1942: the best fighter

[Glider]

Glider the speed limit is an other thing to actual combat dive performances, so a few second of initial advantage that also the much best LF IX, "the Me.109 can leave the Spitfire without any difficulty" Spitfire LF.IX vrs. Me.109G Tactical Trials.
Also the altitudes where they fightning are facts

Be Fair In posting 53 I did say the following

These are significant differences. However it should be noted that air tests showed that the 109 held the initial advantage in dive speed and in combat that can be a priceless advantage if cover is around, or just buy a few seconds of time.

And in posting 44 I also said
and the Spit had eaten away at most of the advantage the 109 traditionally had over the Spit in the dive, apart from a small initial advantage,

I have never tried to deny that the 109 had an initial advantage and I am aware that dive speeds are not everything. That said, they also cannot be ignored and if the 109 doesn't find cover in a cloud or in the support of other fighters then continuing the dive will allow the Spitfire to catch up.

To sum up, I can only repeat that in my personal view the SPit IX is overall a better fighter, note overall not all the time for the following reasons

At altitude the Spit IX clearly has an advantage this view supported by the performance charts and more importantly by the views of a senior experienced German pilot who fought the Spitfire.
At any altitude the Spit IX has the advantage in agility supported by countless combat reports, comparative flight tests and the views of pilots of all nations inculding German pilots
In a dive I don't have problem calling it a draw as the 109 has the advantage in the initial stages and SPit if the dive continues for any length of time.
In a climb until the different boost systems came on line for the Me 109 all the test reports and charts contained on the web site I gave the link for give the advantage to the Spit IX

You are of course free to have your own views but I have at least supported my reasoning and I am not insisting that you agree with me. I would be interested in seeing how you support your view, but only interested not insisting that you do so.

 

[Edgar Brooks]

Spit IX had not best climb rate over 102G-2 also with this limited a combat&climb boost, had not real advantage in speed. thanks to higher FTH is best for him encounters over 8km, but it's in disadvantage from 5 to 8 km to altitude (after M.S. supercharger heght and before of F.S supercharger height). What altitude was most commonf for encounters over 8km or 5/8 km? Spit superior in dive of the 109??? what's the source of that?

The IX, with Merlin 61, had its FS blower cut in at 21,000-22,000', which is 6,300-6400m, not 8000. The IX with Merlin 66 had its FS gear cut in at 14,000' (c4250m,) and the 266 cut in even lower (10,000' - c3000m.) 109s were flying at 22,000' before the end of 1940.

 

[Vincenzo]

The IX, with Merlin 61, had its FS blower cut in at 21,000-22,000', which is 6,300-6400m, not 8000. The IX with Merlin 66 had its FS gear cut in at 14,000' (c4250m,) and the 266 cut in even lower (10,000' - c3000m.) 109s were flying at 22,000' before the end of 1940.

Edgar see the test data on WWII aircraft performance, maybe 21'k was static FTH?

 

[Vincenzo]

Be Fair In posting 53 I did say the following

These are significant differences. However it should be noted that air tests showed that the 109 held the initial advantage in dive speed and in combat that can be a priceless advantage if cover is around, or just buy a few seconds of time.

And in posting 44 I also said
and the Spit had eaten away at most of the advantage the 109 traditionally had over the Spit in the dive, apart from a small initial advantage,

I have never tried to deny that the 109 had an initial advantage and I am aware that dive speeds are not everything. That said, they also cannot be ignored and if the 109 doesn't find cover in a cloud or in the support of other fighters then continuing the dive will allow the Spitfire to catch up.

To sum up, I can only repeat that in my personal view the SPit IX is overall a better fighter, note overall not all the time for the following reasons

At altitude the Spit IX clearly has an advantage this view supported by the performance charts and more importantly by the views of a senior experienced German pilot who fought the Spitfire.
At any altitude the Spit IX has the advantage in agility supported by countless combat reports, comparative flight tests and the views of pilots of all nations inculding German pilots
In a dive I don't have problem calling it a draw as the 109 has the advantage in the initial stages and SPit if the dive continues for any length of time.
In a climb until the different boost systems came on line for the Me 109 all the test reports and charts contained on the web site I gave the link for give the advantage to the Spit IX

You are of course free to have your own views but I have at least supported my reasoning and I am not insisting that you agree with me. I would be interested in seeing how you support your view, but only interested not insisting that you do so.

in the link i posted is not talking of limited initial advantage. however after you gain advantage in the dive you can use this for a zoom and climb or any.

On the climb looking ever on data on that site, for Spit, and Kurfurst site for 109, is clear there is not any advantage of Spit IX, and taking in the count that +15 lbs was available only for 5' minutes

For the clear performance advantage over 8km if you look the data this is less of that has the 109 in the 5/8 km range

 

[Shortround6]

I think there is some confusion between the altitude at which the supercharger changes gears (FS cuts in) and the FTH (full throttle height) which is the height at which the supercharger can still maintain the desired pressure. The Merlin 61 changed gears around 18,500-19,000ft but the throttle had to be closed a bit to prevent over boosting, it opened as the plane climbed until the FTH was reached (and that varied with the forward speed.)

 

[Shortround6]

in the link i posted is not talking of limited initial advantage. however after you gain advantage in the dive you can use this for a zoom and climb or any.

That rather depends on how much of an initial advantage you can get. Say for instance the initial advantage only opens the range (over the initial distance between the aircraft) 100-150 meters vs opening the range 400-500meters?

 

[Glider]

in the link i posted is not talking of limited initial advantage. however after you gain advantage in the dive you can use this for a zoom and climb or any.

On the climb looking ever on data on that site, for Spit, and Kurfurst site for 109, is clear there is not any advantage of Spit IX, and taking in the count that +15 lbs was available only for 5' minutes

For the clear performance advantage over 8km if you look the data this is less of that has the 109 in the 5/8 km range

Firstly I must own up and say that Kurfurst and I went head to head a number of times on various issues and I do not question his sources but treat any views, comparisons or opinions of his with more than a little caution. I don't quite know which part you are referring to but I do remember once him comparing the high altitude performance of the 109 (with a boost system) to a Spitfire with the 109 winning. Until it was pointed out that he was comparing the high altitude performance of a late version 109 to an early Low altitude version of the Spitfire IX.

However if you want to believe that the 109 had the advantage between 5/8 km range I am not going to disagree with you, it is a valid view. However by default the Spit has the advantage between 0 - 5km and 8km+. I can only repeat my view again as previously stated that in my personal view the SPit IX is overall a better fighter, note overall not all the time

As for the dive, I do agree that the 109 has an initial advantage but it cannot be denied that from the Germans own instructions to their own pilots the red line speed for a Spit in a dive is faster than a 109 and all things being equal the Spitfire will catch up.

Your point about using that speed in a zoom climb or similar action is a good one but think about it tactically. The 109 goes into a dive and gains an advantage he is lower than the spit and goes into a zoom. All he is doing is pulling up in front of the Spitfire, losing speed and presenting an easy shot. If its done at the right time say before the Spitfire is lined up then it can be very advantageous, if the timing is wrong then the 109 pilot is putting himself at severe risk.

 

[Vincenzo]

this from my posts in my old thread on G-2 and Spit IX (-61)

Comparison of two of the best fighter of '42 (only variants that actually fightning that year), IMHO the top two fighter of year.
The G-2 was same of G-1 w/o presurrized cockpit (G-4 same of G-2 with different radio set).
Data from official source only (pilot notes test datasheets and so)
Spit IX - 109 G1
weight (full fuel and ammo): 3377 kg - 3042 kg
wing area: 22.48 mq - 16.1 mq
fuel: 386 liters - 400 liters
engine: Merlin 61 - DB 605 A
max power: 1409 HP (metric) at 7.16 km (5' power set) - 1230 HP at 7 km (30' power set)
consumption max cruise set: 364 liters/hour - 331 liters/hour
climb: at 6096 m. in 6' 30'' (the plane was 15 kg over the weight but w/o guns drag, climbing power 60' set) - at 6000 m. in 5'42'' (combat power 30' set)
climb: at 12192 m. in 20' 12'' (as above) - at 12000 m. 24' 2'' (it is not same plane of above)
max level speed: 649 km/h at 8315 m. (5' power set, plane as above ) - 660 km/h at 7000 m. (30' power set)

Speed

Spit IX (from BS274 test)
1829 m. 544 km/h
2438 m. 559 km/h
3048 m. 574 km/h
3962 m. 595 km/h
4694 m. 612 km/h
6096 m. 612 km/h
7010 m. 615 km/h
7620 m. 630 km/h
8352 m. 649 km/h
9144 m. 647 km/h
10058 m. 641 km/h
10973 m. 621 km/h

G-1 (datenblatt)
0 m. 535 km/h
2000 m. 583 km/h
4000 m. 624 km/h
6000 m. 647 km/h
7000 m. 660 km/h
10000 m. 638 km/h

G-1 (kennblatt, w/o semi rectr. tailwhell= -12 km/h at FTH)
0 m. 525 km/h
1000 m. 544 km/h
2000 m. 563 km/h
3000 m. 583 km/h
4000 m. 602 km/h
5000 m. 622 km/h
6000 m. 642 km/h
7000 m. 649 km/h (FTH +12 =661 km/h)
8000 m. 648 km/h
9000 m. 643 km/h
10000 m. 630 km/h
11000 m. 609 km/h
12000 m. 555km/h

 

[Edgar Brooks]

Edgar see the test data on WWII aircraft performance, maybe 21'k was static FTH?

No thanks, I have the Pilot's Notes, which tells the pilot when the FS kicks in (21,000' on the Merlin 61,) and out again, during descent (19,000', and 12,500' on the Merlin 66, 10,000' on the 266.) Service ceiling is given, by Vickers, as 41,000'. Static FTH means nothing to me.

 

[Vincenzo]

Edgar worse for you

as already writed to Shortround6 21k it's the altitute where automatically changes to higher gear not the FTH

 

[bada]

In 1942, the Bf-109F-4 was far more reliable than Fw-190, the BMW-801D engine being restricted in manifold pressure and RPM (so performance was similar to the earlier 801C) for the better part of the year. .

actually,yes and not.

yes , restricted to 1.32 for the first 10 workhours, for the grind-in period, as every 801 build (even the C was restricted the first hours) then, after the grindin', the screw on the handle was removed allowing the full power, so No.

As for the initial question: Best fighter in 42 (on ETO!) 190A2/3/4. Even if the perfs of the MK9-M61 were equal or even better from 6500m+, it still lack the Neg-G carb, beeing unable to follow the Wurger in combat maneuvres.

as for MK9 numbers:
Assigned to squadrons:
Jul-42
1--10 3
11--20 8
21--31 55
Aug-42
1--10 62
11--20 73
21--31 81
Sep-42
1--10 88
11--20 106
21--31 116
Oct-42
1--10 134
11--20 152
21--31 165
Nov-42
1--10 168
11--20 177
21--30 170
Dec-42
1--10 153
11--20 152
21--31 151

 

[Tante Ju]

this from my posts in my old thread on G-2 and Spit IX (-61)
Speed
...

It seems me 109G-2 was a bit faster than Mk IX, by 20-25 km/h, expect at 7000m, when me 109G-2 is some 50 km/h faster, which is significant.
Above 8000 the IX has advantage, but not much 5-10 km/h..

To me it appears Bf 109G had better overall performance in 1942. The IX was very good at very high altitude, but it was perhaps a wrong optimalization.. who flew at such heights? British bomber could not, German bomber mostly could not, with very few exceptions. I think British realize this so why Merlin 66 with only 16000 FTH.

 

[tomo pauk]

Right from the horse's mouth: the manual states that 801D is from March 1942 limited to 1,35 ata 2450 rpm, due to cooling issues. The 801C operates at 1,32 and 2700 rpm*. If you have some data to back up the 'grinding in' procedure that allowed for greater boost RPM, please post it.
If someone can clear up when the limitation was lifted for good, I'd like to know that; IIRC during all of 1943 801D was operating without the restriction.

* addition: in high gear the limit is 1,30 @ 2550 rpm

 

[kielczyslaw]

Vincenzo, Spitfire Mk IX versus Me 109 G - Flight Testing here you can find a little bit different values for speed and climb for Spit IX and Bf-109G-2. The 109's were tested on 1.3 ATA and one of the Spits on +15 boost which was max for merlin 61. As you can see the differences do not favor 109's that much. And the tests for 109 were performed by Daimler Benz, not by British. In the term of maximum climb, there wasn't much to choose...

 

[Vincenzo]

I take data for Spit from that site, the page of the test of BS274 (called BF274), only i used climb data to climb power and not for combat power because this is available only for 5' and so the Spit can not climb a this power to 20000" or 40000". My data for 109G came from datenblatt and kennblatt availabe on Kurfurst site.
The data presented for 109G in your link are near all for later 109G with more drag (already in kennblatt, early '43, the change of tailwhell add drag and so down speed); the alone early data was that for 9/42 comparison Gustav engined with 605 and 601 the plane nr 14026 was a test plane with some instrumentations and so more drag

 

[kielczyslaw]

And you think that 109 could fly at 1.3 ATA all the time?

Every fghter comparison tests should be made with max power settings. Just because Spit could use it's max boost for only 5' doesn't mean that RAF pilots were fightin LW on cruise power.

Dogfights during WW2 didn't looked like in IL2 Sturmovik or something. Usually they lasted for less than 5' if not less than 2'.
It's obvious that when your life's at risk, you'll do everything to survive. Not using combat power during a dogfight almost always was a suicide. So I don't understand why are you comparing Bf 109 on max power settings with Spit IX on climb power. It's a little bit not fair, don't you think?

"i used climb data to climb power and not for combat power because this is available only for 5' and so the Spit can not climb a this power to 20000" or 40000"."

Why would it even try? Again, I do not see the point of your notice. Do you know what combat power is for? I can assure you that 109 couldn't climb to that level at 1.3 ATA applied continuously either

"the plane nr 14026 was a test plane with some instrumentations and so more drag"

Me 109 G-1 Flight Test Read, please, this test report. You can find there that these instruments were downgrading speed by 7 mph.

 

[Vincenzo]

maybe you need read before to write, i writed that that setting, combat&climb, was for a 30'.
climb power in raf is not cruiser power
i never played to il2 and my last time to a game FS is many years ago in SWOTL, 1st edition, and i never remember what i did
i've not writed they can not use max boost in combat i tell i use the climb power for time to 20' and 40'k climb, 109 was a 30' set climb&combat (the max power set was not available at time) and they are enough time for climb to 6 and 12 km and i never see data on climb on lower power set for 109.

combat power is for combat not for climb to altitude

ty for the link i've seen the deutsch version and is not so easy to read like that in english,
ok so we known we need add 10 km/h for the instrumentations and almost an other 12 km/h for the tailwheel so the speed was a bit less of 650 km/h (ot a bit over 650 if had the tailwheel with a 17 km/h penalty) nothing strange within 3% of acceptance

 

[kielczyslaw]

"i've not writed they can not use max boost in combat i tell i use the climb power for time to 20' and 40'k climb, 109 was a 30' set climb&combat (the max power set was not available at time) and they are enough time for climb to 6 and 12 km and i never see data on climb on lower power set for 109."

This and...

"combat power is for combat not for climb to altitude"

this stay in a bit of a conflict manner. If you know that why are you trying to tell me that Germans were climbing to operational height at full throttle and Spitfire pilots couldn't do that because of 5' of max power? Climb after take-off and combat climb are two different things. So when we are comparing combat performance you should use max power performance charts. I mean max power climb for Spitfire, not climb setting climb.

When you climb to operational height, e.g. 20k feet, you won't use emergency power but climb power to avoid overheating the engine. But when in combat you have to gain altitude very quickly you will use boost to give you additional power.

 

[Tante Ju]

this stay in a bit of a conflict manner. If you know that why are you trying to tell me that Germans were climbing to operational height at full throttle and Spitfire pilots couldn't do that because of 5' of max power? Climb after take-off and combat climb are two different things. So when we are comparing combat performance you should use max power performance charts. I mean max power climb for Spitfire, not climb setting climb.

When you climb to operational height, e.g. 20k feet, you won't use emergency power but climb power to avoid overheating the engine. But when in combat you have to gain altitude very quickly you will use boost to give you additional power.

For the Me 109G, inital "full throttle" and "climb" power were the same, the real full throttle - "emergency" in German terms - was not allowed initial.

The "climb and combat" power could be used for 30 minutes on DB 605A, and was equivalent of the British "Normal". "Start and Emergency", the actual German 5 min power, equivalent of British "Combat", also for 5 minutes, was initial disallowed on DB 605A. So terms are a bit confusing when translated to English, because combat power means different in the two countries - its more like US "Military power" in Germany, and US WEP in Britain.

In this case I think Vincenzos comparison is more or less valid, because if you wish to compare an intercept/time to altitude profile, it is done in both case (Kampf/Normal) at the rating official sanctioned for general climbing. For combat, of course Spitfire could use higher settings (and so could 109G from 1943, when "Notleistung" was clear for use)

I think Me 109G performance is pretty clear for 1942, the specification is on Kurfurst site. Specs were 637 km/h at 0m, 660 km/h a 7000m. Aircraftperformance site doesnt list the "good tests", only bad ones for German machines, not even Official specs, maybe people want to show how bad the Me 109 was compared to Spitfire this way, very possible. But everyone is biased to some extent.

 

[Vincenzo]

my point on choice climbing power is cleared to Tante Ju