Battle of Britain without Me-109s

[Jerry W. Loper]

How would the Battle of Britain have been different if Me-109s did not exist and were replaced in the battle by Spitfires? That is, Luftwaffe squadrons that historically contained Me-109Es instead were equipped with Spitfire Mk. Is, and RAF's Fighter Command had no Spitfires, but the Spitfire squadrons were equipped with more Hurricanes. One thing I already know is that the Spitfire was as short-ranged as the Me-109, so the amount of time that German fighters had over Britain would not have improved. Also, I'm sure RAF Fighter Command's losses would increase.

 

[Colin1]

Also, I'm sure RAF Fighter Command's losses would increase.

I'm not sure how you'd go about substantiating that
the Bf109 was every bit as lethal as the contemporary version of the Spitfire would have been to the Hurricane

 

[Jerry W. Loper]

I'm not sure how you'd go about substantiating that
the Bf109 was every bit as lethal as the contemporary version of the Spitfire would have been to the Hurricane

Historically, German fighters were facing a British fighter force that contained a mix of planes that were both roughly equal and inferior to their own. In this hypothetical case, German fighters would face a British force completely equipped with types inferior to their own.

 

[Colin1]

Historically, German fighters were facing a British fighter force that contained a mix of planes that were both roughly equal and inferior to their own. In this hypothetical case, German fighters would face a British force completely equipped with types inferior to their own.

Ahhh yes
mis-read you; well, something similar to this was done with a 'flip-flop' thread and if I recall the jist of it, the Hurricanes would need to find a method of luring the faster fighter into a furball eg attacking the escorted bombers with Hurricanes to lure the escorts in and then attacking the escorts with more Hurricanes. Other than that, the Spitfires would largely range across the skies of SE England with impunity, attacking and breaking off any engagements with Hurricanes at will; all-Spitfire raiding parties would be difficult to intercept.

Theoretically, there'd be as many Hurricanes as there would have been Hurricanes and Spitfires and there'd need to be, they'd be on the wrong end of a clobbering and I doubt they'd have held the line during the battle.

 

[gjs238]

The Germans would have been flying the Heinkel He 100!
(changed my mind from my previous post)

 

[lesofprimus]

This is a very silly thread, a what if scenario thats retarded to even discuss...

 

[davebender]

Spitfires cost at least twice as much to produce. So the Luftwaffe will have only half as many single engine figher aircraft.

Of course there is no realistic reason for the Luftwaffe to purchase Spitfires. Without the Me-109 they will almost certainly be mass producing He-100s by 1939.

 

[Maximowitz]

This is a very silly thread, a what if scenario thats retarded to even discuss...

Amen Les, Amen. It's not as if WWII aviation was so boring that threads like this had to exist.

 

[gjs238]

Ok, now that this is settled, what's the next silly scenario?
Japs flying P-40's?

 

[comiso90]

What if the Japanese didn't have carriers at Pearl Harbor?

What if there were NO tanks at the Battle of Kursk?

.

 

[evangilder]

Would Hitler have been as evil if he had both testicles, instead of just one?

 

[Hop]

Spitfires cost at least twice as much to produce.

The Germans thought they could build them for less than the cost of a 109. 15,000 RM for the 109, 12,500 for the Spitfire.

 

[davebender]

Germans thought they could build them for less than the cost of a 109

I doubt that Germany could build a Spitfire for less then half the cost of a British built aircraft.

 

[Hop]

I doubt that Germany could build a Spitfire for less then half the cost of a British built aircraft.

So do I. But then I doubt the Spitfire cost twice as much as the 109.

Olaf Groehler, I believe, quoted the price of the Bf 109E as about 86,000 RM with engine, 58,000 without. The British government paid close to £9,000 for the first batch of Spitfires, dropping to just over £5,000 in 1940, presumably without engine. There were about 11 RM to the pound at the fixed exchange rates.

German Aircraft Industry and Production 1933 - 1945 by Vajda and Dancey says the Bf 109E was offered for export in 1939 at a price of 162,000 RM each. France bought a Spitfire before the war, with spare engine the price was about £16,500. Turkey ordered Spitfires at £11,700 each, Greece paid just over £9,300 each. Estonia paid £12,604 for 12 Spitfires in early 1939.

Of course, we can't be certain what's included in those prices. They must be for completed aircraft, but what about spares, technical training and support etc? That's the problem with comparing figures from different sources. At the cheapest you can find an airframe only price, at the most expensive a complete aircraft with spares. And just about every variation in between.

That's why the German report is useful, because it compares to the same standard. It gives the price of the 109 as 15,000 RM (airframe only) and says the Spitfire, built in German factories, would cost 12,500 RM.

As to the Germans building Spitfires at half the cost of the British, that's not likely early in the war. Britain had far fewer people employed in the aircraft industry than Germany yet produced more aircraft.

Late war when the Germans were using slave labour things may have changed. According to Tooze in Wages of Destruction a factory could rent a skilled metalworker slave from the SS for about 40% of the cost of a German metalworker, and despite lower productivity, that led to lower unit costs.

 

[davebender]

That's why the German report is useful, because it compares to the same standard. It gives the price of the 109 as 15,000 RM (airframe only) and says the Spitfire, built in German factories, would cost 12,500 RM.

Your price for a Me-109 does not agree with Olaf Groehlers Gdlk. Nor does it pass the common sense test as 15,000 marks is only about $6000. Roughly 10% the price of a P-51.

Do you have a copy of this report?

 

[Hop]

Firstly, I've edited my post above and added a bit.

Your price for a Me-109 does not agree with Olaf Groehlers Gdlk. Nor does it pass the common sense test as 15,000 marks is only about $6000. Roughly 10% the price of a P-51.

15,000 RM is for airframe only. It certainly excludes engine, guns etc, maybe much more.

Do you have a copy of this report?

No. It wouldn't be much use to me as I don't speak German. You could try asking Kurfurst, I think he mentioned George Hopp as a source before.