Bf-109 vs Spitfire vs Fw-190 vs P-51

[Juha]

Hello Nikademus
so Spits vs Bf 109s 144 vs 82 lost
Spits vs. C 202s 28 vs 26
Spits vs Re 2001 6 vs 25 lost.

But Spit figures incl. those force and crash-landed of which some were probable repaired and some were written offs. Did I get it right?

So 202s did as I would have excepted, 1:1 was my expectation. And Re 2001 did somewhat worse than my expectation (1:2) but they flew also fighter-bomber missions IIRC.

Juha

 

[Juha]

Hello
if we quess that c. ½ of those force- and crash-landed Spits were repaired and c. ½ were written-off and the ratio between lost and force- and crash-landed Spits constant we got:
Spits vs Bf 109s 123 vs 82 lost, c. 1,5:1
Spits vs. C 202s 24 vs 26 lost, c. 1:1
Spits vs Re 2001 5 vs 25 lost, c. 1:5

Juha

 

[Nikademus]

Hello Nikademus
so Spits vs Bf 109s 144 vs 82 lost
Spits vs. C 202s 28 vs 26
Spits vs Re 2001 6 vs 25 lost.

But Spit figures incl. those force and crash-landed of which some were probable repaired and some were written offs. Did I get it right?

Juha

Yes. It would probably be more accurate to label these as "victories" vs. kills as some that made it back to friendly territory were later repaired.

 

[Nikademus]

Probably worth adding to further support the necessity and impact of the Spits is that the last Hurricane combats continued to go heavily in favor of the 109 drivers though overall the Hurr's continued to add valuable bomber #'s to the RAF tally.

44 shot down in return for 16 109's in 42. But Hurricanes also nabbed

4 x 110
5 x Ju-87
27 x Ju-88

Sea Hurricanes added:

2 x Ju-87 and 9 x Ju-88's + a 110.

vs. the R.A. add one Z-506B while Sea Hurricanes bagged:

3 x Cr-42
1 x MC-200
5 x S-79
3 x S-84
2 x Z-1007bis
1 x Ju-87(Ita)

Sea Hurricanes lost in air:

1 to 110
1 to MC-200
3 to Re-2001
2 to Ju-88
1 to He-111
1 to "Friendly" AA

 

[Juha]

Hello Nikademus
thanks again for the very intresting extra info!
Small samples, but just what I expected
Sea Hurricane vs CR-42 0:3 lost, even if CR-42 was excellent bi-plane and Hurricane IMHO only mediocrity monoplane.
Sea Hurricane vs MC-200 1:1 lost
Sea Hurricane vs Re-2001 3:0 lost, even if Re did badly against Spit Mk V but against Malta it was often used as fighter bomber. It was not that bad fighter.
Hurricane vs Bf 109 44:16 lost, so almost 3:1 so almost twice as bad as the Spit V.
Sea Hurricane vs Bf 110 1:1, also in early NA campaign IIRC Vokes Mk Is vs 110C/Ds more or less 1:1, usually who saw the other first won.

Juha

 

[steve51]

Nikademus,

Thank you for those very informative posts.

 

[Milosh]

Great stuff Nikademus.

I don't understand why some get so caught up on fighter vs fighter stats when fighters are only a part of the total air battle. (One sees this in BoB discussions as well.)

 

[Juha]

Heh
it was nice to notice that by chance the very small sample gave exactly same results that what is my opinion on relative merits of some fighters.

On the larger samples, results show that Spit V was clearly more effective than Hurri, also had better exchange rate than SeaHurri against Ju 88 as can be expected from a plane which had clearer speed advantage over target plane and so more interception tactics open to its pilot.

Juha

 

[NZTyphoon]

Great stuff Nikademus.

I don't understand why some get so caught up on fighter vs fighter stats when fighters are only a part of the total air battle. (One sees this in BoB discussions as well.)

Yep, excellent work Nikademus. Some points worth mentioning are:

1)The pilots sent to Malta with the Spitfires were all too often inexperienced: AVM Lloyd complained about this saying Malta was "no place for beginners."

2) No radar had been installed on Malta until early 1942 and, as McKinstry points out "many of the staff in central operations had no proper grasp of how its information should be used. What was happening was that the Spitfires and remaining Hurricanes were being scrambled in small numbers only when the enemy formations were well on their way to Malta. This meant that time and again the RAF fighters were being bounced by large formations of German or Italian fighters while still climbing. Result was that in the first two weeks of July alone 36 Spitfires were destroyed or badly damaged + 3 written off in accidents.

3) In July
a: Keith Park took over from AVM Lloyd
b: Fighter Command began to send more experienced Spitfire pilots, starting with Operation Pinpoint.
c: Once Park settled in he changed tactics, sending squadrons of Spitfires up as soon as Radar spotted incoming raids forming up over Sicily - the same tactics Park used during the Battle of Britain. Worked both times.

4) The primary task of the Spitfires was to attack the bombers which were doing most of the damage . The fighters were not the prime objective. 112 Luftwaffe bombers were shot down along with 82 Bf 109s, 26 Mc 202s and 21 Re 2001s and 22 Italian bombers = 263 v 214

5) By October the Luftwaffe could only send over small numbers of Ju 88s escorted by large numbers of fighters. Some raids were turned back and the Ju 88s suffered from high casualty rates meaning that the Jagdwaffe had failed to protect the bombers, nor were they shooting down a high ratio of RAF fighters. After October 18 these raids stopped and were substituted by ineffectual high-altitude Jabo raids. Like the RAF over France and the low countries in 1941, the Axis forces were operating for the sake of operating, with no clear goal in mind.

 

[Glider]

Nikademus
Excellent work. I admit that I thought about doing what you did but chickened out, so top marks to you, shame to me and many thanks.

Next Question, Where did Kurfurst go?

PS I meant to add that I hadn't realised that the Huricanes did so well. They were both seriously outclassed and outnumbered so to achieve approx a 1 to 1 ratio is a very good achievement.

 

[Juha]

Hello NZ
one correction, Malta got its first radar already in March 1939 and the second in June 1940
one clarification, the Oct 42 offensive had a clear aim, to end the use of Malta as a strike base by bombing.

Juha

 

[Nikademus]

Nikademus
Excellent work. I admit that I thought about doing what you did but chickened out, so top marks to you, shame to me and many thanks.

Next Question, Where did Kurfurst go?

PS I meant to add that I hadn't realised that the Huricanes did so well. They were both seriously outclassed and outnumbered so to achieve approx a 1 to 1 ratio is a very good achievement.

Glad to help. It gets easier after the fourth book or so.

Hurricanes worst year was 41, primarily at the hands of 7/JG-26 and their amazing 5 month reign of terror.

 

[RCAFson]

Probably worth adding to further support the necessity and impact of the Spits is that the last Hurricane combats continued to go heavily in favor of the 109 drivers though overall the Hurr's continued to add valuable bomber #'s to the RAF tally.

44 shot down in return for 16 109's in 42. But Hurricanes also nabbed

4 x 110
5 x Ju-87
27 x Ju-88

Sea Hurricanes added:

2 x Ju-87 and 9 x Ju-88's + a 110.

vs. the R.A. add one Z-506B while Sea Hurricanes bagged:

3 x Cr-42
1 x MC-200
5 x S-79
3 x S-84
2 x Z-1007bis
1 x Ju-87(Ita)

Sea Hurricanes lost in air:

1 to 110
1 to MC-200
3 to Re-2001
2 to Ju-88
1 to He-111
1 to "Friendly" AA

I make that 28 Sea Hurricane kills for 8 Sea Hurricane losses. Do you know offhand, how well the Fulmar and Martlet did on the same operations?

 

[Nikademus]

Fulmar (1942) Malta related operations:

2 x S-79
2 x S-84
5 x Z-1007bis

losses:

1 to CR-42
1 to Re-2001
1 to S-79
1 to Z-1007bis
1 to D-520
9 operational losses
1 to 'Friendly' AA


Martlet (1942) Malta related operations

2 x S-84
1 x Re-2001
1 x Ju-88

losses:

1 to Ju-88
6 operational losses

 

[RCAFson]

Fulmar (1942) Malta related operations:

1 to D-520

Thanks.

A D520 loss enroute to Malta?

 

[Nikademus]

May 18th, 1942. D-520 of Vichy French unit GC III/6 downed a Fulmar piloted by Lt. P.R. Hall and A/G Nuttall during Operation 'LB' flying in 17 Spitfires to Malta. A Catalina was also downed by a D-520 from GC II/3 same day.

 

[Juha]

Hello Nikademus
Again, thanks a lot!
Fulmar seems to have worked as planned, it could handle Italian snoopers and bombers and probably also load carrying He 111s, if these would have been around, had long loiter time and large ammo capacity but was too slow for Ju 88s. And fighters, not simply planned to handle them.

Juha

 

[NZTyphoon]

Hello NZ
one correction, Malta got its first radar already in March 1939 and the second in June 1940


Juha

Aw...shucks! Corrected twice in a row It's been ages since I've read Shores et al through, otherwise I would have picked up on McKinstry's mistake (see it worn't me of'cer). Yes the RDF units were 241 AMES (Air Ministry Experimental Station) cliffs of Dingli 1939 (high flying aircraft). By 1941: 242 AMES Ghar Lapsi, 501 AMES Tas-Sile, 502 AMES Madliena and 504 AMES Dingli, each capable of plotting medium-low flyers. There was also a GCI near Salina Bay. (page 24) McKinstry must have been referring to two more RDF stations under construction and operational in February 1942.

 

[fastmongrel]

Hello Nikademus
Again, thanks a lot!
Fulmar seems to have worked as planned, it could handle Italian snoopers and bombers and probably also load carrying He 111s, if these would have been around, had long loiter time and large ammo capacity but was too slow for Ju 88s. And fighters, not simply planned to handle them.

Juha

The more I read about the Fulmar the better it seems to have been. Definitely one of those aircraft where the performance figures dont tell the real story. Obviously the FAA pilots would have liked a higher performing aircraft but what they did with what they had available is remarkable in my opinion.

 

[Nikademus]

The Fulmar was a useful plane, but tends to get berated because it was obviously no match for a 1st class modern fighter such as a Bf-109 or an A6M2. At the time though, many felt that it wasn't possible to create a carrier based fighter that was equal to a land based one. The A6M2 shattered that view more than any other plane while the Wildcat also proved capable. As a component within the framework of RN air defense doctrine however, the plane had some positive attributes....it had twice the ammo capacity vs. the Hurricane which i recall Shores pointing out in his 1st Malta volume as being very useful for a service that constituted many green pilots. The 2nd crewman made overwater navigating much easier and helped with Fighter Direction and also made them useful as guide planes for the Malta reinforcement flights. The fuel reserves also allowed long patrol times which was extremely useful within RN defense doctrine which was quite advanced for the time.....Flights of two being airborne at various sectors whereby they could be vectored onto snoopers and incoming raids. In this capacity as the below will show, the Fulmar did excellent and valuable work.

One negative in addition to the Fulmar's disadvantage vs. an agile modern 1E fighter is that it also presented a big target to enemy bomber/patrol defensive fire. Fulmars did well onboard carriers but a brief stint at Malta quickly showed their disadvantages vs. 109's and they were quickly withdrawn from daytime CAP duty.


1940 Fulmar kills (Malta related Med ops)

8 x S-79
1 x S-81
6 x Z-506B
7 x Z-501

losses

1 to Cr-42
1 to Z-501

1941 Fulmar kills (Malta related Med ops)

6 x S-79
3 x S-84
7 x Z-506B
1 x Z-1007bis
2 x Z-501
4 x BR-20M
1 x Bf-110
5 x Ju-87
8 x Ju-88
1 x Ju-52

losses

1 to Cr-42
1 to Mc-200
1 to Mc-202
1 to Ju-88
3 to Ju-87
1 to Z-506B
5 to S-79
1 to AA
2 to "Friendly" AA
5 on Ground
3 Operational