FW-190A vs Spitfire, Me-109G, P-47D in dogfights

[Gaston]

Quote, TheGrunch: "Originally Posted by Gaston
Therefore full power is NOT helpful, and he contrasts very clearly his method to that of fellow pilots: "I found that when fighter pilots got in a battle, they usually applied full power and then began to turn. In the same situation I used to decrease power, and with lower speed was able to turn equally well."

He was fighting P-51s HEWASFIGHTINGP-51SHEWASFIGHTINGP-51S!!
---------------------------------------------------------------------

No he wasn't: He had ONE doubtfull P-51 encounter that was likely with similar-looking (and maybe performing in sustained turns) P-40s...

Nearly ALL his encounters were with Soviet-built fighters, and that was certainly the intended context... Soviet types are NOT poor low-speed fighters... (Neither is the P-51, compared to the Me-109G, when the "trick" of downthrottling, coarse prop pitch and dropped flaps is used)


Quote, The Grunch: "How is sticking near corner speed ever going to be relevant in sustaining level turns? Who said that? That's because it's not the best sustained turn speed. Sticking near corner speed as an entry speed to a turning fight is useful because it's the best instantaneous turn speed, AND the best sustained turn speed is just a slightly more lengthy yank of the stick away"

--------------------------------------------------------------------

-How about reading what Karhila actually said? :

"I found that when fighter pilots got in a battle, they usually applied full power and then began to turn. In the same situation I used to decrease power, and with lower speed was able to turn equally well."

Decrease power as a preparation to ENTER the turn: Otherwise he would say he reduced the engine throttle DURING the turn, not waste speed BEFORE the turn even started... ("In the same situation" means: Also before the start of the turn)

Same with the FW-190A ace on "Aces High": Downthrottling took place before the merge even began....

In any case, getting back to stalwart math advocates (who think applying pathetically presumptive math formulas to real-world complexities has more validity than obvious reality-based conclusions), IF their warped view of WWII turn-fighting had any validity, then the necessity to UPTHROTTLE after downthrottling would be equally emphasized by those pilots involved...

This is because the "math presumptive supremacy" mantra is: Best sustained turn rate is only available at full power...

You would think then that UPTHROTTLING is equally important when the needed result of DOWNTHROTTLING has been achieved...

Well Karhila peeps not a word about UPTHROTTLING... Neither does the "Aces High" FW-190A Western ace... And finally the most obvious case of P-51 downthrottling I have found (if that one doesn't do it nothing will..): It mentions Downthrottling TWICE. Upthrottling ? A big fat zero...

http://www.spitfireperformance.com/m...an-24may44.jpg

So let's see all those numerous downthrottling accounts that are followed by life-saving UPTHROTTLING to INCREASE the turn rate...

If you want to get an idea of the likelyhood of THAT... Consider these sentences following several hard 360s on the deck...:

"Every time I got to the edge of the airdrome they opened up with light AA guns. Gradually I worked the Me-109 away from the field and commenced to turn inside of him as I decreased throttle settings"

That was the Second mention of downthrottling, first was:

"At first he began to turn inside me. Then he stopped cutting me off as I cut throttle, dropped 20 degrees of flaps and increased prop pitch"

Jeez, this thing is just crawling with mentions of throttling back UP, is it not?!?

He obviously felt throttling UP was an important factor to his success in sustained turns... He just conveys the info in this report by hiding the meaning BETWEEN THE LINES you know...

You guys are too much fun...

Gaston