Spitfire V ME109. I have found these links on the net.

[Readie]

I found these interesting and give a balanced view.

There are some remarks from the Germans about conditions in the last year of WW2 that suprised me. Sabotaged Me109's from the factory and how production standards had slipped.

Spitfire Mk XIV versus Me 109 G/K

Spitfire Mk IX versus Me 109 G - Flight Testing

Enjoy
Cheers
John

 

[ctrian]

I'd advise you to look up Spit stats from that site BUT Bf109 stats from here: Kurfurst - Your resource on Messerschmitt Bf 109 performance.Or you could search this forum for posts comparing the two aircraft.

 

[Readie]

I'd advise you to look up Spit stats from that site BUT Bf109 stats from here: Kurfurst - Your resource on Messerschmitt Bf 109 performance.Or you could search this forum for posts comparing the two aircraft.

Ok, but there is other background information there too.
Is just for general interest...
Cheers
John

 

[NZTyphoon]

I'd advise you to look up Spit stats from that site BUT Bf109 stats from here: Kurfurst - Your resource on Messerschmitt Bf 109 performance.Or you could search this forum for posts comparing the two aircraft.

Unfortunately there are NO guarantees of accurate Bf 109 stats on the site given above (nor can you rely on the so called "discussions" on the forum attached to this site, which mostly seem to be led by a Purple Fang who has a real hard-on against the Spitfire and most allied aircraft); your best sources for 109 info are still to be found in authoritative and reliable books written by authors such as Prien Rodeike, or Willi Radinger etc .

 

[Tante Ju]

I find two sites informative, tests written down, very genuine, only have to read and make conclusion. What is why you say about accuracy bad on sites? What "guarantee" needed? Co-signiture by Prof Messerschmitt or Prof Mitchell? I find this works very useful. Of course author may write in his own article (different from tests) his own opinion, this will be subjective.. even biassed... but no problem with this is there is no lie.. Forum..? Forum is opinions. This forum too people have opinion, a real hard-on both for and against the Spitfire. Which type is you? I guess first with hard on for, because you do not like Purple Fang with against.

 

[ctrian]

Unfortunately there are NO guarantees of accurate Bf 109 stats on the site given above (nor can you rely on the so called "discussions" on the forum attached to this site, which mostly seem to be led by a Purple Fang who has a real hard-on against the Spitfire and most allied aircraft); your best sources for 109 info are still to be found in authoritative and reliable books written by authors such as Prien Rodeike, or Willi Radinger etc .

Actually i think the other site is biased and in a very obvious way but instead of arguing why not simply check every source for yourself? Maybe ,just maybe the Bf didnt explode on take off and it's speed may have been more than 5 km/h .Shocking i know

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Honestly people. If you want to get realistic "Info" you need to take info from both sites. Both sites are very well done and both sites present good info, but they both have there bias. Take the info from both sites and meet yourself in the middle...

It is an aged old discussion between the "Pro Luftwaffe" and the "Pro RAF" camps.

 

[ctrian]

It is an aged old discussion between the "Pro Luftwaffe" and the "Pro RAF" camps.

Yep i will agree to that.

 

[Readie]

Yep i will agree to that.

You sure?

I may agree to that

We could agree to differ

Cheers

John

 

[ctrian]

If you learned something new that may challenge your beliefs it was worth it...

 

[Readie]

If you learned something new that may challenge your beliefs it was worth it...

I enjoy learning something new ctrian, and a spirited debate.
I have noticed though that no one really changes their beliefs,just accepts others points of view.
But, that's ok.
Cheers
John

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

You sure?

Why the rolling of the eyes?

 

[jim]

Mr Kurfust has wtritten an article that demonstrates and proves the unreliability of that site , and especiallythe subject of Spit XIV vs Bf109K4 . It is full of lies, selective evidence, ignorance of evidence, constuction of evidence and many other thinks. Read Kurfust answer and will realize the worth of that site. its not enough for them to lie to glorify the Spit XIV ,they want at the same time reduce the 109. These articles are free on internet for a few years now and i am surprised that anyone still takes seriously that site

 

[NZTyphoon]

Mr Kurfust has wtritten an article that demonstrates and proves the unreliability of that site , and especiallythe subject of Spit XIV vs Bf109K4 . It is full of lies, selective evidence, ignorance of evidence, constuction of evidence and many other thinks. Read Kurfust answer and will realize the worth of that site. its not enough for them to lie to glorify the Spit XIV ,they want at the same time reduce the 109. These articles are free on internet for a few years now and i am surprised that anyone still takes seriously that site

Oh yes, Mr KF was always so balanced, non-selective and reliable.

 

[Njaco]

What was that that someone said about stats?

Do not put your faith in what statistics say until you have carefully considered what they do not say. ~William W. Watt


And be careful with comments. Don't want this to turn into a bashing thread.

 

[Milosh]

The link to the Barbarossa Isegrim, aka Barbi, aka Kurfurst Spit XIV - Me109K-4 article.

Kurfürst

 

[Readie]

I posted these links for a general read not to make any particular point. There are some reports that suprise me and seem genuine. After the passage of years can we really be certain that any stats are 100% reliable? More to the point does it matter, it doesn't take away our admiration of the aircraft involved.
Just a thought...
Cheers
John

 

[Njaco]

I understand what you were doing Readie, I'm not sure everybody else does.

 

[parsifal]

Im surprised that either side would wish to denigrate the other. both aircraft are truly great. I dont think i have ever denigrated the 109, even though i am one of those in th Spitfire camp.

To my mind the Spitfire was on the side that eventually won, but they achieved that at terrific cost, which in no small measure was due to the efforts of the Me 109.

Both sides should perhaps respect the achievements and qualities of the other.

As for personalities, well, we are all what we are. Lord knows how many times I clashed with kurfy, but I would never say he wasnt knowledgeable on the subject. Just that i disagreed with just about every conclusion he ever drew, but thats okay in my opinion

 

[Readie]

Im surprised that either side would wish to denigrate the other. both aircraft are truly great. I dont think i have ever denigrated the 109, even though i am one of those in th Spitfire camp.

To my mind the Spitfire was on the side that eventually won, but they achieved that at terrific cost, which in no small measure was due to the efforts of the Me 109.

Both sides should perhaps respect the achievements and qualities of the other.

As for personalities, well, we are all what we are. Lord knows how many times I clashed with kurfy, but I would never say he wasnt knowledgeable on the subject. Just that i disagreed with just about every conclusion he ever drew, but thats okay in my opinion

Yes, absolutely. Standford Tuck had the utmost respect for his foe and, interestingly, never claimed to hate the Germans.
I am firmly in the Spitfire camp ( in case you hadn't noticed) but, I admire other countries aircraft as well.
We have the right to our opinions and the right to disagree with others provided its done in a gentlemanly fashion.
Cheers
John