Is Spitfire really the BEST British fighter???

[DJ_Dalton]

Dalton...

Excuse me but that is hogwash. The Spitfire was the superior plane when compared with its rival Bf109 at almost any point in the war after 1941.

The problem with your blanket, fact inconsistent and unsupported statement is that the Spitfires were restricted to smaller and smaller roles as the war progressed. They couldn't do what the P-47's and P-51's could. Those planes could outdive the luftwaffe and had the fuel loads to generally came in from above them. Spitfires would have lost the war people. Why do you cling to the illusion that they were an exceptional plane? The Battle of Britian? They were mauled there, pickin on Heinkels and Junkers and 110's when they could. They were outmatched vs the 109's.

The Spit had .303's its entire existance and 2 20mm Hispanos in later variations. That gun just didn't compare with the German cannon and thats why Spitfires fell out of the air in the numbers they did.

The Spitfire was energied up for the IX but it lost its maneuverability. It was carburated its entire existance and just could not match the German planes in hard G maneuvers. It lost its power people not to mention its unresponsiveness in the roll or at high speed. What don't you understand. For every fiction you create or misrepresentation you cling to. I'll point to another Experten that slaughtered Spitfires. The question with this Experten is which plane did he kill them in later and I think its the FW190, but that plane was more suited to bomber attacks.

Heres one. Killed per usual in an attack upon bombers by P-47's. This is the way the war went. Not the way of the Spitfire...lol

By the way the Spitfires got creamed in the wars after WWII also.

http://www.luftwaffe.cz/mayer.html

 

[DJ_Dalton]

"The Spitfire just wasn't especially effective vs. the Luftwaffe Fighters."


Is that TRUE????????

Was Germans held technological superiority over all its rivals: on land, on sea, and in the air????????????????

Without a question.

If it wasn't for the U.S. Britain would be a good German Colony. The Russians helped too.

 

[KraziKanuK]

Dalton,

I have never seen anyone as ignorant about the Spitfire as you. It is not worth the trouble to correct all the errors you have in your posts.

 

[Nonskimmer]

Makes for a good laugh, though.

 

[DJ_Dalton]

Dalton,

I have never seen anyone as ignorant about the Spitfire as you. It is not worth the trouble to correct all the errors you have in your posts.

Its more likely you've never run across anyone that is more familiar with the air war or anyone that spent more time looking into the details rather than listening to those who ultimately prevailed awarding their own laurels.

You're problem is going to be you can't point to anyone or anyting to dispell your utter emptiness on the issue. Thats o.k., I won't hold it against you, you've brought a knife to a gun fight, just like the Spitfire.

http://www.luftwaffe.cz/priller.html

 

[cheddar cheese]

How can you say the Spit was over rated? I used to think the same but then again I used to think Santa Claus was real. The XIV is very widely regarded as the best dogfighter of the war. You do realise that it was just about Britains ONLY fighter, which doesnt give the Gerries a lot of choice in what to shoot down, does it?

 

[mosquitoman]

There was the Tiffie and the Tempest aswell but Britain could have held on probably indefinitley in the West. The Germans just wouldn't have been able to cross the Channel

 

[cheddar cheese]

YEah. and what do you mean we wouldnt have won without the USA? Sure, they helped, a lot, but when we won the Battle of Britain, it was just us. The USA werent even in the war at that time. The odds in the Battle of Britian were against us, but we still came through. We probably would have won with the USA, it just would have taken a whole lot longer.

 

[mosquitoman]

Exactly, remember it wasn't just little old Britain. It was Britian, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, and then the escapeees from Poland, France, Holland, Belgium and Norway.

 

[Udet]

Guys:

Keep the heat down if possible!

While Dalton does not require my help or aid at all, I´d like to assume you understood he did not mean AT ALL the Spitfire was a "piece of shit"; he never even mentioned such words, it was rather you guys getting sensitive here who said such phrase.

He simply said it has been overrated, and to some extent I would agree with him.

Attempting to prevent over sensitive reactions here, i will repeat what i have said several times before: in fact the Spitfire is one of the greatest fighters of the conflict, but you can not have it all, and it certainly did not left the German fighters far behind it at all.

Dalton also makes a good point when saying it was the P-47 mainly who bore the brunt of the fighter job over Europe in 1944, and not the Spitfire or the P-51.

 

[cheddar cheese]

I agree that it was not the best fighter, but he was exaggerating his points.

you've brought a knife to a gun fight, just like the Spitfire.

See? The pilots of the Spitfire would have a little more confidence than that. A phrase like that would be more appropriate if you was flying a Gloster Gladiator up against a flight of 190D's.

 

[KraziKanuK]

Dalton, you are a troll.

Guys, just ignore, for the troll is not worth the effort to debunk his rediculously absurb statements.

 

[cheddar cheese]

!

 

[DJ_Dalton]

How can you say the Spit was over rated? I used to think the same but then again I used to think Santa Claus was real. The XIV is very widely regarded as the best dogfighter of the war. You do realise that it was just about Britains ONLY fighter, which doesnt give the Gerries a lot of choice in what to shoot down, does it?

I don't know anyone that regards the Spit XIV as the best plane of the war. It had a counter rotating engine to the Merlins (Griffin engine you know) and the Spit pilots didn't even consider it a spitfire. It was almost an entirely new plane. It did not have much of a performance edge over the most up motored IX and it retained the anemic roll rate and added accentuation of control surface compression at high speed that left the plane close to out of control. It was fast, but so were the contemporary German planes. If it had an edge it was real high, but it couldn't stay up there long.

 

[Maestro]

Spitfires would have lost the war people. Why do you cling to the illusion that they were an exceptional plane? The Battle of Britian? They were mauled there, pickin on Heinkels and Junkers and 110's when they could. They were outmatched vs the 109's.

The Spit had .303's its entire existance and 2 20mm Hispanos in later variations. That gun just didn't compare with the German cannon and thats why Spitfires fell out of the air in the numbers they did.

The Spitfire was energied up for the IX but it lost its maneuverability. It was carburated its entire existance and just could not match the German planes in hard G maneuvers. It lost its power people not to mention its unresponsiveness in the roll or at high speed. What don't you understand. For every fiction you create or misrepresentation you cling to. I'll point to another Experten that slaughtered Spitfires. The question with this Experten is which plane did he kill them in later and I think its the FW190, but that plane was more suited to bomber attacks.

Heres one. Killed per usual in an attack upon bombers by P-47's. This is the way the war went. Not the way of the Spitfire...lol

By the way the Spitfires got creamed in the wars after WWII also.

http://www.luftwaffe.cz/mayer.html[/b]

Okay s*cker, you're number is out ! You pissed me off !

When we give you comparisons of Spitfires VS FW-190 or Spitfire VS Bf-109, you say that's propagenda. (Now, see the section of your post I put in bold.) Where do you take you're freaking data ? In the Hitler's Youth manual ? Is it what you consider as non-propagenda datas ?

When I gave you its kill ratio, the Galland thing and the Spitfire/Hurricane thing, you do as if I never said anything. Who the f*ck are you ? A Nazi pigeon ?

Now for the armament thing. From about the Mk. V on, Spitfires could be equipped of 8 x .303 OR 4 x 20mm OR 2 x 20mm + 4 x .303. From the Mk. VIII/IX on, they could also be armed with 2 x 20mm + 2 x .50.

Now I'll agree with KrazyKanuK and invite everyone to ignore you.

At best, you're a Neo-Nazi German trying to restore his own contry's pride by pissing on the Spitfire and Great-Britain. At worst, you're a freaking redneck hidding in his house of a lost town in Saskatchewan, with a Nazi flag on his bedroom wall, the book "Meine Kampf" on the table next to his bed, a picture of Hitler right besite it and an illegal machine gun hidden under his bed.

You deserve a great kick in your fat ass, punk.

 

[Chiron]

Man, its getting out of control....................

 

[the lancaster kicks ass]

damned funny though, i aint laughed at someone trying to make a serious post like this in a long time

 

[Nonskimmer]

Remind me not to piss off Maestro!

 

[mosquitoman]

I believe a saying during WWII was the Mustang can't do what the Spitfire does, but it does it over Berlin

 

[Anonymous]

YEah. and what do you mean we wouldnt have won without the USA? Sure, they helped, a lot, but when we won the Battle of Britain, it was just us. The USA werent even in the war at that time. The odds in the Battle of Britian were against us, but we still came through. We probably would have won with the USA, it just would have taken a whole lot longer.

You are kidding arn't you? Even during this time the USA was supplying Britain. Without US supplies Britain would have starved, her war industries would have ground to a halt, and Germany would have been able to eventually manage to force British capitulation. The same is true for the Soviet Union, though by then the USA was "in the war".

=S=

Lunatic