If the RAF had been defeated in the Battle of Britain (3 Viewers)

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules


Agreed. Companies being handed blueprints and a good look at an existing production line is one thing, sorting out a prototype (or series of prototypes) with on going problems is something else. This means working on actual aircraft and finding out that louver B, scoop C and slot D still haven't solved the problem is a lot different than some drawings on paper and a few pages of figures.

Of course the FW 187 could have replaced the Fw 191 with a much better chance of getting something useful out of the tens of thousands of hours of work While leaving the FW 190 alone.
 
Shortround6 said:
Of course the FW 187 could have replaced the Fw 191 with a much better chance of getting something useful out of the tens of thousands of hours of work
Click to expand...

I guess so, but only in hindsight, which they didn't have in 1939/1940 when Bomber B was issued. It's as likely as not, since if the Fw 187 was under development, Fw would most certainly have devoted resources to Bomber B; there's no reason to expect that to have changed, the Fw 191 was the preferred candidate along with the Ju 288. The issues that affected it could not have been known back in late 1939/early 1940, so again, what gives? The Fw 190; 'the second iron in the fire', because at that stage, the Bf 109 is still the Luftwaffe's primary fighter and there's no immediate need to supplement it.

Without 100/130 the Dornier Do 17 or Do 215 could outrun and outmaneuver a Hurricane.
Click to expand...

What?! One example of a German bomber pursuing a British fighter and all of a sudden the bigger and heavier bomber has better performance than a single-seat fighter!? (in saying that, at low altitude, a Hurricane had a hard time catching a Ju 88 without its warload making a sprint for home) So that's how the Luftwaffe got it wrong! The big fast twins were used as bombers instead of fighters! Perhaps if they switched roles and used the Do 17s against the Spits and Hurris then the Germans would have won, eh? Like the Brits; the bombers will go after the Hurricanes and the fighters after the Spitfires!

Koopernic, your tendency to stretch the truth based on the flimsiest of evidence is striking.
 
Last edited:
He
tomo pauk said:
Seems to me that you keep overlooking the law of 15% extra performance due to having black cross.
Click to expand...

Maybe folks are overlooking the flame dampers, Lichtenstein Radar aerials, gun packs on the night fighter.

There is plenty of +5% biases on equipment with or bullseye on it due to the in built superciliousness reality correction factor. I've found this to have a hyperbolic function that corrects lying reality back to legendary truth.

If a Do 17Z could manage 412km/h (256mp/h) at 1220m (4000ft) then it's believable that a good pilot could get it over a Hurricane limited to 6.25 psig boost which managed 420km/h(260.0mph) at 0 meters and 444km/h(276mph) at 5000ft (less at 4000ft). The Hurricane on 87 octane or 6.25psig boost had only 10mph speed advantage. Dornier was flogging the Do 17 as a Zerstörer as well as a schnell bomber.

Data from here.
Hurricane Mk I Performance
Use the original report or data.

The Do 215 with much more powerful (33%) and streamlined DB601Aa engines had of been available in numbers it would have been hard to intercept for the Hurricane with Merlin III with any fuel. At DB601Aa full pressure altitude even with 100/130 the advantage in speed of the Hurricane was tiny.

Daimler Benz had a Dispute with the German Air Ministry over financing of the Geisingham aero engine plant in 1935/36 or so. This is probably one factor which left the DB601 in short supply dooming many aircraft to second rate engines such as the Fw 187 and Do 17/215.
 
Last edited:
JAG88 said:
Im sorry, I dont follow, is 3xMG FF unrealistic?
Click to expand...

Your proposal is excellent, granted people at DB and MTT need to refine the engine installation so it works reliably. That happened historically by some time of late 1940, with introduction of the pre-series BF 109F.
What Milosh said was a tongue-in-a-cheek joke - some early post-war publications stated that late 109s were outfitted with one MK103 and two MG 151 cannons as series. Proven wrong many times, but still sometimes surfacing.


The Do 17 versions from the table I've posted are either bombers or recons (Aufklaerer), as listed there. Ergo no radars or cannon barrels sticking out to slow them down. Do 17 with radial engines of rated altitude at 4000 m were too slower than 420 km/h at their best altitude, that again can be read at the table. Dornier can flog the Do 17 as a Zerstoerer as much as they want, this is if Bristol pitches Blenheim as heavy day fighter.
As for how fast was the Do 215 (DB 601 on board), here it is, compared with SAAB bombers and the best Do 17. Bombers and/or recons:

 

Oh, I got that, but it seemed that he may have been drawing a parallel with my proposal and claiming that it was just as absurd, hence the question.

SOmeone should make a list of the craziest zombie claims, those that refuse to die and keep coming back...
 
JAG88 said:
SOmeone should make a list of the craziest zombie claims, those that refuse to die and keep coming back...
Click to expand...


We can start with the canard about the Bismarck's AA fire control being unable to engage the Swordfish because the aircraft were so slow. This fails the basic smell test, as the AAFCS development process would have started when the Swordfish's predecessor was still in service and it would be incredibly stupid to design a system that couldn't cope with the threats that existed when the design started. While I don't think that the Germans were technically superior to everybody else, I don't think they were stupid, either.
 

True, IIRC the issue was that the AA director somehow had a problem with controlling 105mm mounts that had different speeds, a consequence of the KM low production priority, rush to completion and sales to the Soviets.
 
The Story of the Torpedoing of the Bismarck

Reading the above link it is clear that the Bismark could bring down accurate fire on Swordfish because the last two who were to attack her dropped their torpedoes and left. I understand from the above that the Bismarks RADAR /fire control couldn't cope with 12 aircraft circling. At the time of the attacks visibility was poor and cloud down to 700 ft. The other conclusion I have is that it is much easier to make holes in a Swordfish than actually shoot them down.
 


None of that justifies your statement that a Do-17 or Do-215 could out outrun AND OUTMANOEUVER a Hurricane. The Do-17 definitely wasn't a contender as your own figures demonstrate and the Do-215 production only amounted to 105 airframes by the end of 1941, by which time the RAF's fighter force was in a much stronger position than was the case in early/mid 1940, with corresponding performance increases even for the humble Hurricane MkI.
 
Last edited:

On paper this looks all very plauseable, but remember that whilst on combat operations the German bombers were lumbered with fuel, ammunition etc, which meant that there is no way that they could match the acceleration (this is the key, not overall speed) of the Hurricane. I can't be bothered searching for now, as my copy of Battle of Britain Then and Now is in another room, but there were plenty of examples of Hurricanes shooting down Do 17s. Heck, even Defiants, which had low speed and acceleration bagged Do 17s (and Ju 88s for that matter). Again, Koopernic, your evidence offers nothing but some dry statistics on paper that doesn't reflect reality. And where are the Do 17 and '215 curves and data as extensive as those of the Hurricane that have provided as evidence?
 
Okay, here's something I found among the information you provided, Koopernic. At the bottom of the Hurricane data page - very informative; thanks for the link - is a link to an official document called 'Report of Comparitive trials between Hurricane versus Messerschmitt 109', which states the following;

"At 15,000 ft the aircraft separated and approached one another head on for the dogfight. The Hurricane did a quick stall turn followed by a quick vertical turn and found himself on the 109's tail. The pilot of the 109 was unable to prevent this manoeuvre succeeding. From that point the Hurricane had no difficulty remaining on the tail of the Me 109. The pilot of the 109 trield all possible manoeuvres and finally the one most usually employed by German pilots, namely a half roll and vertical dive. The Hurricane followed this manoeuvre, but the ME drew away at the commencement of the dive..."

At the conclusion it states that; "The ME 109 is faster than the Hurricane by some 30 to 40 miles per hour on the straight and level. It can outclimb and initially out dive the Hurricane. On the other hand it has not the manoeuvrability of the Hurricane, which can turn inside without difficulty."

So, although the Hurri is no match in performance, pilots could out manoeuvre their German counterparts in their fighters, yet you are saying the Do 17 and Do 215 could outmanoeuvre a Hurricane and consequently Bf 109? Bulls**t.
 
This explains to me why some Polish pilots preferred the Hurricane to the Spitfire simply because of its armament, describing the Spitfire as a pepper pot. In the hands of an expert in 1940 for what it had to do it was good enough.
 
That Do 215 story sounds like a nice circumstancial story, maybe it happened just as is told due to some huge difference in pilot skill or damage to the Hurricane, weird crap can happen, but we cant take it as rule to compare both aircrafts...

It reminds of the time a Fulmar turned inside a CR 42... maybe it happened, but I doubt that such a heavy aircraft would be able to outmaneuver a friggin biplane consistently...
 
Also, the pilot has to justify using the boost.
 

Memories are only partially stored but when required are reconstructed by the brain from fragments. With retelling memories may fuse with stories read or told elsewhere. I've personally seen people so infused with tales they themselves believe they were there. We usually let it go, I doubt if Galland if he were there himself would question a senior like Bäder. Nevertheless memories are more reliable than lying historians who generally have an agenda to push and reconstruct "events" as well. The ancients Greeks knew this and systemized and wrote down ways to think to avoid this.

Bäder may be right. Perhaps some Experten tested a motor canon intended for the Me 109F entering service at the close of the BoB campaign.
 
Koopernic said:
Bäder may be right. Perhaps some Experten tested a motor canon intended for the Me 109F entering service at the close of the BoB campaign.
Click to expand...

No, he was generalising about the armament. He and Tuck were holding 1/24 scale Airfix models of a Spitfire and Bf 109 E to illustrate their points.
I bet that old documentary is available somewhere online, MY memory of it is slightly vague .
Cheers
Steve
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 4 (members: 0, guests: 4)

Similar threads

S
Battle of Britain:
Replies
15
Views
906
fubar57
M
Why Didn't The RAF use Beaufighters Instead of Typhoons In The ETO
2
Replies
21
Views
1K
EwenS
E
A
The Myth of the British "Fixing" The Corsair
2 3 4
Replies
76
Views
4K
NTGray
G
Should Napier have been building the Griffon instead of the Sabre?
2 3
Replies
57
Views
4K
MIflyer
M
Italian contribution to the Battle of Britain
2 3
Replies
57
Views
4K
Andrew Arthy
A
Menu
Log in
Register