Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
No but you did say this...LoL, I never claimed that LE slats were a WW2 invention - once again someone tries to put words into my mouth.
No - the fact here is that RAF test pilots knew exactly what the stats did, how they performed and when they deployed...But keep running circles around the facts if you want FLYBOYJ, doesn't matter to me. I'm just especially surprised that you don't even for a second stop to think about why RL LW pilots (Aces even) tell the exact same story as we've tried getting across to you, abit strange if it wasn't true don't you think ?
That's just an assumption.....Its also abit strange how the 109 is mentioned as being embarrased by the opening of its slats if not because the pilot thought that this was the very limit of the a/c. Its a pretty clear message to me!
LoL, I never claimed that LE slats were a WW2 invention - once again someone tries to put words into my mouth.
But keep running circles around the facts if you want FLYBOYJ, doesn't matter to me. I'm just especially surprised that you don't even for a second stop to think about why RL LW pilots (Aces even) tell the exact same story as we've tried getting across to you, abit strange if it wasn't true don't you think ?
Its also abit strange how the 109 is mentioned as being embarrased by the opening of its slats if not because the pilot thought that this was the very limit of the a/c. Its a pretty clear message to me!
No - the fact here is that RAF test pilots knew exactly what the stats did, how they performed and when they deployed...
When did Carson become a British citizen?But its not the first time BS has been said by a British test-pilot, I remember a certain individual by the name of Kit Carson.
I doubt that - what do you think qualified this guys as a test pilot? My guess is he flew dozens of aircraft prior to even being considered for test pilot training...FLYBOYJ, the pilot who tested the 109 had most likely never flown any a/c with slats before, which is esp. apparent with his comment that the 109 was 'embarrased' by the opening o its slats - a guy who knows how slats function wouldn't fling out BS like that.
But its not the first time BS has been said by a British test-pilot, I remember a certain individual by the name of Kit Carson.
Because it was a maintenance issue and it was better just to wire them shut than have to deal with them in the field.Also if the British understood the slats so well then how come they couldn't manage to get them to work on the Westland and had to have them shut ???
Glider,
You're comparing the Spitfire IX which has better high alt performance to the heavy 109G-6. Besides the 109G-6's favorite place to be was at low to medium alt.
Anyway can you find others ? I can't.
FLYBOYJ, the pilot who tested the 109 had most likely never flown any a/c with slats before, which is esp. apparent with his comment that the 109 was 'embarrased' by the opening o its slats - a guy who knows how slats function wouldn't fling out BS like that.
But its not the first time BS has been said by a British test-pilot, I remember a certain individual by the name of Kit Carson.
The Kit Carson who was an 18.5 victory ace who shot down 7 me 109s and 2 Me 26s's?? 'Kit' would be a HIGHLY unusual name for a RAF test pilot
Thats just an assumption... and a wrong one...
Also if the British understood the slats so well then how come they couldn't manage to get them to work on the Westland and had to have them shut ???
Yes, it all supports what I and Kurfürst have been saying all along.
How comes only I have to substatiate the comments.
1) You make a comment about the training of the German pilots which I question giving my reasons for questioning your comments. I ask you to support your comment.
You cannot support your comment.
2) You make a definate statement that I will not find any example of a German pilot finding the the Spitfire a handfull.
I do, but suddenly that isn't good enough.
3) I point out that the Spit V over Malta held their own against the 109G2's. Clearly the only way that could happen is if the Spit could turn faster than the 109 as its slower, dives less well, has a slower climb and doesn't roll as well either.
If the 109 F or G2 could turn tighter as well they would have slaughtered the Spit V
4) You have been asked a number of times to support your comment that the British test pilots were afraid or nervous of the slat deployment.
You cannot or have not supported that comment
Bill, the captured FW-190 [Jabo] actually managed to match the P-51B in turn performance, the P-51B didn't turn any better. Says quite abit!
In German tests the FW-190A [Fighter] proved no match for the Bf-109 in turn fights, yet another clear indication that something wasn't done quite right in those RAF tests.
Do I really need to sum up the rest ??
PS: I do know that the Spit V turns better than the G-6, but the G-2 would've been a handful for the Spit.
Isn't the G2 the alleged test bed for the March 2, 1944 RAF comparison tests?
Wouldn't make any difference at all. Zekes were shot down in swarms despite their VASTLY superior turn performance - the reason for this: Inferior climb, speed roll rate.
Oops - inferior at high speeds, superior in the same strike zone as me 109 G-6 from your above comments. Roll rate advantage disappeared above 300 kts.. and Zeke/Zero were defeated by high speed/medium to high altitude strike zone ships like P-38, F6F and F-4U
The same happened to the Spitfire over channel against the FW-190, the FW-190's slaughtered the Spitfire's in dogfights using yo yo tactics.
Yep until the Spit IX emerged
No cause had it been all about superior performance handling then the G-2 would've done so already with its superior speed, climb roll rate, slow speed turn performance isn't that important. The Spitfire pilots were however excellent and did well to protect each other in aerial engagements (Something the IJN IJA didn't do well at all), hence why the managed to hold their own. Steinhoff himself called British pilots some of the bravest and very best pilots he ever faced, much better than USAAF USSR pilots according to him.
I talked to Steinhoff about those comments to Toliver because I wanted to understand his context - he fought Britain early and USSR most of his career - when he got back to West he mostly was with Me 262 and had very rare encounters w/Mustang and Jug in Conventional fighters.. like Rall and Hartman and Krupinski, etc most LW Experten above 50 awards did not deal with USAAF on a daily basis.. certainly very few above 100.
Bar, Bartels, Hahn, Ihlefeld, Dahl and others survived 1943-1945 on West Front but Nowatny, Mayer, Schwaiger, Wessling and many others did not.
What ?! Now thats just plain lying Glider cause I've been doing nothing else, seriously !
Soren
"Besides the 109G-6's favorite place to be was at low to medium alt."
And how you definite low and medium altitude? Finns thought that Bf 109G-6 wasn't at its best at low level and from 2000m to 3000m was the worst height to fought against Soviet fighters in Bf 109G-6. They thought that the best altitude for G-6 was from 5 to 7 km.
How is it so, G-6 had two MG 131s instead of two MG17 cowling mgs and FuG 16 instead of FuG VII, but those were main differences. G-2 was a bit faster, lacking the cowling bulges and a bit better climber but some 90kg more weight should not have big influence on turning ability.
Already have, can't help you wont read.
Interesting. I will need to find out what type of Spit they were. If it was a low level version presumably your saying that the Spit would beat the G6 at any altitudeNo you're right it isn't good enough, the reason being he's doing a comparison at 28,000 ft - not the 109G-6's favorite operating alt, it is however a very nice operational altitude for the Spitfire.
PPS The Spit V was against the G2 not the G6PS: I do know that the Spit V turns better than the G-6, but the G-2 would've been a handful for the Spit.
No one would disagree that the FW190 was a much better fighter than the Spit V, but we are talking about the 109.Wouldn't make any difference at all. Zekes were shot down in swarms despite their VASTLY superior turn performance - the reason for this: Inferior climb, speed roll rate. The same happened to the Spitfire over channel against the FW-190, the FW-190's slaughtered the Spitfire's in dogfights using yo yo tactics.