Is Spitfire relly superior to FW-190?

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

Status
Not open for further replies.
Well back to the title of the thread....

The Fw-190 and Spitfire remained very well matched throughout the war, and neither was ever really superior to another, except maby at the Fw-190's first introduction to the war where it DID outclass the Spit.
 
mosquitoman said:
Thanks for getting us on-topic Soren, I'll agree with you but at the end of the war the Spit was best

The SPit XIV was definitely superior to any "Anton", but it wasnt more than equal to the "Dora 9". The Spit would have a REALLY hard time against a Dora 9, and vice versa.
 
I'd still rather be in a Spitfire Mk.XIVe. It had better fighter vs. fighter armament.
 
plan_D said:
I'd still rather be in a Spitfire Mk.XIVe. It had better fighter vs. fighter armament.

Why is that? Both the Dora and XIV had 2 20mm and 2 .50"/13mm guns.
 
The M2 Browing .50 cal (12.7mm) delivered a 43.3 gram shell at 880 m/s, with a 750-850 rpm. That's against the MG131 13mm which delivered a 36 gram shell at 730 m/s at 900 rpm.

MG131 fires more but is slower and lighter.

The Hispano Mk.II 20mm delivered a 130 gram shell at 880 m/s, with a 600 rpm. Against a MG151/20 20mm delivering a 105 gram shell 725 m/s, at 700 - 750 rpm.

MG151/20 fires more but, again, is slower and lighter.

I'd still rather have the Spitfire armament although they were more equal in fighter vs. fighter than I previously thought.
 
The armaments were very close to each other. The Fw-190 having a higher rpm, while the Spit having more power pr round. I would call it even.
 
And I would rather fly in an Fw-190D-9... The differences in armaments are negligable...

In the hands of a 180+ Ace, u were pretty much unbeatable against anyone and any other airframe, as long as u weren't gettin bounced or at 5 to 1 odds of course...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back