Spit vs. Messer : Design vs. Design

[MiloMorai]

There was 34 squadrons of MkIXs to support D-Day and another 22 squadrons in ADGB.

A total of 56 squadrons of Spitfire Mk IXs.

Now Izzy, of your thousands of 109s produced up to that time, how many were facing these squadrons?


With only 32 servicable 109s in Luftflotte 3 (Fance, Belgium, Holland), pennypocket numbers of 109s for sure.

[Angus]

Jeeez, to smack a dead pony...
From Izzy, about the massive hoardes of G10's and K's
"against these, the MkIX`s performance was lacking a LOT at altitude."
Are you sure they outperform the 1942 Mk IX (Merlin 61) above 40K or so???????????????????????????????????

Then on to the numbers.

Izzy seems to think that a Spitfire was a rare sight in the skies of WW2, don't know though where all the 109's eventually went.
I remember debating Crumpp about allied air supremacy in 1944, where I actually had the meaning that the LW was still capable of delivering really heavy resistance as late as 1944 autumn.
After some heavy reading, I must confess that Crumpp was more right than I was. After the summer of 1944, the former mighty LW was a well co-ordinated PENNYPOCKET nuicance force.
So, what happened with all the hoardes of 109's?
Waiting silently in the garage while the "should-have-been-shot-down-now" Spitfire Mk V's darted by?

Tell you what...

I'll compile a list of when most Spitfire squads re-equipped, when, and with what. I will scan it and mail it to the ones that want....

However, the final results are known history.
Look at merely September 1944.
The massive para and glider drop in Operation Market Garden.
There were 3 waves of drops, all with a day or more between them.
The size of a wave was 100 miles in the lenght or so, moving at mere 150 mph.
They had to cross the north sea.
1st wave went through unintercepted with minimal losses.
2nd wave went through without being intercepted by the LW, which actually put up quite a show, but allied fighters blocked them all.
3rd wave was worse, some LW aircraft did get there. Yet, most losses were to flak.

Now, this was a massive airlift under the nose of the LW.
This was also a very vulnerable airlift, firstly gliders in ample numbers, then secondly cruising over advanced AA defenced territory.
Yet, it went on, so little disturbed.

Now compare this to the Axis airlift out of Tunisia, which was a Massacre party for humble aircraft such as the P40 all the way to the, cough, hardly existant Spitfire Mk IX

[Karnak]

Barbi,

You can't have it both ways.

First you claim that 350 Spitfire IXs, all Merlin 61s, were built in '42 and Q1 '43.  Then you concede that some Merlin 63 Spits were built in Q1 of '43, but your total accepted Spit IX production for '42 and Q1 '43 drops to 310?

Your math looks like this: 350 (Merlin 61) + x (Merlin 63) = 310.  That means that -40 Merlin 63 Spitfires were built.  That makes absolutely no sense.

Your self serving definition of "available in force" is of absolutely no consequence to what actually happened.  Look, for example, at your BS Mk XIV arguments.  You take no account of how these units were employed.  You simply make up numbers and do a crude statistical analysis assuming that the units are evenly spread through the RAF.  Then when you look at your vaunted Bf109s and Fw190s you concentrate them all in the spot that best serves your bias.

The fact is that 1943 the Germans face Spitfire Mk IXs in numbers.  Spitfire Mk Vs were still in service, but the likely combat encounter for a Luftwaffe pilot, if encountering Spitfires, was Mk IXs.  You didn't get an Fw190 ace complaining that in 1943 the Spitfire was as good, or better, than his fighter in all ways other than roll rate because of the "awesome" Mk V.

You can try to rewrite history to favor your Fascist heroes all you want, but it doesn't make your view of history anything other than a fantasy.

[Nashwan]

Pennypocket numbers again. Like with the XIVs. Too little, too late.

Damn, so that's why we lost the war!

[Angus]

Karnak, I could not have said this better
And Nash, same.

Barbi? TOO LITTLE. TOO LATE????

WHAT?

What was too little, too late? Too late to stop the allied defeat?

Ok, Fact remains that the Mk IX was in service from 1942 onwards in growing numbers being replaced even by Griffon engined Spits as soon as 1943 (?)
The Mk V had it's hayday in 1941, but soldiered on untill 1944.
4 Years of service. Now, would you have seen 109E in the skies by squadron strength in 1943? Would you have seen the 109F in 1944 by sqn strenght.?
Barbi, you just trapped yourself, and you haven't even found out, but by considering these simple questions you may find some way to your senses.

There were 30K+ 109's made, and some 20K Spits
The 109's were mostly killed on the western front. So were the 190's.
By 1944, the combined LW could hardly stop anything the allies wanted to do. Example above, from as early as September 1944.
The LW faced Spits from Mk V to Mk IX/VIII in bundles in the med in 1942/43. They lost more aircraft than in Russia. The LW also lost air supremacy. Then the axis lost the whole game in that theater. To an enemy who had to transport his force like 5 times the distance to begin fighting the battle.
Eventually, the LW was down to penny-pockets. They had some teeth, and they could do damage, but they could not change what was going on. By 1944, many many allied pilots flew a whole TOD without ever sighting a LW aircraft.
Or as General Student promptly put it on that autumn day in 1944, watching slow buzzing convoys of C47's and towed gliders passing slowly overhead for a duration of an hour or so, -
"As usually our fighters were not there"

Where have all the flowers gone Barbi..............
What happened?

[Guppy35]

Originally posted by Nashwan
Damn, so that's why we lost the war!

Izzy seems to have this impression that the sky was full of 109s.

I well remember talking to a Spit XVI pilot who talked about how they got stuck with all kinds of silly air to ground work because there was no air to air to be found.

High Command had them bombing sub pens with 500 pounders just to keep them busy.

Dan/Slack

[Kurfürst]

Originally posted by Karnak

First you claim that 350 Spitfire IXs, all Merlin 61s, were built in '42 and Q1 '43.  Then you concede that some Merlin 63 Spits were built in Q1 of '43, but your total accepted Spit IX production for '42 and Q1 '43 drops to 310?

Your math looks like this: 350 (Merlin 61) + x (Merlin 63) = 310.  That means that -40 Merlin 63 Spitfires were built.  That makes absolutely no sense.

Sorry I am not responsible for you reading comprehension problems, neither for you ignorance, nor of your strange intellectual ways. Nashwan said 350 IXs were built with Merlin 61. Guess what, in 1942 the only engine being fitted in production to the IXs was the Merlin 61.. and in February/March/April 43, aka Q1/Q2 1943, Merlin 63/66/70 began to see service. I guess it`s difficult for you to even grasp that why `43-produced IXs are not counted in `42. Or that a production run that just started won`t produce suddenly thousends of aircraft in just two weeks.


[/QUOTE]
Look, for example, at your BS Mk XIV arguments.  [/QUOTE]

You mean your verbal diarrhea about them being in vast numbers, then I am beating you into ground with hard facts and RAF-statistics about their actual numbers? Quite funny you are bringing up you own miserable failure!

You take no account of how these units were employed.  You simply make up numbers and do a crude statistical analysis assuming that the units are evenly spread through the RAF.
Then when you look at your vaunted Bf109s and Fw190s you concentrate them all in the spot that best serves your bias. [/B]

Now pray tell me why should I even answer this. It`s nothing else than your own desperate fantasia, made up stories about what I said which I did not say. So deeply primitive, but it can only grow from the soil it`s rooted in.

The fact is that 1943 the Germans face Spitfire Mk IXs in numbers.  [/B]

Wishful thinking does not make it a fact.

Spitfire Mk Vs were still in service, but the likely combat encounter for a Luftwaffe pilot, if encountering Spitfires, was Mk IXs. [/B]

Again, more wishful thinking not fact. Got proof for it ? Nah? Then stuck it up.

You didn't get an Fw190 ace complaining that in 1943 the Spitfire was as good, or better, than his fighter in all ways other than roll rate because of the "awesome" Mk V. [/B]

Geez, another nice fantasy. Can we see details of your "Fw190 ace complaining that in 1943 the Spitfire was as good, or better, than his fighter in all ways other than roll rate"?
Yeah, sure.

You can try to rewrite history to favor your Fascist heroes all you want, but it doesn't make your view of history anything other than a fantasy. [/B]

I can best imagine you as a huge fat oscarhole, talking to a mirror, not even realizing you are describing your own behaviour.

[Kurfürst]

Originally posted by Angus
From Izzy, about the massive hoardes of G10's and K's
"against these, the MkIX`s performance was lacking a LOT at altitude."
Are you sure they outperform the 1942 Mk IX (Merlin 61) above 40K or so???

Quite sure. Just look at at level speeds. Spit IXs looses, utterly.
Oh btw, 350 Merlin 61 IXs produced (Source:Nashwan). 2500 G-10s, 1600 K-4s, 1800 G-14/AS, 700 G-6/AS were produced, plus the change (G-5/AS).

Then on to the numbers.
Izzy seems to think that a Spitfire was a rare sight in the skies of WW2, don't know though where all the 109's eventually went.

Right, that`s a good start : Angie doesn`t know much.
I agree 100%.

After the summer of 1944, the former mighty LW was a well co-ordinated PENNYPOCKET nuicance force.

With over 8000 aircraft on hand, 3000+ of these fighters, flying 15-20 000 fighter sorties every month.

So, what happened with all the hoardes of 109's?

They were well, all 1435 of them in service on 31st January 1945, 933 of them G-10, G-14/AS, K-4; further 527 in reserve.

I can see no mentioning of Spitfires in the unit histories, thoughs; what happened to those ?

I'll compile a list of when most Spitfire squads re-equipped, when, and with what. I will scan it and mail it to the ones that want....

Promise #4034 from Angus, nothing will happen as in the last 4033 cases...


BTW, here`s a nice anecdotal evidence for you :

Erwin Leykauf:


"Indeed many fresh pilots thought they were pulling very tight turns even when the slots were still closed against the wing. For us, the more experienced pilots, real manouvering only started when the slots were out. For this reason it is possible to find pilots from the period (1940) who will tell you that the Spitfite turned better than the Bf 109. That is not true. I myself had may dogfights with Spitfires and I could always out-turn them.

One had to enter the turn correctly, then open up with the engine. It was a matter of feel. Whem one noticed the speed becoming critical- the aircraft vibrated- one had to ease up a bit, then pull back again, so that in plan the best turn would have looked like an egg or a horizontal ellipse rather tha a circle. In this way one could out-turn the Spitfire - and I shot down 6 of them doing it."

[Guppy35]

Izzy, you aren't looking at the LW vs Spit IX in 43 bit very well.

I'm sure you know that there were different "Groups" in the RAF that covered certain areas of England.

11 Group was the one involved in the offensive ops over France due to it's location.  This means it was the place to be if you were an RAF Spit pilot in 43.  It also means that the Spit IX squadrons were operating in 11 Group.

So while you could argue that there may have been more Spit Vs overall in Fighter Command at the time, it would be wrong to say the Vs were seeing the majority of combat.

Squadrons coming in and out of the frontline 11 Group squadrons often traded their Vs for IXs as they went into action.  The other squadrons giving up their IXs moved to spots in the north or elsewhere to regroup, train new pilots, get a rest etc.

Does it mean that the LW never encountered Spit Vs in 43?  No.  Spit Vs were often used in close escort to the mediums of the 9th AF or 2 TAF.  But they were escorted by the IXs, XIIs, VIIs.

An example from Ramrod 312, November 11, 1943 to the Todt HQ in the Pas De Calaise:

These were Mitchells and Bostons of 2 TAF the Spits were escorting.

Attack was preceeded by two attacks by Typhoon Squadrons.

Close escort for the Bostons were provided by 5 Squadrons of Spitfire Vs.

The Fighter Umbrella was 4 Squadrons of Spit IXs and a Squadron of Spit VIIs.

Fighter Sweeps to protect the operation were flown by:

2 Spit XII Squadrons and 9 Spitfire IX Squadrons.

So you have 13 Spit IX Squadrons involved, 2 Spit XII and 1 Spit VII to go with the 5 Spit V Squadrons that flew close escort.

That's 16 squadrons of later Mark Spits to go with the 5 Spit V Squadrons.  

The math looks pretty simple.

Dan/Slack

[Angus]

Oh, oh, at it again.
I won't quote servicability numbers, there are others that have them much more handy than I.
But 2 aircraft over the beaches of Normandy on D-day, 3 waves over Arnhem, only a slight interception in the last one, etc etc shows how thin the once mighty LW had become at the fall of 1944.
Then to turning circles.
Most of both allied and axis pilots agree on the same, - the Spitfire outturns the 109. 109 May win the game if loadouts and pilot skill are in its favour. Simple as that.
BTW, Marseille was cutting the turns, since the Spitfire's defense move was almost always a hard break turn, the 109 could cut in on that one, - he even throttled down. However, this left him almost still in the air, therefor highly vulnerable. So, his squaddies had to cover him while hid did the shooting.
But a sustained turn, say alone a climbing turn, NOPE.
Btw, somewhere in my books, I have Johnny Johnsson's description of escaping a gaggle of 109's in a climbing turn, from low alt unto 20K, where he finally left them in the dust.
I asked Rall about that specific thing and he confirmed that this was the case, you would not catch a Spitfire in a climbing turn.
BTW, he and Johnny knew each other, so I guess they had those things sorted out with much more civil manners than often promoted in this thread.

And for your info, I AM compiling the list. It will however be in XLS format, and I'll perhaps gladly mail it to everybody EXCEPT Izzy, heheheheheheheeheh

(Well, since it's already decided there will be no list)

So,finally, aside, what was the ceiling of the G10 and Kurfurst?
And the 109F and G2-G6?

[rshubert]

I have read many, many times that there were over 35,000 109s of all marks built.  Izzy says there were "2500 G-10s, 1600 K-4s, 1800 G-14/AS, 700 G-6/AS were produced, plus the change (G-5/AS). "

That equates to 6600 "late model" 109s.  Yet Izzy's figures state that only 1962 of those 6600 were in service or in reserve at the end of January 1945.

What happened to all those planes?  Seems to me that the LW somehow disposed of 4600+ Me 109s from the time the G-10 began production (my sources say early spring 1944) and January 31, 1945.  Call it 10 months.  That's 460 lost per month.

Now, Izzy has taught us that bombers could not have done it, since bomber gunners can't hit their *** with both hands.  American fighters were never seen over the Reich, since we only flew to the German border with our inferior P-47s, and there were so few P-51s that they could have had no effect.

Spitfire Vs were the most advanced British ride, and they couldn't catch an Me 109 even if the Messerschmitt were out of gas, parked on the runway, with a big "kill me" sign painted on the wing.  Spit 9s were a gleam in Fighter Command's eye up to the end of the war.

Most German bases were out of range of artillery, so that couldn't have destroyed the fleets of uberfighters.

I have reached the only conclusion left.  The 109s were improperly painted, and they all suffered from corrosion.  Yup, they sat around on German airfields, waiting for a worthy opponent.  Since none ever appeared, they rusted to death.

[MiloMorai]

Originally posted by Kurfürst
Quite sure. Just look at at level speeds. Spit IXs looses, utterly.
Oh btw, 350 Merlin 61 IXs produced (Source:Nashwan). 2500 G-10s, 1600 K-4s, 1800 G-14/AS, 700 G-6/AS were produced, plus the change (G-5/AS).
 

You get more hilarious with every post Barbi.

You compare an a/c produced in late 1942 to the production of 109s after the production of the a/c had changed to another engine.

Yet Barbi dares to say this:

That`s nice, but I don`t see how the bulk of MkIXs/VIIIs/XVIs produced in 44/45 would do anything with 1942/43.

So his numbers add up to 6600 109s, yet Merlin powered Spitfire production (after the Mk V) was 8470 a/c. To that Spit number must be added the Mk XIIs and Mk XIVs.

They were well, all 1435 of them in service on 31st January 1945, 933 of them G-10, G-14/AS, K-4; further 527 in reserve.

More number manipulation by Barbi. Facing the Allies in NW Europe there was only 666 109s 'onhand' of which only 463 were servicable.

Source:
Alfred Price. Luftwaffe Data Book, 1997

[Guppy35]

Spit Squadrons that operated IXs in 1943:

19 Squadron
32 Squadron
43 Squadron
64 Squadron
65 Squadron
66 Squadron
72 Squadron
74 Squadron
81 Squadron
92 Squadron
93 Squadron
111 Squadron
122 Squadron
131 Squadron
132 Squadron
133 (Had them in the Fall of 42)
152 Squadron
165 Squadron
222 Squadron
229 Squadron
232 Squadron
237 Squadron
238 Squadron
241 Squadron
249 Squadron
602 Squadron
611 Squadron
682 Squadron

Allied Squadrons under RAF Fighter Command control.
302 Squadron
303 Squadron
306 Squadron
308 Squadron
310 Squadron
312 Squadron
315 Squadron
316 Squadron
317 Squadron
326 Squadron
331 Squadron
332 Squadron
340 Squadron
341 Squadron
350 Squadron

Commonwealth Squadrons
401 Squadron
402 Squadron
403 Squadron
411 Squadron
412 Squadron
416 Squadron
417 Squadron
421 Squadron
451 Squadron
453 Squadron
457 Squadron
485 Squadron
501 Squadron


I count 56 Squadrons that operated the Spitfire IX during 1943.  Did they all have them on January 1, 1943?  No.  But these squadrons all had them at some point in 1943 which tells you how things must have looked going into 44 as well.

56 x 12 =672 if my math is right.  And generally a Squadron had 18 aircraft minimum to keep 12 operational so that gives you roughly 1008 Spit IXs tied up in those 56 Squadrons.

Dan/Slack

[Kurfürst]

Originally posted by Guppy35
Izzy, you aren't looking at the LW vs Spit IX in 43 bit very well.

I'm sure you know that there were different "Groups" in the RAF that covered certain areas of England.

11 Group was the one involved in the offensive ops over France due to it's location.  This means it was the place to be if you were an RAF Spit pilot in 43.  It also means that the Spit IX squadrons were operating in 11 Group.

So while you could argue that there may have been more Spit Vs overall in Fighter Command at the time, it would be wrong to say the Vs were seeing the majority of combat.

[/B]

So basically you make an assumption on a single Group, ignoring all others theathres of combat? Was there no combat with Spits over Africa, Sicily, Italy, (+the Far East) ? Or that doesn`t count ?

Most of these theatres were relying on MkVs, or not even Spitfires, obsolate planes like the P-40 and Hurricanes. The problem was, they faced up-to-date 109G there as well. In the end of June 1943, 1100 out of the 1258 Bf 109 type daylight fighters were Gustav, but practically all on the frontlines, for similiar reasons you would find the older planes in rear areas in the RAF.

The RAF however NEVER have enough of the newer planes, and had to fill the ranks with old ones... Hurris in 1940 and 1941... Spit Vs, P-40s in 1942-43... MkIXs in 1944-45.

An example from Ramrod 312, November 11, 1943 to the Todt HQ in the Pas De Calaise:

...

So you have 13 Spit IX Squadrons involved, 2 Spit XII and 1 Spit VII to go with the 5 Spit V Squadrons that flew close escort.
That's 16 squadrons of later Mark Spits to go with the 5 Spit V Squadrons.  The math looks pretty simple.
 

Indeed it does look simple. Most, if not all IX squadrons in the entire england in the very end of 1944 amounted 13... every squadron has 20 planes maximum on paper, 12 are usable for operations - the rest are reserves. Even in the best case, we have a mere ca 150 MkIXs in the entire British Isles where they were concentrated. Oh, plus the change, 30-40 XIIs and VIIs.

Of course it would be much easier to just take a glance at the OOB of the RAF in say, mid-1943, but sadly none of these are in sight. Until that, the number of aircraft produced clearly shows the MkVs were dominant for most of 1943. Those poor RAF guys flying them...

[Kurfürst]

Originally posted by Guppy35
Spit Squadrons that operated IXs in 1943:

....

I count 56 Squadrons that operated the Spitfire IX during 1943.  Did they all have them on January 1, 1943?  No.  But these squadrons all had them at some point in 1943 which tells you how things must have looked going into 44 as well.

Hillarious ! Now, the same thing for Mk Vs for 1943 please.

56 x 12 =672 if my math is right.  And generally a Squadron had 18 aircraft minimum to keep 12 operational so that gives you roughly 1008 Spit IXs tied up in those 56 Squadrons.[/B]

So, on Dec 31st 1943, there may be up to ca 700 Spitfires operating in the entire RAF, it`s commonwealth and Allied squadrons accross the globe, naturally provided that none of them re-equipped with another Mark and dumped their MkIXs in the meantime (quite unlikely for an entire year of operation).

So, 700 Spit IXs maximum, by the end of 1943.
Looks believable to me. Now see those Mk Vs !