I don't get it, the Focke Wulf 190 was superior in every

>>34717348
Bump

>>34717348
Well having your infastructure and production bombed, your airforce ran by a fatass moron, your leader having the strategic depth of a meth addict, and a military that had massive problems with modernization thanks to aforementioned issues didn't help.

>>34717348
it had a shit agility

btw spitfire was better than mustang due to its superior agility

>>34717583
Boom 'n' zoom > turn 'n' burn
>>34717348
USA never "made the transition". There was ALWAYS a mix of fighters.

The bureaucracy of the luftwaffe was a hot mess. There's a reason why Udet killed himself.

>>34717348
They also had the first fighter jet, but jerk off hitler used it as a bomber.

>>34718574
This was true for all of Nazi Germany.

109 airframe was uprgaded throughout the war even the last 190s were completely different than the A-series, I'd say they just needed as many fighters as possible and it was easier to just keep making 109s

>>34717583
lolol agility hasn't mattered in air combat since 1942

>>34718527
agility it's not turn rate, it's also roll, energy retention, acceleration etc, climb is very important too. bf-109 was better in both vertical and horizontal maneuvering than fw-190

>>34719267
shit /k/ says

File: jigglypuff-pokemon-0.18.jpg (8KB, 210x240px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 210x240px

i would say one using a radial engine and the other using an inline engine was a big factor already having the industry to produce these things and using it is easier than retooling whole factories to a new design that at the end of the day was only better on paper and not always in practical pourposes

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SSEEZ1hxKJI

>>34717348

Manufacturing capacity.

yet again, fw-190 was more an interceptor

>>34717583
while its turn rate wasn't that great, it has the fastest roll rate of any WWII fighter. This makes for a fighter that's very hard to get a handle on.

In a defensive situation causing an overshoot using displacement rolls and performing a high-side is a lot easier with a good roll rate. Split-S and scissors is more effective too.

Give me energy retention, guns, and roll rate over turning any day.

>>34720138
not like bf-109 was a great turner, it is mostly known for a good roll and climb, fw-190 didn't have a great climb, also turning is still important (even simply for pursuit) and it was terrible at it

also afaik it didn't have a good acceleration, as for energy i know it bled it fast if forced to a sustained turn, dunno about vertical energy retention

>>34719419
Turn 'n' burn is shorthand for all that shit you wrote, none of which mattered if you didn't have the speed to engage or disengage at your choice.

>>34717348
Germany couldn't afford to retire the 109's dipfuck. They were short of everything.

>>34720212
no it is not

also bf 109 had a comparable speed and due to a better climb could have more energy either in the form of altitude or speed (when you dive you acquire speed)

anyway you should consider that the pure bnz is possible either on an unsuspecting aircraft or you should have a superior climb to it otherwise your only choice is to disengage after it spoils your attack by changing its course

>>34720223
the only things that bf-109 from 1940 and from 1945 kept it's the name and the shape, everything else was completely different

>>34717348
>I don't get it, the Focke Wulf 190 was superior in every way to the Messerschmitt Bf 109
the early versions, yeah.
but by the time of the A-8, it was pretty shit.
the g-10 was way better

>>34717583
>btw spitfire was better than mustang due to its superior agility
Both American and German fighters were consistently absurdly overbuilt and heavy, to the detriment of their own maneuverability. But at least the Mustang had range going for it (and numbers, of course).
>>34718527
>Boom 'n' zoom > turn 'n' burn
Depends entirely on if you're in an offensive or defensive position.

>>34717348

The 109 was very well optimized for mass production, and went through numerous refinements to reduce the man hours for production.

I'll try and find some charts

>>34717348
iirc the focke wulf 190 was meant to be more reliable and durable than the bf109

File: sdfadsfas.png (148KB, 529x611px) Image search: [Google]

148KB, 529x611px

>>34721140

>>34721176
yeah production of the fw190 started in august 41
by the next year US strategic bombardment had already halved air production in the reich
a little multi-role airplane takes twice as long to build as a big medium armoed vehicle because everything has to be perfect. germany was already suffering armored shortages by then too

The only reason they even developed and adopted the 190 is because it used a different engine than the 109.
They were always meant to be produced side by side.

>>34721478
190's engine was a lot trickier to get right too
190: A beautiful balance
109: A pragmatic compromise

>>34720710
What about the D series with the high performing engines?

File: 1484803953404.jpg (308KB, 1080x1516px) Image search: [Google]

308KB, 1080x1516px

>>34721150
it was better armed too because it was meant as an interceptor of bombers, but bf-109 generally could fight other fighters better

>>34721478
you mean like air cooling thunderbolt vs water cooling mustang? it could be a reason too albeit i don't completely get it, i dunno why but air cooling was common for interceptors, possibly because air cooling engines were less prone to damage and an interceptor had to be tough to sustain the defensive gunners fire

File: he112.jpg (17KB, 606x240px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 606x240px

its like you guys dont even like planes that look cool..

>>34721525
Germany wanted more fighters, but all the factories that could make the 109's engine were already at full capacity. So they had a new fighter designed to use whatever else was available, the 190.

The D variants of the Fw190 used liquid cooled engines.

>>34721525
>i dunno why but air cooling was common for interceptors
Apart from 109 and 190 I don't see where.

>>34717348
>I don't get it, the Focke Wulf 190 was superior in every way to the Messerschmitt Bf 109 save for climb rate
so not in every way then ?

>and yet Germany never fully made the transition like America did to the P-51. What gives?
But anon, America did not make a full transition to the P-51. Several other types of fighters were massively produced until the end of the war.

Also, maybe the fuck wolf wasn't nazi enough.

>>34717348
Too many videogames. You can't just click a button to switch production.

Production lines are made to produce something. If you destroy a ME109 production line, a FW190 line won't magically appear.
Yes, you can make more FW90 lines, but that is no reason to destroy the existing 109 line. You can"t use most of that shit.

This is further complicated by the planes being made by separate companies. If all the US produces is Chrysler sedans, you can't just make a transition to produce Ford pickups just like that, because Chrysler has 99 factories and Ford has just 1.

>>34720212
FYI bnz and tnb and /v/ memes that have nothing to do with real air combat

>>34717583
Mustang would run out of fuel if you flew 20 miles from the airfield

>>34722357
tank and fighter discussions will forever be plagued by warthunderfags

>USA
>full transition to P-51

what