Groundhog Thread Part Deux - P-39 Fantasy and Fetish - The Never Ending Story (Mods take no responsibility for head against wall injuries sustained)

[pbehn]

Jeffrey Quill only spent 19 days as a combat pilot, so he wasnt aware of day to day operations. What he says is true from his experience, but things changed in October. It is also true that Spitfire pilots spent more time on patrols than in combat, even in 11 group.

Jeffrey Quill – Spitfire Test Pilot — Articles | 1940 | people | pre-war | Spitfire prototype

During the Second World War, Quill was in charge of development and production flying, a job that he took very seriously – so seriously that he felt he must obtain first-hand combat experience. He was temporarily released on 5 August 1940 to join No. 65 Squadron at RAF Hornchurch, privately hoping that it would be a permanent appointment. On 16 August he shot down a Messerschmitt Bf 109 and two days later he shared a victory over a Heinkel He 111. His combat days were short-lived because he was recalled after 19 days, but they made Quill all the more determined to make the Spitfire an even better fighting machine.​

 

[Milosh]

It must have been miraculous that British a/c armed with puny .303"s managed to shoot down any Luftwaffe a/c during the BoB.

 

[pbehn]

It must have been miraculous that British a/c armed with puny .303"s managed to shoot down any Luftwaffe a/c during the BoB.

A bigger wonder is that the LW retained the same calibre until the end of the war, no wonder they didnt have any aces worth a mention.

 

[BiffF15]

Gentlemen your patience is astounding. i think the longer this goes on more "items" will be discovered that you will spend an extraordinary amount of effort on all to no avail.

Good luck.

 

[Ascent]

Sorry, I've lost track. Are we listening to fighter pilots now or not?

 

[pbehn]

Gentlemen your patience is astounding. i think the longer this goes on more "items" will be discovered that you will spend an extraordinary amount of effort on all to no avail.

Good luck.

For myself I now realise why the Spitfire MkIX and Mk XIV were how they were, with rate of climb, service ceiling and top speed being much more important than range. Park and Dowdings eyes will have been more upon the many raids that werent intercepted rather than those that were.

 

[buffnut453]

Per Wiki: "From mid September daylight bombing was gradually taken over by Bf109E fighters adapted to take one 250kg (550lb) bomb. They flew at altitudes over 20000'. The raids were intended to carry out precision bombing on military and economic targets, but it was hard to achieve accuracy with the single bomb."

Jeffrey Quill wrote of his combat experience while flying with No. 65 Squadron during this period: "Nearly all of our engagements with 109s took place between 20000' and 25000'."

Most LW raids were at night. No 30000' altitudes there. I continue to maintain that a 109E loaded with a 550lb bomb can't get to 30000' and can't hit anything except the ground. Any combat at 30000' in the BoB was extremely rare. Extremely.

And here you are dissembling again. First you state the BoB got "nowhere near 30,000ft".now you're focusing on combat at 30,000ft. Being charitable, I wonder if this is an artifact of your over-emphasis on test reports and test pilot testimonies, which means you entirely fail to comprehend operational and tactical matters.

Some points regarding your above post:

1. As others have noted, Quill was only in the front line for a short period of time. You criticized others for just having single examples of situations but now you quote just one person, with limited operational/combat experience and no general overview of how the battle was proceeding, and seem to think that's a valid rebuttal. News flash: it isn't.

2. In order for engagements to take place at 25,000ft one or both of the adversaries will typically be above that altitude, usually by a margin of several thousand feet. Per my Post #2107, height is everything in air combat. Neither the defending FC fighters nor any escorting Luftwaffe Me109s would be flying at combat speeds when the fight was initiated. You don't go into combat at cruising speed. The quickest way to gain speed is to dive. Hence a combat at 25,000ft could easily have been initiated at 30,000ft. There are numerous accounts of BoB combats starting at very high altitudes and ending right down on the deck.

3. You are continuing to make the claim that a Me109 with a 550lb bomb could not reach 30,000ft. You may be right...but some evidence would be nice. You keep demanding it of others, so how about stumping up some material yourself instead of continuing to spout opinions. Regardless, you're ignoring the fact that the "bomber" Me109s often had a fighter escort. As noted previously, those fighter escorts would be at a higher altitude, and often many thousands of feet higher, to prevent the escorts being bounced and to give them a tactical advantage in the initial engagement.

4. Regarding "Any combat at 30,000' in the BoB was extremely rare. Extremely." You've been offered evidence of dozens of missions and engagements that were at or about 30,000ft. You have FC senior leaders directing fighters to 30,000ft. You've now had it explained (twice) that altitude controls the battle and just because most combats happened at lower altitudes that does not mean the engagement did not commence very much higher. Again, you're continuing to trot out an opinion (which is funny for person who so prides himself on relying on facts) with not a shred of evidence.

Unconnected with the above post, I also note you are still ignoring my comments about the P-39C and the gas heater. Again, put up or shut up. If the British deliberately specified an unnecessary gas heater for the P-400 show us the evidence. You made the claim now back it up with facts. You say you're big on facts but you seem very reluctant to post many, or to accept facts presented by others.

My overall take-away from this is that you're just trolling. A number of people on this thread have taken the time to provide solid, contemporary evidence, and have tried to explain the flaws in your thinking. In response, you dismiss them with nothing more than your personal opinions and continue to return to the same old tired, debunked, mantras. That's the very epitome of a troll.

 

[pbehn]

Sorry, I've lost track. Are we listening to fighter pilots now or not?

Only if the selected quote fits the narrative. What Quill said was true in September 1940, when twin engined bombers were still operational. They took advantage of the same defensive escort "screen" or pretended to be part of it, overtaking the bomber stream and coming out of the front of it, intended to be the first to arrive at London.

From Wiki article on Battle of Britain day 15 Sept 1940 Battle of Britain Day - Wikipedia

"They crossed the coast at Folkestone at 11:36. Fighters from II.Lehrgeschwader 2 (Demonstration Wing 2) were also to form part of the escort. They flew in advance of the main force to drop 550 lb (250 kg) bombs and then resume their role as fighters."

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Back to the corner...

 

[GrauGeist]

Sorry, I've lost track. Are we listening to fighter pilots now or not?

Nope - it seems that their first-hand accounts are deemed "unreliable"...

 

[MikeMeech]

And here you are dissembling again. First you state the BoB got "nowhere near 30,000ft".now you're focusing on combat at 30,000ft. Being charitable, I wonder if this is an artifact of your over-emphasis on test reports and test pilot testimonies, which means you entirely fail to comprehend operational and tactical matters.

Some points regarding your above post:

1. As others have noted, Quill was only in the front line for a short period of time. You criticized others for just having single examples of situations but now you quote just one person, with limited operational/combat experience and no general overview of how the battle was proceeding, and seem to think that's a valid rebuttal. News flash: it isn't.

2. In order for engagements to take place at 25,000ft one or both of the adversaries will typically be above that altitude, usually by a margin of several thousand feet. Per my Post #2107, height is everything in air combat. Neither the defending FC fighters nor any escorting Luftwaffe Me109s would be flying at combat speeds when the fight was initiated. You don't go into combat at cruising speed. The quickest way to gain speed is to dive. Hence a combat at 25,000ft could easily have been initiated at 30,000ft. There are numerous accounts of BoB combats starting at very high altitudes and ending right down on the deck.

3. You are continuing to make the claim that a Me109 with a 550lb bomb could not reach 30,000ft. You may be right...but some evidence would be nice. You keep demanding it of others, so how about stumping up some material yourself instead of continuing to spout opinions. Regardless, you're ignoring the fact that the "bomber" Me109s often had a fighter escort. As noted previously, those fighter escorts would be at a higher altitude, and often many thousands of feet higher, to prevent the escorts being bounced and to give them a tactical advantage in the initial engagement.

4. Regarding "Any combat at 30,000' in the BoB was extremely rare. Extremely." You've been offered evidence of dozens of missions and engagements that were at or about 30,000ft. You have FC senior leaders directing fighters to 30,000ft. You've now had it explained (twice) that altitude controls the battle and just because most combats happened at lower altitudes that does not mean the engagement did not commence very much higher. Again, you're continuing to trot out an opinion (which is funny for person who so prides himself on relying on facts) with not a shred of evidence.

Unconnected with the above post, I also note you are still ignoring my comments about the P-39C and the gas heater. Again, put up or shut up. If the British deliberately specified an unnecessary gas heater for the P-400 show us the evidence. You made the claim now back it up with facts. You say you're big on facts but you seem very reluctant to post many, or to accept facts presented by others.

My overall take-away from this is that you're just trolling. A number of people on this thread have taken the time to provide solid, contemporary evidence, and have tried to explain the flaws in your thinking. In response, you dismiss them with nothing more than your personal opinions and continue to return to the same old tired, debunked, mantras. That's the very epitome of a troll.

Hi
The RAF wrote an internal Secret report narrative on the BoB, this was reprinted by CASS in 2000 as 'The Battle of Britain' by T C G James, the following pages may be of interest:

Mike

 

[pbehn]

I dont know what the significance of saying it was a rare occurrence is. Use of upkeep bombs was very rare in fact only used on one night. Plutonium and enriched uranium bombs were rarer still, one of each used. Grand slam and tall boys were a little more common but still statistically as rare as hens teeth. When Park and Dowding got involved in an issue it meant it wasnt rare at all. The LW lost 29 Bf 109s in October but that is a fraction of the number sent because as the day by day record shows most werent intercepted, which is why Park and Dowding were involved.

 

[MikeMeech]

Hi
'Air Power Review' of Summer 2015 (RAF BoB 75th Anniversary edition), had reprints of a number of 'No. 11 Group Instructions to Controllers' some of interest to this subject are below, first part of one dated 11 September 1940:

The RAF at the time certainly thought there was action at height.

Mike

 

[Milosh]

No German a/c had 2 stage engines, just to be picky.

 

[buffnut453]

Many thanks M MikeMeech for those posts. The weight of evidence makes it abundantly clear that Fighter Command was striving to operate in the 20,000-30,000ft range, with height of paramount importance to provide as much tactical advantage as possible. It beggars belief that P-39 Expert continues to insist that "It can't be definitively proven that planes did operate at 30000' in the BoB."

I feel a General Melchett moment coming on:

 

[GregP]

What is really extremely rare is P-39 Expert learning anything from first-hand reports of combat pilots who were there and who were required to write about their missions as part of squadron procedures.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Do I understand this correctly? An internet armchair pilot thinks his opinions are more valuable than pilot reports?

 

[buffnut453]

Do I understand this correctly? An internet armchair pilot thinks his opinions are more valuable than pilot reports?

The general thrust of the argument seems to be that, because combat operations aren't suitable for precise, test-regime, measurement, nobody can prove that any aircraft during the BoB operated at 30,000ft.

This is some serious dissembling given that the whole genesis of this discussion began with P-39 Expert stating that the air war over the Eastern Front was conducted at the same altitudes as during the Battle of Britain in 1940. The Soviet Kuban Stairs tactic was cited as an example of high-altitude engagements over the Eastern Front, despite the fact that the Kuban Stairs topped out at about 23,000ft. He then stated that aircraft in the BoB "got nowhere near 30,000ft" and, since then, has been repeating his opinion that, if (stressing the IF...he doesn't think aircraft in 1940 COULD get to 30K ft) aircraft got up to 30,000ft, then it was "extremely rare." Of course, that entire argument ignores the fact that there were all sorts of engagements at altitudes above the Kuban Stairs levels, which suggests that the BoB was a DIFFERENT OPERATIONAL ENVIRONMENT than the Eastern Front. However, all that gets ignored, as do any contemporaneous records of BoB operations at 30,000ft because (a) the pilots were exaggerating, and (b) such operations were "extremely rare."

 

[pbehn]

Do I understand this correctly? An internet armchair pilot thinks his opinions are more valuable than pilot reports?

Not quite, Chuck Yeager's opinion of his trainer trumps any combat or test report by "joe pilot".

 

[Glider]

I think were all missing the most important error. We keep forgetting that the real pilots who flew them, the real engineer's who worked on them and the real designers who did their best to make the most of the aircraft. Are almost as realistic as a flight sim.