Re: Korean Air War

["Love Shack" <Home@DanSources.com>]

Hey Diego..
Mucho gusto..
Regarding the Zero and Mig and Sabre and Warhawk.. YES..
The Mustang had generally better climb the the FW190 except the D model.
All the FW190 had excellent roll rates and high speed maneuvering
performance.

The Luftwaffe pilots were always upset at the manufactures because they
refused to make planes that could turn tight.  Much like the Japanese pilot
preferred. They seemed to stick with theolder 30's design rather then make a
better 40's plane.. Same problem that the Japanese had until 1944 when they
did build better faster AC.

The rool rate in the Corsair and Thunderbolt were close to the FW.  Only the
P38L and Warhawk had better roll rates at speed.

The US had heavier planes becayuse they needed to put the vast ammounts of
gas into the AC. That was the beauty of the Mustang was that it had a fast
econo cruise speed of 390mph at altitude.  Which was 100mph faster then
anyone else.  Kind hard to dive on plane going 390mph.  You almost have to
hit your mach number to catch it.

But the big blind spot on the Mustangs were from the bottom.. This is where
a great climbing plane like the Ki100 and later model Ki84s' were excellent
and frustrated American pilots in Japan.

Dan Fahey

----- Original Message -----
From: "Diego Zampini" <dzampini@hotmail.com>
To: <KOREAN-WAR-L@raven.cc.ku.edu>
Cc: <DanFahey@DanSources.com>
Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2002 2:43 PM
Subject: Re: Korean Air War


> Hi, Dan:
>
> >The F86 was a full ton heavier then the Mig with the same power.
>
> And such difference of weight allowed the MiG to accelarate faster in
> leveled flight. This ability was used by many Soviet (and Chinese pilots)
to
> disengage when they were jumped by Sabres.
>
> >It seems all the US planes were lacking in the performance
> >department during WW2. The Mustang could be outturned and
> >outclimbed by most of the Axis and Japanese planes.
>
> I am an expert in American WW2 warplanes, but it seems to me that the
P-51D
> Mustang could easily out-turn the German Bf 109s and Fw 190s (the last one
> was, however, a better match), despite I guess the Fw 190 climbed better
> than the Mustang. The P-47 Thunderbolt was the one who was easily
out-turned
> and out-climbed by both the Messerchmitt and the Focke Wulf. The only one
> thing that the Thunderbolt did better was to dive. Of course, the A6M Zero
> could out-turn the P-51, but the Zero out-turned every existing combat
> plane.
>
> >The F86 below 30k was said to be more maneuverable than
> >the Mig but when you have a plane diving on you it is hard
> >to get out of the way.  All of the exploits by the best pilots
> >always stipulated altitude advantage and using the sun.
>
> In that aspect (to begin a combat with altitude advantage and using the
sun)
> the Soviet MiG-15 pilots in 1951 used to take the best part, due to the
> higher ceiling of the MiG (51,000 feet vs 47,000 of the Sabre). The Soviet
> Ace Nikolai Sutyagin scored most of his Sabre kills with such tactic. His
> first F-86 on June 19 1951 was shot down that way. I only know an occasion
> where the MiGs score a kill while they were lower than the Sabres: on
> October 6 1951 Yevgeni Pepelyayev began a head-on pass against 2 F-86s
while
> he was at 8,000 meters (24,000 feet) and the Sabres at 9,000 meters
(27,000
> feet). Despite that, in such head-on pass was when he shot-up the F-86A
BuNo
> 49-1178. But since 1952 many of the poorly trained newcomer MiG drivers
stop
> using such tactic and lost the advantage.
>
> >Interestingly the early G-suit was the difference in WW2 also.
> >As speeds got up to 500mph and cranking in 6 to 9 Gs helped you
> >focus on a quick leading shot on the enemy before they could react.
>
> Certainly the lack of G-suits by the Communist air forces was an edge in
> favour of the US pilots, particularly since 1952 onwards. A veteran pilot
> could (at least partially) counterest the G-effects, but a rookie one
could
> not. Despite I think the reports about dozens of MiGs crashing into the
> ground after tight turns in May 1953 are mainly USAF propaganda and are
> inflated, I am sure that some of them really happened. In any case, the
lack
> of G-suit sharply limitated the flight envelope of the MiG, not because
the
> plane, but the pilot!
>
> >My comparison: The Mig vs Sabre is like the Warhawk vs Zero
>
> In your comparison, the MiG is the Zero and the Sabre is the Warhawk?
> Regards,
> Diego
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Descargue GRATUITAMENTE MSN Explorer en
> http://explorer.yupimsn.com/intl.asp.
>