Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
That's just pure crap Dalton, the Spitfire was a relatively poor ground attack plane and suffered badly when it tried that mission.
And pointing to Lemkes success is again based really not upon his ability so much as that of his flight wing. Imagine how much easier it was to rack up the kills when you flew with a dozen or more other fighter pilots all trying to get you into the kill position. To be significant, you need to quote his unit's kills and losses
RG_Lunatic said:Most Spitfire pilots consdiered the IX to be the best dogfighter of all the Spitfires. I have no idea where you're comming from Dalton.
=S=
Lunatic
RG_Lunatic said:Dive characteristics? The 109 was the plane lagging in dive characterisics, not the Spitfire. Early on the 109 had the edge but by the Bf109G vs. the Spit IX this had changed!
The maximum dive speed of the Bf109G was about 465 mph, the Spitfire IX was able to mange speeds in excess of 525 mph and still recover.
Maestro said:My comparisons don't come from a web site, but from an old book (in French). That book took sources from several other books. Here are all of them :
Spitfire At War Vol 1 2...........................................Alfred Price - Ian Allan
Le Grand Cirque (The Great Show)............................Pierre H. Clostermann - Corgi
Aircraft In Profile.....................................................Profile Publications
Spitfire Story..........................................................Alfred Price - Arms Armour
I Flew For The Führer...............................................Heinz Knocke - Evans
Luftwaffe Night Units 1939-45...................................Osprey - Jerry Scutts
Wings Of The Weird And Wonderful Vol. 2.................Airlife - Capt. Eric Brown
High Flyers.............................................................Micheal Fopp - Greenhill Books
WW2 Fighter Conflict...............................................Alfred Price - PBS
United States Army in World War II :
The European Theater of Operations,
Cross Channel Attack..............................................Gordon A. Harrison,Bureau du Chef de l'Histoire Militaire,Army Department,Washington D.C., 1951
Typhoon/Tempest In Action.....................................Jerry Scutts - Squadron Signal
That's all of them.
Personnally, I prefer to trust books written by really interrested writers (Pierre H. Clostermann was the leading French Ace of WW II (32 victories) and flew Spitfires, Typhoons and Tempests in the RAF.) than trust anybody who build up a web site and claim to know what he is talking about. Think about it...
Maestro said:I suggest you to take a reading course...
It is written "When using a 18 lbs boost" and "When 25 lbs boost is employed". So it was not always used.
And read the repport completely. Particualry the three last points...
"Turning circle
20.........The manoeuvrability of the Spitfire IX in this respect is greatly superior to that of the Me.109 and it easily out-turns the Me.109 in either direction at all speeds.
Rate of Roll
21.........Here again the Spitfire has a marked advantage at all speeds.
Conclusion
22.........The Me.109G has an inferior performance to the Spitfire in all respects with the exception of acceleration in a dive and the slight advantage in speed which it possesses at heights between 16,000 and 20,000 feet."
And then you say it rolled like a pig ? WAKE-UP !
Maestro said:There is no mention of gondolas, drop tanks, bombs or whatever in this repport.
So far, I've seen no primary source document that indicates, or even claims, the Bf109G could out dive the Spitfire beyond a small advantage at the very start of a dive -
Also, you make the negative effects on the Spitfire IX and XIV handling because of the additional weight out to be far more severe than they really were. The 109 suffered much more after the F model than the Spitfire did after the V model.
DJ_Dalton1 said:So far, I've seen no primary source document that indicates, or even claims, the Bf109G could out dive the Spitfire beyond a small advantage at the very start of a dive -
I place a great deal of stock in the pilot accounts. Comparative trials don't involve similar maintenance. You can't expect a captured aircraft to perform like an aircraft inventoried by its manufacturing nation. A captured aircraft is out of its element. Those captured on the ground, are captured on the ground for a reason. In other words the British tested Spitfire is going to perform at absolute maximum performance. You know that going in. The captured aircraft performance is entirely debateable and you certainly see that in these tests. Additionally, I don't put huge emphasis on factory testing. I know the British and especially the Russians played all kinds of games with that. Testing without armament. Testing with fuels not generally available at the time of the tests. Using experimental boost. Setting gearing for test conditions. Running at unsustainable rpm. So the issue is, "what is a primary source document"? Comparative testing? Factory testing? Factory testing in what configuration?
DJ_Dalton1 said:I place as much or more emphasis on the anecdotal or combat evidence, because its there that the planes are fully armed for war and pushed to their limits...and this part is important...AND BEYOND. To my mind, its the only place to judge. You don't judge a halfback by his 40 yard dash out of pads. You judge by what he accomplishes on game day. In WWII, in the air, the Germans won on game day vs. the British, but there were a lot of good teams in that division and they didn't win it all.
DJ_Dalton1 said:Anyway, so primary source document? You really want to base conclusions about which plane did what on non combat testing? You didn't pick this up from the Russian moron they had working at Jaleco referencing bogus documentation did you? I had to point out to them the F4U-4C never saw WWII. They actually didn't know.
DJ_Dalton1 said:Anyway, thats another story. Ok, for the third time try this one and keep in mind its a gondola winged Wilde Sau Bf 109G-6/U-2 being tested vs. a cleanly configured Spitfire IX utilizing 25lbs of boost at certain points in the testing:
"Dive
19.........Comparitive dives between the two aircraft have shown that the Me.109 can leave the Spitfire without any difficulty.":
http://www.fourthfightergroup.com/eagles/109gtac.html
DJ_Dalton1 said:Also, you make the negative effects on the Spitfire IX and XIV handling because of the additional weight out to be far more severe than they really were. The 109 suffered much more after the F model than the Spitfire did after the V model.
Its not only weight. Its the additional speed that degrades the Spitfire. That big wing is not a high speed maneuver wing. It rolls like a pig under high load. Abysmal.
DJ_Dalton1 said:Heres a little article I read awhile ago. I don't endorse it entirely. I only cite it for the observations. Its in the wartime observations that the truth is hidden by modern p.c. historians:
"Thomas L. Hayes, Jr., a P-51 ace of the 357th Fighter Group with 8 1/2 victories, recalled diving after a fleeing Me-109G until both aircraft neared the sound barrier and their controls locked. Both pilots took measures to slow down, but to Hayes' astonishment, the Me-109 was the first to pull out of its dive. As he belatedly regained control of his Mustang, Hayes was grateful that the German pilot chose to quit while he was ahead and fly home instead of taking advantage of Hayes' momentary helplessness. Hayes also stated that while he saw several Fw-190s stall and even crash during dogfights, he never saw an Me-109 go out of control. "
http://history1900s.about.com/library/prm/blkillingmachine1.htm
How fast do you think they were going in that dive? or do you not believe it?
DJ_Dalton1 said:By the way, if you think its incredulous regarding what some of their aircraft were truly capable of in a pinch don't read about their submarines. You really won't believe it.
the lancaster kicks ass said:i have read many accounts of comparisons between spits and -109/-190s, most will say the spit was superior
they can't all be wrong,
and hell, even german pilots admit the spit was a superior