How The Spitfire Mk XIV Compared to the K4 and Other Questions

[pbehn]

They were interceptors, not really fighters, and could take off, climb FAST, shoot the intruder, and then had to come home and refuel and rearm, much like the Spitfire did in WWII. A Lightning, in particular, wasn't going to go very far, especially if you used the burner or reheat as the Brits call it.

I have no doubt you are right, I dont think Willy was given details of Germanys military plans but defending a place was not high on any LW agenda in the 1930s.

Off topic, but if you live a while in the UK you will find the Brits are almost uncomfortable unless they have two words where one would do. It drives people from other countries mad trying to learn the "difference" when frequently there isnt one. I am sure you could find someone somewhere to give a very technical explanation why there IS a difference between re heat and after burner. It is what we do when we are bored.

 

[Juha]

Those variants will have better climb and straight line speed, but did they offer better manoeuvrability?

In other words, will the tactics of the Spitfire pilot have to be changed much?

Hello Wuzak
During spring of 1945 Spit Mk. XIV outclimbed virtually everything but 109K-4 (probably this incl also 109G-10) at around 4.000m and of course Me 163 was in its own class. Bf 109G-5/AS and G-6/AS probably only meant that the difference in roc and level speed wasn't so marked higher up but not sure what Bf 109G-14, if MW50 was available, meant at low level, it might be faster and even climbed better near the deck than Mk. XIV with +18 lb boost. Mk XIV wasn't the nice plane that Mks V, VIII and IX were but a brute, it had excellent roc at all altitudes and was very fast over 6.000m. LF. VIIIs and IXs also had very goodt roc even if from late 44 onwards they were on slow side in horizontal speed. So they were not pure horizontal fighters like Spit F. V was because it was underdog against 109F and 190A in other arenas.

 

[Juha]

Kurfurst was an extremely effective internet presence who single handily changed, infact corrected for better the perception and reality of the Me 109 a few of his statements are not proven but most are. I do miss his passion and to an extent his sarcasm, which got him into trouble. He seemed to respond with ad Hominem when he perceived bias. Sometimes it takes that kind of personality to make a change...

I'd say that many Finns knew what kind of planes early and mid 109Gs were long before Kurfürst site. Same goes probably to many Germans. I'd even say that many of Finns had/have more realistic view of 109G than K has.

 

[pbehn]

I'd say that many Finns knew what kind of planes early and mid 109Gs were long before Kurfürst site. Same goes probably to many Germans. I'd even say that many of Finns had/have more realistic view of 109G than K has.

I cant honestly remember any BoB pilots mentioning Kurfurst, their view of the 109 was based on seeing it and many would have liked to change seats.

 

[GregP]

I've always liked the British phrase being "in a bit of a snit" instead of being pissed off. It is likely we Yanks have missed some very good words and phrases, and it occasionally gets us in some difficulty over there.

Perhaps our vocabulary should expand a bit.

Highly unlikely in today's world of US schools. I think they really want to hand out a diploma and push them home as quickly as possible without any study ... mostly due to the school boards being runs by parents instead of educators.

A bit off-subject, eh what? I'll try to stay focused ...

The Bf 109 always WAS a good airplane. But you DID have to learn its characteristics to make it effective. The Spitfire was more simple to fly, but proper training in the Bf 109's idiosyncrasies could easily make the difference.

For instance, the Bf 109 was not good at vertical climbing aerobatics, but it WAS a good climber. It just didn't want to do rolls and aiming while doing so at high speed. So the Germans used the upward vertical mostly to gain separation and to change height. It was VERY good in medium-speed engagements, so the Bf 109 drivers all tried to slow things down to fight. If the Allies bit on that, they were in for a fight. If they stayed fast, the Bf 109 could hang in there but was not as maneuverable.

Also, the Bf 109 had centerline armament and the Germans all said it made a big difference. To loosely quote the top 3 aces, 1 in the fuselage is worth 2 in the wings.

The Bf 109 has a very strong claim to "the best piston fighter ever built" if you were to look only at enemy aircraft kills. But taking missions other than "fighter" into account will quickly make the Bf 109 lose a bit of ground due to short range, lack of ability to haul much of anything useful other than itself, armament, fuel, and pilot. Of course, it wasn't DESIGNED to do much but be an attack figher and it did that mission very well.

Willy would have gained the love of many Germans if he had added aileron and ruddder trim to it ... and maybe a good windscreen with better visibility. I KNOW they flew several, at least experimentally.

 

[pbehn]

I've always liked the British phrase being "in a bit of a snit" instead of being pissed off. It is likely we Yanks have missed some very good words and phrases, and it occasionally gets us in some difficulty over there.
Perhaps out vocabulary should expand a bit.

In the USA I think English is considered to be a language of its own when it is a consrtucted mix of old German old French Latin and a few others. I worked in the pipe industry. Pipe is from German (a pfiffer or piper is a player of the pipe musical instrument) but the latin for "pipe" is tube. I must have spent at least 3 days of my life discussing the difference between a pipe and a tube and having very technical explanations of the difference when there isnt any, apart from the words come from the two languages that made up English and existed side by side for centuries. "Labour", "work" and "travail" all mean the same thing literally but actually have different uses in English.

 

[GregP]

The English language might require a separate thread in some obscure forum that nobody will read ...

Let's see, we have there, their, and they're ... which all are pronounced exactly the same but have different meanings. Not that many young people these days would know ... and that's another thread. The worst are internet phone abbreviations that make the language even less precise. In the end, we may fade into Chinese, which is a flowery, rich language, but which it NOT technical in the slightest. you can ask 5 Chinese people for a translation of a flight manual and get 5 different translations.

I can say that because we spent $8,500 doing it for a Chinese MiG-15 before acquiring a manual in the Polish language that always means the same when the same words are written down. Only after we got the Polish manual did we understand it ... Go figure. The Chinese character for "locomotive" doesn't mean "locomotive" at all. It translates loosely as "the box on wheels that emits smoke and pulls other boxes behind it while making noise ... or something to that effect. Everyone in China KNOWS what it means but the character itslef is a story, not a single word. That is according to several Chinese people I know. I can't read it myself ...

 

[stona]

I was once told by the American captain of a US aircraft on which I was travelling that we would 'be landing momentarily at Chicago'. I distinctly remembering hoping that there would be time to get off
Momentarily means FOR a moment to me, not IN a moment!
Cheers
Steve

 

[pbehn]

A locomotive means something that moves something else. There used to be old street signs saying "no locomotives" in England, on the 1920s and 30s many vehicles were steam powered and used to tow carts trailers threshers etc. That is how the language changes.


I still want to hear someone explaining the different fuel flow rates, exhaust velocities, temperatures and diameters between a re heat system and afterburners, I am sure it has happened.

 

[stona]

You should have seen my Aunt's 1970s knitting machine instructions, translated from Japanese, possibly by someone who spoke neither language. They were gibberish.
Cheers
Steve

 

[Kryten]

Same today with direct translation from Chinese to English, obviously done by a computer, it's more amusing than informative half the time!

 

[pbehn]

Same today with direct translation from Chinese to English, obviously done by a computer, it's more amusing than informative half the time!

I used to have to do it the other way, the English you type in must be completely correct and unambiguous to get anything remotely understood by Chinese people.

 

[Milosh]

Those variants will have better climb and straight line speed, but did they offer better manoeuvrability?

In other words, will the tactics of the Spitfire pilot have to be changed much?

The RAF pilots had eagle eyesight and could tell the difference between the various models of the 109.

 

[stona]

The RAF pilots had eagle eyesight and could tell the difference between the various models of the 109.

LOL. Just as Fw 190 pilots couldn't tell a Spitfire V from a Spitfire IX. Most people can't. I guess they had to assume the worst and hope for the best.

Those same Spitfire pilots couldn't tell a Typhoon from an Fw 190 either!

Cheers

Steve

 

[pbehn]

LOL. Just as Fw 190 pilots couldn't tell a Spitfire V from a Spitfire IX. Most people can't. I guess they had to assume the worst and hope for the best.

Those same Spitfire pilots couldn't tell a Typhoon from an Fw 190 either!

Cheers

Steve

The typhoons had stripes......simples

 

[rochie]

Buck Casson couldn't tell Bader's Spitfire from a 109, Doh !

 

[Kryten]

The typhoons had stripes......simples

They had stripes later, but that was after several other "identification" methods wee used, and still they were attacked by friendlies!

 

[pbehn]

They had stripes later, but that was after several other "identification" methods wee used, and still they were attacked by friendlies!

That was my point Kryten

 

[Kryten]

That was my point Kryten

Jolly good, just pointing out the Typhoon squadrons tried other methods also.

 

[BiffF15]

So, Biff, any thoughts on the importance of climb rate as a single parameter in WWII? I know it was inter-related to others, but climb rate surely counted for something ... unless you got ambushed and shot without knowing you were under attack. Then even an F-15 might not help. Surprised is surprised.

Greg,

The single most important thing you can have is SA (situational awareness)! After that is the knowledge, discipline and skill to use it effectively.

As far as the single aspect of climb goes I will say "it depends" (I've heard that phrase uttered so many times in my fighter squadrons but it is true).

Climb is but one tool in a bag of many (hopefully) that a plane and its pilot have. If climb gives you an advantage, particularly if it's exclusive, then use it. The key is using your SA, knowledge and skill to keep your flight and self out of harms way. Don't allow yourself to get sucked into a position you don't have a high probability of getting out of.

I have been able to open my skill / knowledge set up by pushing it in a situation when prudence dictates I should leave. The result is I learned what worked and what didn't without risking my life. Those guys back then got "some" training then off they went. And if they pushed a bad situation and things did not work out it could mean they lose their life.

A classic example of staying inside your skill set while fighting is Hartmann and his hit and run tactics. His score speaks to it completely.

Cheers,
Biff