Is Spitfire really the BEST British fighter???

[DJ_Dalton1]

In that case, I'll translate and post the two other fighter victories stories listed to Pierre H. Clostermann.

His 4th victory (FW-190) :

"Hazebrouk, August 27th 1943

In this beginning of evening, 224 B-17 from the 8th Bomber Command divided in 4 groups must bomb a forest at Watten, near Saint-Omer. The Allies suspected the Germans set up secrets weapons on this site (in fact, they were building a V-2 site). The first bomber formation was escorted by the 24 Spitfires from the Biggin Hill Wing (12 Mk. IX from the 341 Squadron and a equal number from the New-Zelander 485 Squadron) led by Cmdr. Mouchotte.

Arrived in advance at the rendez-vous point, the B-17s are attacked by an hundred of German fighters from the I and II/JG 2 and II and III/JG 26. The Spitfires join-in at top speed and a nice show begins. During the fight, 2 New-Zelander planes dive behind a FW-190. They are followed by an other Focke-Wulf themselves. The Sgc Clostermann try to warn them and engage the last one. He follows him at a high speed, shooting short bursts at him and hitting him many times. Hit by a last burst at less than 100 meters, the German plane roll on top and crash on the ground at an awful speed. The pilot probably was the unteroffizier Krieg from the 5./JG 26 aboard the FW-190A-4 (WNr.2379). On his side, Captain Boudier also shot down a FW-190. At the radio, Cmdr. Mouchotte say that he is alone, it'll be his last message. He'll fall near Dunkerque, shot down by Leutnant Radener, Kapitän of the 6./JG 26. An other pilot from the 6th Staffel, Feldwebel Mayer will shot down Sgc Magrot who will be taken P.O.W.

The Allied protection was efficient, because only three B-17 were shot down by the Flak while an other one was shot down by a fighter. In spite of the High Command's predictions, it was the first flight group that got beaten up. Two of the following flights didn't saw any Black Cross and for the last one, protected by the biggest part of the escort, the band of Focke-Wulf has been disperced.

interesting engagement. Say 50 of the FW were bomber hunters and 50 support. Still the GB were apparently outnumbered in this one 100-50...maybe even steven for fighter configured aircraft. Two Spits drop on a FW another FW rallies to aid and the French Ace drops on him. It sounds even up for losses. Thats a pretty good engagement for the Spitfures from what Ive read.

Sources :

Le Grand Cirque, page 45
JG 26 War Diary, Vol. 2, page 144

"

His 5th victory (Bf-109G) :

"Saint-André-de-l'Eure, June 15th 1944

Jacques Remlinger and Pierre Clostermann decided to realise a project they were thinking about since december : the straffing of the Saint-André-de-l'Eure airbase, suspected of activity.

They take off at 09h50 with 12 other Spitfires from 602 Squadron. At half-way, they break the formation with the authorisation of the Squadron Leader. Arrived above the target, they spot an ennemy plane at low altitude. Clostermann head toward him at top speed, he must be quick. The airbase saw from 4000 meters high seemed damaged, but was in fact camouflaged to make peoples beleive it was. He pull-up at three or four km away from the airbase and hug the ground to avoid the Flak. At the other side of the airbase, the form of the plane appears - that's a Messerschmitt 109. Clostermann, at 50 meters high, cross at 750 km/h a second Bf-109 that he didn't saw, fockused on the other. The German Flak fired at will, without care for the Bf-109. Clostermann fires long bursts and see him turn-over and start a roll... The Messerschmitt crashed in a field south to the main airstrip.

Clostermann: "Remlinger, Remlinger.......can you confirm ...where are you?"

Remlinger: "The flak is vicious Pierre, I am dodging it"

Clostermann: "Jacques can you confirm meine messerschitt?"

Remlinger: "I've been awful busy Pierre, if you buy me a bottle of champagne I will say i saw it"

Clostermann: "You're tastes are expensive Jacques"

Remlinger: "How badly do you want credit Pierre?"

 

[Maestro]

My combat reports are as valuable as the one you read about Luftwaffe pilots.

 

[Maestro]

I searched the internet in order to find combat reports of James Edgar Johnson victories, but I didn't found any. However, I found his citations for the D.F.C., it's bar, the D.S.O. and it's first bar. The citation of the D.S.O. second bar isn't listed ( thanks to www.rafweb.org ).

Citation for the award of the Distinguished Flying Cross.

"Flying Officer James Edgar JOHNSON (83267), Royal Air Force Volunteer Reserve, No.616 Squadron.

This officer has participated in forty-six operational sorties over enemy territory and has destroyed at least four hostile aircraft. Flying Officer Johnson has at all times shown great courage."

(London Gazette – 30 September 1941)

Citation for the award of the Bar to the Distinguished Flying Cross.

"Acting Flight Lieutenant James Edgar JOHNSON, D.F.C. (83267), Royal Air Force Volunteer Reserve, No.616 Squadron.
Since being awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross in September, 1941, this officer has participated in many sweeps over enemy territory, during which he has destroyed 2 Messerschmitt 109 Fs and damaged a Focke Wulf 190.He has also carried out a large number of convoy patrols. Flight Lieutenant Johnson is an exceptional leader and the magnificent example he sets is an inspiration to other pilots."

(London Gazette – 26 June 1942)

Citation for the award of the Distinguished Service Order

"Acting Wing Commander James Edgar JOHNSON. D.F.C. (83267), Royal Air Force Volunteer Reserve.

This officer has led a wing on a large number of occasions and has displayed outstanding skill and gallantry. During an operation, one morning in May, 1943 his formation was heavily engaged by a large force of enemy fighters. In the ensuing combats 4 enemy aircraft were destroyed without loss. The same afternoon he took part in a similar sortie and 3 enemy fighters were destroyed, 1 of them by Wing Commander Johnson. The next day, this officer took part in another successful sortie. By his skilful and courageous leadership, Wing Commander Johnson contributed materially to the success achieved. He has destroyed at least 13 enemy aircraft."

(London Gazette – 4 June 1943)

Citation for the award of the Bar to the Distinguished Service Order

"Acting Wing Commander James Edgar JOHNSON, D.S.O., D.F.C. (83267), Royal Air Force. Volunteer Reserve.

Since being awarded the Distinguished Service Order this officer has destroyed a further 7 enemy aircraft and shared in the destruction of another. He is a relentless fighter whose brilliant leadership and outstanding skill have inspired all with whom he has flown. Within a period of 2 months, Wing Commander Johnson led large formations of aircraft on very many sorties during which 27 hostile aircraft were shot down and a large number were damaged."

(London Gazette – 24 September 1943)

And I also found this on an other web site :

Lithograph Setting: By the Fall of 1944, the German army was in retreat under cover of Luftwaffe fighters. Number 127 Wing, commanded by "Johnnie" Johnson, was sent to attack the withdrawing forces and on 27 September he scored his final victory near Venlo, Holland. In a grueling dogfight with nine Messerschmitts, Johnson's Spitfire was hit for the first and only time during the war. Most noteworthy, all but one of his 38 victories were achieved against single-engine fighters.

Note : J.E. Johnson only flew Spitfires through out the war. He flew Mk. Is, Vs, IXs and XIVs.

 

[Udet]

RG:

Drop it. This case is lost for the allies.

You said: "In general, it is much harder to fight over enemy held, or even contested territory, than it is over friendly territory".

That is a very correct point. It is kind of assuring to know would you get shot down, you will be received with tea and cookies at the very moment your feet touch the ground.


"Most Luftwaffe' kills were scored either over German held territory, or within a few miles of German held territory. "

Europe certainly is a small continent, so flying any great distances was not the top priority.


Getting back on the Spitfire topic, a good deal of the dogfights of 1942 took place over the Channel (was that enemy held territory?) and even a mere few miles off the southern British coast!

So 1942 saw the Spitfire squadrons very uncapable in dealing with the brand new Butcher Bird and the Bf109s, suffering heavy losses after having enjoyed kind of a very relaxed year of 1941 over the island, and while the Luftwaffe was having an orgy with the massive VVS in the east.

So the losses for the Luftwaffe during the BoB in 1940, if high, were comfortably within the sustainable parameter -never in the "disaster" mode as the allies put it-; the power and success of all Luftwaffe operations following the BoB substantiate this assertion.

What of RAF losses during the BoB? We know they were high as well. Though i have very serious doubts as to the actual impact of such losses for the RAF in the post-Battle of Britain period.

The performance of the RAF in 1942 is not one of a victorious air force, not one of an air force bringing up superior fighters to combat. Their condition simply did not improve until the USAAF began its assembly in the island.

I digress RG: drop it.

I´ve read kilometers of the allied revisionist delusion attempting to minimize the deeds of the hundreds and hundreds of experten. And you know something? The bulk of their ideas and comments are so ridiculous they do not resist the minimum scrutiny; one wonders what kind of wimp dared to expose himself as a Supreme Airhead, no matter how much he got paid for conducting such a particularly funny task, or what kind of interest and/or master he was serving.

Their pathology follows this sort of line: "While hundreds of German fighter pilots shot down hundreds of enemy planes in combat, two of them even reaching more than 300 kills, it is relevant to ask ourselves: is a German pilot with 325 confirmed kills the best?"

After reading such a piece of jewelry, i asked myself whether to laugh or to send a bucket of roses to the genius who wrote it.

RG, the allies have flatly failed in attempting to minimize the German experten.

Perhaps their strongest argument to make a case is the following:

(i) Unlimited number of missions flown while the USAAF guys had a rotation system.

There they use a trick. It happens to be like the oldest trick of the book now.

Number of missions flown by a German kid opposite to those flown by a USAAF guy is a very misleading way of handling the information.

What about the number of hours in the air?
What was the range of the Bf109? How many hours in the air did most German aces effectively spend, compared to guys who flew the Mustang plane that flew thousands of extremely long range missions deep into Germany as bomber escorts?

A Mustang pilot who flew say 70 long range escort missions to Germany in 1944 might have been for about 550 hours in the air: not far from Gunther Rall´s record. Furthermore, there can be cases of USAAF pilots who effectively flew more than many experten and did not score even one third of the kills of the German guy.

I have said all air forces made superb pilots, but gentlemen, the gold medal IS the gold medal.

Grab two USAAF aces, put them either on a Mustang or P-47 while I get Erich and put him on his late Bf109 and unleash a two vs one dogfight: i see a crystal clear outcome there.

I will reply to you other day regarding the eastern front aces.

 

[KraziKanuK]

There is a little problem with your flight time example Udet.

While the Americans might have many flight hours, not was all combat time. In fact, very little of that time was combat time. The German pilot, on the other hand, was almost guaranteed combat every time he took off. Practice makes perfect is an old expression and the Germans had lots of pratice.

Then there is the number of targets. The Germans had lots while the Allies did not. In other words, the Germans had the advantage of many more available targets.

More combat took place over France than over the Channel in 1942. In these combats, if the Germans decided to oppose the RAF, the 190 stuck around while the 109 usually made one pass and then disappeared. Unlike in BoB when the RAF engaged dispite a numerical disadvantage, the Germans only engaged when they held an advantage, usually.

On BoB. The number of German a/c in their OoB decreased during BoB while the RAF's number of a/c in their OoB in the increased from the number at the start of BoB. If the LW losses were sustainable, then why did the LW switch to night bombing to cut their losses?

 

[DJ_Dalton1]

RG:

Drop it. This case is lost for the allies.

You said: "In general, it is much harder to fight over enemy held, or even contested territory, than it is over friendly territory".

That is a very correct point. It is kind of assuring to know would you get shot down, you will be received with tea and cookies at the very moment your feet touch the ground.


"Most Luftwaffe' kills were scored either over German held territory, or within a few miles of German held territory. "

Europe certainly is a small continent, so flying any great distances was not the top priority.


Getting back on the Spitfire topic, a good deal of the dogfights of 1942 took place over the Channel (was that enemy held territory?) and even a mere few miles off the southern British coast!

So 1942 saw the Spitfire squadrons very uncapable in dealing with the brand new Butcher Bird and the Bf109s, suffering heavy losses after having enjoyed kind of a very relaxed year of 1941 over the island, and while the Luftwaffe was having an orgy with the massive VVS in the east.

So the losses for the Luftwaffe during the BoB in 1940, if high, were comfortably within the sustainable parameter -never in the "disaster" mode as the allies put it-; the power and success of all Luftwaffe operations following the BoB substantiate this assertion.

What of RAF losses during the BoB? We know they were high as well. Though i have very serious doubts as to the actual impact of such losses for the RAF in the post-Battle of Britain period.

The performance of the RAF in 1942 is not one of a victorious air force, not one of an air force bringing up superior fighters to combat. Their condition simply did not improve until the USAAF began its assembly in the island.

I digress RG: drop it.

I´ve read kilometers of the allied revisionist delusion attempting to minimize the deeds of the hundreds and hundreds of experten. And you know something? The bulk of their ideas and comments are so ridiculous they do not resist the minimum scrutiny; one wonders what kind of wimp dared to expose himself as a Supreme Airhead, no matter how much he got paid for conducting such a particularly funny task, or what kind of interest and/or master he was serving.

Their pathology follows this sort of line: "While hundreds of German fighter pilots shot down hundreds of enemy planes in combat, two of them even reaching more than 300 kills, it is relevant to ask ourselves: is a German pilot with 325 confirmed kills the best?"

After reading such a piece of jewelry, i asked myself whether to laugh or to send a bucket of roses to the genius who wrote it.

RG, the allies have flatly failed in attempting to minimize the German experten.

Perhaps their strongest argument to make a case is the following:

(i) Unlimited number of missions flown while the USAAF guys had a rotation system.

There they use a trick. It happens to be like the oldest trick of the book now.

Number of missions flown by a German kid opposite to those flown by a USAAF guy is a very misleading way of handling the information.

What about the number of hours in the air?
What was the range of the Bf109? How many hours in the air did most German aces effectively spend, compared to guys who flew the Mustang plane that flew thousands of extremely long range missions deep into Germany as bomber escorts?

A Mustang pilot who flew say 70 long range escort missions to Germany in 1944 might have been for about 550 hours in the air: not far from Gunther Rall´s record. Furthermore, there can be cases of USAAF pilots who effectively flew more than many experten and did not score even one third of the kills of the German guy.

I have said all air forces made superb pilots, but gentlemen, the gold medal IS the gold medal.

Grab two USAAF aces, put them either on a Mustang or P-47 while I get Erich and put him on his late Bf109 and unleash a two vs one dogfight: i see a crystal clear outcome there.

I will reply to you other day regarding the eastern front aces.

Very powerful post Udet,

Regarding the two vs one. If Eric Hartmann starts at equal altitude I have no doubt he kills Preddy and Johnson in His G-10 or that they bug out cause he's way too much plane and pilot to deal with. I think Hartmann would give them fits in a G-6 as well and not necessarily a late model one. The G-6 was a much faster plane than history gives it credit for. The Boscombe Down tests reveal that.

If the Americans have altitude. I bet Hartmann escapes. Hartmann was no dummy, if he saw Preddy really pulling some sharp moves....he'd climb out of it, pass on the risk and live to fight another day.

Thats how the egress would be. Hartmann would climb out of trouble. The other two would dive out.

What I really appreciated Udet was the formulation of the scenario for which the 109 was designed for. It was designed to have a engagement edge despite being outnumbered and thats what it had, from the first day of the war to the last.

 

[Anonymous]

Udet,

Cruising your plane for 4 hours to the combat area hardly accrues relevant flight hours. That's a pathetic argument.

Numbers of combat sorites is what counts - or, more specifically, numbers of combat engagements.

I agree, the FW was superior to the Spit V in 1942 - the 109F was roughly equal. And most engagements that happened over the channel were nearer the French coast than the British coast, and far more were over France than over Britain. Besides, I was not really talking about the British when I was talking about missions over enemy ground, I was talking about the USAAF.

As for "hundreds and hundreds of Experten", my count is that there were 271 German aces in WWII, of which approximately 78 were "Experten" (100 or more kills). Even that count I'm not certain of, since some appear as aces both in the East and West fronts and may have been counted twice, and for some 40 listed as aces there are no specifics for. In only 5 cases that I've found did an Experten have more kills in the West than in the East, and it is clear the norm is 3-5 kills on the Eastern front vs. 1 kill on the Western front.

Anyway, you are entirely missing my point. The German pilots, especially the Experten, were undoubtedly better combat pilots than their Allied counterparts. They got that way through experiance - experiance gained mostly through combat with very much outclassed early Soviets. Lots of practice with minimal risk makes for excellent training, of that there is no doubt. Neither the British nor the Americans had the luxury of such a training ground.

As for the Spit vs. 109, I consider them very equal planes, until the Spit XIV which was clearly superior to its 109 rivals. Where I have a problem is with Dalton's position that the 109 was the superior plane - it clearly was not.

=S=

Lunatic

 

[Maestro]

You, both Dalton and Udet, missed a point...

And I also found this on an other web site :

Lithograph Setting: By the Fall of 1944, the German army was in retreat under cover of Luftwaffe fighters. Number 127 Wing, commanded by "Johnnie" Johnson, was sent to attack the withdrawing forces and on 27 September he scored his final victory near Venlo, Holland. In a grueling dogfight with nine Messerschmitts, Johnson's Spitfire was hit for the first and only time during the war. Most noteworthy, all but one of his 38 victories were achieved against single-engine fighters.

Note : J.E. Johnson only flew Spitfires through out the war. He flew Mk. Is, Vs, IXs and XIVs.

If the 109 and 190 were sooooooo superior to the Spitfire, why did Johnson (who flew over 1,000 missions) only got hit (but not shot down) once during the whole war ? More over, how was he able to shot down 37 single-engined fighters on a total of 38 victories ?

 

[KraziKanuK]

Maestro, he never met an Experten.

 

[Anonymous]

Kanuk, I seriously doubt that.

But, my answer would be: 2 parts skill and 3 parts luck!

=S=

Lunatic

 

[Maestro]

Maestro, he never met an Experten.

Who knows ?

 

[KraziKanuK]

No one noticed the 'wink'? ie joke.

 

[Nonskimmer]

It's alright. I got it.

 

[KraziKanuK]

It's alright. I got it.

Should I have said 'one of Dalton's experten'?

 

[Soren]

Should I have said 'one of Dalton's experten'?

Come on people, lets not be so harsh on each other.

The Bf-109 was a great fighter, wich is very underrated in todays society of Plane-reseachers. However that doesnt mean the Spitfire wasnt a great plane (wich it defidently was), just that it hasnt been underrated.

I can to some extend understand Dalton and Udet, as it can be very frustrating to see the Spitfire being worshipped as much as it is, and that the Bf-109 is always regarded as inferior(Wich it most certainly wasnt).

In my opinion the two aircraft are very similar in Fighter vs Fighter capability.

Take BoB for example, there the 109's gave very good considdering their fuel limitations. A very large portion of the 109's shot down in BoB, were shot down on thier way home !.

 

[cheddar cheese]

I think the late war Spits were far better than the late war 109's, as they lost a lot of their manoeverability. Early war though they were very even.

 

[the lancaster kicks ass]

well try to remember this, byt the BoB the -109 had had years of refinement and development, the spit was still on her first mark, if you sent a spit Mk.I and a -109A against each toher who would win??

 

[cheddar cheese]

I think the Bf-109B was the first combat version.

Type: Single-seat fighter
Origin: Bayerische Flegzeugwerke
Service Delivery: February 1937

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Engine:
Bf 109B-0:
Model: Junkers Jumo 210B
Type: Liquid-cooled, inverted V12
Number: One Horsepower: 610 hp

Bf 109B-1:
Model: Junkers Jumo 210D
Type: Liquid-cooled, inverted V12
Number: One Horsepower: 635 hp

Bf 109B-2:
Model: Junkers Jumo 210E
Type: Liquid-cooled, inverted V12
Number: One Horsepower: 640 hp

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dimensions:
Wing span: 9.97m
Length: 8.51m
Height: 2.59m
Wing Surface Area: N/A
Weights:
Empty: 1580kg (3,483 lbs.)
Maximum, Loaded: 2120kg (4,850 lbs.)

Performance:
Maximum Speed: 292mph (470kph)
Range: N/A
Initial climb: 2,200 ft/min (670.5m/min)
Service Ceiling: 26,575 ft. (8100m)



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Armament:
Two 7.92mm MG 17 machine guns above engine.
One 7.92mm MG 17 machine guns firing through hub.

Avionics: N/A



A lot of it would be down to pilot skill, but I think the Mk1 spit would have clinched it. But remember the Spitfire was a far newer design. If you look at the British fighters of the RAF at the same period of the Bf-109B, you will probably find the 109 was far superior. It is unfair to compare the Mk.I with the 109B, as they are from different eras.

 

[the lancaster kicks ass]

so we're talking 1935 yeah?? compare it to the hurricane, the hurricane would walk all over the -109 with stats like that........

 

[cheddar cheese]

Wasnt the Hurricane also a far later design than the 109 though? Im fairly sure that 109 designing and development would have started back in 1933 (not sure on that though)