You have quoted my response to Dan Fahey, discussing this USAAF fighter victories Nothing to do with aces.
Where did I suggest this?
Japanese Zero vs Spitfire vs FW 190
- Thread starter Chiron
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
You have quoted my response to Dan Fahey, discussing this USAAF fighter victories Nothing to do with aces.
Where did I suggest this?
I don't think that the overclaiming was higher than anywhere else, but nor was it lower. My assertion was merely that when assessing how successful a particular aircraft was, in this case the Tomahawk, that if the number of victories is not high, a couple of hundred, then dividing them with the usual rate of overclaiming of 2-3,
then the actual success is rather less than the percieved.
See post 887
There was a relatively small number of Tomahawk victories because there were a relatively small number of Tomahawks in action for a relatively short time. At the peak in the Summer of 1941 there were three Tomahawk squdarons (112 RAF, 250 RAF, and 3 RAAF)
By Winter of 1941/42 112 RAF and 250 RAF were phasing out Tomahawks in favor of Kittyhawks, while 2 and 5 SAAF got Tomahawks. 3 RAAF switched from Tomahawk to Kittyhakws in Nov 1942.
So the unit strength of Tomahawks in the Western Desert ranged from a high of roughly 30- 36 in late 1941 down to 20-24 by fall of 1942 and I think after that it was just the one South African squadron of 10-12 aircraft (ideally, assuming close to full serviceability - more often it was 7 or 8 aircraft per mission).
I don't know what you mean by "overclaiming of 2-3" but if you mean 200-300% then I don't think there is any evidence for that. Specifically with the Aces as I showed it looks like on that particular day of Nov 22 1941 they underclaimed and the Luftwaffe were the ones doing fairly substantial overclaiming.
As for how impressive it was, it's largely a matter of claims to loss ratios. 112 RAF claimed 36 victories with Tomahawks, 3 RAAF claimed 41 victories with Tomahawks. I don't know their precise number of losses during the time they had Tomahawks but I don't believe it's anywhere near that many. We probably need to open a new thread for this though since you are so adamant.
Last edited:
Basically what we're lookin' at ...
Spitfire Vc (Merlin 45) +9, +12 and +16 boost
Spitfire Vc (Merlin 46) +9, +12 and +16 boost
Spitfire Vc (Merlin 45M) +18 boost
Spitfire Vc (Merlin 45) +9 boost 2850 rpm
Spitfire Vc (Merlin 45) +12 boost 3000 rpm
Spitfire Vc (Merlin 45M) +18 boost 3000 rpm
Last edited:
When testing the universal wing on a MkVc it did 375 mph with 8 brownings, 374 with 4 Hispano's, that was with 9 psi boost.
Last edited:
I'd still like to know where the 52mph the Darwin MkV's lost went?.
We also have a test where it did 359 on +9 psi here; 369 mph at 13000 ft on +16 psi boost.
The fit & finish problems surfacing out in 1942?
Spitfires with Merlin 46 were hard pressed to touch 370 mph on +9 psi boost (20000-22000 ft): link; scroll down for table.
The figures I used are from data sheets and correspondence between big wigs discussing the new clipped-and-cropped Spitfires. They're more to illustrate the differences between the three engines/boost levels than to show exactly what airframe No. XYYYY did.
You would get a variation of 5 mph between 4 planes in the same squadron so 370+ is a fair number. Here's a Spit XIV that had it's wings painted and polished,http://www.spitfireperformance.com/mustang/spitfire-fig6.jpg a gain of 10mph.
Last edited:
I noted the RAAF had 365 mph at 22,000 feet for a tropical Spitfire Vc (Merlin 46) from NAA A11093: 452/A58
The best they got was 332mph, the Zero they tested hit 331.
I'm not talking about a single airframe, but about whole Spitfire V series with Merlin 46 engine - of seven aircraft listed at the table I've linked, neither was able to make 370 mph between 20000 and 22600 ft, let alone going beyond 380. The ones outfitted with float-type carb were barely making 360 mph.
Agreed pretty much.
Not at full-throttle height I assume. Sounds more like about 15,000 feet.
Yeah taking all of the variables out, I wonder what the math says a Merlin 46 Spitfire should do, given known values with a Merlin 45.
My Merlin horsepower/height data is pretty spartan.
