an ace in day. Miss you dad. McDaniel.

[@ML-ev3ks]

nice fairy tale

[@jimanderson2518]

Sweeet....that's got to be documented some where . My dad flew lancaster's & Halifaxs he survived the war mind you he wrote off more then one aircraft....shot down two ju88 s his crew did but Cancer got him in the end .....unfortunately miss him too Cheers

[@vickihunt3598]

Your living in Disneyland, 5, 190,s yeah fairyland , ha ha ha !,!!!

[@Robert-yk8tx]

Name, date, and squadron. We are going to look this one up...

[@hb9145]

LMAO

[@hereLiesThisTroper]

I'm glad to see Lord Varys alive and well and now talking about planes instead of getting burned by a dragon.

[@KapitanPisoar1]

The best comment so far! :D

[@lino222]

muahahahaha

[@theshadowsovereign8914]

When you don't have any balls to play with... you have History... just like Lord Varys' Balls.

[@5crassrocker]

I was looking for this comment lol

[@RidinDirtyRollinBurnouts]

Time to grab some popcorn and watch the experts in the comments section weigh in.

[@sonnyburnett8725]

They never disappoint, all while having no background or practicle experience.

[@suffern63]

And then shake your head with how quickly insults are thrown.

[@bandit5747]

It won't be as bad. Just be glad these aren't tanks.

[@OttoVeblin]

All I know is that Tyson in his prime would beat any other airplane.

[@sid2112]

KZbin comment sections are like a Springer episode.

[@ziggy2shus624]

The lead designer of the P-51 was a German, Edgar Schmued, who had previously worked for Messerschmitt. The biggest problem for the German fighters was lack of oil. When the Soviets over ran the Romanian oil fields in August 1944, the Germans lost most of their oil supply. I talked to an B-17 ball turret (belly) gunner, that flew over Germany from January 1945 to the end of the war. He stated that he saw hundreds of German aircraft sitting on the ground, but never saw a single German plane in the air. Kurt Tank, designer of the FW-190, wanted to build a high altitude version of the 190 in 1941, but the German air command said no. All the fighting on the eastern front was at low altitudes, so the German high command could see no need for a high altitude fighter. Kurt Tank saw the US designing and testing turbocharged high altitude bombers and he wanted a fighter that could oppose them. Tank could also see that Roosevelt was determined to get into the european war one way or another, so they would need a big high altitude fighter.

[@JohnSmith-qv6hp]

The quest for high speed high altitude was a natural progression for every airfoce ergo the jet was seen as the ultimate solution piston were penultimate square peg in round hole

[@Dimension640]

Probably at that time of the war (Jan '45 and after) Germany lacked pilots too, besides oil

[@ziggy2shus624]

@@Dimension640 They also had no oil to be used to train the new pilots. When Hitler invaded Russia in 1941, he invaded with over 500,000 HORSES, because of Germany's lack of oil. The two countries that won WW2, Russia and the US, both had large indigenous supplies of oil.

[@vickihunt3598]

@@ziggy2shus624 typical yank you won the war what bullshit !!!

[@justaguy6100]

My father flew the P-51 all the way to the E version. He was later assigned to the first jet fighter group formed. It was an excellent aircraft and he asserted he could loop any German aircraft he encountered. I'm just glad he made it home.

[@23GreyFox]

I'm sure he would have, vs a 17y boy without training. Somewhere on youtube is a interview with a P-51 pilot, he had a fight against a old BF-109 G6 and he couldn't beat it. Lucky for him he could flee and fight another day. After the war he learned why he couldn't win, his enemy had over 200 victories. Even a (on paper) better plane doesn't mean victory. (Sorry for my bad english)

[@jeffk464]

@@23GreyFox I think you had to get to the 109 K-4 before you could say it was a match for the mustang.

[@barryrammer7906]

Your dad is a great American. The Germans didn't have a chance against men like your dad. Put the bully boys in thier place. P-51 kill ratio speaks for itself. They sliced up the Germans.

[@Diemerstein]

@@jeffk464 The K-4 was superior the P-51 in almost every category, what prevented many P51 from being shot down was that by that time, many of the K-4 pilots were kids and not experienced pilots.

[@ajalvarez3111]

@@Diemerstein Well, since those German fighters couldn’t fly themselves…

[@rare_kumiko]

Notably, P-47s had the range to escort bombers to most of Germany with drop tanks, but the USAAF leadership, dominated by the Bomber Mafia, did not want to develop the droptanks for escorts until it was too late (late 43, after the Schweinfurt raids). As a matter of fact, P-51s did not outnumber P-47s in theater until June 1944, by then the Luftwaffe was largely neutralised. Also: "If the Fw-190D had been available at the beginning of the war things like the Battle of Britain could have been very different" Yea no sh*t and if the RAF had had Hawker Tempests in 1939 the war would have also been different.

[@kevinbias664]

This channel is never a waste of time. Always something interesting to find!

[@charlottexue8023]

*cough cough* nord vpn

[@SubvertTheState]

For some reason, the way you present the sponsor is more professional and relaxed than other creators. Their witty transitions and almost desperate upselling drive me nuts haha.

[@mauroleira9945]

Very good video. Congratulations. No bias, no preferences, just right to the spot.

[@davidvaughn7752]

Fantastic presentation. I am fairly astute when it concerns 1940's aviation technology, but didn't fully appreciate the importance of high-octane fuel in theatre and the disparities therein! Thanks for that and your other brilliant insights as well!

[@ehfoiwehfowjedioheoih4829]

10:19 lol

[@truenoae8689]

The available fuel quality available to the Japanese vs the USA also made a massive difference in the Pacific theatre, because the US had disrupted Japan's supply routes from southeast Asia. Aircraft like the Ki-84 were thought to be good but not better than the Hellcats and Corsairs. However after the war the USA was doing trials with them using their own high octane fuel, and they showed incredibly higher levels of performance

[@davidvaughn7752]

@@truenoae8689 Interesting. Thanks!

[@truenoae8689]

@@davidvaughn7752 no problem I just realized you said that 3 years ago hahah

[@mg7685]

Isn't a fair comparison. On paper alone: the FW-190D is armed with cannons to take down bombers whereas the P-51hH is armed with MGs to take down fighters.

[@KapitanPisoar1]

FW190 Dora series are the best and most beautiful WW2 planes in my books. EDIT: With Ta-152 being the most advanced piston aircraft of the war, but barely made it into service, so I would not include it.

[@randomuser5443]

Do 335, need I say more?

[@KapitanPisoar1]

@@randomuser5443 Say Pfeil. But if we talk about "prototypes' then Ta152 was the best piston aircraft ever build

[@randomuser5443]

Ep!dEm Fair

[@jesuschristhomeslice9492]

Ep!dEm The P47 M was the fastest piston fighter of WW2, had a top speed of 480mph

[@martijn9568]

Cough, P-51 H Mustang, cough

[@KapitanPisoar1]

I only hope, that when the Extraterrestrial beings reveal themselves to us. They will provide us with the HD footage of all those great dogfights of WW2 :)

[@kwichzwellbreck3567]

HD??? 3D with all sourround sound and you can watch from outside or inside the cockpits ^^

[@leons.kennedy6710]

Lol

[@olliefoxx7165]

Can you imagine the WW1 fighters dog fighting and going after armed Zeppelins? Howard Hughes movie "Hells Angels" had some crazy scenes using veterans flying fighters from the era. Amazing stuff!

[@wdavis6814]

Lmao

[@bodenplatte1360]

Bro imagine watching the Battle of Britain, Marianas Turkey Shoot, or Operation Bodenplatte in real time. Shit would be crazy.

[@gar4132]

The Mk 9 Spitfire was introduced in 42 and was more than a match for the FW190.. it actually came out the same time as the P51B

[@CorePathway]

Better plane but much shorter range

[@stellartutoring2544]

Not really, no. It was no more than a match

[@drstrangelove4998]

Well it depends which mark of FW190 you are comparing it with Gary 😉

[@Jeffei-qs7kp]

How did the Spitfire ever contend with its own range limitations? Any Mk regardless of the amount of they jammed into it. Beautiful aircraft.

[@keithbrown2045]

Actually, from what I read about the FW-190 several decades ago, the designer was only allowed to use a Radial engine from the outset. He was told that he could not design a new plane using an Inline engine as production of those were already earmarked for existing aircraft designs. Simply put, there were no Inline engines available for a new airplane.

[@Austrian-Painter-88]

It’s literally amazing that the Germans held on for as long as they did. When you consider the lack of logistical support, raw materials and man power on their side compared to the enormous flood of the aforementioned things on the Western and Soviet side. It’s actually remarkable how long they held out for. I personally believe the “unconditional surrender” requirements along with the scars from the terms of the Versailles treaty after surrendering in WW1 were significant factors in not only Hitlers psyche, but the entire German people regarding their sheer refusal to surrender. People forget that Germany was not a nation that had been treated well at all in the 1920s/1930s. Think of it as a scaled up version of an abused person, of course it’s not going to want to go back to its abusers regardless of what it costs. Not to mention that Germans saw Britain and France conquering empires all around the globe and simply could not understand why the above mentioned had such a problem with their desires to expand eastwards, given their population size/density. The whole situation is much more shades of grey than black and white “good guys” vs “bad guys.”

[@karlwagner932]

What a honest declaration !! Somehow History should be more honest ....but it was written from the'' winners ''

[@SonsOfSevenless]

Ah yes being forced to reduce your army to 100,000 men after starting a war that resulted in the deaths of millions and brutalizing Belgium because uh... muh place in the sun lol... germans are the true victims in the 20th century :(

[@ffmdotcom]

@@SonsOfSevenless did they start the war tho? You may want to read that up... Germany even rejected the idea of Austria declaring war against Serbia in 1914 foreseeing a possible World War as a result...

[@SonsOfSevenless]

@@ffmdotcom "did they start the war tho" yes. and they dragged it on for 4 years, resulting in the deaths of 40 million people. they also signed a peace deal with the russians at brest-litovsk that made the treaty of versailles look like a slap on the wrist. the austro-hungarians and germans were the aggressors in the first world war, that much is evident.

[@ffmdotcom]

@@SonsOfSevenless your initial comment was about Germany starting the war which still is incorrect - you don't have to listen to me just read it up or just ignore the facts and ignore the details... Ignorance is bliss I guess but I don't really know how any other point you mention will change that fact that you are wrong

[@ightsixtwo1102]

You... you just had to step into this hornets nest. Enjoy the war in the comments

[@humanbeing9079]

Scrolled through 20 comments, pretty levelheaded and calm so far. Reflects the type of people who follows this channel and how comprehensive the video is.(just watch any of those dumbed down, lowest common denominator infographic channels) But when this gets more external viewers, the situation will probably change.

[@Easy-Eight]

Perhaps the FW-190 was better. Rather pointless given they were facing 3 to 1 over the Soviet Union and 4 to 1 in '43 over Africa & Italy. The FW-190 faced more Soviet P-39s in combat than P-51 and the Soviets generally shot down one German aircraft of all types for every P-39 lost. For the Soviets that was a very fair exchange, a fascist for a hero.

[@jonathanmatthews4774]

Maybe he's bored and wants some entertainment in the comments suggestions?

[@LEGOBubuS]

Btw, none of them better than the other. Both are true masterpiece of engineering.

[@ightsixtwo1102]

@@Easy-Eight you just had to didn´t you

[@braindeadbogan9272]

Two of my favorite planes, in a video narrated by one of my favorite youtubers. And in the background one of my favorite songs by Beethoven. So much win!

[@MAGGOT_VOMIT]

_Ya talkin' about Richard Wagner's "Ride of the Valkyries"?_ _Yep I heard that song play when I was hungover and worried if I slept with the Fat Bish...............then the phone rings........!!!!!!........0.o_

[@Hypersonicmind]

The Bf109K4 had a top speed of 452mph and had the fastest climb rate of any prop driven fighter in WW2 due largely to light weight and 2,000hp (water methanol/ nitrous oxide boosted). To claim the 109 as inferior is ignorant.

[@annirish784]

Sure but like the most common were the g version not the k.

[@Hypersonicmind]

@@annirish784 To me it is about the evolution of fighters- The last variant of the P51 to see action in Germany was the D. The last variant of the 109 was the K (August 1944) They should be compared, as they are contemporaries. Unfortunately for the Luftwaffe, in late 44 pilot quality was eroded significantly, and often outnumbered 10:1 against Allied bomber streams. FYI the 109G6 had 2x20mm cannons underwing, and was a bomber killer- NOT a fighter v fighter. This was one of the most common variants. Interesting that P51 fans seem to be the most arrogant and sure of themselves while they are often the most underinformed...no offense (Personally, i love the P51D & N)

[@yorkyleefairbank]

If i could pick one ot would definitely be the FW190 D even though the p51 had laminar flow wings so cold fly longer and was a beautiful fighter the FW in my opinion was the best looking and one of if not the best fighter of ww2

[@darrylarrington8323]

While aircraft factory workers in the US were "safe from the fear of bombing by the enemy", they were still proficient in aircraft assembly in blackout conditions. My aunt was a "Rosie the Riveter" at the Bechtel-McCone-Parsons plant in Birmingham Alabama back during WWII, where they assembled B-29 bombers. She was required to be able to assemble her section of the airplane while blindfolded, she said this was done to ensure that if the US was ever bombed, the workers could continue while the lights were out to reduce the chance of factories being hit.

[@RandomDudeOne]

They always mention how early in the war the P-47's escorting the bombers didn't have the range to go all the way to the targets like it was some deficiency with the plane. They never mention that the reason P-47's were being used in this role was because it had a greater range than any other fighter available at the time.

[@testaccount4191]

also the Germans use to jump the p47s early so they dropped their drop fuel tanks over france.

[@nightshade7745]

The P-47 replaced the longer-range P-38 in that role. There has to be a reason. The P-38 was either inferior in performance to the German interceptors or less serviceable than P-47, probably both.

[@CallanElliott]

The P-47 is a great plane but a poor bomber escort.

[@nightshade7745]

CalzerDan watch Greg’s new video. P-47 had the range required to escort B-17s, it is the USAAF bureaucracy which banned the use of droptanks that made the P-47 a short-range airplane. They made the story that P-47 couldn’t escort the bombers to Berlin while the P-51 could, by taking the figures of the longest-range variant of P-51 and comparing to the shortest-range variant of P-47.

[@danielmocsny5066]

The crazy thing is that the USA could have had the Grumman F7F or some similar twin-engined P&W R-2800-powered fighter as early in the war as the P-47 reached service, with plenty of range, speed, firepower, climb rate, etc. to escort the bombers to Berlin. They could have even left the bombers at home and just sent thousands of fighter-bombers to do the bombing and fight their way back home. The fighters always had much lower loss rates than the B-17s, so for the cost of all the B-17s and crews lost, they might have gotten almost the same results with the same resources put into making a larger number of more survivable fighter bombers. The Brits of course had the Mosquito in a similar role of the fast bomber that was hard to shoot down, but with a modest bomb load. But anyway, it seems Grumman was only thinking about developing the F7F as a carrier-based fighter for the Pacific theater, which it wasn't well-suited for as it couldn't land safely on a carrier with only one engine running. I can't understand why the USA didn't develope a high-peformance twin engined fighter for the European theater (the P-38 not being high-performance enough). They could have even tried building a twinned P-47 like the F-82 Twin Mustang. It wouldn't have been maneuverable enough to dogfight with smaller fighters, but it could have kept the German fighters off the bombers, especially the larger bomber-destroyers that were easy for any escort fighter to shoot down.

[@nitehawk86]

That Moonlight Sonata takes me back to "Wings of the Luftwaffe" when the Discovery Channel used to be good. Channels like Curious Droid have fully supplanted any cable TV history and science programming.

[@warpartyattheoutpost4987]

Totally.

[@CallanElliott]

There is a rule from the 5 Truths of Special Forces: Humans Matter More Than Hardware The guy piloting an aircraft is more important than the aircraft itself.

[@sethjansson5652]

Exactly! In vehicular combat, it's not the men you're after, it's the machine. It's a big reason why the Germans and especially the Japanese lost air superiority immediately. They focused too much on performance rather than endurance. The best pilots would take advantage of performance but could hardly rely on the machine Itself. Like a sword without a shield.

[@geronimo5537]

you can build all the hardware in the world more than anyone else. but it is all useless unless someone can operate it and do so efficiently.

[@CallanElliott]

@@sethjansson5652 The Germans and Japanese also didn't do things like rotate their fighter aces back home to train new pilots, so overtime their quality pilots dwindled, while the Allies continually produced quality pilots because they institutionalized the knowledge these combat aces brought. Also, at least in the case of the Japanese, they produced hyper specialised aircraft. The Zero was good for one thing, low speed, low altitude dogfighting, and little else. Sure it was fantastically agile, but when your opponent dives from above on top of you at a much greater speed, you're toast.

[@CallanElliott]

@@geronimo5537 The two also scale a little. There's no point in wasting lots of resources on high quality equipment for poorly trained troops, just as there's no sense in wasting time training fantastic troops and giving them lackluster equipment.

[@VincentComet-l8e]

‘Even with the Allison V12…it was as fast and manoeuvrable as a Spitfire at low-level…’ I think you’ll find that the Spitfire, having a similar wing area but being about a ton lighter, was always more manoeuvrable…

[@pointlagrange4823]

I watched a documentary where this aging P-51 pilot was helped to sit in a Fokke-Wolfe 190. His comment: If I had known the visibility was this bad in here I would have been more aggressive

[@erichkaufmann5284]

Depends on the pilot, truly it does. Some P-51 pilots shot down FW-190’, some FW-190 pilots shot down P-51’s.

[@ISAFSoldier]

All down to skill, knowing yourself, your plane, your opponent's plane and a maybe even a measure of luck.

[@0000SYL]

yes, some pilots shot down over 20 p51 mustangs with fockewulf 190, If you faced guys like Egon Mayer, Josef Priller, Walter Oesau you were dead no matter what plane you were flying. On the other side, Hub Zemke and Robert S. Johnson were dominating the rookie fw-190 pilots

[@WALTERBROADDUS]

Exactly. The P-51 racked up kills late in the war vs. low talent pilots largely in both Pacific and Europe.

[@erichkaufmann5284]

sigma man some Luftwaffe pilots also shot down 20 spitfires with just a BF-109. A lot of Luftwaffe pilots had a lot of experience and saw combat more than any other nations airforce I would argue.

[@WALTERBROADDUS]

@@erichkaufmann5284 That is a small corpe of aces in a tired force by 1944 to 45.

[@davidca96]

The P-51 with the Merlin engine was a perfect match of US/UK technology. The US designed fuselage with a British engine was a perfect match.

[@wilburfinnigan2142]

Davidca NO production Mustang used a British engine !!!!! ALL Merlin engines used in production Mustangs were Made and re designed by PACKARD in the USA and this versions of the Merlin were ONLY used in the Mustang !!! ! FACTS of history less the lies, hype and Bullcrap !!!

[@davidca96]

@@wilburfinnigan2142 You do understand that the Packard Merlin is a licensed copy right? Its design is British, the US produced licensed versions of the BRITISH design, so its a British designed/US manufactured engine, thats not a lie thats exactly what they were.

[@starsailor49]

@@wilburfinnigan2142The British replaced the original engine in the Mustang with a Rolls Royce Merlin engine. The modification was so successful the Americans were allowed to build the BRITISH engine under licence in America. Packard supplied the engine which was a British designed engine. I suppose according to your logic the Spitfire had an American engine?

[@LeodiAstoriaXIII]

The Ta 152 is such a beautiful piece of machinery.

[@brandonstrife9738]

Its a cryin shame he didn't cover the fact that none of the new features worked it was underpowered and over half remianed grounded at all time due to engine fires and overheating.

[@HaganDave]

To me, it looks like an aircraft with anorexia.

[@hymanocohann2698]

Not a word I'd use, potent, mebbe.

[@thatoneguy7451]

I don't like the overly long fuselage compared to the earlier variants of the 190, but if it had better performance then that's fine.

[@ThatGingerGuy51]

Personally I believe the P-51D is the best fighter of the war, however the Fw 190 is a close second. The P-51 simply had a better top speed, better maneuverability, better high altitude performance, greater range, ext. then the Fw 190’s of the time. I do agree that if the Fw 190 Dora came sooner and in higher numbers, maybe the P-51 would have met it’s match, but the fact of the matter is the plane came to late, and with little to no experienced pilots. Even in the most advanced Fw 190, dogfighting with a veteran Mustang ace like Preddy or Wetmore was a death sentence for rookie flyers. So to sum up, as it stands I say the P-51D takes the crown for best single engine fighter of WW2, but I am completely awake to the fact that the Fw 190 Dora could have easily taken that title if it was produced earlier and with better pilots

[@vickihunt3598]

That is not the question, which was the better fighter plane by far the FW 190D was that plane they wasn't called the butcher bird for nothing !!!

[@ThatGingerGuy51]

@@vickihunt3598 Did you not read what I said? I literally said that the Fw 190 Dora was better then the P-51D, but the P-51D was better then every other version of the 190

[@stokerboiler]

The engineer looks at the planes and sees the Fw-190A, The P-47, and the F4U Corsair were very similar. 2,000 HP radial engines, an emphasis on ruggedness and serviceability, and enormous firepower. All three were very fast, although the wings imposed by carrier operations robbed the Corsair of 15-25 MPH. The P-47's turbocharger gave it altitude capabilities that even the jets had to struggle to match. With its smaller size, shorter wings and high roll rate (necessary for surviving against Spitfires) relegated the Fw-190A to short-range defense work. The P-47N was modified to escort B-29s and might have been the best of the bunch but the Mustang cost a third of what a Thunderbolt cost.

[@BKBorgerKing]

Great Birds. The Speed They Designed These Planes And Put Them To Use Back Then Was Amazing. 100 Days, That's Crazy To Think About Today!

[@davidrussell8689]

Probably because engineers were running the show back then ! Nowadays look what happens when bean counters and box tickers gain control . Ie Boeing 😂

[@jeffk464]

yup, we spend decades and then end up with problem childs like the f35. You look at what a masterpiece they came up with overnight with the mustang and it makes you scratch your head, we are clearly more advanced, but are we dumber? Clearly we don't have anyone like Kelly Johnson working for our aerospace companies anymore.

[@SparkRattle]

Hey CD, I have to admit this. You will always and forever be my favourite plane history channel. Thank you for giving me everything I know in the subject.

[@wade998]

I would have expected this from Mark Felton Productions.. Nice job!

[@normaowens918]

My heart skipped a beat after seeing the Dora near the end. I'd like 2 of each fighter please.

[@1joshjosh1]

You seriously come to this channel and compare it to another Channel, as if that channel is the pinnacle of everything. That kinda sucks.

[@1joshjosh1]

And in this episode with Dr Mark. The Allies secret plan to capture Hitler's dirty underwear.

[@1joshjosh1]

@Massimo K Bingo!

[@huntmatthewd]

My heart skipped a beat after seeing the Dora near the end. I'd like 2 of each fighter please.

[@daleburrell6273]

...THEY'D BE EXPENSIVE AS HELL TO MAINTAIN AND OPERATE-!!!

[@oggearhound2242]

Sorry, but I call bs on the fact that, Pilot Armin Faber landed in England "by mistake".. I find it very hard to believe that would have been possible just because he was, "..disorientated.." after a dogfight. He had to fly for a good while to get there.. The sun would have been the last resort guide to his direction even if his instruments were damaged.. and, if he was that befuddled, how the heck was he able to land perfectly? AND, British Air Defenses would have either shot him down or tried to intercept him when he was spotted. And he SURELY would have been spotted. None of the "accidentally landed" on Enemy territory makes sense.

[@wape1]

On the difference between the Bf 109 and Fw 190, I've always liked Günther Rall's view, likening the 109 to a rapier and the 190 (Anton) to a broadsword.

[@randomuser5443]

Look at the guns on them, two center line 13mm and a 20mm, or 2 several 20mms

[@wape1]

@@randomuser5443 Exactly. With the Bf 109 it was all or nothing, which was great for the Experten, but not so much for the average, less-trained pilot. You can see that same effect with the Mustang's and Thunderbolt's wing-mounted .50 cals. American pilots didn't have to fly until they either racked up an absurd level of kills or quite literally burned out.

[@jebise1126]

i think the designer made comparison between race horse and work horse

[@jeffk464]

The 190 was clearly the better engineered plane the only thing is the 109 had the superior engine. Its amazing what Tank was able to achieve being stuck with the inferior engine if he was given the benz engine from the start he would have come up with the best piston fighter of WW2. The Italians had no such restrictions though and came up with the excellent Macchi C.205

[@bodenplatte1360]

Or a race horse and a cavalry/war horse

[@RCAvhstape]

Merlin-equipped Mustangs had a ceiling of 42k ft? Wow, some jets even struggle up there.

[@nightshade7745]

I believe that is not the service ceiling but the absolute ceiling. It also depends on the engine variant. The Merlin 63 (V-1650-3) engine has a supercharger tuned for higher altitudes than that of the Merlin 66 (V-1650-7); the two engines are otherwise identical, and are interchangeable in the field. The V-1650-7 Mustang had substantially better low-altitude performance and was preferred over the -3 at the latest starting from mid to late 1944. However, the 42k ft ceiling is likely achieved with the -3 engine. The -7 engine was re-rated for running 75 inHg of boost in the USAAF and +25lbs boost (80.1 inHg) in the RAF after the availability of the 44-1 fuel, which enables it to outrun any production German piston-engine fighter at low altitude. There are relative few mentions of the -3 engine being rated for 75” boost, and no mentions at all of it being rated for 80”. Re-rating for a higher boost would not have improved performance above the critical altitude (if I recall is 28k ft) anyways. In my opinion, the 42k ft ceiling is more likely to be the absolute ceiling rather than the service ceiling, owing to it being much higher than the critical altitude.

[@PenzancePete]

@@nightshade7745 Just in case anyone is wondering. The absolute ceiling is just that, the aircraft can't and won't go any higher. The service ceiling for a piston powered aircraft is the height at which the rate of climb is less than 100 feet per minute.

[@tomsmith3045]

@@PenzancePete ....and they had to make it 100 ft/min, because if it were 300, some planes would have a service ceiling of 0!

[@wilburfinnigan2142]

@@nightshade7745 Most service ceiling I have read for the Merlin Mustang was the 42,000FTB !!!

[@nightshade7745]

@@wilburfinnigan2142 I highly doubt that, since all speed graphs of the P-51D I can find with the USAAF testing at Wright Field (Dayton, Ohio) don’t even have data up that high, and rate of climb all seem to have dropped below zero way before that

[@skogga]

"Green Hearts: First in Combat with the Dora 9" by Axel Urbanke is an outstanding work on the people who flew the plane in combat and IMO a must-read for FW fans. Let the mindset of the old hands and the new pilots into the eternal question posed in this video.

[@richardgewin2282]

I was Naval Air Technical Training instructor in electronics on the Douglas SBD Dive Bomber,at Ward Island,Corpus Christi,Texas.I believe the SBD was last used in combat ,at the Battle of Midway.After Midway ,remaining SBD ,S were sent to Naval training bases.Most pilots loved the plane because of the armament. They often said the SBD stood for” SLOW BUT DEADLY “. With SBD top speed of 235 knots,it’s main adversary,the Japanese “Zero” , could run circles around it. With superior armament the SBD pilots were more likely to make it back home.

[@leadsolo2751]

In 1991, Armin Faber visited the Shoreham Aircraft Museum, where only the armoured-glass windscreen of his FW 190, together with part of its control panel were displayed (the rest of the aircraft had been scrapped after 18 Sept 1943, post RAF evaluation) and presented it with his officer's dagger and pilot's badge.

[@Easy-Eight]

The FW-190 was perhaps a better aircraft but as Lenin said, "Количество приобретает качество само по себе." Translation, "Quantity takes on a quality all it's own."

[@CaveJohnsonAperture]

Even early in the war the metallurgical shortages and oil shortages were limiting German aircraft potential, and was part of the reason they tried to shoot for jets early, which wile only 25 hour lifespans were way cheaper and didn't require exotic metals like high performance piston engines. In addition the high-octane fuels required were just unavailable to the Axis. So really by no fault of its own, the later 190D's etc would never match up to their equivilent allied "baby super props"

[@profesercreeper]

Weren’t there more fw-190s made than the p-51?

[@zariumsheridan3488]

@@CaveJohnsonAperture Jet turbine blades require even more exotic rare earth metals.

[@imapopo2924]

@@profesercreeper There were about 5,000 more FW-190s than P-51s, but more P-51s were made in a shorter amount of time and many of those 190s wouldve been shot down or destroyed by then, meaning they would be spread thinner than the masses of P-51s.

[@CaveJohnsonAperture]

@@zariumsheridan3488 In turbine construction and heat sensitive materials yes, but easier to apply overall, simpler to build and much less complex then the later pistons. Again, was only part of the endemic shortages of fuel and material the Nazi economy constantly inflicted upon itself since the 30s

[@simoc24]

Hard to find a good video on FW-190, thanks :)

[@arniewilliamson1767]

My uncle flew Spitfires and P51’s. He felt that the P51 like the Spitfire, was vulnerable to damage of the cooling as opposed to the FW 190 with it’s radial engine. He experienced that like the P47 would take a lot of battle damage.

[@shawntailor5485]

P 47 warhawk ?

[@tonyennis1787]

@@shawntailor5485 P-47 Thunderbolt. P-40 Warhawk

[@BillHalliwell]

G'day Paul, I have no idea how I missed this video of yours until today; especially as I'm a WW2 aircraft historian and enthusiast. Very interesting set of questions in your video. There were so many differing and constantly changing elements; both good and bad, about each aircraft; although it must be said the 'birth' and growth of the P-51 was a lot less stressful and fraught with danger than its Luftwaffe counterpart. I had already read about that Luftwaffe pilot who landed in western England by mistake, however, I didn't know they flew his aircraft so extensively in competition with the RAF's inventory of fighters. You picked up on a good point as a kind of 'what if' towards the end of your video. Here's one for you: IF Admiral Raider had got the 400+ U-boats he'd asked Hitler for in 1936 and IF the Luftwaffe had many more 190s plus a bigger pilot training scheme, as you said, the Battle of Britain could have been a devastating loss for the UK and, subsequently, the free world. Had Raider’s submarines managed to halt vital war supplies and then manpower coming to Britain; it's possible the world today would be a drastically different place. In the very least bad case, the US would have only had the main southern approach to Europe via Africa. Yes, I think they eventually would have come up with the A-Bomb but the 'on the ground' war in Europe leading into Germany would have added years to the conflict and placed a mammoth burden on the Soviets to keep fighting without the significant assistance it got from the US and the UK. Once again, I've got to say we all should be grateful that Hitler and his pack of in-fighting cronies were so generally incompetent. Thanks for the video, Paul. I'll try not to miss any more. Cheers, Bill H.

[@paulbantick8266]

"If the Luftwaffe had had the FW190D at the beginning of the war things may have been different" So! FW190Ds in the Battle of Britain? This would mean Spitfire XIVs in opposition, which would mean an even better result for the RAF.

[@youraveragescotsman7119]

Trying to escort your HE-111 in your 190 when, suddenly, your Plane combusts after a Spitfire squadron rolls up.

[@felipevelez1938]

A series of rare ww2 aircraft would be very interesting.

[@BobGolob]

Two fantastic fighters. Circumstances decided of the outcome of the battle, well said.

[@jeffreytam7684]

What’s interesting in the FW and the P-51 is how they were both relatively early in their design lifetimes. They could’ve evolved further, if not for the end of the war. Compared to the Spitfire and the 109, who were very much near the end of their evolutionary cycles by 1945, the P51 and FW190 had more of a future. This was exemplified by late war and experimental versions, like the TA152 and the P51H, whose performance ceilings were well in excess of what the older platforms could hope to achieve.

[@Dante_S550_Turbo]

War time technology is so freaking fascinating and at which the speed and growth it was going at is just insane.

[@JAFO.]

I'll have to vote for the P-51D if for no other reason than it was the best looking plane to ever have been built. It reminds me of a Corvette with wings.

[@azypk]

As a car guy I can only admire how the engineers were ingenious. Race/drag cars are equipped with the same technology nowadays. Quality content !

[@OrbvsTomarvm]

190 was an absolute thoroughbred.

[@doctorfairlight2792]

To say that if the FW 190 D was available at the beginning of the Battle of Britain things could have been very different would apply to the latest version of the Mustang/Spitfire/ Mosquito. At Waterloo if Napoleon's army had tanks and machine guns things would have been very different. The Luftwaffe were not good enough. They were beaten off by the RAF even though they had a massive airforce compared to England when the scrap started. Long before the Mustang came they gave up. No offence meant. I appreciate your effort in making this video. Kind regards.

[@keithd5181]

Great video. Some of the subtitles need to be changed from meters to metres though.

[@davieheartattack]

Love it when a new Droid comes out.

[@markarnold6257]

Learn something new everyday: the fuel quality. Great video, thanks for posting!

[@TheFunkhouser]

'IF' is a big word my man :)) I think the Germans did amazingly well to put up the Wulf against the 51d in those circumstance's. America could, like you said, build them unimpeded, while Germany had to build hers under constant bombardments. I think with all sides even, the Fw190D's would've been a very (EVEN) interesting match against the same fielded P51D's.

[@theluckyegg3613]

Edgar O. "Ed" Schmued (Schmüd), German "-American" aircraft designer (1899-1985) was famed for his design of the iconic North American P-51 Mustang and, later, the F-86 Sabre while at North American Aviation. He later worked on other aircraft designs as an aviation consultant.

[@ironcladranchandforge7292]

Unimpeded or not, Germany and Japan decided to start a war with an industrial giant with nearly unlimited resources. Not smart!!

[@stephengraham1153]

This was not the only FW-190 to be captured during the war. According to many sources, including notably Mark Felton, several FW-190 landed at RAF West Malling on the night of 16th/17th April 1943. One of the aircraft flown by Feldwebel Otto Berchtold was in "mint" condition when it landed - the other three that landed that night were written off because of damage caused by crashing etc.

[@damienmaynard8892]

Having spoken to some German aces who survived, they rated the P-47 as the most feared at altitude. They regarded the P-51 as troublesome mostly because of the numbers of them..... Kurt Tank himself proved that a Ta-152 could outrun and outclimb anything the Allies had - and at high altitude could out-turn them as well..... just a numbers game.... They called the P-38 "Fork-tailed Devil" for good reason!

[@X8X8X8X8X8X8X8X8X8X]

I appreciate the subtle nod to 'Wings of the Luftwaffe': Beethoven's moonshine sonata as a background track.

[@bobbybooshay8641]

*moonlight

[@birkensafttt]

Both were awesome machines and it’s difficult to say which one was better. If I had to chose one I’d go with Fw.190 though. The cockpit was simple, visibility was very good, it had an ammo counter and Kommandogerät made it very simple to fly

[@drstrangelove4998]

Agreed Emil.

[@jiveturkey9993]

Chuck Yeager said in his book that the FW 190 is every bit as good as the P51.

[@stingray427man]

Bill Barry Best pilots fly their planes to their advantages, that will never change.

[@ludovicbon5903]

FW-190 were greatly helped by their 20mm cannons with minengeschoss shells, way more deadly than the .50cal ammos .

[@wape1]

Anton or Dora?

[@Allwin-lz6yj]

wape1 both variations had the minegoschess ammo available

[@wape1]

@@Allwin-lz6yj Indeed, but I actually meant to ask the OP which variant Chuck Yeager was talking about in his book, since they are so radically different.

[@tomsmith3045]

This is a great video, in part because comparing these two planes is very fair. Both were developed at about the same time, and neither design team were not influenced by the other. The German designed wanted a fighter better than the 109 and Spitfire, more rugged in particular. The Americans wanted to design a plane better than the P-40. Each group made a major change. The 190 has the radial engine. The Mustang has a laminar flow wing. Efficiency bonus goes to the Mustang here. The 190, at least according to Wiki, was built to be a fighter first, airplane second. The Mustang, to me, was built to be an airplane first, fighter second, as evidenced by the way the guns are stuffed into the thin wings. As to the engines, on paper the radials are more reliable, as they're air cooled; and used against in combat, then might be. But the Merlin's were quite a bit more reliable, from what I've read and heard, than the American radials. So which one wins? The one with the Rolls Royce engine, of course. Tip of the hat to the British, who ordered the P-51 in the first place.

[@tomsmith3045]

@Bugler55 Thinking about it, I'd still have to pick the Mustang, not only is it better looking, it's longer range, and had the advantage that the gauges are in English. :)

[@HongTran-be8up]

@@tomsmith3045 better looking, bloody hell as my daughter says in vietnamese

[@HongTran-be8up]

Wouldn't it be about altitude...the P-51s superchargers are tuned for high altitude...the fokker could have no such luxury having to fight at all altitudes...no plane can do everything...see F35, can do everything êxcept fight

[@tomsmith3045]

@@HongTran-be8up P-51 started out working low level - the British used it as an attack plane with the Alison engine, and it could outrun anything at the time down low. Then it got the Merlin, with 2 stage supercharger, and that let it be an all altitude plane.

[@tomsmith3045]

@Bugler55 :) It kind of was!!

[@nickdanger3802]

19. It has been found that the Mustang (Mark I) is faster than the Me 109 and the Fw 190, and that 4000 to 8000 is a good altitude at which to catch the enemy. At sea level, the Mustang can run away from any enemy aircraft they have encountered to date. The pilots are schooled to run rather than fight because their main objective is the destruction of ground targets, not to fight enemy aircraft. They are instructed in the use of flaps in combat to reduce their turning radius (which with flaps is shorter than the Me 109 or Fw 190). At least one Fw 190 has been made to spin in through the use of a small amount of flap by the Mustang when engaged in a turning contest at low altitude; the Fw 190 tried to tighten his turn to keep the Mustang in his sights after the pilot had dropped his flaps slightly but spun out of the turn. They practice combat, evasion, flak evasion, low altitude flying continually. MUSTANG VARIANTS OF THE RAF AND RAAF erenow.net/ww/mustang-thoroughbred-stallion-of-the-air/8.php

[@boblewis8838]

Both great planes. My father fought from Normandy to the Bulge to Crossing the Rhine, and he always said what he wanted to see overhead were P-38s, cause if the P-38s were in the air, the German tanks would be in hiding.

[@minot.8931]

So would the British tanks... 😂

[@gwaters8067]

14:18 now that's some low ground strafe! Had to pull up to clear the target... 😂💪

[@PaddyPatrone]

If you really want to learn something on this subject and dive deep into it, go over to "Greg's Airplanes and Automobiles" channel. He really knows his stuff and he covered this topic.

[@Legitpenguins99]

I just came from there. He is almost too knowledgeable for me. I get bored and space out when he goes into too much detail

[@GeorgiaBoy1961]

The man often described as "America's greatest pilot," Brigadier General Charles E. "Chuck" Yeager, who flew the P-51 Mustang in WWII and became an ace in one - had the opportunity to fly both aircraft a great deal when he became chief maintenance officer at Wright-Patterson Army Air Force Base (later WPAFB). In his autobiography, though admitting a preference for the P-51, he rates both air-frames as excellent and more-or-less equivalent. Interestingly, however, virtually none of the "Experten" - Germany's highest-scoring fighter aces - preferred the FW-190. From Erich Hartmann (352 confirmed kills) on down, they generally preferred the Me-109 in one of its many variants. Individual preferences matter - even when you are an ace.

[@WanderfalkeAT]

Both had rather inauspicious Beginings? The FW-190A was flying Raids over England shooting Spitfires and bombing Stuff, untouched by the RAF. While the P-51A was so bad at higher Altitudes, they gave it to the English for Ground Attacking Duty in Africa.

[@GiovanniEsposito5]

There is not such thing as "150 octane" fuel. There was (and is) 100/150 GRADE av fuel, where the first one is the aviation lean octane number and the second one the aviation rich octane number. Anyway 100/150 is 100 octane, or 100 RON (research octane number) or maybe RON+MON/2 (that's the octane rating currently used for pump gas in the US). Anyway, not THAT much better than the, for sure, lesser grade fuel the german had at that time. Infact they had to use water injection in their DB6XX engine to avoid knocking...

[@kwahoo5746]

Just to extend your comment: German C-3 fuel was equivalent to 96/130 Grade Allied fuel, and from late-1942, 96/145 Grade fuel. Source: kurfurst webpage.

[@nightshade7745]

Adik The Allied never used any fuel of 96/145 grade. There is 100/150 grade, code named 44-1, which came into widespread use in mid to late 1944. After the introduction of the 44-1 fuel, the Allied airplane performances improved significantly at low and medium altitudes. The P-47 raised the manifold pressure limit from 54” to 70”. P-51: 67” to 75” or 80”. Spitfire: +18lbs to +25lbs. After the war there is another fuel the 115/145 grade fuel, code name AN-F-33, which was used in P-51H, F4U-5 and F8F.

[@lilletrille8998]

Nice video! I think you meant that the Fw190 became even more dangerous when armed with 30mm cannons as it already had 4 x 20mm MG151/20.....

[@Caseytify]

Which only had a 600 meter range, which with the 262's closing speed gave only 2 seconds to fire per pass.

[@TheMalMeninga]

My daughter loved your shirt in this one! "He looks so cool!"

[@burrelmuchenenduta5080]

Yeeer u have an idea were he go it . man

[@profo4544]

Dora's were the most capable fighters of ww2, when the US came across abandonded ones after the war, we rigged them up so that they could operate off our fuel. And they outperformed anything we had. Mustangs, spitfires, anything. And the Dora has nose mounted weapons, and the cannons that were on the wings were very close to the fuselage, that makes it easier to aim and get ur nose on things with ur guns. Tho the drawback to nose mounted weapons is that you have to have them fire at timings basically so you dont shoot ur propellor and youd get a 10 to 40% reduced rate of fire, the germans used an electrical system for firing the guns, so they only saw a 10% max loss rate of fire. The mustang can outturn it, atleast in dcs, but the dora should have a better roll rate. In IL2 you could use alot of aggressive rolling manuevers with it to get the enemy to overshoot you, im not sure if these tactics work in dcs. Also the dora should be about 50 faster at sea level, they should be about equal at 3000 and the mustang starts to take over above 6000, but this difference is only 50 kph .The mustang will outdive it, but not by a huge amount. And the dora should start to catch up once u hit sea level. The dora is a pure BnZ aircraft u need to master to learn, once u learn all its tricks and whats its capable of its lethal.

[@theluckyegg3613]

(Schmüd), German-American aircraft designer (1899-1985) was famed for his design of the iconic North American P-51 Mustang and, later, the F-86 Sabre while at North American Aviation. He later worked on other aircraft designs as an aviation consultant.

[@mosindesire]

By far my favorite time period for airplanes.

[@straymusic]

Oh my God please more WW2 aircraft videos. Please! Such an awe inspiring period of military aircraft

[@mygaffer]

The tail of these two planes? Tail? Get it? I'll see myself out.

[@bryantcurtis2665]

User You’re a towel

[@RalphPhilbrook]

Good Humor Award.

[@seavixen125]

@@bryantcurtis2665 No, you're a towel

[@bryantcurtis2665]

@@seavixen125 I need tree fiddy

[@Ba11leFieldAce]

As a car guy, can I just say thank you for explaining how octane works. It drives me crazy when people think that running expensive high octane fuel in a normal engine does anything other than waste money.

[@rezyl102]

Higher octane fuels retard (or delay) the time of combustion, allowing more boost to be built without causing detonation, which is a spontaneous combustion in the cylinder after the spark plug has fired. Higher octane fuels are not necessarily better. They are just different....but also more expensive. I have a 1991 Nissan 300ZX Twin Turbo that has been modified to make 500bhp at 18lbs boost on 93 octane, but If I run 106 octane "race" gas, I can push the boost to 23lbs and make 600bhp.

[@duanesamuelson2256]

@@rezyl102 or you can really run some boast if you use e-85. Of course then you have to add ethanol sensor and remap the computer for ethanol . The cool thing is you can badge the car as being a " green flex fuel vehicle " and shut down the environmental crowd that your burning a renewable energy source 😉

[@scottdewey3544]

This was very good. One irony in the whole story (if I'm correct about this, and apologies in advance if not)--the radial engine used by the FW-190 was originally licensed from the United States and was similar to the engines used by U.S. heavy bombers and naval fighters. [If I remember right, a Pratt-Whitney design. Both powerful and very reliable. In other words, the pre-war, neutral United States effectively taught Nazi Germany how to make a really top-notch radial engine that couldn't have its coolant lines shot out the way Me-109s, Spitfires, and Mustangs could. Those engines are what brought back the majority of B-17 and B-24 crews after often almost hopeless missions deep over German territory without sufficient or any fighter escort during 1942-1943.] Although this of course never happened, it would have been sort of interesting to see how the radial-engined F4U Corsair of the Pacific Theater, which came pretty close to the P-51D in various aspects of performance (though I've admittedly not checked on crucial high-altitude performance), would have stacked up against the FW-190. [And even to say that, as a counterfactual fantasy, is to ignore the valid points you make that worked in favor of the Allies: P-51Ds and F4Us were being produced far away in factories safe from bombing and materials or labor shortages, while the FW-190 was being produced in a zone that was increasingly subject to intensive bombing, materials shortages, fuel shortages, shortages of pilots, shortages of pilot training, etc., etc., etc. Even had the most advanced types of the FW-190 design been truly "wonder weapons," like the Me-262, it still wouldn't have been enough to make up for the larger numbers of nearly equal planes and pilots that both the Western Allies and the Soviets could throw at Nazi Germany as its resource pool and manpower pool rapidly drained from 1944 onward. [Which is, I suppose, for the good, given that notwithstanding all their military and engineering prowess, they were a WICKED, WICKED, WICKED regime that deserved the crushing defeat that followed.]

[@wadefarrar6313]

I have never heard that about the FW-190 engine having US ancestry but it does not surprise me since I have read that the tooling to produce the German and British V-12 in-lines was purchased from the US in the late 30s. And they both quickly left the existing US designs in the dust. With radial designs it seems the US managed to stay more than competitive.

[@JonatasAdoM]

Liking the use of classical music in the new videos.