Spit vs. Messer : Design vs. Design

[Angus]

Ok, some facts.
109 had the highest kill ratio. By some margin.
LW lost the fight. By a little margin.
The 109 could, despite its high kill ratio, NOT stop the RAF fighters from cutting down the bombers, with .303 bullets, and in severe numbers. Some 1200 LW aircraft, mostly twin engined were shot DOWN by RAF fighters, total LW losses (Flak, scraps, crashes, all BoB related) were 1700 aircraft in what, some 2-3 months?

The Spitfire could hold it's own against the 109, and was the first aircraft the 109 drivers ever met that could do that. Once it had a CS propeller and 100 oct fuel, it actually outperformed the 109E4, in both climb and speed, - but by a hair's margin though.
The 100 oct fuel was american allright, bought.

[agent 009]

Yep. That's bout right.

 but Exact numbers? no. I have read 1200 single engined fighters for Brits, 600 109's for Germans. How many of the 1200 were Hurries & Spits is the question. These may be old numbers. I'm sure someone here has more accurate figures than these.

[Squire]

It makes as much sense to compare 109 losses to just the Spitfires and Hurricanes as it would to compare the 109 (or any other LW fighter) vs P-47 or P-51 losses and ignore the fact that the LW was intercepting B-17s and B-24s at the time.

The RAF lost many fighters to bomber return fire (all models), and 110s. The 109 did not score all the kills, far from it.

The BoB pitted the LW (attacking):

He-111
Do-17
Ju-88
Ju-87
Bf 110
Bf 109

vs RAF (defending):

Hurricane (65 percent)
Spitfire (30 percent)
Defiant (5 percent)

Part of the reason the LW losses were higher is not hard to figure out: #1 They were attacking with bombers, that are by their nature more vulnerable. #2 The are flying over hostile territory, where damaged engines and wounded crews do not have the luxury of trying to come down sooner without a long flight home to France (and over the Channel).

July 10-October 31st 1940 LW lost 1880 a/c in the campaign, and 2660 aircrew (KIA or captured) to the RAFs 1020 a/c and 537 aircrew (KIA or captured). (Messenger).

The RAFs job in the BoB was to hang on as a fighting force, in order to stem an invasion attempt. The LWs job was to attrite the RAF fighters to the point that it could not seriously hamper a cross Channel invasion. It wasnt about who shot down more, or whos favorite fighter did what. It wasnt a polo match, and it wasnt a stats game of 109 vs the Spitfire.

Trying to compare one fighter vs another is difficult at best. They have different roles, they are fighting under different circumstances (surprise, #s, experience ect), and are usually in the presence of other combat a/c at the time (either bombers or fighters). In many ways its "apples and oranges". Thats true for all of WW2, not just the BoB. There are very few instances where two groups of fighters fought with even #s where neither side possessed some kind of edge. Thats war.

[MiloMorai]

LW OoB - Luftflotte 2, 3

Aug 13 1940
26 Jagdgruppen - 976 - 109s (853 servicable)

9 Zerstrergruppen - 244 - 110s (189 servicable)

9 Stukagruppen - 365 (286 servicable)

42 1/3 Kampfgruppen 1482 (1008 servicable)

A total of 3067 a/c.


Yet with all these a/c, the LW could not defeat the 24 squadrons (384 Spit/Hurries) of 11 Group.

13 Group did not take part in the southern air battles and 10 and 12 Groups only somewhat did so.


Why is it the Luftluvers always forget that the bombers were the main objective of the RAF's fighters and never mention the bomber losses?

[Kurfürst]

Originally posted by MiloMorai
Yet with all these a/c, the LW could not defeat the 24 squadrons (384 Spit/Hurries) of 11 Group.

Interesting, as the RAF admitted 900-odd of it`s fighters lost in combat, the total wastage being 1960 fighters during the BoB.

That would mean the LW completely destroyed the 11 Group 5 times during the battle.

[Angus]

From Izzy:
"the total wastage being 1960 fighters during the BoB. "

Never seen anything like that. Source?
For a little fun, that would be 20 - 30 fighters a day average for 2 or 3 months.
In the worst days the RAF lost more than 30 fighters, but sometimes very few.
So, this is ,,,as expected,,,,BALLOCKS!

Anyway, Milo, your LW  numbers are much higher than the ones I have!
(From memory)

[Kurfürst]

Originally posted by Angus
From Izzy:
"the total wastage being 1960 fighters during the BoB. "

Never seen anything like that. Source?

Len Deighton`s 'Fighters' BoB book.

The total wastage of the RAF-FC was 1960 planes, the usally qouted 900 odd fighters lost is from combat only without writeoffs from damage/use and accidents.

Quite 'naturally' for British history writing, they list only the _combat-related_ losses of the RAF fighters without losses of the Bomber Command, and that they compare to the LW combined bomber+fighter losses, both from combat and non-combat...

[GScholz]

Angus, is that egg on your face?

[Angus]

Smells like a rotten egg
Anyway, I have read Deightons book twice and have it in my shelf, - there are sadly a few misconceptions in it.
His numbers are to be taken with a lot of salt.

Same with his turn radius calculations, hehe.

[GScholz]

Well then, how many planes did the RAF lose during the BoB? All aircraft types + accidents and write-offs? (edit: of course combined for all the RAF commands (fighter, bomber, coastal etc.)

How many did the LW lose?

[Guppy35]

Originally posted by GScholz
Well then, how many planes did the RAF lose during the BoB? All aircraft types + accidents and write-offs? (edit: of course combined for all the RAF commands (fighter, bomber, coastal etc.)

How many did the LW lose?

From the "Battle of Britain-Then and Now" which breaks down losses of all kinds by both sides, each day, listing aircrew, aircraft, unit, where and what happened, etc.  This includes the accidents.

This covers the July 1-October 31 time frame that is generally given for the B of B.

Royal Air Force airmen killed: 537
Luftwaffe Airmen killed: 2,662
Me109 and 110 airmen killed: 549

Royal Air Force aircraft lost: 1,017
Luftwaffe aircraft lost: 1,882
Me109 and 110 aircraft lost: 871


Dan/CorkyJr

[GScholz]

Does it include Bomber Command and Costal Command losses?

Does it include RAF aircraft destroyed on the ground?

[GScholz]

From what I can find RAF Bomber Command lost 271 bombers from 1 July to 31 October 1940. I don't know if that number includes accidents and write-offs.

[GScholz]

With the loss of 271 bombers (62 in daylight raids and 209 on night operations) I find it quite unrealistic that the RAF lost only 537 airmen. I guess they are not included in your numbers. With a modest guess of 5 airmen lost per aircraft Bomber Command crew losses alone amounts to ~1300.

Anyone have data on Costal Command?

[Angus]

I have a very good essay about that.
Have to scrape it together and type, bit busy at the moment.
From memory the LW lost with almost complete verification some 1200 aircraft (elevenhundredandsomething) aircraft to RAF guns in a given period, which BTW does not cover the whole, if you go June to November, the stats AFAIK get worse for the LW.
100 are credited to ack and the rest to various other incidents, totalling some 1700.
Operations are all BoB related.
I belive I have posted those already, just can't remember where  
Anyway, the RAF losses are quite near the 900, and honestly, that high figure from Izzy is more or less impossible, - not enough planes to fill the figure.

Deightons book is actually quite good, and his book "Blood tears and Folly" is a worthy read, IMHO much better. Fighter is also good, but it has some bugs in it, and the one that triggered me was his turn calculation (109, Hurry, Spit) which is completely a contradiction to the laws of physics.
So, it's a worthy read, but take it with a grain of salt. Since Deighton easily broadcasts gibberish like that, I re-read his books from a little distance.