The P-51 with it's Merlin Engine sounds like music. My Grandfather built Packard Merlin's. He earned the Wing's of War award for production. He spent over 10 years with the company. They built beautiful Automobiles, especially in the late 20's & early 30's. FDR was known to travel in one.
I sooooo wanted to be there for this! I live south of Seattle, and somehow forgot that the alaskan way viaduct/hwy 99 is closed this weekend. Got about 1/2 mile from the freeway when I hit the backup and remembered about the closer. So what is normally a 40 minute drive would have been 90 minute drive easily. Had I stayed on the road, i still would have missed it. Argh! That 190 has the coolest sound!
soaringtractor Wrong again there MR HISTORY SCHOLAR' 47 had highest air to air kills of any fighter in ww2 in the ETO' who flew them' wait for it ' ZEMKE'S WOLFPACK .
The 190 combined the sleek and elegance of inline engine fighters like the Mustang, Spitfire and 109, and the sturdiness associated with radial engine fighters like the Hellcat, Thunderbolt and Corsair. All planes here look beautiful in their own way. But I have more preference for radials actually, so the Jug and the Wurger for me.
OK, WWII was terrible... but these warbirds are absolutely fantastic... shrivers up and down my spine... radial engines sound like music to my ears! P-51 Mustang is the king! :)
Great video footage. Many thanks for uploading. When comparing the outside size of those 3 fighters, the Fw 190 seems to be relaively small, though having a radial engine. I could have a look at the data, but I get the impression, the 190 might be more comparable to the Mustang then to the Jug sizewise. Michael
Yes, the Fw 190 was indeed smaller than the other ones. I just looked up the lenghts of the three planes: Fw 190 A-5 exactly 9 meters, P 51 approximately 10 meters and P 47 approximately 11 meters. I assume that being shorter means an advantage in that the plane is harder to hit in a dogfight.
Dang, that's so frustrating! Be sure to make it up here for "Luftwaffe Day" on August 11, as that's when they'll fly both their Bf-109 and Fw-190 again.
There are many examples of the 190 around these days thanks to a replica firm re-building them with what I am lead to believe are Russian engines. But this is the only genuine example airworthy with its BMW-801 radial. This one was found in a forest in the Russian Federation and it retains it's authentic colour scheme as to when she was found.
Falkor The Luck Dragon The FlugWerk project created 21 new replicas powered by a Russian/Chinese engine that is more affordable than the original BMW. They were sold in a semi-kit form, so only a few have have been completed for flight so far by the buyers. A couple are being used as a template for D-9 restorations. There will be a couple more original Fw190A restorations completed within the next few years.
That would be nice FiveCentsPlease, Because not many German aircraft fly that are genuine, there are the few exceptions like the Bf-109E that is coming over here to England as well as the E-1, the 190A-5 in the video and I believe a G-10.
***** The NASM has been working on the sole surviving Ta-152 on and off for a long time, but I'm unsure if it is in the queue for full conservation for display yet. You'd have to disassemble the plane into structural parts to accurately measure it to build a replica, and the NASM would not allow that.
That Focke Wolfe 190 pilot must feel the odds are against him and although this was done in fun the P-47 and the P-51 keep him in their sights all the way through.
I just have to wonder what the pilots are thinking when they fly these warbirds like this. Does the thought of what they are doing, being behind another "enemy" aircraft, ever make them think for a moment or two about what the kids (and I do mean kids, teens even), did who flew these in WWII went through and see the target. I'd love to know. I can't imagine it not crossing one's mind. At least not mine.
That was beautiful. In my opinion The Mustang looks like a athlete. The P47 looks like it's on steroids and the FW-190 to me looked like it was made out of ice cream sticks covered with newspaper.
Yea, that will work ! In my estimate the Bf-109E you have was the best in the west in 1939, the Focke-Wulf 190 was considered by the RAF as the best in 1941, the P-47 tops in 1943/44 and finally the P-51 the best piston engine 'fighter'* of 1944/45. As a German-American I like all ! Never thought I would see them flying together like this! A tail-chase next time like they do at Chino? Modern Avgas must be like sweet nectar to the German engines. Any cooling issues with the 801?
Not my intension to slight the Spitfire (various marks), sorry. I tend to think of the Spitfire as a great pure interceptor or short ranged fighter (no center tank) Although not truly a long-ranged fighter I give the FW-190 extra credit for it's ground attack capabilities with the FW-190F/G. You recall how little time over target the Bf-109E had during the Battle of Britain and how Hurricanes and Spitfires prevailed? See how the tables were reversed for the Spitfire at the Dieppe 'raid'.
I know that swastika was common on Luftwaffe aircraft but couldn't we dispense with that bit of authenticity? After all, how many Mustangs and Thunderbolts are painted with D-Day markings that never saw these in their combat service?
You're comparing apples to oranges. The swastika wasn't just a marking for a single mission like the invasion stripes. It was part of the insignia all German military aircraft wore at the time. And also, these aircraft are wearing the markings they actually wore in combat.
theirs a few 2800s that fly around at my small town airport. glasgow montana. kick ass radial barn stormers! that jug had to floor it.... that fw-190 was pulling away and its prop was barley turning. lot of unused power here. p-51 is at idle..
That's not true at all. It is correct that at low altitude the Jug is the slowest of the 3, but not by much. It's not like it struggles to keep up with the Fw-190 and that Jug was absolutely not being pushed to it's limits. The P-51 wasn't at idle either. Look up Richard Grace's thoughts on flying the P-47 "Nellie B." He tells of a story where he was flying a TF-51 in formation with the P-47 during a show. On take off he couldn't keep up with the Thunderbolt and eventually had to ask the guy flying Nellie B to reduce throttle so he could stay with him. It's all situational. You seem to be forgetting of the pretty big power advantage that the Thunderbolt has over these two. That combined with it's bigger prop allows it to stay in competition at low altitude. Originally, back in WWII both the Fw-190 and the P-51 would be somewhere in the order of 10 mph faster than the Thunderbolt at low altitude. Which is not much considering their aerodynamic advantages. At high altitude, the P-47 and P-51 were pretty equal (depending on the model of each) and the Fw-190 fell behind.
It was much more rugged that the P-51 because of its air-cooled, radial engine which was much more resistant to damage than the P-51's inline, liquid-cooled Merlin. The FW also had that advantage over the P-51 and Bf-109, however, and with four 20-30 mm cannon ... found the P-47 far from impenetrable.
The Spitfire was always the best western allied fighter, available in any number, with regards to pure dog-fighting performance (the biggest factor in where to land on D-Day was is it in range of the Spitfire?). It was rather short-legged, however. The P-47 out-ranged the Spit' by a fair margin, although even it still couldn't escort bombers to their deepest targets in Germany.
That's a myth, the reason why the 8th wasn't escorted by Jugs, was due to the 8th themselves, cuz their "superior bomber doctrine" in the early stages of the war, they did manage to not allow the 47 for escord, the Jug did all the dirty job in the western ront, like the Hurricane in the Battle of the England. The Jug had the same range than the Mustang, was much better suited for high altitude long range escort missions, had much firepower, much armor protection, and great maneuvrability at high, but it was a much expensive plane. And, by the way, the Spitfire was just an interceptor, you shouldn't think about pure dogfighting performance, cuz that just vanishes in a 2v2 scenario, where even a P-47D-5 was faster than a Spitfire MkIXe, and had also almost the same roll rate or better at high speed, not going even about armor protection or firepower, in a drag&bag tactic, 2 Spit's are toasted against 2 Jug's, that's the true.
@@fortinero3361 I think you misunderstood Greg a little. While the Jug had much more range than it is often given credit for, it did not have the same range as the P-51. It's true that the P-47 could escort the bombers to ALMOST all German targets, but the P-51 always did have longer range, until the P-47N came out, which doesn't really count in this conversation. Also, the P-47 didn't really have more armor than any other WWII fighter. What it did have was more secondary protection (sometimes called secondary armor bit it's not really armor). It just had a lot of metal things an enemy round had to get through to hit the pilot. And, your thoughts on the 2v2 of the Spitfire vs the Thunderbolt is a little oversimplified. That is very situational and depends on the exact type of fight that occured between the two. If it was at low altitude, the Spitfires would most likely win. They were at least as fast down low, had better roll rates at lower speeds, had better maneuverability, more acceleration, and a better climb. The P-47 had a better peak roll rate, better dive performance (if it had room to dive), better zoom climb, and was more rugged. Both had good firepower. So while the P-47 certainly had some tricks up it's sleeve, it's a hard match going against the Spitfire down low. At high altitude, it's another toss-up. The P-47 would probably have the advantage up here, especially in pairs as in this case, but it's tough to call. Two Spitfires certainly aren't 'toast' if they meet two Thunderbolts, and I say that as an absolute die-hard fan of the P-47. I do think the P-47 was the best fighter of the war, but I have to admit that looking at that role from a purely fighter stance, (i.e. ignoring other fighter roles like fighter-bombing, ground support, etc), the Spitfire may take that title. Both great planes and I'm always willing to give the crown to the Thunderbolt, but that Spitfire is more than a worthy contender.
Is the P-47 really so loud, when compared to other aircrafts? On the film: Mustang is coming - bzzz..., Wurger is coming- bzzzzzzz..., P-47 is coming- HMMMWWW!!!!!!!!!! A freaking P&W R-2800 with 4m propeller. ]:}
@@lisawolak9942 this plane did not have 2,800 hp. Relatively few P-47s did, and they were very late war models. This is a P-47D bubble top, which originally would have either 2,300 or 2,600 (I believe 2,600) hp. I think all bubble-tops had at least 2,600 hp (some sources list it as 2,535, but I digress), but some of the earlier bubble-tops might have still had 2,300 hp.
+Jwild38 Unlikely that there ever will be a flying Ta-152. Only if an unknown wreck is discovered or dug out of a buried pile of aircraft scrap, or if someone builds a replica. There is only one complete example, along with a surviving engine package from another museum.
A P-40 was much more manueverable than a Spitfire. Too bad it lacked a supercharger because the Allison V1710 was one hell of an engine. Bad decision by US Army, doomed the P-40 to mediocrity.
Why did they put the over rated 51 with those two beautiful radial engined bad asses' no wonder the germans loved the 190 ' man she was a streamlined honey' that merlin sounded really lame next to those loud and proud radials on take off .
+Lisa Walz If the P-51 is over-rated how come every other fighter in the USAAF had substantially less victory claims ? The only plane close to Mustang's aerial victory claims is the F6F Hellcat used by the navy and marines. The USAAF fighters do not come close to the Mustang neither in air victory claims nor in ground claims. And the germans pilots were split between the 109 and the 190.
AMVM Wrong again' do some research' the 56TH FIGHTER GROUP AKA ZEMKE'S WOLFPACK had the highest air to air victories of any fighter group in the ETO in ww2 ' and they flat out refused to part with their kick ass p47's when asked to switch over to the fragile and weak P51.. Like it or not the p47 was the backbone of the fighter force in ww2 over europe and had the german luftwaffe pretty much on it's heels when the johnny come lately mustang came and joined the fight .
Lisa Walz One fighter group doesn't make the difference. And when you added ground kill claims to aerial victory claims they actually came second. They flat out refused because of pride, but that just shows that humans are irrational (most of the time). Zemke himself switched to the Mustang because of its range. The backbone of USAAF for half the war was actually the Curtiss P-40, from late '41 to late '43. The P-47 was available in truly massive numbers only by late '43. The 2 biggest contributions the P-47 had were: a) as a tactical fighter-bomber for close air support and/or short range interdiction and b) it cleared the skies and/or protected the P-51s while they (the Mustangs) were still loaded with a lot of fuel (in both drop tanks and internal tanks) and thus were not agile enough to fight (not without dropping the tanks and thus reducing their range). And the FW 190 was kind of similar. Like the P-47 it was used both as a air superiority fighter/ interceptor on the western fronts and primarily as a fighter bomber on the eastern front (because it could take a lot more damage then the Stuka).
AMVM hahaha' go tell that to all the bomber crews zemke and his wolfpack saved from the german single seaters' they refused to switch over to the p51 because they had supreme confidence in their thunderbolts ability to do the job and bring them home .Pride had nothing to do with it ' if I were one of them and I flew that great p47 all the war and someone came up and told me to switch over I would have stood with zemke as he was a rare commander who got everything from his men and their thunderbolts .
Lisa Walz Pride had everything to do with it. They were famous for being a Thunderbolt group and, I think, they were the actual first group to receive the P-47. And as I said, Zemke himself actually switched to the P-51, and in his last WWII mission destroyed the wings of his Mustang in a prolonged dive which led to him being captured. Overall, the P-47 is 4th in aerial victory claims, after the P-51 Mustang, F6F Hellcat and P-38 Lightning.
Fw190 using the same 150 American octanes and non of the allied planes could keep up fw190 much too fast. During ww2 fw190 was using 87 to 100 octanes. Think about that the p51 and p47 used 150 octanes and still about the same in speed as a fw190 what a joke!
Not true at all. For a large majority of the war, the U.S. used 130 octane, not 150. And the Germans had a different rating system. Yes, in general their fuel was not quite as good. But 100 octane was used pretty commonly in the Luftwaffe. 100 octane German fuel was equivalent to 130 octane American fuel. America takes the higher octane rating level of what is really called 100/130 fuel, and Germany takes the lower. So while it sounds like Germany was using terrible fuel compared to America, it wasn't as bad as it seems. Likely still a small disadvantage, but not by much.
@@garyseeseverything8615 did you read what I said? Can you refute any of it? Yes, Germany had fuel shortages. And late war they certainly had lesser quality fuel and less of it. But before America commonly used 150 octane (when they used 130, which was a large portion of the war), a lot of German fuel was nearly as good if not just as as good. They used what was in Germany called 100 octane, which was equivalent to U.S. 130 octane. Both countries in used different rating systems and it's the source of a lot of confusion on the topic. And yes, German planes would've performed better with better fuel. But Allied planes would've performed better if they didn't have to have such long range to escort bombers. This made them heavier and gave them a disadvantage as well. If planes of either side were solely made to fight each other in a 10 minute dual from airfields that were right next to each other, than we'd have different stats for both. But that's not the case. The realities of war gave both sides a disadvantage. I'm just saying that Germany's fuel disadvantage wasn't as bad as commonly thought until the war dragged into the Spring of 1944 and beyond. Until then, Germany had competitive fuels with the allies.
