Kevin J
Banned
Yes, but how many? Like I said you can't reconcile in any way the German claims against the British admission of losses.
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Yes, but how many? Like I said you can't reconcile in any way the German claims against the British admission of losses.You don't think that production contracts, especially for engines, included the provision of spare parts?
Can we see your documentation of said sparesI'd say you get a drop in production to build more spares. Ho, ho, ho, hoe.
I don't have anything. Like I said, it was in a book I read back in the seventies saying production was higher, composite aircraft were being built. There was even a question in parliament about the speed of repaired Hurricanes, which was 306 not 324 mph.Can we see your documentation of said spares
Like I said you can't reconcile in any way the German claims against the British admission of losses.
In that case, we should use a different metric other than claims to losses, maybe production to claims?Claims of kills were notoriously inaccurate, largely due to the claiming pilot often having little more than a split-second view of the enemy aircraft before he needed to redirect his attention to ensure he wasn't becoming a target.
A great many claims were made because an aircraft appeared to depart from controlled flight, often accompanied by a puff of smoke, which, instead, indicated the enemy pilot pushing the throttle open and manoeuvring wildly to avoid being shot down. And that's before we consider the same enemy aircraft being claimed by more than one pilot.
Claims could easily be 2x, 3x, 4x or more the actual losses sustained by an enemy. So why do you think there would be any correlation between one side's claims and the other side's losses?
In that case, we should use a different metric other than claims to losses, maybe production to losses?
In that case, we should use a different metric other than claims to losses, maybe production to claims?
I don't have anything. Like I said, it was in a book I read back in the seventies saying production was higher, composite aircraft were being built. There was even a question in parliament about the speed of repaired Hurricanes, which was 306 not 324 mph.
Yes, bits two creating one.Composite, as in cannibalising one aircraft to fix another?
Here's a recollection by Komet pilot Mano Ziegler (from his book Rocket Fighter, The Story of the Me 163, Macdonald, London, 1963) of a landing accident he suffered and was very lucky to survive.
You cannot use such a simplistic calculation of average production with the Spitfire in 1939/40. When war was declared the RAF had approximately 130 in service, an astonishing percentage being lost in accidents I believe about 30%. At the fall of France this had increased to around 250 which with approx 250 Hurricanes made up Dowdings minimum of 500 it quickly rose as the table shows until the battle really started. During the battle as has been said production was dispersed factories bombed and a new factory brought into production. However that is only one part of the issue even in war time most fighter aircraft are not lost to enemy action, they are lost in accidents or simply replaced because the limiting factor is pilots. If an engine needs a rebuild after 250 hours and airframes need lots of work or checking after a similar number of hours it becomes simpler to just replace them with new. When Castle Bromwich started producing MkIIs in June and they went into service in August they replaced Mk Is. Just as they were replaced by MkVs and then MkIXs. The table posted by Fubar shows the rate of "churn" I believe they are new production and planes reclaimed combined. Every month the RAF received around 1000 fighters, twice its previous full time strength yet the number in service only went up by 150. It is a similar story with P-51s look at all the P-51B/C and D variants shipped to Europe look at how many were shot down and tell me where the rest went, it is documented somewhere but on the face of it they seem to evaporate as soon as combat really starts.Isn't it magic how if you look at the annual production figures, divide by 12, multiply by 3 then you get the magic 900 the RAF said it lost. Obviously the Luftwaffe wasn't told that the BoB was only August to October till later. Ho ho. I imagine the Germans must have been scratching their heads at some point wondering how their 3200 victory claims was only 900 in reality. Ho ho. The reverse happens during 1941 with the the RAF wildly over estimating their victories over German fighters.
You obviously don't understand sarcasm, nor what I was saying. Even I never claimed 1000 pcm, only 450 combined pcm production including rebuilds.You cannot use such a simplistic calculation of average production with the Spitfire in 1939/40. When war was declared the RAF had approximately 130 in service, an astonishing percentage being lost in accidents I believe about 30%. At the fall of France this had increased to around 250 which with approx 250 Hurricanes made up Dowdings minimum of 500 it quickly rose as the table shows until the battle really started. During the battle as has been said production was dispersed factories bombed and a new factory brought into production. However that is only one part of the issue even in war time most fighter aircraft are not lost to enemy action, they are lost in accidents or simply replaced because the limiting factor is pilots. If an engine needs a rebuild after 250 hours and airframes need lots of work or checking after a similar number of hours it becomes simpler to just replace them with new. When Castle Bromwich started producing MkIIs in June and they went into service in August they replaced Mk Is. Just as they were replaced by MkVs and then MkIXs. The table posted by Fubar shows the rate of "churn" I believe they are new production and planes reclaimed combined. Every month the RAF received around 1000 fighters, twice its previous full time strength yet the number in service only went up by 150. It is a similar story with P-51s look at all the P-51B/C and D variants shipped to Europe look at how many were shot down and tell me where the rest went, it is documented somewhere but on the face of it they seem to evaporate as soon as combat really starts.
Yes and no. There were certainly several thousand Spitfires and Hurricanes left over after the war. Somewhere I read that there were 6000 Mustangs in the States that never got deployed overseas. As for the Russians wooden fighters, the numbers written off due to weather erosion was staggering.We often forget the (by modern standards) phenomenally high accident rates in the 1940s.
Those airframes that did survive relatively unscathed often were scrapped when they became worn out simply because of the rough handling they suffered during combat ops. The life of a front-line fighter aircraft was measured in months at best (more frequently just weeks), which is why so few actual combat veteran airframes survive. Those that do are frequently name-plate restorations.
Minimal numbers would be my guess. I recall reading years ago that spares equivalent to 1000 airframes to fix 14k Hurricanes built. Also 2011 P-40F/L built, 300 re-engined with V-1710. So obviously not enough to go round.You don't think that production contracts, especially for engines, included the provision of spare parts?
I wasn't referring to your sarcasm but to your calculation.You obviously don't understand sarcasm, nor what I was saying. Even I never claimed 1000 pcm, only 450 combined pcm production including rebuilds.
Well, if the RAF are receiving 1000 fighters pcm, and the numbers available only go up by 150, is that over the 3 months the RAF considered to be the BoB, or perhaps the 4 months that the Luftwaffe considered the BoB. Because if its 4 months then that's a loss of (4000-150 =) 3850 fighters or if its 3 months then that's (3000-150=) 2850, so split the difference and you get 3350 which would match fairly closely the 3200 claims the Luftwaffe made. I'm working on the 4 month period with 450 delivered pcm which gives about 1800 losses. Multiply Luftwaffe claims of 3200 by 4 and divide by 7 to cater for over claiming and you get 1840 which is close to my estimated losses of 1800. Also about 500 Hurricanes and 271 Spitfires had been delivered by the time WW2 started. I think you need to check your maths. The official 900 or so losses announced to the public is pretty much 3 months of the 12 months production in 1940, or 600 Hurricanes and 300 Spitfires. You can prove anything with statistics. I mean 900 losses looks quite reasonable and plausible so long as you don't take account of rebuilding 2 damaged fighters to create one new one.I wasn't referring to your sarcasm but to your calculation.
When you say "announced to the public" do you mean announced as losses in combat or the total losses to all reasons? There were ten operational Spitfire squadrons when war was declared. I was referring to the post by Fubar #153 using 1000 as the ball park average (its slightly more but also includes Defiants and Blenheims). The point I was making was aircraft needed is massively more than aircraft lost to enemy action in combat. Before the war started the RAF couldnt receive Hurricanes as fast as Hawkers could produce them so they got permission to export them, it was the Battle of France that reduced numbers in front line service by almost 200. What is your "estimate" of? Losses in combat losses to enemy action, losses by front line squadrons, losses to all causes in RAF service or all losses?Well, if the RAF are receiving 1000 fighters pcm, and the numbers available only go up by 150, is that over the 3 months the RAF considered to be the BoB, or perhaps the 4 months that the Luftwaffe considered the BoB. Because if its 4 months then that's a loss of (4000-150 =) 3850 fighters or if its 3 months then that's (3000-150=) 2850, so split the difference and you get 3350 which would match fairly closely the 3200 claims the Luftwaffe made. I'm working on the 4 month period with 450 delivered pcm which gives about 1800 losses. Multiply Luftwaffe claims of 3200 by 4 and divide by 7 to cater for over claiming and you get 1840 which is close to my estimated losses of 1800. Also about 500 Hurricanes and 271 Spitfires had been delivered by the time WW2 started. I think you need to check your maths. The official 900 or so losses announced to the public is pretty much 3 months of the 12 months production in 1940, or 600 Hurricanes and 300 Spitfires. You can prove anything with statistics. I mean 900 losses looks quite reasonable and plausible so long as you don't take account of rebuilding 2 damaged fighters to create one new one.
It's called overtime mate, people work 7 to 8 hours per day, then get paid overtime, 28 days holiday even company paid sick pay, always have done. During the BoB more overtime was worked. You can't keep that up for more than 3 months.