I have noticed that many of the performance tests do not agree with the pilot's perceptions at the time?
A single case out of many as an example.
If you watch the various programs on the Battle of Malta, either on the History Channel, or on U-Tube, you find that all the pilots from both sides state unequivocally that the Me-109 was faster than the Spitfire. ( Strictly about the AC in use at that time and place for this single example!)
But if you search the various test reports on line, they tend to show that the Spitfire is faster than the Me-109?
I have three questions;
1. Are the pilots wrong, and if so why?
2. If not, why do the test results seem to dispute this body of evidence?
3. Are there other factors that are not widely known that affect this and if so, what are they?
A single case out of many as an example.
If you watch the various programs on the Battle of Malta, either on the History Channel, or on U-Tube, you find that all the pilots from both sides state unequivocally that the Me-109 was faster than the Spitfire. ( Strictly about the AC in use at that time and place for this single example!)
But if you search the various test reports on line, they tend to show that the Spitfire is faster than the Me-109?
I have three questions;
1. Are the pilots wrong, and if so why?
2. If not, why do the test results seem to dispute this body of evidence?
3. Are there other factors that are not widely known that affect this and if so, what are they?
