Author Topic: Spitfire structural failures (Read 6916 times)

Karnak · « **Reply #90 on:** July 26, 2004, 12:59:50 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by VO101_Isegrim
Yep, 'war is not about who`s right, it`s about who is left'.

109s left in service until 1967 IIRC, after some 30 years of service. Spits retired in the mid-50s I think.

I think what makes the 109 such a red carpet in the Spitdweeb eyes is that it took both the firsts and lasts away from their birdie, and has such an irritating long list of records held in speed, number of kills made, number of planes produced, number of years served, number of aces made, and number of countries it was employed by.

But hey, why is it so humilating to be the 2nd best in such a company?

None of that matters to me.

That such things are what bind you doesn't make your projections true.

mw · « **Reply #91 on:** July 26, 2004, 01:08:07 PM »

Hi Milo: "Was not the 109 fitted with trim tabs that were adjustable when on the ground? These were set for a certain speed so would be 'incompletely trimmed' when above that speed. "

You're quite right. A smoother summary of that passage is this one from British Intelligence:

VO101_Isegrim · « **Reply #92 on:** July 26, 2004, 01:08:36 PM »

You mean the Red Carpet thing? LOL, visit this site , you will see that the very existance of the 109 is unbearable, everyday pain for some guys.

I have absolutely no doubt what would be the first three numbers to erased and eternally banned from all historybooks in the world if that guy would be given a Magic Eraser with a world-wide effect.

Guppy35 · « **Reply #93 on:** July 26, 2004, 01:49:06 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by VO101_Isegrim
Yep, 'war is not about who`s right, it`s about who is left'.

109s left in service until 1967 IIRC, after some 30 years of service. Spits retired in the mid-50s I think.

I think what makes the 109 such a red carpet in the Spitdweeb eyes is that it took both the firsts and lasts away from their birdie, and has such an irritating long list of records held in speed, number of kills made, number of planes produced, number of years served, number of aces made, and number of countries it was employed by.

But hey, why is it so humilating to be the 2nd best in such a company?

LOL Merlin engined HA1112s in Spain still flying in the 60s speaks more to Spain's lack of a modern air force then to the '109''

Syrians were still using Spit's as fighter trainers into the 60s as well.

And since it was Mustangs and Corsairs that were the last Piston engined fighters to see combat, the 109 and Spit don't place on that list.

As for countries it was operated by. Off the top for the 109 I come up with:

Germany, Italy, Romania, Hungary, Bulgaria,Finland, Czecheslovakia, Isreal, Spain, Switzerland. Who am I missing? One source I have says Japan recieved 2. I guess that counts. (edited to add Yugoslavia and apparenly Russia got 5 109Es before the war too)

For the Spits off the top:

UK, Australia, Canada, South Africa, USA, Isreal, Egypt, Syria, Turkey, New Zealand, Burma, Holland, Belgium, France, Norway, Sweden, Argentina, Ireland, Czecheslovakia, Greece, Portugal, USSR.

Last shots fired in anger for the Spit were with the Burmese AF in 55-56. The 109 would have been the Isreali Avias in 48-49 correct?

As far as last air to air kills by both. Wouldn't those have been Isreali Spits and Avia's downing Egyptian Spits in the same time frame?

As for speed records. Are you really going to lump the "109R' into the 109 line?

Talk about a propoganda coup.

How bout we accept the fact that both the 109 and Spitfire were great aircraft that served from before the war to well afterwards with numerous air forces of the world, while setting the standards by which other piston engined fighters were measured.

That work OK?

Dan/Slack

Furball · « **Reply #94 on:** July 26, 2004, 01:54:59 PM »

Quote

Hi Milo: "Was not the 109 fitted with trim tabs that were adjustable when on the ground? These were set for a certain speed so would be 'incompletely trimmed' when above that speed. "

109 trim tabs:- (fixed to ailerons & elevators, none on rudder)

GScholz · « **Reply #95 on:** July 26, 2004, 02:20:29 PM »

Elevators were fully trimmed, fixed tabs on ailerons, no rudder trim on most 109s (some versions had fixed tabs).

Furball · « **Reply #96 on:** July 26, 2004, 02:27:11 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by GScholz
Elevators were fully trimmed, fixed tabs on ailerons, no rudder trim on most 109s (some versions had fixed tabs).

fully trimmed? on that 109G-2 they are same as those on ailerons.

GScholz · « **Reply #97 on:** July 26, 2004, 02:58:00 PM »

The entire horizontal stabilizer was moved by the trim-wheel in the cockpit.

Karnak · « **Reply #98 on:** July 26, 2004, 03:07:23 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by VO101_Isegrim
You mean the Red Carpet thing? LOL, visit this site , you will see that the very existance of the 109 is unbearable, everyday pain for some guys.

I have absolutely no doubt what would be the first three numbers to erased and eternally banned from all historybooks in the world if that guy would be given a Magic Eraser with a world-wide effect.

Barbi,

Comments like this really make it seem as though you are sliding into delusional, tinfoil hat style, paranoia.

VO101_Isegrim · « **Reply #99 on:** July 27, 2004, 06:12:54 AM »

Karnak,

calling me 'Barbi' actually makes me think you share some of Milo`s intellectual defiencies.

As for 'paranoia', I was putting it, in a possibly polite manner, the amount of bias and partisan mindset of that mentioned site. If you don`t get what that meant, here`s it straighforward : Mike Williams at that site is doing a propaganda work with manipulation and selective qouting from certain documents, the agenda being quite clear. You won`t find a single good sentence about the 109 there, but you will find roll test where the 'inconvinient' parts are cut off, you will find 1940 trials betwee n the Spit and 109, with only the negative parts taken out of context from the full, multiple-page report, and the positive parts being ignored and unquoted. So when talking about bias, this site is a good place to get first hand examples.

Well if you mentioned paranoia, it`s really not me who`s spending hours and hours to build a site of lies, whenever something good comes about a plane, try to distort it with the abovementioned tricks. Appearantly, it`s not me who cannot put up with the facts, or that both the 109s and Spit were good planes, but the guy who spend his days and night writing articles to his site which kinda say one of them is complete sucker, the other is the best prop fighter ever. You and Guppy had to knock on an other door, when it comes to bias and paranoia I am afraid.

Crumpp · « **Reply #100 on:** July 27, 2004, 06:57:21 AM »

It's like any fan site. The data is selected to make the plane look the best. Plenty of folks do it, whether it is a 109, Spitfire, 190, P38, or any other fighter. Nobody selects data that says, "My plane sucks" to post on the Internet.

My views on Luftwaffe-Allied A/C History.

I am sure everyone is familiar with the "Pendulum Theory" of historical study.

Right After World War II, Historians saw the high kill scores the Luftwaffe produced. Many incorrectly concluded that the Luftwaffe must have had "super" planes. The Myth of Luftwaffe technical superiority was born.

Then in the Pendulum began to swing. In the Mid-50's some Historians began to say "The Luftwaffe actually had Inferior Aircraft" and isn't it amazing they scored so high. Until finally, Historians concluded that in fact Luftwaffe Aircraft were inferior and couldn't stand up one on one with Allied contemporaries.

The issue pretty much laid dead until the early 1990's. I think flight simulations had a lot to do with the reexamination of this part of History. Now, with the declassification and public access to documentation previously out of reach, the pendulum is moving again toward a more balanced view. There are quite a few new sources of information, INCLUDING, archaeological evidence.

Crumpp

VO101_Isegrim · « **Reply #101 on:** July 27, 2004, 07:12:05 AM »

Very much agree. I would add, that the Inet probably added a lot more than anything else. It brought people, and experts together. Formerly it was a hard process for experts, working thousends of miles away, sharing their knowladge, the way was exhanging mails and bumping into each other in airshows and such. Pretty complicated. But now with emails people far far away can share the fruits of their research for the better of all. aviation Forums, and sim communities had there share in that, too.

The historical technical advantage in air war had a zig-zag nature, one side getting the upper and then loosing it again. Sometimes it was not even that easy to decide over which newest upgrade done by one side offered the greater advantage, as the until then parellel developments took a whole different path, each offering it`s own advantages and disadvantages. The fight for the technical advantage in the air war was a decisive one, and not only waging on the drawing boards and minds of engineers, but also in the workshops : any technological leap worth only as much as it could feel it`s presence on the battlefield itself: that means it had to appear in numbers, and had to be free of defects that would limit it`s usefullness in operational use. In the recent years, so much of hard evidence showed up, that I think will change even the common view very quickly to a more balanced one free of extemities (a minority would always remain though). Simply because the massive weight of facts emerging up, and available to all.

MiloMorai · « **Reply #102 on:** July 27, 2004, 07:27:25 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Karnak
Barbi,

Comments like this really make it seem as though you are sliding into delusional, tinfoil hat style, paranoia.

You hit nail on the head, Karnak. His post to you supports this.

Will be interesting, if and when, he finally gets his 109 site up and running if he can leave out his anti-British bias.

Barbi is a legit nick for him, from the old OnWar forums. Some very well informed people, who are not intellectually deficent called him Barbi as well there. When OnWar folded, they formed http://www.1jma.dk/default.asp

Here is a thread which shows his twisted views of WW2. http://www.1jma.dk/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=1859&whichpage=5&SearchTerms=concentration,camps

VO101_Isegrim · « **Reply #103 on:** July 27, 2004, 07:45:46 AM »

Discussion getting to be productive, time to put it on a sidetrack, eh ? lololol

Crumpp · « **Reply #104 on:** July 27, 2004, 08:00:19 AM »

Quote

You hit nail on the head, Karnak. His post to you supports this. Will be interesting, if and when, he finally gets his 109 site up and running if he can leave out his anti-British bias.

Why do you even need to pipe up? Karnak can handle himself. BOTH you and Barbi need to find your own thread. Your infighting ruins any discussion.

Barbi does make some borderline delusional comments and SO do you. Your constantly nipping at his heals like a lapdog in heat. People can read and they can think for themselves.

Crumpp