Bf-109 vs. Spitfire....

[Soren]

Glider,

The earlier 109's weren't any heavier than the K-4, the K-4 was infact abit heavier at 3,364 kg.

 

[Glider]

Well this is the source, so all you have to do now is to read it:

Amazon.co.uk: Target England: Edmund L. Blandford: Books

[QUOTERemember that was at night over very short distances with London only being around 60 miles from the French coast.

This has been discussed not so long ago, no He 177s were operating 'from 60 miles from the French coast', they were operating from bases much further away - the recce ones in particular operated from the bases at the German border IIRC - yet you continue to lay the same claim again.

So now I ask you to support it.[/QUOTE]

Kurfurst
I cannot believe that you are claiming that London isn't 60 miles from the French coast, get an Atlas and look it up.

Let me make it simple for you.
Allied PR aircraft were in danger from when they crossed the French coast, they then flew to Berlin and beyond, hundreds of mile behind the German lines by day and night.
German PR aircraft were in danger when they crossed the British coast and hardly ever made it to London about 25 miles from the British coast by day or night.

Well have you heard of daylight on recce missions by 109Es in the Battle of Britain..? No? Yet it happened.

OK I will give you that PR missions were flown during the BOB, not exactly the same as He177 flying over the UK in daylight is it.

Its funny you know. All this talk about PR Spits, Mossies - which didn`t came into existance well after the 109s (and 190s, too) were doing the same job for some time - and the firm belief it wasn`t 'anything like the basis of the Allied PR aircraft'.

The first PR flight by a Spitfire over Aachen took place on 18th November 1939
On 10 February 1940 PR Spitfires took photographs of the German naval bases at Wilhelmshaven and Emden
The PR Spit IV entered service in October 1940 with a range of 2000 miles taking photos as far away as Stettin
The PR Spit VI on 14th March 1941 took photographs of Berlin.
I think the point is well made. The following source may be of interest
Photo Reconnaissance Spitfires
As an aside, it speaks well of the design team who took over after the death of Mitchell.

I guess its just a classic logical fellacy, ie. if we had PR aircraft, there is no way that they could have the same on the other side.

This is an interesting comment. I was thinking that you may be working on the assumption that if the He177 was used as a Navel Recce aircraft it was also used over the British mainland.
By the way, I am still waiting for a source for this. If its included in the book you mentioned, can I have the page numbers? I remind you that I did this for you when you questioned the 4 cannon armed spitfires mentioned in the book Malta the Spitfire Years.

Well, you can do your reading, I gave you plenty of literature above.

You gave me one book that I suspect doesn't cover the statements you made. As mentioned if you could give me the page nos

 

[Glider]

Glider,

The earlier 109's weren't any heavier than the K-4, the K-4 was infact abit heavier at 3,364 kg.

My mistake. I thought that postings had been made that the K version was lighter than the G's, but your right, I should have checked it first.

 

[claidemore]

In regards to the 2TAF documents with plane types used by various squadrons in 1944.

The squadrons shown with Hurricanes or Spit Mk V's, were not front line operational squadrons. They were either new, or being rotated back to England to regroup with new pilots etc. They used those older planes basically as advanced trainers, then switched to newer types before going operational.

The MkV was not soldiering on, it was being held in reserve. No MkVs were stationed in Europe after D-Day, the only time they might have even entered European air space would be when a reserve squadron would do a cross-channel sweep just to give some new pilots a chance to feel what an operational flight was like.

And the Mk IX was already being pulled out of the interceptor/fighter role, and being used in ground attack. There were enough Mk XIVs and Mustang III/IVs and Tempests to do that job, and the Mk IXs were being fitted with bombs etc.

Saying there were only X number of Mk XIVs vs X number of 109/190's is pretty misleading, since there were also, Mustangs, P47s, P38s, Tempests, Typhoons, and Mk IX/XVI/VIII spits.

 

[Kurfürst]

This is almost priceless.
1) So in other words your saying that a 400mph Fw109 and Me109 is dead meat for a Mustang which can go 440mph because at 400mph a Mustang has excess thrust that the other two don't have. I somehow don't think you really meant that.

Well at 400 mph at high altitude the earlier 109G and FW 190A would of course would be at the same disadvantage against the Mustang as the Mk IXs vs the 109K. At slower speeds it may be a different matter, but at least the LW was introducing a parallel cure to that with the high altitude 109s that appeared the same time as the Mustang.

2) You are saying that the Spitfire hence why its relatively slow, and outclassed by others at high speed turns, climbs acceleration
Which of the German aircraft was better at high speed turns?

Any, which had higher excess thrust, ie. 109K, 190D etc.

Re climb we are talking about a 1942 Spit IX that you agreed could match the climb of the end of war 109K with a boost that may or may not have been used in the last few months of the war.
What chance the earlier 109G's which weighed a lot more than the 109K and had less powerful engines?

a, I`ve certainly not agreed anything like that, the 1942 Spit IX at its +15 ratings was outclimb by its contemporary G-2 with ease.
b, the earlier G-2s were of course much lighter, ie G2 : 3037 kg, K4 : 3362 kg.

3) The equivalent to the 109K with the 1.98 boost would of course be the Spit 20 if you want to talk about like for like.

In timeframe, yes, but not in operational importance. I belive the Mark 20 series didnt saw air to air combat, having done but a couple patrols towards the wars end.

4) You forget that the Spit IX had more or less been replaced as an intercepter by the Spit XIV by the time the 109K was around

No, unfortunately.

The 2nd TAF towards the end of 1944, when the 109K appeared, though it had all the Mk XIV Squadrons in the RAF, had only six Mk XIV Sqns and something like 30+ Mk IX/XVIs.

Lack of range was always a problem but there were versions that matched the 109 and it was always sufficient for the tasks as the Allies had other aircraft that had a longer reach.
Lack of Speed I question, certainly when compared to the 109G and 190A. The aircraft performed at different heights but that is no suprise, all aircraft have different characteristics and the Spit was flexible enough to be able to fight at all altitudes.

Poor Control Characteristics I am not aware of any unique poor control characteristics, could you name any one in particular, with of course supporting references?

In particular I am referring the very poor control harmony, ie. extremely sensitive elevator (made the aircraft difficult to fly to the limit and made a poor gun platform) coupled with excessively heavy ailrons.

One Spitfire pilot put it, very vividly, as it was like 'touching the elevator with a light fingertip while arm wrestling the ailrons'. I am sure you`d agree its not a good combination to have in the midst of combat..

Nice info PR Spits, thank you. Do you read Hungarian, btw - as I can only give you the page in the Hungarian edition of Blandford`s book..

 

[claidemore]

Lets use 6k and 20,000 feet for climb comparisons, since charts for either plane usually show results for those heights, and they are only 300 or so feet apart.

1942 Spit Mk IX with Merlin 61, time to 20,000ft/6k, is 6.5 min at normal 12 lb boost, 5.6 at combat 15 lb boost.
A recon G2(closest data to a clean fighter G2) according to German data, is 5.8 min at presumably 1.3 ata. Knock off .2 min for the camera weight, and you have parity in climb to 6k, with one plane or the other having the edge at different alts. This pretty much agrees with British tactical trials of the two types. I know the Finnish G2 test shows slightly faster times, but the Finns were cheatin!

With Merlin 66/70 the Mk IX was reaching 6k in 4.75/4.85 minutes.

Clean 109 G-6s were 6.5 minutes, add gunpods it's 6.7min. 109K4 with 1.45 ata was also 6.5 minutes to 6k and with 1.98 ata it was 5 minutes to 6k (still longer than the 66/70 Merlin Mk IX) The superior climb rate of the Mk IX was one of the reasons it could still fight effectively in 44 and 45.

As for excess thrust in turn at high speeds, if we follow that logic, then the Mk XIV should also turn faster than a Mk IX at 400mph, yet all reports say that turn was identical. There is never any mention of the Mk XIV turning better as speed increases. Same thing happened when the Mk V was up-engined to the Mk IX.

 

[wing angel]

if its a spitfire mk 5 vs bf-109 then its down to skill

if a german ace was vs a british recruit then the ace would win

but if ace on ace then it would be close but the spit would win

BF-109 cant bank and dive lol

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

BF-109 cant bank and dive lol

Care to prove that. I am not saying you are wrong, but lets see some proof of that.

 

[Colin1]

if its a spitfire mk 5 vs bf-109 then its down to skill
if a german ace was vs a british recruit then the ace would win
but if ace on ace then it would be close but the spit would win
BF-109 cant bank and dive lol

A Bf109 what? Which version?
I'm not sure if you're saying the Bf109x can't bank and can't dive or that it can't bank-and-dive.
Your post is a little lacking in data to prove your point but diving was a stock manoevre of German pilots who'd gotten uninvited company on their tails, they would simply bunt the nose down and dive away, something the earlier Spitfires had no answer for.

 

[Soren]

The std. 109 evasive maneuver was either a hard climbing turn or a quick dive with full right rudder followed by a spiral climb.

 

[Colin1]

...or a quick dive with full right rudder...

How was the dive executed?
Did they bunt the nose forward to give themselves a few seconds on the pursuing, carburetted Spitfire, or was it another way?

 

[Soren]

The std. evasive maneuver in the early years was different Colin, the Emils would usually dive to take advantage of the British fighter's carburator issues.

The std. evasive maneuvers in the F, G K series was as explained either a hard climbing turn or a quick dive with full right rudder emmidiately followed by a tight spiral climb. The quick nose over dive was to throw off the aim of the pursuer, while the tight spiral climb was to get him off your tail. The hard climbing turn was made to take advantage of the Bf-109's two strongest assets, its' excellent turn climb performance. Nearly no Allied a/c could follow a 109 in a hard climbing turn, besides maybe the Spitfire in some rare cases.

 

[claidemore]

Spitfire pilots loved it when 109s tried the hard climbing spiral as an evasive maneuver.

 

[Soren]

Spitfire pilots loved it when 109s tried the hard climbing spiral as an evasive maneuver.

And what is your source for that claim ?

 

[claidemore]

Johnson, Closterman, Godefroy, and others.

Here is one sample:

S/L. H.C. Godefroy D.F.C. of 403 (RCAF) Squadron recorded in his Combat Report for 1 July 1943:

I was leading Sunrise squadron as top cover to 421 Squadron. We had turned up sun and were flying towards Abbeyville when I saw 5 aircraft climbing up in line abreast in front of me. I ordered my squadron to attack. Yellow section remained as top cover while Red and Blue sections dived down slightly below the E/A and came up line abreast dead astern. I picked the leader. He must have seen me because he pulled up to the right and I followed him and at about 250 yards gave him a three second burst with cannon and machine guns. There were hits all around the fuselage and cockpit and it would appear that I killed the pilot. He stayed in this turn for a short while and then spun down and crashed North East of Abbeville.
1 Me 109 Destroyed

F/Sgt G. M. Shouldice of 403 (RCAF) Squadron recorded in his Combat Report for 1 July 1943:

I was flying Red 2 to S/L H. C. Godefroy at approx 28-29,000 feet in line astern when we saw four ME 109's flying line abreast ahead of us at the same height. We climbed slightly and then positioned ourselves on the E/A's. I took a short burst from 350 to 400 yards at the third from the Starboard but observed no results. The E/A started a climbing turn to fire at Red 1 and at this time I gave the E/A another burst from about 200 yards and observed explosions in and around the cockpit and pieces dropped off the E/A. While climbing up to rejoin Red 1 I observed this E/A spinning down and smoking. Because of this and evidence added by S/L. H. C. Godefroy (Red 1), I claim this 109 as destroyed.

 

[Kurfürst]

These doesn't seem as evasive manouvers to me... in the first instance they dived down with altitude advantage, the second he was picking off a 109 attacking another Spitfire.

Ie. quite typical of the realities of air combat, real 'duels' were quite rare.

 

[parsifal]

surely it must depend on the actual situation. If your attacker is above you, and you start to climb, you are going to lose kinetic energy, whilst gaining potential energy (ie altitude), whilst the 109 might do that well, even perhaps better than most (i dont know), in the short term it is probably going to be dead, because it is slowing down in the face of a serious threat. They might as well paint a sign "hit me" on their tails.

If the 109 has the altitude advantage, and can climb faster than the allies, (something I am unconvinced of) no combat. If he dives to engage, then by implicatiuon his dive characteristics are not as good as those of his opponents (something else i am not convinced of). If the oppoennts can dive quicker they will hit the deck faster, and hit maximum speed more quickly. The German plane is generally not going to be able to close to effective range.

All this proves is that the characteristics of the aircrarft, whilst important, are not the determining factor in the combat. they are a factor, but so too is the pilot experience, the level of surprise, and tactical situation (which usualy means altitude)

 

[drgondog]

The key question is which operational scenarios must be present for the 109s excellent corkscrew climb ability making it impossible for the trailing a/c to be able to shoot (and score) effectively.

1. High closing speed for attacker - and getting too close w/o scoring?

2. Level flight in trail closer than 100 yards?

3. Both ships diving, 109 pulls into zooming corkscrew climb'

Encounter reports are subjective - and rarely state 'he beat me with a corkscrew climb'... I'm more curious about the 109 driver that consistently beats a trailing Mustang or Spitfire with this manuever to see whether it is a consistent set of tactical scenarios which enabled the 109 to get away from a six o'clock disadvantage.

 

[claidemore]

These doesn't seem as evasive manouvers to me... in the first instance they dived down with altitude advantage, the second he was picking off a 109 attacking another Spitfire.

Ie. quite typical of the realities of air combat, real 'duels' were quite rare.

In the first report Godefroy did a low yo-yo, which brought them up at the same alt but with similar, or slightly more energy. A simple manuever which keeps the attacking pilot from overshooting. The 109, according to Godefroys report, saw him and attempted to escape by doing a climbing turn (pulled up to the right). That is about as close to the tactic Soren claims was the standard 109 evasion tactic as you will find in any combat report.

In the second report the 109 was doing a climbing turn. Whether it was a climbing turn to attack "Red 1" (Shouldices interpretation), or an evasive manuever, we can't be sure, cause we don't have the 109 pilots testimony and he was the only one that knew. In either case, it was a climbing turn done with a pursuing Spitfire, and it resulted in fatal results for the 109.

I had to look a long time to find a half dozen reports of 109 pilots going into a climbing turn when attacked. For those half dozen instances, there are scores of instances where the 109 simply dived away to escape. And I don't mean dived and then did a zoom climb to regain alt, they just nosed over and made a run for it, which is a sensible thing to do when you are already at a tactical disadvantage with an enemy plane on your six. Some of those diving 109s got caught if the Spitfire stuck to it long enough, eventually you run out of altitude and have to level off. But a lot of them got away too, and a successful escape manuever tends to get repeated, hence a multitude of reports of diving to escape vs a handful of reports of 109s doing a climbing turn to escape (or attempt to turn the tables and get an advantage).

I'm sorry, but I simply do not believe that a hard climbing turn was a standard 109 evasion manuever, or even a particularly effective one.

 

[Soren]

Well sorry but you have presented no reliable source which contradicts it so far I'm afraid Claidemore. And seeing that the Bf-109 can turn as well as the Spitfire but can climb faster, I don't see why it wouldn't be an effective maneuver.