Soundbreaker Welch?
Tech Sergeant
He still has the avatar?
I like it too! Winston Churchhill!
I like it too! Winston Churchhill!
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
regardless of what escort was flown it was the change in german tactics from bombing airfeilds to cities that lost them the battle, amoung other things obviously........
How on earth do you chose between the 190 and the Spit IX?
The FW-190A for sure, but the Bf-109F-4 is a close second. Both could reach 670 km/h at alt, which is pretty impressive for the time period.
As for going long and deep, well how long deep are we talking here? The Fw-190A Bf-109F could both carry drop tanks, so range was pretty decent by then.
I can't see why the Spit IX was a better pure fighter than the Fw-190A, except if we're talking late 44 to 45 where the +25lbs boosted version appeared, but AFAIK this was only used for chasing V-1's and had a very short service life.
However we need to consider the Bf-109 here as-well, which considering its climb rate, speed and agility is a serious contender and atleast the equal of the Spitfire as a pure fighter, if not slightly better. The Bf-109 G-2 and Spitfire IX were very equal on all aspects of flight really.
I can't see why the Spit IX was a better pure fighter than the Fw-190A, except if we're talking late 44 to 45 where the +25lbs boosted version appeared, but AFAIK this was only used for chasing V-1's and had a very short service life.
However we need to consider the Bf-109 here as-well, which considering its climb rate, speed and agility is a serious contender and atleast the equal of the Spitfire as a pure fighter, if not slightly better. The Bf-109 G-2 and Spitfire IX were very equal on all aspects of flight really.
Spit IX vs 109G (first versions of both as this is 1942)
The Spit was more flexible. For instance, it could be upgunned with a minimal impact on performance, when the 109 was upgunned the impact was significant.
I am certainly not saying it was an easy target, or that the difference is huge, far from it ,but the question is which is the best.
I feel the Spit had the advantage. It certainly had the advantage at height which is no small thing. It also had the better manoeuverability.
Glider, I agree with about everything except the below.
The Bf-109 Spitfire were very equal in terms of maneuverability, the Bf-109G-2 holding a slight edge in sustained turn rate, climb rate roll rate, as well as speed at at low to medium altitude. The Spitfire IX held a slight advantage in instantanous turn rate and speed at high altitude. All in all they were very similar, th pilot being the deciding factor.
I don't really see the P-38 as a contender, atleast not as a pure fighter. Had it been a good deal faster than it was I would look at it otherwise.
Given the years indicated, there are several other fighters from other countries that should have been listed, at least perhaps mentioned. Especially when "early war" ETO is the criterion. I would have included aircraft from countries like:
France: D.520, MS. 406, MB 152
Holland: Fokker DXXI, Fokker G.1
Poland: PZL P.24
Italy: Fiat G.50, Macchi MC 200 202, Caproni-Reggiane Re 2001
Russia: MiG-1 3, LaGG-3, Yak-1
Yugoslavia: Rogozarski IK-3
Romania: IAR 80
How about a poll for the "non-US-UK-Ger aircraft"?