My take is a rooky pilot in the Spit or Hurri could be bested by an experienced 109 pilot but when equal pilots in both planes meet the 109 looses out.
P40 Vs all other fighters in Europe
- Thread starter denny
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Throughout the war machines and information became obsolete very quickly, testing enemy equipment and spying may have been a great way of deceiving yourself, an early 1940 Hurricane was nothing like what was sent up in the BoB.
Shortround6
Major General
Looking at Wuzak's post again.
That is for a minimum radius turn without height loss. Or a sustained turn.
Both planes could easily hit 5 1/2 to 6 Gs in a turn. But they would have to trade forward speed or trade altitude in order keep the speed above stall.
The 109 with it's slates could not actually turn better, as seen above and in other documents/tests.
The Slats on the 109 gave a much more noticeable warning of approaching stall than the Spitfire did. That is the advantage the 109 gave some rookie pilots.
Please note that the early Spitfires were noted for having a very powerful elevator which was easy to over control in turns. Later Spits (and I believe we are talking about sometime in 1940 here?) had a bob weight installed the control circuit that increased the force needed on the stick to reduced sensitivity.
I would venture to guess that an older Spitfire, that is one with the two pitch propeller would have trouble with 2.65 G turn in test. The two pitch propeller would be in coarse pitch and the prop would be close to stalling at that speed (or at least operating very, very inefficiently) and with less thrust the plane would not be able to sustain the 2.65 turn rate without descending.
I would also note that a pilots ability to maintain a steady rate turn is very, very hard.
That is for a minimum radius turn without height loss. Or a sustained turn.
Both planes could easily hit 5 1/2 to 6 Gs in a turn. But they would have to trade forward speed or trade altitude in order keep the speed above stall.
The 109 with it's slates could not actually turn better, as seen above and in other documents/tests.
The Slats on the 109 gave a much more noticeable warning of approaching stall than the Spitfire did. That is the advantage the 109 gave some rookie pilots.
Please note that the early Spitfires were noted for having a very powerful elevator which was easy to over control in turns. Later Spits (and I believe we are talking about sometime in 1940 here?) had a bob weight installed the control circuit that increased the force needed on the stick to reduced sensitivity.
I would venture to guess that an older Spitfire, that is one with the two pitch propeller would have trouble with 2.65 G turn in test. The two pitch propeller would be in coarse pitch and the prop would be close to stalling at that speed (or at least operating very, very inefficiently) and with less thrust the plane would not be able to sustain the 2.65 turn rate without descending.
I would also note that a pilots ability to maintain a steady rate turn is very, very hard.
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
Back up even further - it will be a matter of who sees who first and how that tactical advantage is exploited.
Shortround6
Major General
The general rule of thumb was that a squadron was going to write off it's initial issue of planes in the first 6 months and replacement aircraft would be used up at about about rate during service. Varies a bit with actual sortie rate of course.
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
at·tri·tion
- the action or process of gradually reducing the strength or effectiveness of someone or something through sustained attack or pressure.
Can't argue with that.
One of the biggest causes of write off was hitting tree's, the dust was so bad pilots would only realise they have gone off the strips after they hit one.
Couldnt they have installed tree catchers or something?
Shortround6
Major General
Assumes pilot can see the crewman on the wingtip.
Assumes the crewman can see the tree also
That brings you back to tactics like the Finger-four, the use of radios etc. The standard Finnish tactic when encountering enemy fighters (which I believe was similar to the German) was one pair from the flight makes a shallow high speed climbing turn to the right, the other turns left and climbs. Whichever the enemy fighter(s) go for becomes the bait, using their superior power and climb rate to stay ahead of their pursuers. The other pair then chases the pursuing fighters and shoots them down.
Early fighters had the turtle decks and many of them lacked rear-view mirrors initially... it became very easy to become focused on the target and forget that you were at risk... and as many early fighters (especially in Russia) either lacked radios or had radios that either didn't work very well or that they hadn't learned to use properly, a useful warning either never came or came too late. This is how a lot of fighters were shot down 'without ever seeing their enemy' - not just in the initial attack from out of the sun.
Other tactic typically used by German pilots was the rolling scissors; when faced with a better turning fighter, you roll and turn one way, then roll again and turn the other way. Bf 109 had a bit better roll rate than the Spitfire and considerably better than the Hurricane. In this manner they could sometimes get behind their opponent. This is also what the Kittyhawk pilot did against the Spitfire in that famous Australian test. Bf 109s were particularly good at this because of the slats.
Another typical tactic also used was the high or low Yo-Yo. The high Yo-Yo was a way to use some extra energy (and / or an exceptional climb rate) to make a climbing turn (what the Russians would call a 'vertical turn' ) and thus turn inside a normally better turning aircraft. I believe this was a tactic often used by German pilots, particularly in Russia. Japanese pilots did this against Allied fighters in the Pacific too.
A low Yo-Yo was a similar tactic where you have a fast diving aircraft and / or are running out of energy, you make a diving turn (picking up speed in the process) and then zoom climb up, cutting the circle. This was a standard tactic used by US fighter pilots in the Pacific especially, but also in the Med.
I mention these just as a reminder that a dog fight wasn't necessarily just a matter of turning in circles. Pilots figured out many ways to take advantage of their aircraft's strengths and exploit their enemy's weaknesses.
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
Good stuff but be aware that some of us have actually participated in these maneuvers (my experience is very novice compared to our resident Eagle driver, Biff) and these maneuvers and tactics have been discussed countless times on this forum by many. If you don't see you're enemy coming, all this is void. Every doctrine written by leading fighter pilots involves the ability to see the enemy first.
Shortround6
Major General
The 109 gets a lot of credit for the slats.
It was done but depending on the slats means you are at the very bottom of the energy zone.
They are automatic slats, pilot has no control over them (can't pop them at 250mph in level flight).
They also don't come out until the airflow over the wing surface is at a certain point, like 10-15kph above stall.
Granted in a Hi G turn that could be close to 300kph above true airspeed and nowhere near the stall speed at landing.
It also means that the the wing is just about stall which means the angle of attack of the wing is probably 12-14 degrees above where the direction of flight is pointed.
In other words you are in a high drag situation. You will need several minutes to get your air speed back up to near full speed flying nearly straight and level.
If your (and a wing man) have gotten into a turning fight with one or two opponents then it may be a good tactic. If you are outnumbered then getting out of Dodge is may be the better strategy. If you have gotten your slats to deploy then somebody in the furball has a better energy status than you do and they are going to be on your tail very soon.
Not saying that the German and Japanese didn't use the hi yo-yo or the low yo-yo or some variation of it. But you get the slats to pop on the yo-you you might have already slowed down to much.
special ed
2nd Lieutenant
- 5,669
- May 13, 2018
This tactics/awareness discussion brings to mind an account from a book read about 70 years ago. The British WW1 ace was flying alone near or over German lines looking for the enemy when he spotted a German enjoying aviating. His description was that the German must have been a new pilot as he was enjoying the beautiful day and flying the rims of the of the clouds circling and climbing. The British pilot thought it was a shame to shoot down someone who enjoyed flying that much but realised the man could become a great flyer and so shot him down without the German ever seeing the danger. I can no longer remember the book or the pilot.
Right, I don't disagree with any of that. Many pilots were certainly caught who had never seen their opponents. Deploying the slats definitely increased drag, and from my understanding they had some problems with the slats on the Emil, which were sorted out with the Franz.
But it was often also the situation that the pilot did survive an initial encounter, or saw the enemy coming, but then found themselves in a desperate situation in a close-quarters fight. They typically worked out standard tactics to exploit their aircraft's strengths. These were used over and over again.
The Scissors was described several times by German pilots as a 'survival method' when they did get caught in a turning fight, which was actually not that unusual depending on the circumstances. For example when they had to fly escort, they couldn't just stay above the enemy fighters until the circumstances were ideal - they had to stay and fight or else the bombers would be shot down. The Soviets also talk a lot about how the Bf 109 pilots used 'vertical turns' to outmaneuver their own (better turning) fighters. I found it quite interesting that the Scissors was also mentioned in that Australian test P-40E vs Spitfire V using combat experienced pilots.
The famous Thach Weave used by F4F pilots in the Pacific was also basically a scissors.
Similarly, the 'low-yo-yo' became a go-to survival technique for US P-40 pilots when facing zeros. This is how 14 victory ace Robert DeHaven described it:
"[Y]ou could fight a Jap on even terms, but you had to make him fight your way. He could outturn you at slow speed. You could outturn him at high speed. When you got into a turning fight with him, you dropped your nose down so you kept your airspeed up, you could outturn him. At low speed he could outroll you because of those big ailerons ... on the Zero. If your speed was up over 275, you could outroll [a Zero]. His big ailerons didn't have the strength to make high speed rolls... You could push things, too. Because ... f you decided to go home, you could go home. He couldn't because you could outrun him. [...] That left you in control of the fight."
I am aware of that, I wasn't trying to 'school' you or Biff, but some people posting here don't know all of this.
And i agree, good eyesight is the fighter pilots first and most important trait. Second however may be knowledge of some of these tactics, or that ability to endure high G.
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
You'll be surprised how many do!
Well I didn't when i first started reading this forum. It took me many hours of research to figure that out.
It's not just the matter of whether these techniques exist, but the context in which they were used (and by whom).
If people generally feel that post is redundant or not useful I'll remove it.
It's not just the matter of whether these techniques exist, but the context in which they were used (and by whom).
If people generally feel that post is redundant or not useful I'll remove it.
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
No, you don't have to remove it, but just understand there's many (if not the majority ) in this forum who are not novices
