Fact or Fiction?

No.

The Spitfire Mk XIV entered in squadrons during 1944 and it was the first RR Griffon engined Spitfire to enter in large scale production. It had comletely redesigned airframe with new fuselage. It was powered by RR Griffon 65 or 66 engine with five bladed Rotol propeller. The first examples entered service in Europe with No. 610 Sqdn, in January 1944. Subsequently 37 RAF squadrons flew it. Spitfire Mk XIV was intented for combat at all altitudes. It succeeded well also against flying bombs (V1), destroying over 300.

Click to expand...

From http://koti.mbnet.fi/~jjuvonen/planes/spit_14apd.html

While searching I found this comparison of the Spitfire MKXIV and an FW190A. It is quite interesting and is based on actual tests.
http://www.odyssey.dircon.co.uk/Spitfire14v190.htm

P38 Pilot said:

Dogfighting??? I would go with the P-51 but the Spitfire XIV was more manverable.

The P.108 did seem like a great Italian bomber but whne compared to a B-17G, it would defintely lose.

Click to expand...

You do know that the P-51 was not the greatest dogfighter and even Bf-109s could hold there own against a P-51D right? The Spit was a much better dogfighter than the P-51.

my mistake with the .XIV date........

P-38 pilot said:

The P.108 did seem like a great Italian bomber but whne compared to a B-17G, it would defintely lose

Click to expand...

the B-17G was nothing special, in 1940 the P.108 was better than the B-17, which at the time was only in the C/D stage........

So by September 1943, which frontline model of the Spitfire was in existence?

Would that model have been able to take a Fiat G 55, Reggiane Re 2005 or Macchi Mc 205 in a dogfight where both pilots were of equal skill, aware of each other and starting from a position that favored neither.

I dont think so. Not much compared to the Spit in maneuvarbility. Yes I am admiting this you British blokes!

DerAdlerIstGelandet, earlier you responded that "I would go as far to say that they were equal with advantages in some areas." to the question of if the series 5 were better than the best of their contemporaries including the spitfire.

Now you say I don't think so against the best contemporary Spitfire.

I am saying they were equal at the time with each aircraft having advantages in certain areas over the other. If you read what my post said that is what I said. Against a Spitfire I dont think it would stand a chance because the Spit was more manuevarable no matter which way you look at it. The Fw-190 I would say the same. Against the best fighters of the day it did not stand a chance but it was equal to most fighters of the time.

I haven't been able to find any information on the manueverability of these Italian fighters vs. the Spitfire except for the following:

"Experience in combat confirmed what the tests had shown, that the Folgore had lost little of the agility of the Saetta. It could still turn inside any Allied fighter including the Spitfire, which together with the P-51 was the only Allied fighter that was considered an even match."

The Folgore was the Mc-202. The Mc-205 is the same aircraft, just with a more powerful engine.

I have read elsewhere that the two were equally matched but that the spitfire had a much better armament

Maybe like I said I believe that they were pretty equal to one another with either aircraft having advantages over the other in some areas but as I said in my last post I dont believe that it would be much of a match for a Spitfire or Fw-190. Maybe with German Engines it might have.

Sal Monella said:

So by September 1943, which frontline model of the Spitfire was in existence?

Would that model have been able to take a Fiat G 55, Reggiane Re 2005 or Macchi Mc 205 in a dogfight where both pilots were of equal skill, aware of each other and starting from a position that favored neither.

Click to expand...

By September 1943 you have 3 major Spitfire types deployed in Italy. Spitfire Vb/c, Spitfire IX and Spitfire VIII. Speciality Spitfires like the Mk XII, Mk VI, Mk IX HF and Mk VII were generally limited to deployment on the Channel front.

In terms of speed at all altitudes and rate of climb the Spitfire IX and VIII are more than a match for the 5 serise fighters, particularly the Merlin 66 engined variants. Rate of turn probably goes to the Italians, but as Fw-190 pilots will tell you 'turning doesn't win battles'. I don't know how well the smaller wings of the Italian fighters would of performed above about 20,000 feet, but most Meditteranean theatre combat was at medium-low altitude anyway. Up high, with the 2 stage MErlins, I would give the advantage to the Spitfire, particularly the VIII.

At low level the Spitfire L.F V would of been the dominant type. This was a Mk V with clipped wingtips and a Merlin 45M, 46M, 50M or 55M running at +18lbs boost. It was used exclusively as a low level fighter with a cropped supercharger impeller and refined aerodynamics (mostly replacing the fish tail exhaust types with multi-ejector stubs and other minor changes). It produced its top speed around 6000 feet and was very useful below 10,000 feet as a knife fighter.

If both opponents were entering the dogfight from a co-energy situation, head on, at equal altitude, I would back the Spitfire. Armament and visibility are roughly the same. A Spitfire IX or VIII climbs a little better, acclerates a little better, has a noticably better power to weight ratio than any of "5" series fighters and probably is generally better in the vertical.

A Spitfire pilot would use his better rate of climb and acceleration to build a height and energy advantage over his opponent and then proceed to make a serise of slashing high speed attacks against the Italian fighter. The Italian fighter may be able to turn inside the Spitfire at low speeds (not sure about high speeds) but that means little if your opponent is higher and faster than you. Burn all your energy in turns and your a dead duck against a faster opponent.

In an evasive situation the Italian bird would probably be superior to the Spitfire, but I really know very little about their rate of roll, pitch stability, dive limits, strength of stick inputs, instanteous turn rates, sustained turn rates ect, ect. If I wanted to control airspace then I would choose the Spitfire over the Italian fighters.

I understand that all three of the series 5 fighters and the Mc-202 had phenominal climb rates.

http://www.aldini.it/re2005/performances.htm


Reggiane Re-2005 Sagittario

climb rate:
19,685 ft in 5 min

As for the famed Fiat G 55:

In December 1942 a technical commission of the Regia Aeronautica was invited by Luftwaffe to test some German aircrafts in Rechlin. The visit was part of a joint plan for the standardization of the Axis aircraft production. In the same time some Luftwaffe officers visited Guidonia where they were particularly interested in the performances promised by the Serie 5's. On December 9 these impressions were discussed in a Luftwaffe staff meeting and rised the interest of Goering itself.

In February 1943 a German test commission was sent in Italy to evaluate the new Italian fighters. The commission was led by Oberst Petersen and was formed by Luftwaffe officiers and pilots nad by technical personnel, among them the Flugbaumeister Malz. The Germans carried with them also several aircrafts included a Fw190A and a Me109G for direct comparison tests in simulated dogfights.

The tests began February 20. The German commission, not without a certain surprise, was very impressed by the Italian aircrafts, the G55 in particular. In general, all the Serie 5's were very good at low altitudes, but the G55 was competitive with its German opponents also in term of speed and climb rate at high altitudes still maintaining superior handling characteristics. The definitive evaluation by the German commission was "excellent" for the G55, "good" for the Re2005 and "average" for the MC205. Oberst Petersen defined the G55 "the best fighter in the Axis" and immediately telegraphed his impressions to Goering. After listening the recommendations of Petersen, Milch and Galland, a meeting held by Goering on February 22 voted to produce the G55 in Germany.

The interest of the Germans, apart from the good test results, derived also from the development possibilities they was able to see in the G55 and in the Re2005. For the Re2005 the German interest resulted in the provision of an original DB605 with the new WM injection. This engine and a VDM propeller were installed on the MM495 prototype that was acquired by Luftwaffe and tested in Rechlin. The aircraft reached 700 km/h during a test with a German pilot, but the airframe was not judged sufficiently strong for these performances.

The G55 was bigger and heavier and was considered a very good candidate for the new DB603 engine. Other visits were organized in Germany during March and May 1943 in Rechlin and Berlin. The G55 was again tested at Rechlin at the presence of Milch. Gabrielli and other FIAT personalities were invited to visit German factories and to discuss the evolution of the aircraft. The specifications of the German G55/II included the DB603 engine, five 20 mm guns and a pressurized cockpit. The suggestion of weapons in the wings, limited to one 20 mm gun for each wing, originated the final configuration of the Serie I, while the 603 engine was succesfully installed in the G56 prototypes.

As a concrete results of the German interest in the G55, the Luftwaffe acquired three complete G55 Sottoserie 0 airframes (MM91064-65-66) for evaluations and experiments giving in change three DB603 engines and original machinery for the setup of other production lines of the DB605/RA1050 RC58 I. Two of the Luftwaffe G55's remained in Turin, at the Aeritalia plants, where they were used by German and Italian engineers to study the planned modifications and the possible optimizations to the production process. Later these two were converted to Serie I and delivered to the ANR. The third one was transferred to Rechlin for tests and experiments in Germany. The DB603 engines were used to build the G56 prototypes.

The interest in the G55 program was still high after the Armistice: in October 1943 Kurt Tank, who previously personally tested a G55 in Rechlin, was in Turin to discuss about the G55 production. However, war events and the not yet optimized production process were the reasons for which the G55 program was eventually abandoned by the Luftwaffe. Early produced G55's required about 15000 manhours; while there were estimations to reduce the effort to about 9000 manhours, the German factories were able to assemble a Bf109 in only 5000 manhours.

Nice info Jabberwocky!

The information that my sources give is this:

Fiat G.55 Maximum Climb rate 3,300-3,900 feet per minute
Macchi 205- Maximum climb rate 3,900 feet per minute
Re-2005; Maximum Climb rate 3,750 feet per minute

Spitfire Mk VIII Maximum Climb rate 4,650 feet per minute
Spitfire Mk IX Maximum Clib rate 4,700 feet per minute

Spitfire Mk VIII (+25lbs boost) 5,580 feet per minute
Spitfire mk IX (+25lbs boost) 5,740 feet per minute

Merlin 66 engined Spitfires, which was the most common production variant, could climb to 6100 meters (20,000 feet) in slightly less than 5 minutes.

Merlin 61 engined variants did the same climb about 5.5-6 minutes, but maintained a higher rate of climb above 25,000 feet. Maximum rate of climb was around 3,850 feet per minute.

Merlin 63 engined variants made it to 20,000 feet in around 5.5 minutes. Maximum rate of climb was about 4,000 feet per minute.

From everything i have ever heard, the MC.205 could turn inside a spitfire. It was also ive heard more manoueverable in every aspect. It had decent armament of two 12.7mm machine-guns, and two 20mm cannon, not too heavy, but nothing to be scoffed at. Climb was less than a spitfire, but it could still more than hold its own.

That's my understanding too Carpenoctem.

I also heard that prior to discovering the unacceptable amount of man hours necessary to manufacture the plane, the Germans were contemplating the G.55 as the replacement for the Me-109. The Me-109's airframe had reached its developmental apex and the G 55 was thought to have superior performance potential with the new German engines.

The G 56 was developed for the Germans. It was a G 55 with a DB 603A engine.

Gnomey posted an interesting comparison of flight tests between the FW-190A vs. Spitfire Mk V and IX.

http://www.odyssey.dircon.co.uk/Spitfire14v190.htm

Mk. V - Fw-190 is faster at all altitudes. Fw-190 has greater climb at all heights. The best speeds for climbing are approximately the same, but the angle of the FW 190 is considerably steeper. Under maximum continuous climbing conditions the climb of the FW 190 is about 450 ft/min better up to 25,000'. With both aircraft flying at high cruising speed and then pulling up into a climb, the superior climb of the FW 190 is even more marked. When both aircraft are pulled up into a climb from a dive, the FW 190 draws away very rapidly and the pilot of the Spitfire has no hope of catching it. Fw-190 can dive faster at all altitudes. Fw-190 has greater manueverability except in turning circle. Fw-190 has greater acceleration.

Mk. IX - In speed, both are roughly equal with each having a slight advantage over the other at various heights. In climb, both are roughly equal but overall, the Spitfire appears better. At 22K, the Spitfire is progressively superior. Fw-190 can dive faster at all heights. The Fw-190 is more manueverable except in turning circle. The general impression of the pilots involved in the trials is that the Spitfire Mark IX compares well with the FW 190. Providing the Spitfire IX has the initiative, it undoubtedly stands a good chance of shooting down the FW 190.

The above tests between the Fw-190A the Mk. V and IX are interesting because it was these Spitfires that were the contemporaries of the Series 5 fighters.

The G 55 in particular was found to have performance that was notably better than the Fw-190A at all altitudes.

One could easily infer that the G 55 would have edged out the Mk V and IX Spit. (All of the 5 Series fighters could turn inside of the Spitfire.)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:

P38 Pilot said:

Dogfighting??? I would go with the P-51 but the Spitfire XIV was more manverable.

The P.108 did seem like a great Italian bomber but whne compared to a B-17G, it would defintely lose.

Click to expand...

You do know that the P-51 was not the greatest dogfighter and even Bf-109s could hold there own against a P-51D right? The Spit was a much better dogfighter than the P-51.

Click to expand...

I realise that. But i prefer the P-51D Mustang over anything. It wasnt as good as the Spitfire or Bf-109 but it could pack a pretty good punch.

That it could. I like the P-51D also I just think that a lot of it was a myth and based off of numerical superiority.

Sal Monella said:

Gnomey posted an interesting comparison of flight tests between the FW-190A vs. Spitfire Mk V and IX.

http://www.odyssey.dircon.co.uk/Spitfire14v190.htm

Mk. V - Fw-190 is faster at all altitudes. Fw-190 has greater climb at all heights. The best speeds for climbing are approximately the same, but the angle of the FW 190 is considerably steeper. Under maximum continuous climbing conditions the climb of the FW 190 is about 450 ft/min better up to 25,000'. With both aircraft flying at high cruising speed and then pulling up into a climb, the superior climb of the FW 190 is even more marked. When both aircraft are pulled up into a climb from a dive, the FW 190 draws away very rapidly and the pilot of the Spitfire has no hope of catching it. Fw-190 can dive faster at all altitudes. Fw-190 has greater manueverability except in turning circle. Fw-190 has greater acceleration.

Mk. IX - In speed, both are roughly equal with each having a slight advantage over the other at various heights. In climb, both are roughly equal but overall, the Spitfire appears better. At 22K, the Spitfire is progressively superior. Fw-190 can dive faster at all heights. The Fw-190 is more manueverable except in turning circle. The general impression of the pilots involved in the trials is that the Spitfire Mark IX compares well with the FW 190. Providing the Spitfire IX has the initiative, it undoubtedly stands a good chance of shooting down the FW 190.

The above tests between the Fw-190A the Mk. V and IX are interesting because it was these Spitfires that were the contemporaries of the Series 5 fighters.

The G 55 in particular was found to have performance that was notably better than the Fw-190A at all altitudes.

One could easily infer that the G 55 would have edged out the Mk V and IX Spit. (All of the 5 Series fighters could turn inside of the Spitfire.)

Click to expand...

This was a test done against a Spitfire IX with a Merlin 61. The Merlin 61 produces 1,565 hp and has a best critical altitude of around 27,000 feet.

The FW-190 outperforms it at low altitude, and is outperformed by the Spitfire IX at high altitudes. At medium altitudes there is a small advantage to the 190.

The most common Spitfire in 1943 would be a L.F. IX with either a Merlin 63/63A or a Merlin 66, which offered marked improvement below 20-25,000 feet over the Merlin 61. Both produce ~1,720 hp at a critical altitude of around 22,000 feet. Rate of climb to 20,000 feet is 5-5.5 minutes, about 1.5-2 minutes or 750-1000 feet per minute faster than the Merlin 61 engined variants Speed at low and medium altitudes is around 10 mph faster. Top speed at high altitude is down by about 5 mph.

Fiat G 55 produced 1,475 hp