Was watching Dogfights on Nat Geo (yes im enjoying the channel at the moment) and it had the tuskugee airmen episode on.
It did a comparison between the P-51C and the FW-190 (Look like possibly an A-8)
Speed and manoeuvrability went to the mustang. Durability and Firepower went to the 190.
I always thought the 190 was more manoeuvrable?
I don’t know how ‘real’ this stuff is, but anyway
Regards Ninetalis.
I’m pretty sure the 190 could out-turn the Mustang, but the Mustang could perform some nasty maneuvers of its own. I also wonder if perhaps the scorecard was taking altitude into consideration? A lot of those battles occurred at high altitude in and around the bomb groups, and the 190A suffered that high up (big reason for the 190D and later the Ta 152).
Or maybe they were talking about the uparmored Rammjagers?
It would depend on the altitude for the 190. Their role rate was superior(“A” series, not long nose), as the German Pilots favorite defensive tactic was to split S and dive for the deck. The mustang could drop 10 degrees of flaps and out turn any German plane. Interesting comparison though…
While on the Mustang vs. 190D, still of interest:
http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/aviation/fw-190-dora-9-vs-p-51d-mustang-3151-23.html
Thanks for the responses guys. According to the show they did the comparison at the point when the 190 and mustang had dived for the deck. The 190 then dragged the stang through the flak cover of the airfield being bombed. So the dogfight occurred at low altitude. They interviewed the mustang pilot and he said “He made a fatal mistake when he turned right, i think he was trying to lose me in the smoke, but i happened to be in just the right position, and down he went”
This is the episode (It was history channel, not Nat Geo, sorry)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=XJmDY2V-Rhw
I have a question about History Channel, do you guys in the US have to pay extra fee to be able to watch the channel? because down here in Europe we have to…
Regards.
Sorry, I’ll take 4 x 20mm cannon any day over the 6 x .50 cals, just get close.
For us down in little ol NZ it comes as part of our basic sky package. which we have to pay for. ($49.95 a month for around 50 something channels)
Yeah, we pay about 55 Euros I think (thats about 88.0326), but that’s with internet and a free house phone line included, and we do have a lot more than 50 channels, but we don’t have History channel, except when you want to pay about 5 euros extra every month, but then you do get a total package, wich include an extra 10 channels
Regards.
My parents pay for the cable here 
but in the USA History Channel comes with it. Now if the Military channel would be too thatd be great! One thing I miss about my ex [:'(]
I think the FW-190 would win, depends on the pilots though.
I am going to hazard a guess that no FW-190 every destroyed a P-51C on the ground, but I could be wrong. And that plenty of C’s destroyed 190’s on the ground, but I could be wrong about that. And that more 190 pilots died than did C pilots.
Oh and that the factories that built 190’s didn’t look as good as the one’s that built C’s, in say late 1945.
But that’s just me.
So if Nowotny had to pick whether to fly a 190 or a 51, which would he choose?
We have “dish”…those channels (military, history, etc) don’t come with the “basic package”. We pay about $70 a month for the upgrade with those channels. So, we have many hundreds of channels (3/400), but maybe…MAYBE 15 are worth having.
I would say between these two, it would come down to the pilot.
As proven with any aircraft, it’s not the plane but the pilot. The 51 only flew during roughly the last year and a half, and the quality of pilot training of U.S. pilots by that time was so much more comprehensive than the Germans. The Germans had a lot of experience but most of the older pilots were pretty burned up having to fight for so many years.
Thanks for all the informative responses guys.
How many of you read the initial question?
I wasnt asking which was the better aircraft. I understand That american pilots at that point were better trained.
What i was asking is, in an out and out comparison test between these 2 aircraft. Which is more manoeuvrable?
I found an interesting book regarding this topic.
The B/C Mustang… If you’re talking typical “dog-fighting” turn-fights… The Pony had the edge in turn-radius and wouldn’t bleed airspeed in the vertical as fast as the FW…
Yepper…
Chuck Yeager said it best… “The pilot with the most experience is gonna whip your azz every time, no matter what he’s flying…”… (This was after Yeager whipped an RAF pilot flying an F-86 against him in a MiG-15, then they switched, and Yeager did it to him again…)
However, given we’re that we’re talking about the C (or B, they’re the same thing. Only measurable difference was where they were built, ie: Dallas, TX or Inglewood, CA), the B/C Pony had a tighter turn radius than the D/K had… There was also an issue with the early B/C Mustangs’ guns in high-g turns, but this was solved with powered feed-pawls…
First two things to remember is that “Speed is Life, and Altitude is Life Insurance”… “Zoom and Boom” attacks are always preferable… But when it comes down to a turn-fight, the Fw190 is out-classed, the way I read it… Like what was mentioned with dropping 10-deg of flaps in a fight, the Mustang could hang right on the edge of a stall ( and the pilot kicked in opposite rudder to keep the nose up), with little chance of departure, while the FW needed to widen the turn a bit to keep it from departing in a rather vicious snap-roll and little to no warning… Going into the vertical, the Mustang had it over the FW as well…
Dad flew both the B and D, and he always told me of the two, he preferred the B… Once he got a Malcolm Hood, that is… Rearward vis in Malcolm-equipped Mustang ws almost as good as the D’s bubble canopy, and the addition of two more guns and their ammo brought the weight up by almost 350 lbs and decreased the performance at low-speed/low-altitudes… But the Ds were what they got instead of new B/Cs, and since the Bs were clapped-out by that time anyway, they liked them too…
Bottom line was that, all things being equal, if a 190 got on your six, you had about half a heartbeat to make peace with your maker if you didn’t shake him… Those cannons and guns on the Butcherbird would eat you alive… Luckily, the Germans had way more in the way of Fw190s than they had in experienced pilots…
When an American pilot with 300-400 hours (The USAAF considered it tantemount to murder to send a pilot into combat with less than 250 hours) went up against a typical, late-war German Jagdflieger, who had about 10-15 hours, the result was pretty one-sided…
Nice run down Hans!