Spit vs. Messer : Design vs. Design

[Kurfürst]

Originally posted by Furball
Johnnie Johnson shot down 38 single engined fighters, not sure how that breaks up 109/190 though.

[/B]

Not one of them was a bomber, eh? Hard to believe.

Originally posted by Furball
Its hard to get victories when the airforce you are supposed to be fighting is nowhere to be seen.  Allied pilots could go through entire combat tours and see German aircraft 2 or 3 times.

[/B]

Yeah-yeah, the old boring excuse. Funny though that somehow the LW had no problem finding the RAF... I mean, how is that Galland found&shot down about 90 planes in just up to 1941... those 90 planes certainly met Galland.. and lost every time. The highest scoring of the RAF, Johnson wasn`t able to score even one half of that during the 6 years. There must be reason for that. Now of course you will say it was extremely hard to find enemy planes for the RAF`s fighters in 1939, in 1940, in 1941... provided they weren`t looking too hard for the opportunity! I still wonder how could the LW meet RAF planes, if the RAF planes didn`t meet LW planes. A mystery to me.

How many 109's were made?  how many were lost?  

[/B]

ca. 30-35 000. Maybe about 1/3 of them lost in total, even less in combat. Most were simply retired when newer types become available, the airframe grew old.

How many pilots did the 109 kill?

[/B]

Tenthousends, of course on the Allied side.

How many 109's failed due to sabotage on the production line due to forced labour?

You claim this was the case ? That`s fine, but now you should prove it, come up with numbers, references, sources, things like that.

[Angus]

Hehe, Izzy boy, you need to read some more.
"Yeah-yeah, the old boring excuse. Funny though that somehow the LW had no problem finding the RAF... I mean, how is that Galland found&shot down about 90 planes in just up to 1941... those 90 planes certainly met Galland.. and lost every time."

Galland got shot down multiple times. However, he was lucky enough to be over his own turf.
When Galland met Bader, he was still bearing burnmarks from the last time,  - being shot down by some of Bader's boys.
Mölders got shot down some times as well, once being captured by the French, another time duelling with a humble Spit MkI and loosing to the humble .303's.
Gunther Rall got shot down 8 times.
Rudorffer got shot down 17 times.
I remember that Hartmann did also get shot down, he was captured but escaped.

On the western front in particular, the LW was more or less always over their own turf from 1940/41 onwards, simply because they were on the defensive side. That allows a 200 kills ace 17 lives (such as Rudorffer) while the RAF30- 50 kills guy (Such as Pat Pattle, scoring a good deal in a biplane) never wrecked a plane.
But alas, wasting my time.
After all, I somehow recall that in Barbiworld the name of Ernst Udet is yet ubknown.....
How about "Uncle" Theo Osterkamp. I can throw you a bone about his opinion of the Spitfire.
First you have to read up.
Who was Udet
Who was Theo

??

[Kurfürst]

naziangie wrote :


Galland got shot down multiple times. However, he was lucky enough to be over his own turf.
When Galland met Bader, he was still bearing burnmarks from the last time, - being shot down by some of Bader's boys.

And..? Wasn`t Galland`s overall record against the RAF, hmm, quite positive, even at that time ? Not that he didn`t met fierce opposition in the air, but the fact still is he scored about triple as much as them. Even during the same period. Even when flying over the enemy.

Why angiebangie, if he flew a that inferior plane like the 109?



Mölders got shot down some times as well, once being captured by the French, another time duelling with a humble Spit MkI and loosing to the humble .303's.
Gunther Rall got shot down 8 times.
Rudorffer got shot down 17 times.
I remember that Hartmann did also get shot down, he was captured but escaped.

BS. Hartmann was never shot down, naziangie. Not even once. Same with the rest,  you attempt to mix various forced landings with being shot down. You lied Malan shot down Moelders, when in fact all he did was peppering his Emil and Moelders got home with some injuries in his leg..


On the western front in particular, the LW was more or less always over their own turf from 1940/41 onwards, simply because they were on the defensive side. That allows a 200 kills ace 17 lives (such as Rudorffer) while the RAF30- 50 kills guy (Such as Pat Pattle, scoring a good deal in a biplane) never wrecked a plane.

Aha. So Galland was flying over it own turf, ie. France in 1940, where he shot down 14 planes, and during BoB, where he shot down further 35? That makes it 49 victories when Galland was flying over enemy 'turf' constantly. Moelders did 16 in Bof, 28 in the Bob, for a total 44.

Tell me, how many victories the highest scoring RAF ace did at the same period? Maybe 10-15? Appearantly there`s a consiparacy against you. You keep telling us how amazed the LW was with the Spitfire, and felt 'inferior' but we see no qoutes, no references, we see the top scoring 109 pilots scored 10 times as high during the war, and 3-4 times as many even during the same period and area, and we see the overall combat records, fighters lost vs. fighters also favours the 109 heavily. Read up naziangie when you pulled your head out from the darkness, read up for example what happened over dunkirk. And dont forget to make up the new excuses.

With the above I mean that there`s no slightest correllation between the story you tell us, and what history tells us.

But forget it. People like you always need more and more excuses instead of facing the facts. You appear to be living in a dreamworld where leading RAF aces never get shot down.. vs. reality, some brit aces that got shot down SEVEN TIMES during BoB and survived? Talking about advantage here!



After all, I somehow recall that in Barbiworld the name of Ernst Udet is yet ubknown.....
How about "Uncle" Theo Osterkamp. I can throw you a bone about his opinion of the Spitfire.
First you have to read up.
Who was Udet
Who was Theo



Ah, more vivid stories from naziangie.. You want to tell me about Udet, and Osterkamp. I guess it`s just the same thing when you say Rall did prefer a Spitty wing. Rall says that nowhere, though.  How pathethic is that, naziangie, you don`t even understand the words of people you are quoting, and now you came up with fabricated stories... yes this is a good thread, it shows us how low you can get in the mud.

[MiloMorai]

Originally posted by Kurfürst
naziangie wrote :
.
.
.
.
Why angiebangie, if he flew a that inferior plane like the 109?
.
.
.
.
How pathethic is that, naziangie, you don`t even understand the words of people you are quoting, and now you came up with fabricated stories... yes this is a good thread, it shows us how low you can get in the mud.

LOL Angus, looks like you are #1 on Barbi's love list now. You have sent him of the deep end with and we have another of his typical patented rants.

Is not calling someone a Nazi, as Barbi has just done, not a reason for banning? Will be second from the AH site.

Furball, you will never convince Barbi that Messerschmitt used slave labour even though Willy was convicted and sent to prison for 2 years for doing so.

[Arlo]

Seems he's a might confused, yes it do.

[Kurfoist]Don't tell me the Spitfire's better than my 109 you Nazi bastage![/Kurfoist]

lol

Do mental wards in Europe actually give unlimited access to the internet to their patients?

[Kurfürst]

"Is not calling someone a Nazi, as Barbi has just done, not a reason for banning? Will be second from the AH site. "

Appearantly not, since then Angus and Karnak would have been long banned from here, as they did that continously in the past and at least Angus continoues to do so. Besides that is the reason of calling angus in this more suiting name, his habit of sticking "nazi", "brown trousers", "swastika-tattooed-arse-side" etc. and other nazi-implications on other board members instead of an intelligent debate. I guess if he is man enough to use the nazi word in every second line, he is man enough to bear that I named him after this habit of his. And it will remain so until angie starts to use more coherent arguements than calling people a nazi with whom he can`t agree with. But I am a bit sceptical about this happening, angie isn`t famous for his deeply rooted rationality.

[Arlo]

Anyone else seein' the irony in Izzy threatening to continue to act stupid until others become coherent?

[straffo]

Originally posted by Arlo
Seems he's a might confused, yes it do.

[Kurfoist]Don't tell me the Spitfire's better than my 109 you Nazi bastage![/Kurfoist]

lol

Do mental wards in Europe actually give unlimited access to the internet to their patients?

It's part of their therapy.

Too bad it don't work

[MiloMorai]

Using names such as you accuse Angus of doing Barbi and outright calling a person a Nazi as you have done is not the same. But then, you would not know the difference.

Only one person has Angus done so for because of his maniacal stance on 'German is uber, all other is crap'. Refer back to your first 2 posts Barbi with all the insults thrown at Angus. As I said, it is IMPOSSIBLE to have a civil discussion with you in a thread Barbi. Now when did the doctor take you off your medication?

Angus is not the only one who has called you a 'brown-shirt'. A well known and respected webmaster has also in a PM to me.

I would not talk about being rational Barbi, for you are certainly not.

Question for the members:

Would you have Barbi as your lawyer in court of law? (he claims he is a lawyer)

[Karnak]

Originally posted by Kurfürst
"Is not calling someone a Nazi, as Barbi has just done, not a reason for banning? Will be second from the AH site. "

Appearantly not, since then Angus and Karnak would have been long banned from here, as they did that continously in the past and at least Angus continoues to do so.

I only recall one time, about four years ago, that I actually did that.

I have not called you any name, other than Barbi, in this thread.


I don't call people "Nazis".


I don't think you are a Nazi, Barbi.  I think you are a misguided idealist like our American Confederate nuts who are convinced of the rightousness of their heroes.  You like to put your guys on a pedastal and wax long about how great they were, and part of that for you seems to be denegrating the other side in its entirety.  You want your noble heroes to have gone down fighting exceptionally well against the pedastrian masses in their cheam crappy equipment.


That is where we differ.

I think The Spitfire was a great and classic warplane.  You think it was utter crap.

I think the Bf109 was a great and classic warplane.  You think it was a divinely inspired engineering miracle.

And it goes that way across the whole spectrum of Allied and German equipment.

[Arlo]

Originally posted by Karnak
I think you are a misguided idealist like our American Confederate nuts who are convinced of the rightousness of their heroes.  

Hey now! Don't go cornfusin' the issue here!:cool:

[Kurfürst]

Originally posted by Karnak
That is where we differ.

I think The Spitfire was a great and classic warplane.  You think it was utter crap.

I think the Bf109 was a great and classic warplane.  You think it was a divinely inspired engineering miracle.

And it goes that way across the whole spectrum of Allied and German equipment.

Eh-eh, wrong. I dont see it so black and white, you see it so black and white how I see it.. I have told you and others several times that I think the Spit/Messer were a good match. Just that the 109 was a bit more equal. of the two Sorry if it bothers you that I am convinced it`s a smarter design, and that I can throughly back that up. But that`s different than saying it was lightyears ahead. Arguing with blockheads makes my point to seen rather blocky, too, I guess.

That`s what this discussion is supposed to be. Design vs. design aspect, discussed if possible in an intelligent matter, an exchange of ideas. I am glad it is possible with Guppy, and appearantly with you too.

PS : And I like confeds better.

[Tony Williams]

It's always instructive to read the views of those pilots with combat experience who have flown a wide variety of types - like Captain Eric Brown, a WW2 FAA fighter and test pilot, who flew everything he could get his hands on.

The British tested captured German planes against their RAF equivalents whenever they could get hold of flying examples (which was quite often). Brown reports that their judgment was that there was little to choose overall between the versions of the Spitfire and the Bf 109 (sometimes one had the advantage, sometimes the other) until late 1942 when the Spitfire IX came onto the scene and blew the Bf 109 away. From then on, the RAF was mainly worried about the Fw 190.

The efforts to keep the Bf 109 up with the game with the G series improved the performance and the armament, but at the expense of handling. The Bf 109 was never an easy plane to fly, and it became trickier still with the extra weight and power. It was really only an Experten machine by then, and lethal to tyro pilots.

Brown's order of rank of the finest fighters in WW2, judged by objective performance and handling criteria, runs as follows:

1. Spitfire XIV
2. Fw 190D-9
3. Mustang IV
4. George 12
5. Tempest V
6. F6F-3 Hellcat
7. Zeke 53

He also produces a modified list of 'the greatest single-engined fighters in WW2', which also takes into account their combat success rate and influence on the conduct and outcome of various operations. This runs as follows:

1=. Spitfire and Fw 190
3. Hellcat
4. Mustang IV
5. Zeke
6. Tempest V
7. George 12

Notice anything missing from these lists?

Tony Williams: Military gun and ammunition website and Discussion forum

[HoHun]

Hi Tony,

>Notice anything missing from these lists?

Rhyme and reason.

If you put the Spitfire XIV on top, you can't simply leave out the Me 109K-4 which shares a lot of the same strengths (and weaknesses).

And where's the F4U, judged "best carrier fighter" by US pilots at the Fighter Conference?

That list is completely arbitrary.

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)

[MiloMorai]

Originally posted by HoHun

If you put the Spitfire XIV on top, you can't simply leave out the Me 109K-4 which shares a lot of the same strengths (and weaknesses).

And where's the F4U, judged "best carrier fighter" by US pilots at the Fighter Conference?

But he is not being specific on which model of the Spit and 109. It is the whole family.

Being the best at the FC is only one aspect. The combat and the influence in combat was also considered. This puts the F6F ahead of the F4U.

"..... also takes into account their combat success rate and influence on the conduct and outcome of various operations."