To interject another idea in here. For high speed control the torsional rigidity of the wing structure becomes an issue. A wing can actually warp and cause a control reversal, the aileron acting like a geared tab. Every aircraft is a set of compromises, it is possible that the compromises settled on by the Bf designers favored light weight, helping climb, acceleration and low roll inertia. For boom and zoom tactics this was apparently felt to be a good compromise.
In the transport jets that I have flown we had excellent roll rates potentially available (much better than any WWII piston fighter) due to the integration of roll spoilers. Each wing also had two sets of ailerons, with the flaps up the outboard ones lock out so as not to torsionally distort the wing.
Certainly it is possible for some WWII aircraft to exhibit excellent high speed roll control, such as the F4U, but in a large and heavy aircraft. The F8F "Beer Cat" took an interesting tack toward structural strength and light weight by having breakaway wing tips, allowing the ultimate structural strength without further building up the basic wing weight.
So maybe these were their set of choices?
In the transport jets that I have flown we had excellent roll rates potentially available (much better than any WWII piston fighter) due to the integration of roll spoilers. Each wing also had two sets of ailerons, with the flaps up the outboard ones lock out so as not to torsionally distort the wing.
Certainly it is possible for some WWII aircraft to exhibit excellent high speed roll control, such as the F4U, but in a large and heavy aircraft. The F8F "Beer Cat" took an interesting tack toward structural strength and light weight by having breakaway wing tips, allowing the ultimate structural strength without further building up the basic wing weight.
So maybe these were their set of choices?