Spit vs. Messer : Design vs. Design

[Crumpp]

I would agree with that Guppy and Angus.  The differences are so small that it could go either way in the air.

Maintenance and pilot skill would win the day.

Crumpp

[Naudet]

I would agree with that Guppy and Angus. The differences are so small that it could go either way in the air.

Thats right on spot, the performance of the most late war birds was so close together that individual aircraft condition was most times the decisive factor.

i.e. a D9 in "good" condition could do around 610km/h@SL using MW50, but in "bad" shape the speed could well drop too around 580km/h@Sl and in "perfect" condition (when a special engine cooling sealing is aplied) it might even be capable of around 625km/h@SL.

Now just imagine your are an allied pilot flying a P51 in "normal" condition (capable of around 370mph@SL) and you meet a D9.
You would catch the bad condition bird, more or less hold the distance to the good condition plane and would be outrun by the "perfect" one.

Even if only the performance of one plane changes you already have three different "stories" to tell.
Now take into account that the performance of the P51 varies in the same way and that you usually do not know at which power setting the other guy is really flying and you can have all sorts of outcomes.

The problem in flightsims is always that planes are identical, we know excatly the speeds the plane type we use are capable of.
Something you could never be sure of in WW2.

[Guppy35]

I've used this image before, but it proves the point.

The photo was taken in April 44.  MB882 EB-B was delivered to the Squadron at the end of December 27, 1943 and is the A Flight Commander's kite.  This was after the XIIs had fought most of their major air combat.  They scored a kill in January 44 and again in September 44 but nothing in between except the V-1s from the summer of 44.

MB858 EB-D arrived in September 43 at the height of the air battles taking place over France that involved the XII.

Note the difference in finish.  MB882 clearly looking polished with a better paint finish.  MB858 looking a lot more worn.

Both these aircraft survived frontline service and together flew the last operational flight of a Spit XII in September 44.

MB882 remained the A Flight Commander's aircraft and proved to be a good V-1 killer in the hands of A Flight CO Terry Spencer.  He also scored the last air to air kill of a 190 in this bird in September 44.

Knowing it was the Flight CO's bird and knowing it was more pampered then a regular squadron aircraft like MB858, which would you choose as the better performer?

MB858 was damaged and repaired twice btw.

Dan/Slack

[Crumpp]

Excellent Example, Guppy35!

In spite of what some on this BBS want to claim,  filled, waxed, and polished was not all that an unusual finish for a front line fighter.  Many a ground crew during the war stayed up burning the midnight oil with putty and polisher.  Some aircraft recieved great benefits from this, like the 109 and I imagine the Spitfire.  Others, like the FW-190 gained only a tiny amount for a lot of effort.

From Willi Reschke's book Jagdgeschwader 301/302 "Wilde Sau":



Crumpp

[Angus]

Spitfire Sqn leader would que up for the improved ailerons.
Some also for different spinners and exhaust stubs, - 5 mph each I think.
All parasite drag issues.

Anyway,,,,,,all thread grudges held aside....


Merry Christmas to you all!!!!!!!  

[Crumpp]

Merry Christmas to you and all on the BBS!

Crumpp

[Kurfürst]

Originally posted by Nashwan
My memory must be worse than I thought, because I don't ever remember saying any such thing.

Nashwan, you have a history for failing memory. One time you say one thing, a week later - the opposite and deny you ever claim anything else.

I did say only around 350 were built with Merlin 61 (afaik), but I think Isegrim has just assumed the Merlin 63, 66 and 70 were not fitted during until at least the second quarter of 43.

A quick glance at Spitfire the History proves that wrong, though, for example EN 478, first flight 17th Feb 43, En 476 13th Feb 43, En 479 24th Feb 43, En 480 19th Feb 43, etc (all with Merlin 63).
[/B]

Nice switch about the second quarter Nashwan. But any case you just proved me right.

Because in other words, not a single Merlin 63/66/70 powered Spit IX before February 1943 (Merlin 63s entered service in February, 66 and 70 a month later).

Which leaves only the Merlin 61 powered Mk IXs up to Q1 of 1943. Thats a mere 350 planes produced (and its quite possible they were produced after Feb1943 for some time).

Add to that maybe 1000-1500 Mk IXs produced in 1943.. enough for what, 10 squadrons maybe? 800 XIVs prodced for a year were enough for 5 as shown...  hell I doubt even that many was avaiable; A total ca5000 IXs was made, about 300 in 1943, 1000 were supplied to the Russians, which leaves about 3700 for the RAF, produced in 1943, 1944, 1945. Most were produced in 1944, so say 700 in 1945, 2000-2500 in 1944 (hmm, about 1.5 months of 109G production at that time...). So a better number would be 500-1000 MkIXs produced in 1943. Pennypocket numbers!

No wonder the RAF had to rely on MkVs (the most produced Mark), and even Hurris still in mid-43 !!

I'm not looking through all 5000+ Spitfire IX serials to count how many were delivered before the first quarter of 1943, and you'd have to go through the Spit V serials as well to see which were converted. [/B]

Of course you dont. This would just prove how rare the Mk IX was until 1944. The poor MkVs had to stand up against the 109F and G, and the 190A. Bad news for 1942/43 RAF pilots!

[Angus]

So, anyway, in 1944 the skies were full of 109G10's and there were little pockets of resistance from Spit V's and a handful IX's right?
Most spits were produced after the war.

[Angus]

P.S.
I have a complete list of when this and that squadron got re-equipped with this and that.
RAF, that is.
But...it's about 60 pages, so it will take me some time to compile.
I will do so gladly, however, hehe.

A quick glance of mk IX reception (opened a page and went on a bit):

65 aug 43
72 July 42
74 april 1944
80 may 1944
81 jan 43
87 april 1943
92 april-august (the V's lived long I guess)
93 sept

Now, this was just a wee, and just the IX, not the VIII, or XIII, or some other models.

The missing squads were non-Spitfire sqn's
So, I'll make you a list, it will take a couple of days though.
(the list of Spitfire upgrades, ok =)
But it seems that from 5% of RAF sqadrons it's half-half from 1943/44 already, and from the squads I was looking at, most were in the med. So, I'd expect the outcome to be a tad different.

Regards

Angus

[MiloMorai]

Angus, the Germans must have had seconds thoughts on putting their 109s up against the lowly Spit Vs since in Luftflotte 3 (France and the Low Countries) there was only 42 109s versus 326 190s. (17 May 43 OoB) And we all know how the 190 stacked up against the Spit V.

[Kurfürst]

Originally posted by Angus
So, anyway, in 1944 the skies were full of 109G10's and there were little pockets of resistance from Spit V's and a handful IX's right?

No, I presume the MkIXs were fairly widespread by 1944. There were about 20 squadrons in mid-1944 equipped with them in britain, that makes about 300-400 planes. MkVs were still around in some numbers.

The problem was, the LW was already well in the process of replacing the older Gs to the new high altitude models: G-6/AS, G-14/AS, G-10 and K-4 produced in huge numbers (alone of G-10 and K-4 4200+ were built..) by that time and against these, the MkIX`s performance was lacking a LOT at altitude.

The RAF wasn`t lagging behind the LW in technical development, but it was always one or two phase behind it in deployment...

[Nashwan]

Nashwan, you have a history for failing memory. One time you say one thing, a week later - the opposite and deny you ever claim anything else.

Isegrim, I'm not responsible for your poor comprehension.

Nice switch about the second quarter Nashwan.

What switch?

Here's what you claimed:

As for Mk IXs, Nashwan/Hop claims only some 350 were made in 1942 and Q1 of 1943

Here's what I said:

I did say only around 350 were built with Merlin 61 (afaik), but I think Isegrim has just assumed the Merlin 63, 66 and 70 were not fitted during until at least the second quarter of 43.

You said 350 were made in 42 and Q1 43, I said more than that were made before Q2. It's exactly the same thing. Before Q2 = Q1, which is what you said.

Again, poor comprehension.

That's understandable, you being a foreigner and all, but you really shouldn't try to blame me for your misunderstandings.

Because in other words, not a single Merlin 63/66/70 powered Spit IX before February 1943 (Merlin 63s entered service in February, 66 and 70 a month later).

Which leaves only the Merlin 61 powered Mk IXs up to Q1 of 1943.

No, it doesn't.

Again, you said:

As for Mk IXs, Nashwan/Hop claims only some 350 were made in 1942 and Q1 of 1943

You are including Q1, so you have to include the planes that were produced in Q1. That includes Merlin 63 production.

Add to that maybe 1000-1500 Mk IXs produced in 1943

Source?

enough for what, 10 squadrons maybe?

150 aircraft per squadron? Can I have some of what you're smoking?

Approx 1,580 Spitfire Is were made in total (up to spring 1941), they equipped 19 squadrons during the BoB, as well as training units, building up a sizeable reserve, and production after the BoB. And that's during a  period of high losses.

In a similar timeframe to the Spit IX, there were 100 Spitfire XIIs produced, equipped 2 squadrons.

1000 Spitfire IXs in 1943 (plus 300 or so in 1942) would be ample for 25 - 30 squadrons. (not counting Spit VIIs in the UK, VIIIs in the Med etc)

A total ca5000 IXs was made,

Actually about 5,600.

about 300 in 1943, 1000 were supplied to the Russians, which leaves about 3700 for the RAF, produced in 1943, 1944, 1945.

Why are you removing the 1942 production?

5,600 Spitfire IXs produced, approx 1,180 sent to Russia. On top of that add 140 Spit VIIs, 1,680 Spit VIIIs, 1050 Spit XVIs.

Essentially 8,000 Merlin 60 series Spitfires.

Of course you dont. This would just prove how rare the Mk IX was until 1944.

According to the RAF website, "In February [1943], No 72 Squadron arrived in North Africa with Mk IXs.

By this time, most 11 Group squadrons had Mk IXs "

[MiloMorai]

The greater proportion of G-10 and K-4 production was in 1945. Some were produced in late 1944.

On May 31 1944, the LW had in Luftflotte Reich 269 190s and 356 109s (total fighters 634 of which only 330 were servicable). Most of these Luftflotte Reich a/c would be facing the USAAF's 8th AF with P-38s, P-47s and P-51s. In Luftflotte 3, there was 118 190s and 50 109s (total fighters 168 of which only 115 were servicable). http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/2072/LW_OBs.html

Stop with the numbers game Izzy. The RAF was not facing the vast numbers of 109s, even your 'super' 109s, you would have us believe.

[Guppy35]

Originally posted by Kurfürst
No, I presume the MkIXs were fairly widespread by 1944. There were about 20 squadrons in mid-1944 equipped with them in britain, that makes about 300-400 planes. MkVs were still around in some numbers.

The problem was, the LW was already well in the process of replacing the older Gs to the new high altitude models: G-6/AS, G-14/AS, G-10 and K-4 produced in huge numbers (alone of G-10 and K-4 4200+ were built..) by that time and against these, the MkIX`s performance was lacking a LOT at altitude.

The RAF wasn`t lagging behind the LW in technical development, but it was always one or two phase behind it in deployment...

Problem was the war wasn't being fought by the RAF at high altitude and they were the aggressors.

The airwar was being fought at medium to low alts by the RAF and was much more of a Tactical airwar since the LW was not as much in evidence.

If those high alt LW birds were the ones doing the attacking then the Spit may have been at a disadvantage, but no doubt you'd have seen more HFIXs and VIIs.  BUT! since the LW were the defenders the high alt birds made little sense for dealing with LF Spits escorting medium bombers of the 9th AF and 2 TAF to targets flying at medium to low altitude.

Now I suppose you could suggest that th high alt 109s were meant for the USAAF bombers, but then you'd have to say that the 51s, Jugs etc weren't equipped to deal with the 109s, but then again we know how that turned out don't we?

Dan/Slack

[Kurfürst]

Originally posted by Nashwan
Isegrim, I'm not responsible for your poor comprehension.

[/B]

You are right, you are only responsible for you own reputation as often being in conflict with your previous statements and ad hoc 'facts'. +25lbs griffons, indian XIV squadrons, represnative V-1 chasers that become non-representative the next week`s post, you what I am talking about.

You said 350 were made in 42 and Q1 43, I said more than that were made before Q2. It's exactly the same thing. Before Q2 = Q1, which is what you said.

[/B]

Quite irrevelant, the point is still that MkIXs were practically non-existent in operational service in `42. Simply not enough of them compared to the hordes of MkVs! Let`s forget Q1 of 1943 when the IX/M61s were still produced. So that leaves less than 350, say, 250-300 for the whole 1942. It`s not even worth speaking about them. Most RAF was flying Spit Vs and Hurris that time.

You are including Q1, so you have to include the planes that were produced in Q1. That includes Merlin 63 production.

[/B]

OK, Hop, let`s include Q1 of 43. And Merlin 63 production, too.
So how many IXs that would make instead of ca300? 301? 302? 310? Meaningless numbers, it doesn`t change anything.

150 aircraft per squadron? Can I have some of what you're smoking?

[/B]

Well Hop, the RAF produced some 800 XIVs in 1944, but that was enough only to equip 5 Squadrons or so until the end of the year. Appearantly they needed 160 planes produced to make a squadron operational for a 6-12 months, and they didn`t even see heavy fighting until the fall of the year.

That`s nothing of suprise, 856 K-4s were produced until the end of the year 1944, but only some 200 were at the units by december. Losses, transportation, delays in refit etc.

In a similar timeframe to the Spit IX, there were 100 Spitfire XIIs produced, equipped 2 squadrons.

[/B]

2 squadrons, wow..

1000 Spitfire IXs in 1943 (plus 300 or so in 1942) would be ample for 25 - 30 squadrons. (not counting Spit VIIs in the UK, VIIIs in the Med etc)

[/B]

Well 800 Spitfire XIVs in 1944 were enough to equip FIVE squadrons. Maybe you say they needed 800 for the first five squadons, but only 200 more for the rest 25 Squadrons (which would require 500 planes to start with just to be on-strenght w/o sustaining losses. No reserves of course.)

Too bad the production history of the Spitfire is so badly researched. You cannot even tell us how many were produced in a given year, you can`t even give an appx. figure.

Actually about 5,600.

[/B]

Great, how many of that in 1942, 43, 44, 45?

Why are you removing the 1942 production?

5,600 Spitfire IXs produced, approx 1,180 sent to Russia. On top of that add 140 Spit VIIs, 1,680 Spit VIIIs, 1050 Spit XVIs.

Essentially 8,000 Merlin 60 series Spitfires.

[/B]

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. MkVIII basically see no service in Europe in numbers, XVIs were not produced until 1944 etc.

The 1942+Q1/43 production gives you some idea about the story. Some 300 MkIXs were made up to that time. And well over 3000 Bf109Gs. Ten times as many. The RAF would be very likely to encounter Gustavs, a LW pilot would probably not see a single MkIX for months.

According to the RAF website, "In February [1943], No 72 Squadron arrived in North Africa with Mk IXs.
By this time, most 11 Group squadrons had Mk IXs "

Interesting, how many squadrons made up 11 Group at that time? 10-15? How many of that IXs? 6-8?? So that would mean in early 1943, somewhere about 150 MkIXs in service.

How many Mk V squadrons around, 30-40 ?


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