Jump to content

Bf 109 K-4 vs Fw 190 D-9


Krupi

Bf 109 K-4 vs Fw 190 D-9  

111 members have voted

  1. 1. Bf 109 K-4 vs Fw 190 D-9

    • Bf 109 K-4
      58
    • Fw 190 D-9
      53


Recommended Posts

Not sure that is the best number to throw out, how many kills did the 109 have in WWII? I thought I heard some crazy number like 30,000... but I have no source :) I am sure someone knowns or will look it up now though :)

 

True, but the 109 was in the war from the beginning. My only point was the P-51 got enough kills to show it was capable.

Buzz

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 106
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • ED Team
True, but the 109 was in the war from the beginning. My only point was the P-51 got enough kills to show it was capable.

 

Yeah, and I cant imagine anyone saying it wasnt, but you have to agree the Luftwaffe was on the way down when the 51D was having its way with them. Would have been interesting to see them go head to head when they were both in their prime.

64Sig.png
Forum RulesMy YouTube • My Discord - NineLine#0440• **How to Report a Bug**

1146563203_makefg(6).png.82dab0a01be3a361522f3fff75916ba4.png  80141746_makefg(1).png.6fa028f2fe35222644e87c786da1fabb.png  28661714_makefg(2).png.b3816386a8f83b0cceab6cb43ae2477e.png  389390805_makefg(3).png.bca83a238dd2aaf235ea3ce2873b55bc.png  216757889_makefg(4).png.35cb826069cdae5c1a164a94deaff377.png  1359338181_makefg(5).png.e6135dea01fa097e5d841ee5fb3c2dc5.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi gents,

here my 2 sence of gun DM/Hitpower of the different planes on air-targets

 

1. Bf109K-4 / (P-38, even when it is not there, but has guns in the nose )

2. Fw190D-9

3. Spitfire MKIX

4. P-51D

 

Personally I like the FW-190 weapons a bit better than the Bf109 ones for anti-fighter work. Yes the 30mm hits real hard .. but the rate of fire isn't great and the muzzle velocity is kinda low, so actually getting hits isn't that easy. Being nose mounted is good, but the 190's weapons are so close together that in practice there are no convergence issues there either. You also don't get a lot of ammo with the Mk108, and it's a bit "overkill" for a fighter. It's perfect for killing bombers though.

 

That wouldn't be historic. The P-51 has almost 5000 kills in WW2. It wasn't always because they had higher numbers in the fight. Sometimes it was the other way around.

 

I love the P-51 and I think it was an important part of the allied victory ... but mostly due to it's range, and numbers. Quantity has it's own quality. There's no doubt in my mind the most advanced plane of WWII was the Me-262, because it was simply a plane from a different era. And that makes sense, Germany was strapped for resources and pilots, it made sense for Germany to focus on quality ... the Allies weren't so they took the very sensible (and ultimately successful) approach of going for quantity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally I like the FW-190 weapons a bit better than the Bf109 ones for anti-fighter work. Yes the 30mm hits real hard .. but the rate of fire isn't great and the muzzle velocity is kinda low, so actually getting hits isn't that easy. Being nose mounted is good, but the 190's weapons are so close together that in practice there are no convergence issues there either. You also don't get a lot of ammo with the Mk108, and it's a bit "overkill" for a fighter. It's perfect for killing bombers though.

 

 

 

I love the P-51 and I think it was an important part of the allied victory ... but mostly due to it's range, and numbers. Quantity has it's own quality. There's no doubt in my mind the most advanced plane of WWII was the Me-262, because it was simply a plane from a different era. And that makes sense, Germany was strapped for resources and pilots, it made sense for Germany to focus on quality ... the Allies weren't so they took the very sensible (and ultimately successful) approach of going for quantity.

 

WTF is this quality vs quantity doing here? Bf109 is the most produced fighter of all time and cheap at that. Way cheaper than P51D.

 

Me262 was underdeveloped and pushed into service too early with massive engine problems.

 

P-51D is capable of 8h flights and is still able to maneuver with both 190 and 109 which both can't fly even half the time. Its also faster than both. Is it a way better fighter? No. But for the one big strategic advantage it has, there are lots of tactical ones too.

 

If I was to choose IRL, 190 over 109 any time due to better roll and dive with amazing armament.


Edited by Solty

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]In 21st century there is only war and ponies.

 

My experience: Jane's attack squadron, IL2 for couple of years, War Thunder and DCS.

My channel:

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCyAXX9rAX_Sqdc0IKJuv6dA

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does anyone know the top speed of the K4 at seal level and at altitude?

 

 

Our version, in DCS, has 1.8 ata boost max and 9-12159 propeller.

5026-26_DCStart_noMW_geschw.jpgme109k-glce2-13844.jpg


Edited by Solty

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]In 21st century there is only war and ponies.

 

My experience: Jane's attack squadron, IL2 for couple of years, War Thunder and DCS.

My channel:

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCyAXX9rAX_Sqdc0IKJuv6dA

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Me262 was underdeveloped and pushed into service too early with massive engine problems.

 

Actually not all all. The early/mid war - like 41/42 - JUMOs had significantly higher power output and better reliability than the serial production. The culprit was not that they were underdeveloped, but by 43/44 the rare metals needed could not be acquired in necessary amounts. So a bunch of sub par alloys were used in the turbine which caused massive problems. To alleviate these problems the engine output was decreased and a bunch of changes and new features introduced. That is btw the same reason the germans didnt bother with turbochargers, the materials withstanding the massive exhaust heat simply couldnt be acquired

 

The speed graphs you posted are btw for the 605DC/ASC with C3 config without MW50 at 1.8 ata and the comparison sheet is for the pre production model with 1800 PS engine. Not really meaningful to the 1850 PS 605DB + MW50 DCS model. In DCS the K-4 does 595-600 kph at deck and around 710 kph at altitude.

Cougar, CH and Saitek PnP hall sensor kits + shift registers: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=220916

 

Shapeways store for DIY flight simming equipment and repair: https://www.shapeways.com/shops/rel4y-diy-joystick-flight-simming

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure that is the best number to throw out, how many kills did the 109 have in WWII? I thought I heard some crazy number like 30,000... but I have no source :) I am sure someone knowns or will look it up now though :)

 

Well, IIRC JG 52 alone chalked up around 10,000 and afaik they only flew the 109, mainly on the eastern front. Given that, regardlese

Of the usual claims vs actual kills debate, 30k doesnt seem to be that hard to believe.

http://www.kurfurst.org - The Messerschmitt Bf 109 Performance Resource Site

 

Vezérünk a bátorság, Kísérőnk a szerencse!

-Motto of the RHAF 101st 'Puma' Home Air Defense Fighter Regiment

The Answer to the Ultimate Question of the K-4, the Universe, and Everything: Powerloading 550 HP / ton, 1593 having been made up to 31th March 1945, 314 K-4s were being operated in frontline service on 31 January 1945.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...