I think I agree with you. Johnson describes flying along in his borrowed Mk XII, rather uneasily looking up at a formation of FWs; above them. They refused to come down to play. I tell you, it would terrify me!
I'm sorry, but that's completely unwarranted. I don't "Jump" to conclusions. I try to reach them, on the basis of the information and evidence available. Of course I've "thought about the guys behind the controls". I've commented more than once in this thread that pilot quality is probably the...
Of course, there weren’t that many combats between Zeroes and Seafires (possibly not enough to make up a “statistically valid sample", whatever that means) …… but what there were seem to indicate a decisive advantage for the Seafire, at least within its best height band. At least as significant...
I'm quite prepapred to admit that the FAA's claims are a bit exaggerated. Everyone overclaimed to some extent, because in the heat and confusion of battle, it's impossible to be really sure; also all fighter pilots are optimists, or they would not be fighter pilots! But even knocking off a bit...
You are quite right, a lot depends on height. As I read Henning's graphs, the Seafire outclimbed the A6M3 Zero by roughly 500 fpm up to about 3,000 feet. That is a significant advantage, and enough to make a real difference in combat. According to the graphs, the A6M3 reached its best rate of...
I must admit I was never too happy about relying on one main source too heavily. Trouble is, there isn’t much written about the Seafire. David Brown’s book seems to be about the only full-length treatment, and it does seem to be mostly well researched.
He has been described as a “Seafire...
The problem with this sort of performance comparison is the figures are pretty meaningless unless the source also specifies some extra data; like what mark are we talking about, at what height, and at what speed, is the rate of climb or rate of turn obtained, are we talking about normal...
I think the reason for the Vokes filter was plain bad design. The Supermarine design office must have been incredibly busy during WW2, and was possibly a bit over-stretched. The Spitfire was developed through nineteen marks during WW2. They got up to the Spitfire 21 before the war ended, but...
Henning,
Looking at your excellent graphs a bit more, it seems possible to move towards some fairly definite conclusions.
1)The Seafire LIII enjoyed a decisive performance advantage over the Zero, in both speed and rate of climb, provided it stayed within its best fighting height, i.e...
Henning thanks again for the graphs. Having had some time to absorb them, they really do show just what a highly specialised aircraft the Seafire LIII was; also just what a substantial edge it had within its area of specialisation, and just how comparatively useless it was outside it...
Thanks all of you. Of course the Spitfire Mk VIII had a Merlin 60! (That'll teach me not to post late at night and tired and from memory without any books handy!) And I even know a group of people who are in the early stages of restoring a Mk VIII. I really ought not to have dropped that, and I...
Thanks. I’m glad you found it informative. A few more points; and please note I’m away from home tonight, and writing without access to my reference books, completely from memory (so please check and correct as necessary!)
1) Tanks; there were already extra tanks available for the...
I'm very sorry, but that's quite simply incorrect. Brown in "The Seafire", (Ian Allen, London, 1973), quotes the rate of climb figures for the Seafire LIII (the main variant used in the Pacific) as 4,160 fpm at sea level and 4,310 fpm at 6,000 feet, this powered by a Merlin 55M with its boost...
While we’re on the subject of the Wildcat, here’s a bit of light relief……
All taildraggers swing a bit on takeoff, but the Wildcat more than most. This was due to a combination of a big torquey radial, a narrow undercarriage, a short fuselage and a fin (“vertical stabiliser” in American) and...
True; and Johnnie Johnson would probably have agreed with you, (I've quoted him in an earlier post) and he certainly knew what he was talking about. And yes, you are quite right, UK authorities did work on a pretty crude statistical notion of how many bullets you needed to spray into the target...